afford them harbor facilities which they would welcome in bad weather and at night.

8. Our sport fishing income could be greatly increased. With the large catches of trout, flounder, channel bass last season, Quinby has become very well known by sport fishermen. We have only 11 boats available for sport fishing. The secretary and a director of the Eastern Shore Chamber of Commerce advised us that there are not enough boats available on the shore to accommodate sport fishermen during the fishing season. Our local chamber is now making a survey of all waterfront towns to determine the names of guides, type of boats, and rates to aid in supplying guides and boats for the visiting fishermen.

9. These habor facilities in Quinby (a community of approximately 500 people) are used by many more people than reside in Quinby alone. We know for a fact that there are boats in the harbor now which belong to people residing in Mappsburg, Painter, Keller, Belle Haven, Harborton, Exmore, Parksley, Trower, and Wachapreague.

We have listed 32 pleasure boats. It must be understood that these boats belong to people throughout a large area and they use these boats to obtain food from the water. The food value of the fish, clams, oysters, crabs, and wild game that these people coach or kill and carry home has a considerable dollar value in their cost of living. We have many, many other people who would like to have a boat in this harbor but there is just not space.

10. To show what the first $20,000 appropriation in 1948 returned to this community: There have been 19 new homes built in Quinby. From the figures estimated by the engineers in 1948 and figures for 1953, the dollar value of seafood handled was more than tripled. The population has doubled. This certainly adds up to magnificent interest on your investment.

GENERAL STATEMENT

Mr. HICKMAN. There are three very crucial things in this request that I think maybe Mr. King has brought out.

One of the things is the protection of the boats that are in this harbor.

When the first $20,000 was appropriated, the manner in which the dirt from the harbor was spread out around this channel, this harbor, was done in anticipation of further appropriations, because the north side of the entire harbor was left exposed to the winds and tides, with a result that it looked right out onto the ocean.

As you know, occasionally we have hurricanes there. We had one last fall. The fortunate thing about it was that when that hurricane reached us, we had northwest winds. If those winds had been northeast, well, I venture to say most of those boats in our harbor would have been completely ruined.

Senator ROBERTSON. May I ask you this? Is it not a fact that those boats now have a total value of over $146,700?

Mr. HICKMAN. Yes, sir. The record will show that, sir.

Senator CORDON. What is the measurement of the refuge harbor, or the turning basin?

Mr. HICKMAN. The present one?

Senator CORDON. Yes.

Mr. HICKMAN. One hundred by two hundred feet.

Senator CORDON. What would be provided with the funds that you are asking for?

Mr. HICKMAN. Our understanding is that the new part would be 200 by 300 feet.

Mr. KING. Four hundred feet.

Mr. HICKMAN. Two hundred by four hundred feet.

Senator CORDON. That would give you adequate space so that there would be protection to the small boats in case of a hurricane and resulting waves and high water?

Mr. HICKMAN. It would give us an increased area.
Senator CORDON. That is what I mean.

Mr. HICKMAN. Besides that point, when they bring this dirt up they will pile it up and make an embankment around the entire harbor with that dirt and that will give us protection from the northeast, and the storms in that direction, which is the direction they come from.

The other point is that at the mouth of this little harbor which we have now, there is a little stream that comes in from the north that is gradually filling in the mouth of the basin.

Now, then, I venture to say that it is not going to be very many months before that is going to be filled up to such an extent that our larger boats-and I do not mean large boats-I am talking about 25-, 30-, and 35-foot boats-are not going to be able to get out of the basin at all except on high water and, of course, when these men have to work, they have to work with the tides, and if they cannot get out to work the tides, then it means that they do not get any income.

Senator CORDON. And, they have families who have to eat when the water is high, as well as when it is low?

Mr. HICKMAN. Yes, sir.

Senator ELLENDER. What would be the expense to keep that channel open there?

Mr. HICKMAN. That can be done when they dig out the basin. There is a very little distance, maybe about 50 feet or 100 feet, from where they pile up this dirt, you see, and it will be very simple to clean that little place out, if the equipment is there to do it. In fact, they have got to come in that way to get in here. Probably they would have to deepen it there when they bring the equipment in to dig out the basin.

Senator ELLENDER. That is a good way to get it done.

Senator CORDON. That is certainly a good place to have the first work done.

DOCK CONSTRUCTION

Mr. HICKMAN. Also at this place we do not have a public dock. In fact, there is not a dock there that the public can unload and load their oysters and crabs and clams on, and things like that. They have to pull them ashore in the mud.

The highway which leads to this harbor area does not go to the deep water.

Now, then, they have made an arrangement, back in anticipation of the development of this project, when it was started, with the local board of supervisors, and they, in 1948, agreed to set aside $300 a year for this Quinby public dock.

As it is today, there is no place to build the dock. But, they told us, "We will lay this aside for the dock and if you are fortunate enough to get the project, then we will give you the $300 which we have laid aside for you.'

Now, these men in Quinby, besides getting this $300, have agreed to furnish the labor to build the dock.

Senator ROBERTSON. They have already made contributions over and above the $20,000 to get the channel built.

Mr. HICKMAN. They have raised by their own efforts around $2,400, which they did when this project was first thought of. But, here is a thing to think of, here are men who are working for a living who have agreed to go out there and furnish the labor to build this dock. And so, their idea is that this $300 that the board of supervisors have offered them yearly, will be sufficient to do this.

They will use that for material, so that then as they donate the labor, the cost of labor will not increase the cost of the dock.

Senator ROBERTSON. In other words, you good people believe that the Lord helps those who help themselves, and you are trying to do your part?

Mr. HICKMAN. We have been trying to do our part.
Senator ROBERTSON. Thank you very much.

Mr. HICKMAN. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF W. M. WELCH, JR., QUINBY, VA.

GENERAL STATEMENT

Senator ROBERTSON. I am going to present just one oysterman, Mr W. M. Welch, Jr.

Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman and gentleman: I wish to thank you on behalf of our people-my people-for this opportunity.

I think that our position has been covered very well by Senator Robertson and the previous witnesses, and I would not like to take up any more of your time other than to express the thought that the mouth of this basin opens directly to the east and, of course, most of our hurricanes come from the east, and in this new basin that we propose, it will be more of an L shape affair.

However, I do have some pictures that I would like to present to you. I would like for you to keep in mind that those pictures were taken Sunday and there are not as many boats in there at this time of year as there would be in the summertime.

With the number that is there, which you can hardly see all of them-there will be at least 25 or 30 more in there during the summer months.

As I said before, we are grateful for past considerations.
That is about all that I have.

Senator ROBERTSON. Mr. Chairman, we are going to hear testimony on the Peace Monument. I see the distinguished Senators from Maryland present. Of course they have good oysters in Maryland, and there are a number of places in Virginia that have good oysters.

Do you know of any place that has any better oysters than Quinby? Mr. WELCH. No, sir: I do not.

Senator ROBERTSON. Mr. Chairman, that will be all. I just want to recognize, but not ask them to testify-they would all support these things, if they had an opportunity-but I want to recognize Mr. G. H. Wood of Quinby, and Mr. A. S. Doughty, Jr.: Mr. L. T. Cropper. How long have you been an oysterman, Mr. Cropper?

Mr. CROPPER. I have been an oysterman or in the oyster business ever since I was 10 years old.

Senator ROBERTSON. And how old are you now?

Mr. CROPPER. 64.

Senator ROBERTSON. And you are still hale and hardy?

Mr. CROPPER. Yes, sir.

Senator ROBERTSON, And Mr. T. A. Hickman.
I believe that is all of your delegation, is it not?
Mr. HICKMAN. It is.

BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO

Senator ROBERTSON. Now, I would like to have just a word from the General there about this project. Is it not true, General, that when you planned an 8-foot channel and an adequate turning basin, you estimated the cost would be $116,000 and at that time this ratio of benefit to cost would be 7 to 1?

I

General CHORPENING. The ratio of benefits to cost was 4.6 to 1, Senator. That was when the estimates were made at that time. understand that there has been, since we have done the $20,000 worth of work, far more use of this project than we had contemplated, probably, when we arrived at what was a very favorable benefit-to-cost ratio; but the work that has been discussed here, we estimate would cost $24,500, which would provide a basin 400 feet by 200 feet, to a depth of 4 feet, which I understand is what is desired.

Senator ELLENDER. Would it not be safer to say $25,000? You might slip up on the $500 there.

General CHORPENING. We like to slip the other way, sir; but I believe it would be better, since it is closer to $25,000, to make it that,

sir.

Senator ELLENDER. What is your recommendation about the desirability of this project?

General CHORPENING. This is an extremely well justified project, Senator, and our recommendation when the survey was made quite some years ago was favorable to it and it was authorized by the Congress.

Senator ROBERTSON. Are there any further questions?

Senator CORDON. Are there any further questions on this?

Senator ROBERTSON. Mr. Chairman, we thank you very much for the privilege of these hearings, for hearing these constituents of mine, and I am sure that you will agree with me that they have presented a very urgent case.

Senator CORDON. The committee is pleased to have them. The Chair has some personal knowledge of this Quinby situation. Senator ROBERTSON. For which we are very grateful.

ANACOSTIA RIVER

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

GENERAL STATEMENT

Senator CORDON. The next project is the Anacostia River, and the committee has Senator Butler and Senator Beall of Maryland appearing this morning, and I suspect that like most of the Members of that body, they have one or two other things to do, and we will be happy to have them appear at this time, so as to save their time.

Senator BUTLER. Mr. Chairman, I deeply appreciate this opportunity to give you my views with regard to appropriations for the Anacostia River flood-control project. To me, it has been especially encouraging to note that this appropriation, among others, was recommended by President Eisenhower in his recent budget message.

In recent weeks, I have sent to each Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee an analysis of the intolerable conditions which occur much too frequently in the vicinity of the Peace Cross near Bladensburg, Md. The focal point of the Anacostia River flood-control project surrounds this area.

Your very kind responses to my correspondence have given me renewed hope and optimism that finally, after too many years, this essential flood-control project will be commenced.

SIGNIFICANT FACTORS

Very briefly, may I outline those significant factors which have moved me to advocate so strenuously the approval of this particular appropriation? In my judgment, these points are well reasoned and are as follows:

1. The periodic floods in the vicinity have resulted in many, many years of deplorable hazard, serious inconvenience, and unnecessary damage to property, to say nothing of the fact that highway transportation is obstructed for lengthy intervals. The seriousness of this situation, as it relates to the defense of the Nation's Capital, cannot be minimized, and in my opinion, these untenable and recurrent conditions cannot be permitted to continue.

2. From a civil defense standpoint, highways-alternate Route 1 and Route 50

Senator ROBERTSON. Senator, if I may interrupt you. I am sorry, but I have another engagement. As far as this project is concerned I was for it last year, and I am still for it.

Senator BUTLER. Thank you, Senator. Passing through Peace Cross have been designated by the Department of Defense as first priority military highways for the movement of military vehicles and equipment. In the event of a military emergency, the inundation of Peace Cross by floodwaters would present very serious problems which would confound our military and civil defense forces and greatly contribute to mass hysteria.

3. In 1953, there were 20 floods at the Peace Cross, and it is estimated that 35,000 automobiles per day use this arterial highway intersection. In the opinion of experts, this is one of the most heavily congested surface intersections in the country. At flood stage, it requires little imagination to visualize the tremendous congestion and confusion.

4. Quite naturally, a tremendous number of Government employees use these vital traffic arteries in travelling from their homes in Maryland to their offices, and return, and this number increases each year with the growing population density and residential development in nearby Maryland. With this point in mind, and realizing that for 29 days in 1952 (often for 111 consecutive hours) and 32 days in 1953 (often for as long as 144 consecutive hours) the Peace Cross was under water, a great many man-hours resulting from lateness or absence can