« PreviousContinue »
Colonel STARBIRD. This is flood control and sedimentation control. The sedimentation problem on this particular river is very serious, as the Senator brought out.
Senator ELLENDER. When was the last flood you had of any consequence?
Colonel STARBIRD. We have had serious floods in 1891, 1905, 1906, 1916, and 1920, sir.
Senator ELLENDER. Those are the only ones that you have had which the building of this project could have averted.
Colonel STARBIRD. Those are the major floods, sir. There have been other smaller floods, undoubtedly, which I do not have recorded.
Senator ELLENDER. I wonder if you could put in the record at this point our treaty obligation?
Colonel STARBIRD. We can, sir. (The information referred to follows:) Article 13 of the water treaty between the United States and Mexico, signed February 3, 1944, charges the International Boundary and Water Commission with the making of studies and investigations and the preparation of plans, subject to the approval of the two Governments, for flood control works on the lower Colorado between Imperial Dam and the Gulf of California in both the United States and Mexico. While Painted Rock Reservoir is properly proposed as a domestic flood control project of the United States, it has a bearing upon the international flood control problems on the lower Colorado. The Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, and interested agencies have collaborated in studies which show the necessity of levee construction and channel improvement in the section of the Colorado River below Imperial Dam ; however, they also indicate that aggradation of the streambeds of the Colorado and the Gila precludes the use of such improvements exclusively as a permanent means of affording adequate protection on the lower Colorado. The commission has expressed the opinion that there is no doubt as to the necessity of providing adequate flood control on the Gila, the principal tributary to the lower Colorado. Mexico has constructed Morelos Dam on the lower Colorado River on the assurance of the construction of the Painted Rock Reservoir, and the Bureau of Reclamation has raised and strengthened levees protecting Yuma Valley on the assumption that Painted Rock Reservoir would be constructed. Both the Department of State and the Bureau of Reclamation have expressed interest in the early construction of Painted Rock Reservoir.
CAPACITY OF RESERVOIR
Senator DWORSHAK. How much water would be impounded in this reservoir ?
Colonel STARBIRD. This reservoir has a total capacity of 2,480,000 acre-feet.
Senator DWORSHAK. Could any of it be used for irrigation development?
Colonel STARBIRD. It is not authorized as an irrigation dam, sir. Undoubtedly the flow control that will be afforded by this flood-control structure will benefit irrigation downstream, and there is extensive irrigation downstream.
Senator DWORSHAK. Does it propose to bring any new lands under cultivation ?
Colonel STARBIRD. It does not have land enhancement as a feature.
Senator HAYDEN. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that there are reservoirs on the Salt, on the Verde, and on the Gila, above this place that
catch and control the normal flow, and the water thus caught and controlled is used to irrigate in the vicinity of Phoenix, Florence, and central Arizona; but these occasional big floods when they come would overtop all those reservoirs, and that is what you have to catch in this reservoir. They are very infrequent.
The nearest land that is now in cultivation to this reservoir is some 75 or 80 miles west of it, known as the Yuma-Gila project, which is irrigation water from the Colorado River. Nobody claims that the cost of this dam would be justified for any irrigation purpose. It is solely for flood control and to protect the works directly under a treaty with Mexico.
Senator DWORSHAK. Has it been authorized yet, Senator?
Senator HAYDEN. Yes, it is authorized, in a flood-control act and included in the treaty.
Senator ELLENDER. To what extent did you give weight to the benefits that would be derived for irrigation purposes?
Colonel STARBIRD. To direct benefits through irrigation, none, sir. Senator ELLENDER. I understood that
said a moment ago that it would benefit the irrigation projects in the lower portion of the river.
Colonel STARBIRD. Only incidentally.
Colonel STARBIRD. Yes, sir, through a better control of the river, sir. The benefits that are used to justify the project are flood prevention or flood control benefits.
Senator ELLENDER. Will these benefits come about simply when we have big floods?
Colonel STARBIRD. Damaging floods; right, sir.
Senator DWORSHIAK. It is to be used almost entirely for flood-control purposes and, consequently, it would not have maximum value for irrgation because there would be a lack of stability in providing water for irrigation on a normal basis?
Colonel STARBIRD. That is correct, sir. We would let the water out almost immediately thereafter, so storage would be available for flood control.
Senator DWORSHAK. It is rather difficult to have a resorvoir of this kind serve the maximum purposes of flood control as well as irrigation. They do not complement each other too well?
Colonel STARBIRD. They do not, sir.
COYOTE RESERVOIR, RUSSIAN RIVER, CALIF.
Colonel STARBIRD. The next project, sir, is also a reservoir. It is the Coyote Reservoir, on the Russian River, termed the Russian River project, in California. That project has a benefit-cost ratio of 2.24 to 1.
We have had appropriated to date $326,000 in planning money. The amount recommended for fiscal year 1955 is $150,000. This will bring the project to a point where construction can be initiated as soon thereafter as appropriations for that purpose are made.
Senator ELLENDER. This likewise is strictly for flood control!
Colonel STARBIRD. This one is for conservation as well as flood control. However, local interests are paying, in the form of cash, over $5 million toward the conservation benefits to be realized therefrom.
Senator ELLENDER. Is that in addition to this amount?
Colonel STARBIRD. That is in addition to the Federal cost shown on the justification sheet. The estimated cost of the project of $15,250,000 is exclusive of the contribution by local interests.
Senator ELLENDER. Who will spend the contributed funds?
Senator ELLENDER. What kind of work would be done with that money? Would it be the same as you contemplate?
Colonel STARBIRD. The same type of work, sir. The overall project involves both the reservoir and certain channel improvements.
The contribution would come to us at an appropriate time to carry on the overall project.
SAN ANTONIO-CHINO CREEK PROJECT, CALIFORNIA
Colonel STAREIRD. The next project, sir, is the San Antonio-Chino Creek Channel project. The project is below the San Antonio Dam, which is under construction at the present time and is due to be completed in fiscal year 1956.
We have had appropriated for this project $150,000 to date. The amount recommended for fiscal year 1955 is $80,000, which will bring this project to a point where construction could be initiated.
The project, collectively with the dam with which it functions, has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.18 to 1.
Senator ELLENDER. Why do you say "in connection with work already done”, then. Will it not stand on its own?
Colonel STARBIRD. This is a project, sir, which is directly related to a reservoir now under construction. That reservoir is planned and being constructed on the assumption that a certain safe outlet to the channel below can be made. The channel work is carried as a separate project, as far as bookkeeping and the type of work is concerned, but it is impractical to separate the benefits that will accrue to the channel portion from the benefits that will accrue from the reservoir portion.
Senator ELLENDER. Will this be strictly a channel work, and not a reservoir?
Colonel STARBIRD. This is strictly channel work, sir. The reservoir is budgeted as a separate project.
Senator ELLENDER. Well, is that reservoir built or being built? What is the status of it.
Colonel STARBIRD. It is being built right now, sir. There were funds appropriated for fiscal year 1954 and there are funds recommended for fiscal year 1955 to carry on its construction. The schedule is to complete the reservoir in fiscal year 1956.
Senator ELLENDER. When that reservoir was authorized, was it contemplated also to complete this work about which we are now talking!
Colonel STARBIRD. That is correct, sir. It was an authorization for both the reservoir and channel improvements.
Senator ELLENDER. What was the cost-to-benefit ratio of both projects ?
Colonel STARBIRD. At the time of authorization it was 1.08 to 1. The present benefit-to-cost ratio is 1.18 to 1.
Senator ELLENDER. That is, for both the San Antonio and Chino Creeks?
Colonel STARBIRD. That ratio is for both the dam and the channel, considered collectively, as far as costs and, as well as benefits, are concerned. The ratio is 1.18 to 1, sir.
Senator ELLENDER. I just cannot follow you there at all. One is dependent on the other and neither stands on its own feet; is that right? One is complementary to the other? Colonel STARBIRD. That is correct, sir.
Senator ELLENDER. Neither stands on its own feet, but together, they register ratio of 1.18 to 1?
Colonel STARBIRD. That is correct, sir.
Colonel STARBIRD. We take the overall cost of the 2 features, sir, and we take the benefits that will be realized from the 2 features, and contrast 1 with the other. That is, first, costs, with, second, the benefits.
Senator ELLENDER. If they are so dependent on each other, how did you come to get the money to start the reservoir ? That is the point that I cannot understand. It strikes me that, since they are so dependent on each other, they should have been built concurrently.
General CHORPENING. Senator, this work of taking care of the stabilization or straightening of the channel below the dam will not take as much time as the construction of the dam.
Now, we have been on the construction of the dam for 2 or 3 years. We expect to complete the construction of the dam in fiscal year 1956. Now we want to bring this project to the point where we could come in for construction funds for fiscal 1956 and we hope to go ahead and bring it to completion slightly after we would complete the San Antonio Dam.
Colonel STARBIRD. I might point out too, sir, that the dam itself will give certain advantages even without the channel improvement.
Senator ELLENDER. I know that. You have said that, but the costbenefit ratio would not be according to our yardstick here. It would be less than 1 to 1.
Colonel STARBIRD. No, not necessarily, sir. We have not computed it separately, because the two should function together. That is the way they were originally planned. However, it is not a certainty at all that if you forego the channel work entirely, the reservoir would not have a ratio of better than 1 to 1.
Senator HAYDEN. Let me ask, Mr. Chairman, was the authorization for the dam and for the channel made at the same time?
Colonel STARBIRD. It was, sir.
Colonel STARBIRD. The original authorization covered both the reservoir and the channel work as interrelated projects.
Senator ELLENDER. The cost-benefit is so small, 1.18 to 1 is not very much. The project about which we are now talking would not stand on its own feet except for the other.
General CHORPENING. I think there is a little added information that might be helpful. It is true that the benefit-cost ratio on this project is smaller than many, but involved in this project and protected by this project are certain very important railroad lines and highways which, if damaged, and if their operation was suspended by fioods, would have a tremendous impact on the region, and even nationally. It ties into a great population center, where we are manufacturing airplanes, and other things, so, although the benefitcost ratio is rather low, the impact of flood damages, if they occurred, would be very considerable.
Senator ELLENDER. But you did give weight to that situation in Traching the 1.18 to 1, did you not?
General CHORPENING. Yes, we did, as far as possible to estimate. Senator ELLENDER. Well, it is already in there.
General CHORPENING. But they are the kind of damages that you cannot evaluate so much in dollars and cents, Senator.
Senator DWORSHAK. Proceed.
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
Colonel StarBiRD. The next project is a project along the lower San Joaquin River. It is a project that involves about 120 miles of that river.
The project has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.5 to 1. This also is a part of a comprehensive plan. We have had appropriated to date $51.200 for planning. The amount recommended for fiscal year 1955 is $40.000, which will bring the project to a point where construction can be initiated.
Senator ELLENDER. This is excavation only!
Colonel STARBIRD. Sir, it involves the improvement of the levees, the construction of levees, channel improvement, and the creation of I!««»lways, together with certain bank protection.
Senator ELLENDER. What contribution, if any, is there by the local authorities?
Colonel STARBIRD. The local authorities, sir, will furnish the lands, the rights-of-way, protect the Federal Government against damages, and will effect any necessary public relocations, and maintain and otworate the project upon completion. It is estimated that that inital cost to them will be $1,790,000.
Senator ELLENDER. What is the local contribution in the San AnPropio and Chino ('reeks project?
Colonel STARBIRD. There is no local contribution called for in the arborizing document for that project.
Sanator ELLENDER. That is only excavation?
CHATFIELD RESERVOIR, COLO.
Colonel STARBURD. The next project is a reservoir project on the Sorth Platte River, located just above the city of Denver. It is the (attield Reservoir project. No funds have been appropriated to