mittee to appear before the fifth district levee board to enter a protest against these unnecessary setting backs of the levee, and I can state to you in concrete form that the people of Vidalia are very much opposed to having the levee set back behind the town at that place.

We understand from newspaper reports that there is a possible project for setting the levee back several miles, which would destroy the entire town, as well as practically ruin the town of Natchez, or the city of Natchez, and we do not believe there is any necessity for it whatever.

The engineers, after presumably mature consideration, decided to make a cut-off at Giles Point, to straighten the river. Now, if there is another levee thrown back some 3 miles, all the work apparently done at that place would be thrown away.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you locate Giles Point?

Mr. J. R. ADAMS (member of the Board of State Engineers of Louisiana, New Orleans). Let me call the attention of the committee to it. He is pointing to this point here [indicating on map]. This is Vidalia. The town of Vidalia is situated here. The river follows the green line down here. The United States now is making cut-offs at this point, which I tried to make black, so you can see it, changing the river at that point, running straight down the bank way past Natchez.

Mr. DALE. Our contention is that that cut-off made at Giles Point now will come nearer straightening the river than any other that can be made. You can see that from the map, this point here.

Mr. CRUMP. Where is Natchez?

Mr. ADAMS. Right here.

Mr. DALE. And Vidalia is just across the river from Natchez.

I want to state to the committee that that is not a cave-in bank at Vidalia and never has been. I have been familiar with it for more than 50 years and have lived right on it for the last 48 years. It has not changed in any place that I know of 100 feet along that line in all that time. It may pile up little sand bars at times on one side and then when another water comes along, and we have a wash it will take a little of that off, but there has been no serious cave-in there at all. We may possibly have a little wave wash at times and have fresh dirt made there, but there has been practically no change in practically 50 years on that river at that point, and what we are asking is that that be not destroyed.

We are not coming here to ask the Government to buy our property, but to protect us. We believe that by some revetment in the front of the levee, when that cut is made through there, that point can be well protected. We have been led to believe that by the views of a great number of engineers. We are informed that the river at that point at high-water stage, which is 46 feet on the gage at Natchez, is considerably over 100 feet deep, which would make it considerably over 50 feet deep at low stage. It is a very deep river along that point, and for that reason we are informed by the engineers that it never gorges or chokes up; it carries off all the water that can be brought into it, and it is wholly unnecessary from an engineer's point of view, as we understand it, to set that levee back at all.

What we want is to have the levee protected, to have the levee built where it is, and then protected.

While I am discussing this question I want to say this, that there has also been some talk about not extending the levee down further than Deerpark, which is 17 miles below Vidalia. If that is done, you are going to raise the backwater area in there all over Tensas Parish and Catahoula Parish.

Mr. SWANK. Do you want to cut that bend from where that black line is?

Mr. DALE. That is being cut now. What we want is not to have it thrown back 3 miles further.

Mr. SWANK. How long is that point in there, east and west?
Mr. DALE. Mr. Adams will be able to tell you.

Mr. SWANK. How long is that point in there, east and west?
Mr. DALE. It is 15 to 17 miles around.

Mr. SWANK. I mean straight through?

Mr. ADAMS. The cutoff is 8,000 feet long. The point is about 4 miles long.

Mr. DALE. It is supposed to be about 15 miles, isn't it, around? Mr. ADAMS. Around the river; yes, sir.

Mr. DALE. We also request that the levee be extended on down to Carrs Point, that is at Red River, and for this reason, if you do not do it, the sooner you stop the levee line, the more backwater area you produce. What I mean by that is-I know the committee fully understands that the water will come in at Red River and back up, or if you stop it at Deer Park it will come in there and go up. We understand there are about 4 inches fall to the mile. It is about 16 miles or more from Vidalia to Carrs Point or Red River. At that rate there will be a 20-foot difference in the height. Two hundred and forty inches would make about 20 feet. The further you come up this way and stop the levees, the more backwater you will have, and whereas it was below Vidalia in 1929, according to the engineer's report, it would run up over Tensas and also run up over Catahoula Parish. The only thing between them is Black River. It is all subject to the same water that Concordia Parish would be. So you would have three parishes covered with backwater, if you do not keep your levee up.

That is what we are here to request, that the levee be maintained where it is, and that a proper revetment be made in front of this area, and the levee be kept on down below.

I can say that Natchez feels just like we do about it.

Mr. CRUMP. What is the distance from your side to the Mississippi side?

Mr. DALE. I am going to ask Mr. Adams to answer that.
Mr. ADAMS. Do you mean between levees?

Mr. CRUMP. Yes; between levees.

Mr. ADAMS. Three thousand feet. That is about the narrowest point on the river.

Mr. DALE. I understand it is one of the narrowest points anywhere on the river, and it is one of the deepest also, I understand. Mr. ADAMS. Even though it is narrow, it passes more water than Vicksburg, where it is 8,000 feet. You have a very much deeper

channel and a very much heavier velocity, and consequently it carries more water.

Mr. DALE. That is our view, and I will answer to the best of my knowledge any questions the committee desire to ask me.

The CHAIRMAN. The people do not understand sometimes the circulated statements that landowners in the lower Mississippi Valley are anxious to unload their property on the Government. I understand your position is that you are appealing—

Mr. DALE. To the Government not to force us to do that. The CHAIRMAN. These folks would prefer to have it protected? Mr. DALE. We would prefer to have it protected. We are not asking the Government to buy our lands. We are asking them not to take them unnecessarily. We are asking for protection and not for compensation.

The CHAIRMAN. Your view is that this cut-off has not been definitely settled upon, but it has been under contemplation.

Mr. DALE. Yes, sir; that is it, and we are opposing setting that back some 3 miles and destroying the whole town. The town is the parish seat. The courthouse is there, the jail, the clerk's office, and there are two high schools there, both a white high school and a colored high scool.

There are several large plantations that would be ruined, a number of large plantations, not only adjacent to Vidalia but farther down and on down to where it hits the Mississippi River again.

If it were 3 miles each way, it would be 10 square miles, and there are 640 acres in each square mile, which would be about 6,400 acres. Practically all of it is in fine cultivation and is as good land as we have anywhere.

We feel like it is wholly unnecessary, and we are asking to have that bank revetted and have the levee maintained and protected. I do not know that I can say anything more, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The city of Natchez, just opposite Vidalia, would be very much interested in the program there?

Mr. DALE. Absolutely. A committee from the chamber of commerce at Natchez came over to us and asked us what they could do, and they said they were right with us.

STATEMENT OF HON. RUSSELL ELLZEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI

Mr. ELLZEY. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, last summer I was invited to Natchez to go up the river and look at this very project, and I went there with a number of citizens from Natchez, and they showed me this particular cut-off. It is my understanding that the theory is that if you straighten out those curves it will have a tendency to lower the gage at Vicksburg. That is what the project is, up at that particular place. You can see what a tremendous cut-off that makes.

I want to read you, in part, a telegram from the same gentleman that invited me over there last year, Mr. Goetz. He is the president of the chamber of commerce and also business manager of the Natchez Democrat. [Reading:]

The citizens of Natchez and Adams County are deeply concerned with the proposed changes in Vidalia levees, at Vidalia, La., threatening destruction homes our good neighbors just across Mississippi River. We join them in plea wait see what effect new cut-off just above us will have.

Understand engineers, with few exceptions, feel no drastic changes necessary. Narrowness river this point more than offset by great depth.

The gentleman who preceded me referred to the depth of the river there. I had a very happy conversation yesterday with the mayor of Vidalia who tells me that if this plan were encouraged and put into effect it would literally destroy the town of Vidalia.

Gentlemen, that is a very expensive experimentation. That is out of all reason, as I see it. It reminds me considerably of a suggestion I had last year. I don't know whether it was from an engineer or not, but with all apologies to the engineers, one man wrote me and said that the problem of flood control could be solved if we just cut a canal from Vicksburg, Miss., approximately 75 miles straight across the country to Jackson and emptied it into Pearl River. That is what this wild experimentation reminds me of. I want to protest against it, because if you should go up that river and see all that this means, you would not have to be an engineer to see it. All you need is just common sense. The engineer has a wild theory in the back of his head

The CHAIRMAN. Of course we do not know that the engineers have determined to do that, but the matter was discussed in such a way that we wanted to know how Natchez and Vidalia felt about it, even though they were compensated.

Mr. ELLZEY. First of all, as the representative of Natchez, I wish to say this, that they are going to protest it very bitterly, and as a Representative of this Government I want to say that I protest against this wild, expensive experimentation, and I think this committee or any Member of Congress or any citizen should protest against any such expensive experimentation.

I am saying that on my own responsibility, but as far as the citizens of Natchez are concerned, I think they want to protest against it. We have had a sad experience down in Wilkinson County. From the selfish viewpoint of some of the people I represent further down the river on the Mississippi side, it might be to our interest not to advocate this, because the more river you turn across their district, naturally the more relief we get.

As a matter of fact, further on down the river, in Wilkinson County, it has gradually destroyed acre after acre of valuable land, and I could bring you pictures to show you that there are farms that have been completely destroyed.

So, I can readily understand why the citizenry of Vidalia would come and protest against this proposed cut-off, because eventually it would bring the same results in that district as it has brought in Wilkinson County.

That is all I have to say. I think it would be a great mistake to permit that, if it is within the jurisdiction of this committee to prevent it, and I just want to come before you in behalf of the citizens of Natchez. I do not believe in profiting at the expense of my neighbor. If that water came over there, it might help some sections a little bit, but it would be very detrimental to the citizens over there. I do not believe success comes out of profiting at the expense of your neighbor.

That is all I have to say, unless there are some questions. The CHAIRMAN. Your position is that the adjoining territory in Mississippi is ready to cooperate with Louisiana?

Mr. ELLZEY. I would say 100 percent.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

While we are on this particular question I would like to get some engineering view as to a practicable and feasible plan that would avoid the proposed cut-off that is under contemplation. I will ask Mr. Harry Jacobs, chief engineer of Louisiana, to make a suggestion along that line.

STATEMENT OF HARRY JACOBS, CHIEF ENGINEER FOR THE STATE OF LOUISIANA

Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, during the last 2 years there have been a number of cut-offs on the Mississippi River, made by reason of lowering flood heights.

One of those cut-offs has been made just above Natchez, known as "Giles Bank." A good deal of money has been spent there, in making that cut-off. The reason for it was to eliminate the cave-in at Vidalia Point, and to protect the bank line in front of the city of Natchez.

Below Vidalia Point there is also another cut-off that has been made at a location known as "Glasscock." Those two cut-offs were primarily for the purpose of straightening the river to protect Vidalia Point and the city of Natchez.

I cannot understand as an engineer why any further cut-off would be necessary across Vidalia Point. You have a river there that, as Mr. Adams says, is between 3,000 and 3,500 feet in width. That is about the same width the Mississippi River is at New Orleans. At New Orleans we pass a million and a half feet of water a second. The same volume and more has passed Natchez. You have the deepest stretch on the Mississippi River at Natchez, above Baton Rouge.

The condition existing in the river at Natchez is exactly what the Government is trying now to do with the rest of the river north of Natchez. The entire Mississippi River north of Natchez, up to and above Arkansas City, is not a river; it is a lake, with an average depth of from 10 to 25 feet. You have a width of river up there of from 5 to 15 miles wide. In other words, you have a lake. You have a shifting of bars, which is detrimental to navigation. The Government is continuously spending money in there to keep that stream open for navigation during low water.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Government engineers now, in this reviewing board's report, will probably recommend revetment work in that stretch of river so as to narrow the river and use the water to scour out and develop a deep channel. If that is done the channel will be something similar to what you have at Natchez now. The bank line at Vidalia Point is what we term a stationary bank." There is no caving in there. If anything, it is more of a making bank. From the town of Natchez above, along that point, there is a wide sand bar extending into the river.

66

Mr. CRUMP. What is the distance from the water's edge to the levee?