at the present time. We will address ourselves to the project for improvement of the Buffalo River and ship canal, 22 feet in earth and 23 feet in rock. I might point out that most of Buffalo's waterfront industry is located along these channels. This project has received total appropriations which ended in the fiscal year 1952 and which totaled about $2 million. I want to emphasize that the $2 million that has been appropriated, as spent so far, has produced no tangible benefit because no increment was received sufficient to really constructively progress in this project, and I think it is important to get a benefit from the money already spent. By way of comparison, Cleveland is an important Great Lakes harbor in close proximity to Buffalo, and has Federal projects of an estimated cost roughly equivalent to those in Buffalo. Let's compare the statistics of the past few years on appropriations. In 1949 Cleveland received $2 million; we got $500,000. In 1950 Cleveland received $12 million; we got $550,000. In 1951 Cleveland received. $237,000, and it is my understanding that this reduction was because they had not fully spent the prior appropriation; and we got $900,000. In 1952, $1 million for Cleveland; $305,000 for Buffalo. In 1953, $4,720,000 for Cleveland, and $436,000 for Buffalo for another project than the one I am speaking about right now. In 1954, $500,000 for Cleveland; nothing for Buffalo. In 1955, $1,200,000 recommended for Cleveland; nothing recommended for Buffalo. APPARENT DISCRIMINATION I submit, sir, that ports are in competition with one another, particularly Great Lakes ports, and that it is of the greatest detriment to the port of Buffalo when this sort of apparent discrimination is permitted to exist. In an effort to get a fair recommendation from the executive department this year for Buffalo, I visited Washington last fall, and, of course, as you know, the administrative agencies cannot speak freely on what they proposed to recommend, but they indicated that they were under very strict ceilings, and they indicated also that those projects which were continuing would be favored over those which had not received appropriations in recent years. To me that is the most twisted form of logic. In effect, it says that because we have not been equitably treated for the past 2 years that is the reason we will not be favored this year. At the risk of repeating myself-I mentioned this to Congressman Taber last week-it reminds me of the fellow who shot his parents and asked the court for mercy on the ground he was an orphan. LOCAL COOPERATION I would like to point out that there were certain conditions of local cooperation in the bills enacted in these projects, and the city of Buffalo has faithfully executed them at considerable expense. One of our city bridges was severely damaged. We absorbed the damage under our agreement to hold the Government harmless from any claims. We furnished all lands that are necessary. The industries along the river have agreed to deepen the remaining distance between the channel and their docks. And I submit that equity dictates that the Federal Government uphold its end of the bargain. As an attorney, I think you first indicate liability and then you talk about damages, and the damages in this case are, to come right to the point, $1,450,000. That is the sum that we are assured is necessary to make this Buffalo River project usable at the present time. $880,000 of it, roughly, would be used to deepen half of the Buffalo entrance channel in rock down to 23 feet, and the remainder to complete the earth dredging in the Buffalo River and ship canal. And this, sir, would make use of the $2 million already spent and provide a usable project of 23 feet in rock and 22 feet in earth. We are particularly alarmed in Buffalo at the present time because the lake levels are receding, and 1 inch of water represents 100 tons of cargo to the average lake trader with the same fuel cost and with the same crew. Experts tell us that the present Great Lakes fleet is largely obsolescent, and as these boats are being retired they are being replaced with longer, deeper draft, faster, more economical vessels that draw up to 27 feet. So you see it is a bare necessity that we get this 22-foot and 23-foot project. I have here a group of newspaper articles which indicate that the citizens of my area are quite aroused about this matter, and, if I may, I would like to submit them for the record. They are all of recent vintage. There are about 25 newspaper articles, 6 editorials from the local newspapers. I would point out, finally, that the last time we received an appropriation of $436,000 we used it to good purpose, and the channel that was dug with it was immediately used to set new records for the port. We assure you, sir, if you make an appropriation this year we will make equally good use of it. At this time I would like to introduce Mr. Joseph E. Maloney, vice chairman of the port board, who is New York State director of the United Steelworkers of America. STATEMENT OF JOSEPH E. MALONEY, VICE CHAIRMAN, DIVISION OF THE PORT BOARD, BUFFALO, N. Y., AND NEW YORK STATE DIRECTOR, UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA PREPARED STATEMENT Mr. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I join in the request which was submitted to your honorable committee by our director. Senator KNOWLAND. Would you care to move up here? I think it would be a little easier to hear you. Mr. MALONEY. It is hardly worth while coming up. I merely join in the expressions of my colleague, and I would like you to know, sir, that I have filed our statement here with you, and I would ask, on behalf of the port commission, your very kind consideration. Senator KNOWLAND. Your statement will be published in full in the body of the record at this point. Thank you for appearing. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF THE DIVISION OF THE PORT OF BUFFALO The board of the port of Buffalo is a port authority type organization organized in the traditional manner of such organizations to preserve, promote and develop the port of Buffalo. A comprehensive survey of the port has been accomplished with an appropriation made available by New York State, in recognition of the port's impact on the economy of the entire State. It outlined many development projects to be accomplished with local capital improvement funds. It is desired to emphasize, however, that the future of the port of Buffalo hinges upon the accomplishment of basic harbor improvements of the type traditionally accomplished by the United States Government acting through the United States Army, Corps of Engineers. Therefore, much of the work of the port division is tied in with the fact that vessel operators and shippers are constantly in need of and seeking greater navigable depths. An inch of additional draft means 100 additional tons of cargo per average size vessel, carried with the same crew at about the same fuel cost. These depths are vital to the port of Buffalo if she is to maintain her competitive position. They have always been recognized as vital to the Nation as a whole because savings in shipping costs are passed on to the consumer under our system of competitive free enterprise. Congress has authorized three projects for the improvement of Buffalo's harbor. Each of these projects was approved by the Congress only after an exhaustive survey had proven that they would produce at least a dollar's benefit for every dollar proposed to be spent. The first project, briefly mentioned below, was approved in 1935; the other two in 1945. Progress in industry and modernization of lake carriers have increased the economic justification for these projects each year since their authorization. One project involves the deepening of the south outer harbor to provide a deeper channel, for example, to the third largest steel plant in the United States. In fiscal year 1953, a $436,000 appropriation was employed to provide a minimum 25-foot channel, which was immediately used by modern lake carriers to set alltime speed and cargo records for this port. Completion of this project involves enlargement of the deepened area to provide adequate mooring space within the harbor for boats waiting to unload, and turning space. These safety features can be accomplished for about $600,000. Nothing was appropriated for this project in fiscal year 1954. A second extremely important project involves deepening the Buffalo River and ship canal, and their approaches, from their present 20 feet to 22 feet in earth and 23 feet in rock, at an estimated cost of $17 million. The entrance channels are to be deepened to 25 feet in earth and 26 feet in rock. Most of Buffalo's important waterfront industry is served by these channels. Thus far, $500,000 was provided in fiscal 1949, $550,000 in 1950, $900,000 in 1951, and $305,000 in 1952. These relatively small appropriations, although they now total over $2 million, have produced no additional depth or benefit because certain control points remain to be deepened. This vitally important project could be greatly progressed, and substantial benefit realized from sums already expended, if rock were removed to project depth from half of the Buffalo River entrance channel, at a cost of approximately $875,000 and if earth dredging were completed to 22 feet at an approximate cost of $575,000, in the forthcoming fiscal year. Local interests are alarmed that this particular project has received no appropriations for 2 successive fiscal years. The city of Buffalo has in the meantime conscientiously discharged its obligations of local cooperation as required by the authorizing legislation. Necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way have been acquired and furnished. Under an obligation to save the United States harmless from claims, the city waived its claims for severe damage to a city-owned bridge resulting from blasting by the contractor employed by the United States. The city has furnished the land and bulkheaded, at considerable expense, to eliminate a dangerous bend at Ohio Street. Principal terminals have agreed to deepen between the Government project and their docks. The project itself has, however, lagged badly. Finally, an authorized project for widening the Lake Erie entrance to Black Rock Canal at an estimated cost of $300,000 has not even been started for lack of funds. The national importance of the harbor of Buffalo and the economically dependent metropolitan area around it cannot be overemphasized. It is the largest inland port in the United States in value of waterborne commerce handled, and the 12th largest port, inland or coastal, in tonnage. This in turn results in its being the first city in the world' in flour and feed milling, the second largest rail center in the United States, and the Nation's sixth ranking steel center. The treatment of this area on the matter of civil-works appropriations seems grossly inequitable when we consider a report of the local director of internal revenue that, for the first time, collections in this area exceeded $1 billion. We fully recognize the need for cooperating with the administration in its efforts to achieve economy. Yet a rivers and harbors bill was enacted last year to provide $300 million for rivers and harbors projects and Buffalo was completely bypassed. If all such appropriations were eliminated, we in this area would certainly endorse that uniform policy in the interest of the national welfare. However, since these appropriations represent a relatively small segment of the national budget, and are uniformly made each year, the importance of the city and port of Buffalo justifies its receiving its fair share. Finally, there is considerable alarm over the fact that lake levels are dropping for the first time in 10 years, indicating the reversal of a cycle which has produced higher levels and unusually increased depths for some time. Extensive editorial and other comment in the local newspapers indicates the concern with which this lack of recognition of Buffalo's harbor needs has been viewed. It is impossible to conceive that the important Buffalo River project could be ignored for 3 successive fiscal years, and the outer harbor project previously mentioned, for 2 successive fiscal years. Yet that would be the result if Buffalo's needs are not recognized in the 1955 budget. The availability of increased harbor depths and the utilization of such depths by the modern, more economical superfreighters is so closely interrelated that it is often difficult to determine whether the deeper draft vessels give rise to the greater depths, or the improved depths encourage the utilization of the larger vessels. It is certain, however, that no port can accommodate these new vessels, which are replacing the smaller ships as fast as they become obsolete, unless and until its channels are modernized. Buffalo needs these increased depths and these larger vessels to take full economic advantage of present trends, and to retain and progress its present position as a leading port. The failure of the executive department to recognize the needs of Buffalo Harbor in its budget recommendations to the Congress, is incomprehensible. Buffalo's case for Federal appropriations is clear and persuasive, and has been presented continuously and forcibly to the administrative leaders who make up this budget, during the past several months. They have, no doubt, a heavy responsibility in making recommendations which will fit within the ceilings imposed upon them. Why they have for the second and third successive years failed to recommend a cent for Buffalo's congressionally authorized projects while, for example, they once again recommend appropriations in excess of $1 million for Cleveland's harbor, is unfathomable, particularly since portions of Cleveland's prior appropriations are as yet unexpended. It is not that the case for Cleveland's harbor is without merit. It is that Buffalo's position is at least equally meritorious. Since ports, particularly Great Lakes ports, are in competition with one another for greater depths, among other things, this kind of illogical distinction could be destructive. We respectfully submit that it is your privilege and responsibility to see that vitally important projects above-described are progressed to completion with all reasonable dispatch. STATEMENT OF HARRY ALLEN, JR., MANAGER, REPUBLIC STEEL CORP., BUFFALO, N. Y., ON BEHALF OF THE NIAGARA FRONTIER COMMITTEE FOR PORT PROMOTION AND DEVELOPMENT, BUFFALO, N. Y. NIAGARA FRONTIER COMMITTEE Senator KNOWLAND. Will you call the next witness, please. Mr. SPECTOR. Next, I will call upon Mr. Harry Allen, Jr., manager of Republic Steel Corp. in Buffalo, representing the citizens committee which I earlier mentioned. Mr. ALLEN. I have submitted a statement to the committee, and I will make my remarks as brief as possible. I am representing the Niagara Frontier Committee for Port Promotion and Development, and that committee represents the mayors of all communities from Buffalo to Niagara Falls, most of the industry, including flour and milling industries and manufacturing industries and anyone else concerned with water shipping. We only want to say that we feel that the economic necessity for further development and improvement of the port of Buffalo is of the utmost importance to the whole community, and while we realize the need for reduction in unnecessary governmental functions, we feel the matter of the Buffalo port comes, possibly, out of the unnecessary category. With a metropolitan area of 1 million persons and an annual waterborne traffic of 20 million tons, we would like to urge again that you seriously consider the record of lake port dollar expenditures in relation to Buffalo and the necessary development in Buffalo to stimulate this continued development of private enterprise. Thank you for your consideration. Senator KNOWLAND. Your statement will appear in full in the record. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE NIAGARA FRONTIER COMMITTEE FOR PORT Firstly, We wish to emphasize at the outset that we who are here today are merely representatives of a total of 29 members of a committee which in turn represents the entire area economically dependent upon the port of Buffalo. Attached to this statement is a listing of the committee members. They are leaders in government, business, and industry, labor or public groups. Each in turn represents a large community or organization in western New York. This committee was formed in recognition of two important facts. it is recognized that the vital relationship between the port of Buffalo and the economic growth and prosperity of the city of Buffalo, and the whole Niagara frontier cannot be too strongly emphasized. Secondly, basic harbor improvements have been a traditional Federal responsibiilty since the early days of this Nation, and the port of Buffalo has been so poorly treated in this respect in recent years that it, and the area of which it is the heart, are threatened by such discriminatory omissions. The metropolitan area and port which we represent are far from insignificant in the national picture. Permit us to review a few statistics in that regard. Greater Buffalo embraces a population of over 1 million. It is worthy of note that every year since about 1928, the port of Buffalo has handled an average of about 20 million tons of waterborne cargo. This usually includes about 5 million tons of grain and about 10 million tons of ore, coal, and limestone, the ingredients of steel. The remainder of the tonnage is made up of petroleum products, automobiles, and other miscellaneous items. From the standpoint of tonnage, Buffalo ranked as the 12th biggest port in the United States based on 1950 statistics. It is a sad commentary on the very subject of this hearing that in 1951, the port of Buffalo had dropped to 15th rank. Its annual waterborne cargo is valued at about $1 billion, making it the largest inland port in the United States in value of waterborne commerce handled. These figures in turn contribute to the fact that Buffalo is the largest flour and feed milling center in the world; the second biggest railroad center in the United States, and the sixth greatest steel center in the United States. They help to make Buffalo a very diversified manufacturing center, the eighth largest in the Nation, with the economic stability which that diversification affords. About $400 million has been invested along the harbor's 37 miles of waterfront, providing most of the jobs which have thus become available in steel, grain, cement, petroleum, automobiles, sand, and gravel, to mention the most important ones. MEMBERS OF THE NIAGARA FRONTIER COMMITTEE FOR PORT PROMOTION AND Government: DEVELOPMENT Hon. Steven Pankow, mayor of the city of Buffalo, 201 City Hall, Buffalo, N. Y. Hon. Eugene H. Duffy, mayor of Tonawanda, Tonowanda, N. Y. |