STATEMENT BY HON. S. O. BLAND, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. BLAND. I have no detailed statement other than the reports that have been made and which, in our opinion, justify the project, and show considerable losses that have accrued from previous flooding at Fredericksburg.

I thought that practically all of the points of difference had been resolved, but from the appearance of my friend, Mr. Smith, they have not.

I will present Mr. Marshall King, the mayor of Fredericksburg. The CHAIRMAN. We are delighted to have the distinguished mayor of the city of Fredericksburg.

We will be glad to have your statement, Mr. Mayor.

Mayor KING. Mr. Chairman, I would like first to present Mr. John D. Butzner, a citizen of Fredericksburg. Mr. Butzner has made a study of this project.

The CHAIRMAN. Who is he?

Mayor KING. He is a lawyer in Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. Is he a member of the council?

Mayor KING. No, sir; he is not.

The CHAIRMAN. He speaks for the local people?
Mayor KING. Yes, sir.

STATEMENT BY JOHN D. BUTZNER, JR., FREDERICKSBURG, VA.

Mr. BUTZNER. My name is John D. Butzner, Jr., Fredericksburg. I have no official position.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you a prepared statement?

Mr. BUTZNER. No, sir. We learned about this last night. The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have your statement. sure the committee will profit by it.

I am

Mr. BUTZNER. As the report which you gentleman have considered shows, the project calls for a dam known as the Salem Church Dam some 208 feet high. It is a multiple-purpose dam and will provide what we are primarily interested in-flood control for the city of Fredericksburg.

In 1942 Fredericksburg was visited by a flood of some 140,000 cubic feet per second. That flooded a large portion of the main business section of the town, a great many of the warehouses, and some 185 residences.

The CHAIRMAN. Was the stream very much wider than it was when Washington threw across it in the early days?

Mr. BUTZNER. Considerably wider.

Not only does the river come down its main channel and expand, but Fredericksburg is so located that there is really two channels when the river gets high. There is a channel below the Sunken Road.

Now, when the river rises two parts of Fredericksburg are flooded very severely, the area along the river and the area along Keenmore Avenue, which is a residential section. The area along Keenmore Avenue is flooded partially from the existing canal.

The CHAIRMAN. What purpose does that canal serve?

Mr. BUTZNER. The canal serves the Virginia Electric Power Co. in conveying water from its dam to its power plant. The CHAIRMAN. And then returning it?

Mr. BUTZNER. And then returning it to the river.

Those two areas were flooded, and I believe that in the report that has been given by the colonel it is set out that the damages in the entire river basin from the 1942 flood was $1,401,550. Of those damages, 72 percent lie in the area from the headwaters of this dam down to Port Royal.

The Army engineers' report states unequivocably that this damage would be eliminated at the main damage centers, which are Fredericksburg and Falmouth which is just across the river from Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. What happens to that present existing power project?

Mr. BUTZNER. The present power project, as I understand the report, would not be changed.

The CHAIRMAN. What statement would you care to submit to the committee, if any, as to the utilization of any power that might be developed under this project? I do not mean to interfere with the continuity of your statement.

Mr. BUTZNER. The Army engineers considered two projects, the Salem Church project and a project which is known as the Fredericksburg project. Oddly enough, the Fredericksburg people are up here about the Salem Church project because that is a multiple-purpose project. The Fredericksburg project, which would be a 36-foot dam at the site of the present 28-foot dam, is not concerned with flood control. It is concerned with utilizing the flow which would come out of the Salem Church project in generating more power.

Now, it seems to us that the essential thing is the Salem Church project. That is what has been endorsed and recommended. Then in future years if power is needed or justified it would be time enough to consider the Fredericksburg power project. But that is not a flood-control project; that is a power project. The Salem Church project is a multiple-purpose project, and it is the thing we are primarily interested in.

The CHAIRMAN. There will be a market for the power developed in that area?

Mr. BUTZNER. Yes, sir; there will be a market. Richmond is within the orbit of that market.

I have seen a larger report concerning the power put out by the Federal Power Commission, in which they say there is an adequate market for all of these. I do not have the figures.

The CHAIRMAN. They will be available when the report is published. Mr. BUTZNER. As I said a moment ago, we were visited by a flood in 1942 of 140,000 feet and it did considerable damage. This dam, as we understand the Army report, has been designed to take care of a flood of 200,000 feet, which is much larger than any flood we have had, but within the realm of possibility.

Mr. JACKSON. Can I ask a question?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. JACKSON. Was the 1942 flood the severest?

Mr. BUTZNER. That was the severest. In 1937 there was flood that approached the 1942 flood. I think that went up to 122,000. There was considerable damage done.

What interests us is that it has been stated unequivocably that a flood of 200,000 feet could be cut down to 75,000 feet, and that would be a boom to Fredericksburg and a boom to that whole country.

In 1942 our public utilities were disrupted, the city was without power and light. There was a great danger of an epidemic. Practically everybody in town found it necessary to be vaccinated. People were homeless. The churches on the high ground were used to house those people who were homeless. The hospital was endangered and partially flooded. Under this project the 1942 flood, according to the report of the Army engineers, would have been cut in half. It would have been cut to 70,000 feet had the Salem Church project existed at that time.

There are a lot of other features. It would assist in sewerage disposal. At the present time the sewage is put in the river untreated. It will not be long before, under the Virginia law, sewage will have to be treated. Under the Salem Church plan the minimum flow would be 770 cubic feet per second. Now it drops down to 5 cubic feet per second. You can understand what a difference that makes and how much less the sewage would have to be treated for its disposal in order that it would not injure plant life and fish life in the river. It has the feature of providing additional water for fire protection in the city. The main thing is the flood control.

After studying it the members of the Fredericksburg Council who are here today, the city manager, and the other representatives The CHAIRMAN. Will you give us the names?

Mr. BUTZNER. I think the mayor will introduce them.
The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement.

The committee is in receipt of a letter from Governor Tuck, of Virginia, dated April 5, in which he states,

I enclose herewith a copy of my letter to the Chief of Engineers in reference to the construction of the Salem Church dam.

I was compelled to answer the Governor's letter and advised him that he omitted to enclose the copy of the letter.

Mayor KING. I have one, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. We also have a telegram from Mr. Camp, executive secretary of the Virginia Chamber of Commerce, requesting that we postpone hearings on Rappahannock flood-control bill pending report of Governor's committee on all Virginia flood-control proposals.

We also have a telegram from Mr. Opie, newspaper publisher, Staunton, Va., requesting that we postpone hearings on Virginia dam projects until State government and public can study over-all river development.

We also have a telegram from Mr. C. P. McCue, of Waynesboro, requesting that the hearings be postponed pending report by Governor's committee investigating proposed hydroelectric projects on all rivers in Virginia.

I assume, of course, that the project under consideration was submitted to the Governor of Virginia and his comments are available to the committee.

It just occurred to me it was fair to read these statements before you left the stand.

If you have any further statement we will be glad to have it.
Any questions by Mr. Allen?

Mr. ALLEN. You started out talking about a dam two-hundred-andsome feet high. You wound up talking about the Salem Church dam 36 feet high.

Mr. BUTZNER. No, sir. The Salem Church Dam is a dam 208 feet high. The dam I mentioned being 36 feet high is known as the Fredericksburg project.

Mr. ALLEN. You are not advocating that?

Mr. BUTZNER. No, sir. We are advocating the Salem Church project, which is just upstream from Fredericksburg.

Mr. ALLEN. I judge from your statement that the flood damage listed by the engineers is confined almost solely to the city of Fredericksburg?

Mr. BUTZNER. The city of Fredericksburg and the town of Falmouth suffered the greatest urban damage. There was damage to highway bridges. There was damage to the railroad. There was damage to farms. There is one gentleman who is here with us who suffered damage to his farm road.

Mr. ALLEN. How much agricultural damage was there in this 1942 flood?

Mr. BUTZNER. I do not have the break-down of figures between urban and agricultural damages. I know those figures exist.

Mr. ALLEN. Now one further question. After the precipitation takes place how long does it take the flood to reach the city of Fredericksburg? In other words, the 1942 flood was caused by unprecedented rain?

Mr. BUTZNER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ALLEN. After that rain took place how long did it take the water to get down to the city of Fredericksburg?

Mayor KING. We do not have over 24 hours' warning.

Mr. ALLEN. The amount of warning was what I was trying to get. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jackson, any questions?

Mr. JACKSON. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McCowen?

Mr. McCowEN. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Adams?

Mr. ADAMS. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Davis?

Mr. DAVIS. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have had your statement.

Mayor KING. I would like to present Mr. L. J. Houston, Jr., the city manager of Fredericksburg.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Houston, you may come around. We will be glad to have any additional facts you desire to emphasize.

STATEMENT BY L. J. HOUSTON, JR., CITY MANAGER,
FREDERICKSBURG, VA.

Mr. HOUSTON. Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to answer questions. Of course, I corroborate everything Mr. Butzner has said. I will not repeat that.

The CHAIRMAN. I will ask you one or two questions.

What, generally, according to your knowledge, is the character of the reservoir lands that would be condemned for this proposed reservoir dam site?

Mr. HOUSTON. Most of the territory that would be covered by this lake consists of cut-over woods. Of course, there is included a small amount of tillable land.

The CHAIRMAN. What percentage would you say is at present tillable that would be required for this site?

Mr. HOUSTON. Personally, I think there is a very small proportion.
The CHAIRMAN. Something has been said about the Fredericksburg
Reservoir 36 feet high. I assume that would not be a power reservoir?
Mr. HOUSTON. The Fredericksburg Dam is a power reservoir.
The CHAIRMAN. And the Salem Dam would be a power reservoir,
too?

Mr. HOUSTON. The Salem Dam would be a multiple-purpose dam.
The CHAIRMAN. The 36-foot dam, would that generate power?
Mr. HOUSTON. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Nothing like as much as the other?

Mr. HOUSTON. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your view as to the public opinion respecting the desirability and feasibility of the project under consideration? Mr. HOUSTON. So far as the citizens of Fredericksburg are concerned, I have only heard of one man in town opposed to it.

The CHAIRMAN. What about the citizens above, are they opposed or for?

Mr. HOUSTON. I have not discussed it with the people above the city. I think probably it would be divided opinion.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions by Mr. Allen?

Mr. ALLEN. I would like to know how many people live in this area that would be covered by the water?

Mr. HOUSTON. I think there are very few people who live in the actual flooded area.

Mr. ALLEN. The number of people that would be flooded, do you have that information, General?

General CRAWFORD. We do not have that information available. We can supply that for the record.

(The following statement is inserted for the record:)

The total area inundated by the reservoir at the top of the power pool is 21,300 acres of which 17,600 acres are wooded lands, and 3,700 acres are cultivated, pasture or open land. Included in this area there are approximately 1,050 acres of cultivated land along the Rapidan River from Racoon Ford downstream for approximately 7 miles. In general, however, the lands within the Salem Church Reservoir are mostly steep and sparsely settled. A total of 55 groups of buildings are located within the reservoir area.

Mr. ALLEN. I wish you would supply that information for the record.

Mr. JACKSON. Would it cause any hardship, to your knowledge, to these people in the area that would be flooded?

Mr. HOUSTON. I do not think so.

Mr. JACKSON. Generally, it is not going to affect many people?
Mr. HOUSTON. In those cases they would be paid fair prices.

Mr. JACKSON. They would be compensated, of course. Are there very many people, to your knowledge?

Mr. HOUSTON. I don't think so. Of course, the damage that was done in Fredericksburg cannot be compensated.