General POTTER. Unless I am prevented; yes.

Senator YOUNG. Are there any more questions? Do you have some, Senator Ellender?

Senator ELLENDER. I just want to look at the amounts allocated to the various projects. That is all right.

Seantor YOUNG. I think General Potter has completed his testimony. Would you want him to remain here until you could look at those?

Senator ELLENDER. No, sir.

Senator YOUNG. Are there any other questions, Senator Case? Senator CASE. There are several question I want to ask on some of the projects of the Missouri River.

Senator YOUNG. Proceed.

LOCAL WORKS ABOVE SIOUX CITY

Missouri River, Kenslers Bend, Nebr., to Sioux City, Iowa

Senator CASE. General Potter, what funds are you asking for work
on the local protection work immediately above Sioux City?
General POTTER. There is $100,000 in the budget for works in
Kenslers Bend and Miners Bend, sir.

Senator CASE. That is the total program, just $100,000?
General POTTER. That is all that is in the budget.

Senator CASE. Do you have any carryover?

General POTTER. There will be an unexpended balance on June 30, 1954, of about $50,000. I had $17,732 carryover on June 30, 1953. As the Senator well knows, that project is pretty well isolated above Omaha and it really does not pay to do minor jobs and have contractors move in until they can be pretty well funded.

Senator CASE. I am looking at the page that carries the project for Missouri River, Kenslers Bend to Sioux City, Iowa, and I notice nothing there on the Miners Bend, but for the Kenslers and Sioux City Bends, there is shown $150,000, which apparently would be the $100,000 of new money and $50,000 for unliquidated obligations. General POTTER. Yes.

Senator CASE. Are we now talking about the same funds?

General POTTER. Yes.

Senator MUNDT. On that point, you may remember we had difficulty last year. We added the Miners Bend feature and I think it was knocked out in conference by the House. It seems to me it should be cleared up at the beginning this time. When we are talking about these bends, we are talking about the whole area of the river.

General POTTER. It is one project, Senator Mundt, Sioux City through Miners Bend. It was authorized at 2 different times, but we considered it 1 project.

Senator CASE. The way you show it you have Kenslers-Sioux City Bends, miles 773 to 760, bank stabilization, $150,000, for fiscal year

1955. You show nothing for bank stabilization from Miners to Kenslers Bend in miles 779 to 773. Where are you going to spend the money?

General POTTER. It will be in the lower bend, immediately above Sioux City. I have a map of that if you care to look at it.

Senator CASE. Does it have the colors?

General POTTER. Yes.

Senator CASE. May we see that?
General POTTER. Yes.

Senator CASE. To complete that portion of the project between Kenselers and Sioux City Bend the figures would indicate that after this $150,000 is spent there will still be required $1,040,000; is that correct?

General POTTER. Yes, sir. That is Kenslers and Sioux City Bend over here.

Senator CASE. How far will that $150,000 carry you?

General POTTER. These three little pieces of work extending this system to this existing revetment.

ANNUAL RATE OF LOSS

Senator CASE. What is the annual rate of loss there in dollars, the annual loss due to the absence of protection?

General POTTER. The loss, sir, is the threat of the river breaking through incompleted work into McCook Lake and hence around Sioux City. The program you see in front of you, sir-and we do this kind. of program every year to outline our work because the river does change extensively above Kensler's Bend-shows for fiscal year 1955 a possible program of about $2.8 million, and in 1956 a program of $2.3 million, and in 1957 a program of about $1 million would complete the entire project.

Senator CASE. Those figures that you just gave would include Miner's Bend? That would apply to both bends?

General POTTER. Yes, Miner's and Kensler's Bends.

Senator CASE. With the river cutting across and going into Big Sioux.

General POTTER. Joining through McCook Lake. I have a greater fear at the present time, sir, and that is this constant erosion at Miner's Bend which might cut across here.

Senator MUNDT. Where would the Italian farmers be?

General POTTER. Right here [indicating]. When we were there in September we stood here.

Senator CASE. What would be necessary in dollars to stop that potential damage that you speak of back here?

General POTTER. This program here, sir [indicating].

Senator MUNDT. The one you have marked for 1955?

General POTTER. Yes. That program right there [indicating].

Senator CASE. To get the protection that will stop the damage you would need $2,200,000 in Miner's and Kensler's Bends and $650,000 on Kensler's and Sioux City Bends?

General POTTER. Yes; as a start of the 3-year program.
Senator MUNDT. It would take you 3 years to do it?

General POTTER. I believe that would be the best program to recommend, Senator, because of the fact that the river will do some work itself for which you do not pay if you do it gradually.

Senator MUNDT. Supposing the money were authorized and you could start, would the fact that you were in there starting tend to stop this threat working through?

General POTTER. Oh, yes. You immediately start to direct the river into a newer channel.

Senator CASE. What is the potential damage dollarwise if the river should cut across in those two places that you fear it may?

General POTTER. There would be the complete loss of thousands of acres of agricultural land that exist, the loss of all of the facilities newly constructed around McCook Lake, and, as you know sir, that is quite an extensive community.

Senator MUNDT. You would need about a million dollars' worth of improvements at McCook Lake alone.

General POTTER. I would say at least that; yes. And there would be the peril to the town of Sioux City, and I do not believe I can evaluate that, Senator. It is an enormous amount of money.

Senator CASE. It would be equivalent to the damage that might come from a major flood?

General POTTER. Yes.

ESTIMATE OF POSSIBLE DAMAGE

Senator MUNDT. Would you prepare for the record, General, a rough financial estimate of what the cost would be should this thing cut right through at Miner's Bend, chopping into this Italian farm and going straight through, with and without the possibility of cutting through Sioux City. If it went into Sioux City it would be pretty hard to estimate the area. By cutting into the McCook Lake area, it cuts up all this farmland and alters your whole river program. Some of the things you are now building would be left high and dry down in Nebraska and not on the river channel at all.

General POTTER. That is right, sir. Adverse conditions in Miner's Bend would affect Kensler's Bend and it might be that the river would cut across through Sioux City, the community on the other side of the river.

(The information referred to follows:)

MINER'S BEND

The principal area of erosion on Miner's Bend is along 21⁄2 miles of the left bank just upstream from the stabilization work on Kensler's Bend. The erosion has advanced about 4,000 feet since 1948 at the point of maximum change. If erosion continues at this rate, the river would cut through the point of land on the left bank of Kensler's Bend in 12 to 15 years destroying about 2,000 acres of land, worth at least $400,000. In about 5 or 6 years, at the present rate of erosion, the river will have a direct attack on the leadoff to the Kensler's Bend stabilization works. Such a condition would cause the flanking and ultimately the destruction of the downstream stabilization works, which have been constructed at a cost of about $4 million.

M'COOK LAKE BEND

The recreational area and property adjacent to McCook Lake is estimated to be worth $750,000 to $1 million. The breakthrough of the river into this old oxbow lake would destroy it as a recreational area. Once the river cuts into

the old McCook Lake oxbow it could readily, either by erosion or avulsions, cut across to the Big Sioux River in the vicinity of Riverside, a suburb of Sioux City. This would destroy the area as a residential and industrial area which includes a powerplant, railroads, highways, bridges, and business establishments as well as residential facilities. The property is valued at about $20 million.

Senator CASE. If that happened what would become of the bridge? General POTTER. It would become a dryland bridge.

Senator CASE. The bridge between Sioux City and South Sioux City would be like the bridge farther down the river?

it?

General POTTER. Yes.

Senator ELLENDER. Such a situation is not peculiar to that area, is

General POTTER. We have another dryland bridge in our area;,

yes.

Senator ELLENDER. I have heard of a few of them.

Senator YOUNG. General Potter, would you discuss in greater detail your program of navigation improvements from Omaha to Kansas City, from Sioux City to Omaha, and from Kansas City to the mouth, separately.

General POTTER, Yes. The navigation project from Sioux City to the mouth has three general reaches. Number one is the reach from Kansas City to the mouth; then from Omaha to Kansas City, and Sioux City to Omaha. From Kansas City to the mouth the unexpended balance on June 30, 1953, was minus $289,000, which meant that we had barrowed money for it.

Senator YOUNG. That is from Kansas City to the mouth.

General POTTER. Yes. On December 31, 1953, it was $871,788. On June 30, 1954, it will be zero.

This stretch of the river has had total appropriations to date of $96 million. The budget includes $2 million for this stretch, and it includes 386 miles of river. The precent complete as of the present time is 81.6 and it will be 83.3 with the appropriation requested. The changes in price levels since the last hearings: Due to index, $910,000; due to additional land requirement, $179,000, or a total of $1,089,200 increase.

Senator YOUNG. Have construction costs increased in the last year? General POTTER. Yes.

Senator YOUNG. Has dirt moving become more expensive?

General POTTER. Not generally, but the mechanical trades and special labor and that sort of thing.

MCCOOK LAKE

Senator MUNDT. General, I would like to ask you another question on the McCook Lake area before we leave that if you are through with that section. We were discussing Miners' Bend and Kenslers' Bend. There is another problem that has come up for discussion and that is the great degree of damage and the adverse effects of this whole river program on the McCook Lake community with consequences of serious floods. It has pushed in a lot of silt in a beautiful lake which is a recreational area and around which they have been building some very fine residential areas. They have relied down through the ages on the supply of water from flood tides. Going back quite a few years ago when I was on the Game and Fish Commission, they relied on the fact that the river, which had its flood tides in the old days before we started the harnessing, washed in and built up the lake and they had a nice lake and evaporation in the summer and fall would bring it to comparatively low levels, but it would maintain fish life and go on through the years.

Now, the channelization of the river and the regulation of the flow has shut off that source of supply, so it seems to me that those people have a very definite consequential claim against the Government. We are obligated to the people there to do something about a way of life, an investment in an area which we have come along and completely disrupted as part of the river program. I think they have every right to have something done to restore their area and to protect it, little towns flooded out or farmers whose property is taken and paid for. I do not see anything here in your figures, General Potter, to indicate that you have a request at this time to meet that particular problem and I wish you would comment on that a little bit and let me know what you think could be done to help the people. I know you are familiar with it because you have been there and the engineers have surveyed it.

General POTTER. Yes. I have personally visited this project and you have well described the development and the dependence of that development on the existence of that lake. The damage you describe, the siltation of the lake, is consequential to the repair and fixing up of the river, and also due to the construction of the large reservoirs upstream.

LAKE SILTATION

The fluctuation of the river was what kept the lake full. We are now going to control that river to a much finer degree and we will not get those large fluctuations which tended to keep the lake full. The flood of 1952 which covered these entire bottoms put an enormous silt load into that lake. In fact, I would say that roughly one-half of it was filled up and the people are having a terrible time keeping a facility that will support the housing that has been developed."

Senator MUNDT. I spent quite a part of the day down there this summer, one time in a boat poling down with a steel rod and we found anywhere from 3 to 5 feet of this slimy silt. It not only made it that much shallower, but had the result of shutting off some of the streams that normally fed the lake from below and were sealed off.

It seems to me something in the nature of dredging must be involved some place to restore it to the status that it was before the flood of 1952.