Hon. DIXIE S. GILMER, AUTO PARTS Co., Hominy, Okla., May 5, 1949. United States Representative, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I am writing you in regard to the Keystone Dam project that looks so favorable at this time and, first, I wish to thank you for all your efforts you have put forth in favor of this matter. We, the citizens of Hominy, Okla., and I believe I can say all of Osage County, are heartily in favor of this project. I wish to speak as a landowner, affected by this dam to the extent of practically wiping my place out. It will be covered by 90 percent if the dam goes in, but I believe the remaining 10 percent will be worth what the whole farm is worth now. It will be an asset for the State of Oklahoma and all affected localities more especially. I hope you continue your good work on this matter and I am hopeful to see this made a definite project at this hearing, which I understand comes up the 19th of this month. Again I wish to thank you and all others for their efforts in promoting this worthy project. Yours respectfully, CLYDE M. FRAZIER, MANNFORD, OKLA., May 12, 1949 Hon. DIXIE GILMER, Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I am a rancher and farmer some 31⁄2 miles south of Mannford. I own 320 acres of land and some of my land may be covered by water on the Keystone Dam project but I am greatly in favor of this project as I know the Government will pay me all my land is worth. We need a project of this type in our vicinity. Yours very truly, LESLIE PURSELL. TARLTON, OKLA., May 11, 1949. Hon. DIXIE GILMER, Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I own a farm, of about 500 acres in the Cimmarron River bottom but I am sure about half of my land will be converted by water, but I am willing to sacrifice my land if it will benefit the community. in favor of the Keystone Dam project. Sincerely yours, Hon. DIXIE GILMER, I am strongly W. D. KLINTWORTH. MANNFORD, OKLA., May 11, 1949. Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I own a farm in the river bottom some 2 miles west of Mannford and some of my land will be covered by water if the proposed dam goes in. I am willing to sacrifice my farm if it will benefit the community. I am sure this project is needed in this area. We also need employment in this vicinity. Yours very truly, GENE KLINTWORTH, Tarlton, Oklahoma, KEYSTONE, OKLA., May 10, 1949. Hon. DIXIE GILMER, Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: It has come to my attention that a meeting of the Flood Control Subcommittee of the Public Works Committee of the Congress is to be held on the Keystone Dam as recommended by the Corps of Army Engineers in substitution of the Blackburn, Mannford, Taft Dams on the Arkansas River. on May 19, 1949, in Washington. While it is not possible for me to be present for the hearing, I want to urge Congress to approve the Keystone Dam and get this work to the committee. I have a 3,000-acre ranch just south of Keystone some 5 miles. Some of my land will be flooded if this proposed dam is built but it will improve this valley to such an extent that its value will be of untold benefit to all in this area. There are a great number of citizens in Keystone, in the town itself, and in the immediate vicinity who are strongly in favor of the project. I have heard that one of my neighbors is opposed to it but if a careful investigation were made I am confident that the great majority, even those who will be affected by having to dispose of part of their land, would be found in favor of it. Certainly, I heartily endorse it and want you and your subcommittee to know of our enthusiastic support of this project. Yours very truly, W. L. OLLER. TERLTON, OKLA., May 14, 1949. Hon. DIXIE GILMER, Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I would like to let you know that I am in favor of the building of the proposed Keystone Dam, although I own a farm northwest of Mannford and some of my land may be under water if the dam is built. After obtaining all the information I could concerning the dam, I think the benefits it will bring the community here (as well as other parts of the State) will far out-weigh any disadvantages some of my neighbors think they will suffer if it is built, and I am willing to sacrifice my farm to have the dam made. I made a trip through Tennessee about 20 years ago, and another 3 years ago after the TVA had come in, and I think the changes made by the TVA there are nothing short of wonderful. I feel sure the proposed Keystone Dam will insure much progress and prosperity for Oklahoma too, and I hope you will do everything possible to see that we get it soon. Yours truly, FRED FEIL. Mr. GRAHAM. I want to say that Governor Turner, the Governor of the State of Oklahoma, has approved this project. The CHAIRMAN. That will be in our report. Mr. GRAHAM. That is right, sir, as required by the 1944 Flood Control Act. I want to point out that this project has a ratio of 1.31 to 1, the highest of any ratio in the valley of any project that has been brought forward. It will protect 485,860 acres in the Arkansas Valley and contribute to protection in the Mississippi. The CHAIRMAN. You have set that forth in your statement here? Mr. GRAHAM. Yes, sir. In the matter of land acquired, the Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board has opposed the Taft, Blackburn, and Mannford Dams because we felt that the Keystone Dam would take less land out of cultivation in the area than the three other proposed dams. Our records show that 51,000 acres less will be occupied by the one dam than by the three dams, and that they have a severance value in excess of the Keystone of $11,357,000. The CHAIRMAN. This statement is filed by you and by the chairman? Mr. GRAHAM. The State of Oklahoma, yes, sir; the planning and resources board of the State. The CHAIRMAN. And you have made it available now to all of us. Is there any other point you want to emphasize? Mr. GRAHAM. I have several points that I would like to emphasize. We have had some experience in Oklahoma as to the recreational value, which is of no interest to the committee directly but is of complete interest to the people of our area. We have found that in the Pensacola Dam, taking the tax ratio between 1935 and 1939 at 100 percent, that the three counties affected in the Pensacola Dam have increased their tax valuation since the building of that dam 167 percent, whereas the average in the State has been 139 percent over those periods of time. We find in the matter of business done by the people in the areas involved that in those three counties, taking 1935 to 1939 as 100, that those three counties have had an increase in business as reflected by the sales tax of 372 percent, whereas the average for the State is 339 percent. We make that point because we feel that that economy will replace and more than replace the loss of land. Senator Ferguson talked about the water of the Arkansas River, and yet the city of Tulsa has made application for 100,000,000 gallons of water daily, industrial water, from the Keystone Dam. They, of course, will have to acquire or rent the storage space that is involved in that. The CHAIRMAN. How far will that dam be from Tulsa? The CHAIRMAN. I see. That is what I thought. Mr. GRAHAM. The city of Cleveland, which is where this refinery is located, has also made application to the Planning and Resources Board for water rights from that area. So that rather refutes the idea that the water wouldn't be usable. The CHAIRMAN. Have you set that reply out in your statement or are you just making this in response to the Senator's statement? Mr. GRAHAM. Yes, sir. Now he spoke about oil wells, and I want to speak about that. I think, if I may, I will save time if I can read this paragraph. The CHAIRMAN. All right, read the paragraph. Mr. GRAHAM. Another reason for the State's preference of Keystone Reservoir is because Mannford Reservoir extends into the Cushing oil fields. Within the area of Mannford Reservoir, there are 270 producing oil wells, with an estimated daily production of approximately 2,000 barrels. Our estimated severance cost to acquire oil wells or platform them and relocate pipe lines in Mannford is approximately $10,000,000. This is a very high cost in view of benefits, because of limited flood control and the absence of power in Mannford. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any oil wells in Keystone? Mr. GRAHAM. Yes, sir. I will get to that. The CHAIRMAN. All right, go ahead. Mr. GRAHAM. In contrast, we estimate such costs at below $4,000,000 for Keystone. Keystone is not located in a major oil field. There are 43 small producers within the permanent pool of Keystone. These are old wells and altogether produce an average of 250 barrels per day, whereas the wells located in the permanent pool of Mannford produce 1.061 barrels per day. These 43 small wells in the permanent pool of Keystone will probably have to be acquired, but our estimate of their market value is considerably under a million dollars and is included in our over-all estimate of $4,000,000. Approximately four times that figure would be required for those located in the permanent Mannford pool. To illustrate the difference in production in the two areas, the 140 permanent pool wells in the Mannford are within 15,820 acres while the 43 producers in the permanent pool of Keystone are scattered over 22,200 acres. So far as the flood-control space above permanent pool is concerned, the only cost is in readjustment of wells and pipe lines. No oil will be lost in this area. In many cases, no provision is made to guard. against floods so far as oil wells are concerned. Floods may from. time to time hold up production in low areas, but floods do not hurt the wells. In other cases, pumps are put on platforms and produc-tion proceeds. There are 130 wells in the flood plain of Mannford Reservoir and 135 such wells in the flood plain of Keystone. Thus, the problem of severance, so far as oil property in the flood plain is concerned, is no greater in Keystone than it is in Mannfora, while the severance cost of such property in the permanent pool of Mannford is four times as large as in Keystone. No estimate of cost is included for unproven oil production in either reservoir because it has been found in the Texoma Reservoir and in other water areas that drilling may proceed under water at no greater cost than on land. At Texoma, a number of good producers have been brought in since that reservoir was filled. Our inquiry of the operators reveals no objections to such operations. This is important not only in the matter of Federal costs but also in the matter of the national economy, for none of us want to retard or deny development of any possible production of oil. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chairman, I would like to give you the names of the other people and, for the benefit of the committee, we will file our statement and not keep the committee any further, but I would like to give the names for the record now. The CHAIRMAN. You desire to file this statement? Mr. GRAHAM. Yes, sir; it is already with the clerk; he has it. The CHAIRMAN. It will be inserted in the record by the clerk at this point, and the following will appear and present their statements, and those statements will be filed. (Statement submitted by Mr. Graham follows :) STATEMENT OF THE OKLAHOMA PLANNING AND RESOURCES BOARD BEFORE THE FLOOD CONTROL SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EIGHTY-FIRST CONGRESS, ON THE MATTER OF KEYSTONE DAM AND RESERVOIR PROJECT, ARKANSAS RIVER WATERSHED, OKLAHOMA GENTLEMEN OF THE COMMITTEE: A letter written by the Honorable Roy J. Turner, Governor of Oklahoma, to Gen. Lewis A. Pick, Chief of Engineers, in reply to the request for comments on the Keystone project, as required by the 1944 Flood Control Act, best reflects the position of the Government of the State of Oklahoma on this subject. The letter was written on April 25, 1949, and is as follows: "I find that the approach to the feasibility and desirability of the construction of Keystone Reservoir, in lieu of the proposed Mannford, Blackburn, and Taft Reservoirs, has been diligent and covers a period of several years. "In May 1945, in a statement to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors in Tulsa at the time they were considering the comprehensive plan for the development of the Arkansas River, testimony on the part of the Arkansas-Oklahoma Interstate Committee, appointed by the Governors of the two States, was as follows: "We believe that under his powers to modify, the Chief of Engineers may find. large additional public benefits in consolidating the proposed Taft, Blackburn, and Mannford Dams in one property near Keystone, Okla.' "Before the Committee on Rivers and Harbors of the Seventy-ninth Congress, it was stated: "We show the proposed Keystone project instead of the presently proposed Mannford, Taft and Blackburn projects We believe Keystone will eventually be substituted for these three projects. We believe such change desirable in the public interest.' "In the public hearing on Keystone project held at Tulsa on March 7, 1946, in a detailed statement, the Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board endorsed Keystone as a substitute for Mannford, Blackburn, and Taft. "Again on April 19, 1948, in a sttaement prepared for the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, the Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board added to the record further endorsement of Keystone Reservoir in lieu of Blackburn, Mannford, and possibly Taft Reservoir, either eliminated or modified. "At the present time, I further find that the best interest of the State of Oklahoma will be served by the modification of the authorized Mannford Reservoir project to provide in lieu thereof the Keystone Reservoir, which will eliminate the necessity for Blackburn and Taft Reservoirs. "I ask the maximum consideration in harmony with existing law for those who will be displaced and whose lives must be adjusted to make way for this great step in the progress of flood-control water resources development. "The State of Oklahoma, through this office, concurs in the construction of Keystone Reservoir in lieu of Blackburn, Mannford, and Taft Reservoirs." Under the Flood Control Act of 1944, States are granted the right to review and comment on plans for river development. It can be seen by the foregoing letter that this provision is effective for in this case at least the State has led in the idea of substituting Keystone for Blackburn, Mannford, and Taft, and the engineers have followed. This is no reflection on the ability of the corps; rather, it is a compliment for it shows that they accepted the State's suggestion that greater public benefits at less public cost would result from modification of the project. The corps was not arbitrary but amenable. When they had investigated and found the State's suggestion feasible, they agreed. The State of Oklahoma for many years has adopted and followed a general policy of supporting or opposing flood-control projects on the basis of what they will do in protecting bottom lands and also on the basis of the type of land to be used for reservoir space. When Taft Reservoir was proposed, for example, we knew we could not approve, for the lands which would be taken were truck croplands, producing sweet corn, peas, beans, spinach and other high income crops, not only supporting many field hands but also numerous workers in canning factories. This economy simply could not be disturbed for a project like Taft Reservoir, proposed for sedimentation purposes only. The substitution of Keystone for Mannford, Blackburn, and Taft is, we believe, very fortunate. Let us briefly review some of our reasons for this belief. FLOOD CONTROL The report on Keystone shows that substantial protection to 485,860 acres will be furnished to lands below Keystone site in the flood plain of the Arkansas River. That is, however, only part of the flood-control benefit in Keystone. Through increase in levee free-board and reduction in backwater effects of the Mississippi River, there are actually about 2,000,000 acres of land benefited. LAND The greatest industry in Oklahoma is agriculture. The greatest boon to agriculture in the valley is flood control. We have a large portion of upland, some very good, some not so good, and a small percentage of really high productive bottom land, much of which is subject to overflow. From the standpoint of stabilizing Oklahoma's agriculture production the problem, therefore, is to obtain flood control for the rich bottom lands with a minimum loss of such lands in reservoir sites. To obtain this objective is a prime policy of the State of Oklahoma operating through its planning and resources board. We find a substantial saving in good bottom land when comparing Keystone with Mannford, Blackburn, and Taft. Based on the district engineer's report, Keystone will inundate about 6,000 acres of cultivated bottom land in the permanent reservoir area, while Mannford and Blackburn will inundate 9,200 acres of such lands and Taft 6,000 acres. |