and county, total annual carrying charges would be $831,658 due to the interest rate of 3.5 percent applied to non-Federal costs. Maintenance and operation is estimated at $80,000 annually.

BENEFITS FROM PROJECT

The Army engineers estimate total annual benefits at $893,000, consisting of $429,000 from prevention of tangible flood damage, 214,000 from increased return from protected agricultural lands, $191,000 from increased returns from industrial lands, and $59,000 from benefits to fish life.

OTHER BENEFITS FROM PROJECT

As you gentlemen know, the Army engineers historically have been very conservative in estimating benefits from flood control projects. This is as it should be, since investment of public funds is involved. There are long-range benefits in connection with this project which the Army engineers have not included. These benefits, which I will mention in a moment, are what we might call of a semispeculative nature in that their realization will depend upon future constructive action by the communities involved.

Studies by competent engineers and industrial committees in Seattle estimate that if the city of Seattle is to fulfill its industrial potential over the next 25 to 50 years, an additional 8,000 acres of suitable sites must be available. The major industrial development in Seattle has taken place on filled in tidelands in the southern section of the city. Practically all of the desirable sites are now being utilized. Future growth should logically take place along the banks of the Duwamish River which, as I have explained earlier, is fed principally by the Green River. To bring to fruition present long-range plans for development of this area, local interests-chiefly King County and the city of Seattle-will have to invest 10 to 36 million dollars in channel improvements. Straightening the channel and related improvement will cost about $10,000,000. A ship canal into this prospective industrial area would cost about $36,000,000.

Ultimate decision on this phase of the project remains for the future. The opportunity to make the decision, however, depends upon the construction of the proposed dam at Eagle Gorge, to eliminate the flood threat. Obviously industry would not be willing to invest in sites and construction if the lands involved are continually subject to destructive floods.

I reiterate, the engineers properly have not included these prospective benefits in their compilation of the benefit-to-cost ratio. Nonetheless your committee should have these facts in mind as additional argument for approving the project.

Army engineers studied this project carefully and have approved it. Local interests are contributing $2,000,000 for its construction. One million five hundred thousand dollars has been appropriated by the State legislature, King County commissioners have $250,000 in this year's budget for the project and have committed themselves to set aside another $250,000 next year. Immediately after the project is authorized by the Congress and even a token appropriation is approved, this $2,000,000 of local contribution will become available for completion of plans, sepcifications, and construction.

The project will permanently eliminate the flood threat, thereby permitting better use of agricultural lands, potential industrial sites, and protecting life and property in the Green River Basin. Those of you who have read about or witnessed floods know there is still one additional benefit, perhaps the most important one of all, which has not been computed by the Army engineers; namely, the security and happiness of the people involved. It is impossible to compute in dollars and cents the discouragement and human misery created by a flood which, in a matter of hours or days, may destroy a man's crops, his home, his furniture, his livestock, and even his own life.

Investment of public funds in this project, like others you have under consideration, is an investment in the lives of people and their property. I sincerely hope you will approve expeditiously, authorization of the Green River flood-control project.

Mr. ANGELL. May I say to the Senator with respect to that project that we did have evidence pertaining to that project, and it is one that is before the committee.

The 308 report was not formally before the committee, but the Green River-Duwamish project and the Albeni Falls projects are before the committee.

Senator MAGNUSON. Referring to the Green River situation, as you know, the mountains rise right behind the city of Seattle, and this is the river that runs in about 55 or 60 miles from 5,000 feet to tidewater.

It runs through a very fertile valley in which the population runs around, exclusive of the city of Seattle, 40,000 to 45,000 people, in which constantly every year we are troubled with floods. We were fortunate this year that we did not have a disastrous flood there, because the water rushes down quickly to the sea.

In the mountains behind Seattle where this river rises-and, as I say, the river goes down through a valley that is rather heavily populated-we had almost 32 feet of snow this year, an unusual year, and if we had had a quick thaw and a quick run-off we would have had a disastrous flood. There is a flood every year there, and this project is merely to build a dam, and it has been studied by the engineers and there is a favorable report on it, and it has been the subject of a great deal of consideration by the State, county, and city and the Army engineers.

The State legislature appropriated $1,500,000 at the last session of the legislature for the project. The county, which has no taxing power, but gets money from the State, intends to give and has obligated itself for another $500,000, and the engineers have made a favorable report on the financial arrangement, and we hope that this bill can be authorized.

It is true that the matter is pending down in the budget, and, of course, we cannot speak for what the budget will do, but I can say informally that I have no reason to believe that they will not send it down here also with a favorable report in the very near future. It is a very serious situation.

The ratio of costs to benefit is somewhat conservative in the engineers' report, and rightly so, but this matter involves also the industrial expansion of the city of Seattle, because without this control there is no possibility for the city of Seattle to expand down in the Duwamish flats. The situation could be very serious with great loss of life

and millions of dollars of property damage unless we can control this precipitious river that runs right down to the sea.

Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the permission of the committee for the other members of the House and Senate to extend their remarks on the Columbia River projects following the Senator's remarks.

Senator MAGNUSON. Thank you, sir.

SMITH MOUNTAIN DAM--ROANOKE RIVER FLOOD-CONTROL PROJECT

STATEMENT OF HON. CLARENCE G. BURTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Burton, have we discussed that Roanoke River project before?

Mr. BURTON. Yes, sir; on the first day of the hearing we discussed it. in connection with two bills which were before the committee at that time. The Smith Mountain Dam was the project under consideration, and it was fully explained to the committee at that time.

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Burton, you were present at that time?

Mr. BURTON. I was present to appear in favor of the project with witnesses. I asked permission of the chairman to permit them to testify today, which he very kindly consented to do.

I have with me a number of constituents from the district who would like to testify on behalf of the Roanoke River-Smith Mountain Dam; Mr. Arthur Owens, city manager of Roanoke, Va.; Mr. A. R. Parker, of Danville, Va., who is director of the Roanoke River Basin Association; Mr. Glenn B. Updike, Danville, Va., who is past president of the Danville Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Bolling Lambeth, who is chairman of the Roanoke River Basin Association, of Bedford, Va.; Mr. Thomas B. Noland, town manager, Altavista, Va.; Mr. Wyatt H. Walton, president of the Southside Electric Cooperative, Huddleston, Va.; who is chairman of the Bedford County Board of Supervisors; and Mr. Dan J. Cronin, who is a member of the Roanoke City Council.

Mr. DAVIS. Will you announce the witnesses as they appear?

Mr. BURTON. Yes. I would now like to present Mr. Bolling Lam

beth.

The CHAIRMAN. In order to accommodate Mr. Burton before we meet at 10 o'clock this morning, these gentlemen are to appear on the Roanoke River or Smith Mountain Dam Reservoir.

If they have prepared statements, it would help us out considerably, Mr. Burton.

Mr. BURTON. They will be brief and probably will wish to submit statements later.

The CHAIRMAN. I suggest that those statements now be inserted in connection with this project.

STATEMENT OF BOLLING LAMBETH, CHAIRMAN OF THE ROANOKE RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION, BEDFORD, VA.

Mr. DAVIS. All right, Mr. Lambeth; the committee will be very glad to hear you, sir.

Mr. LAMBETH. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I would like to speak very briefly as chairman of the Roanoke River

Basin Association, an organization of business concerns, municipalities, and individuals throughout a large area of Virginia and North Carolina.

We are very much interested in the two bills which have been introduced by Mr. Stanley and Mr. Burton for the authorization of the Smith Mountain project as part of the development of the Roanoke River Basin.

The organization which I speak for represents, I think I can safely say, 90 percent of the interests involved in this area.

I mention that because there has been some appearance here before the committee in opposition to this project.

We are quite positive that the people in the area are very solidly behind the project, both in virginia and in North Carolina.

This project has peculiar significance as part of the over-all plan for the development of the Roanoke River Basin.

It is the first project proposed on what we call the StauntonRoanoke River side of the development of the basin.

The Buggs Island Reservoir is now under construction at a point in the lower basin area. That reservoir is fed by two large rivers, the Dan River and the Roanoke-Staunton River.

The Buggs Island Reservoir will be supported in this system development by a dam on the Smith River which is on the Dan River side which is now under construction, the Philpot Dam, and which is now proposed by the bills before your committee on a river feeding this Buggs Island Reservoir.

We are presenting some other witnesses here to emphasize several of these points, but I mention this simply to point out that this dam is part of a system, and not an isolated dam project.

We are not asking for the immediate construction of the Smith Mountain Dam. We are simply here to ask your committee to help us plan ahead.

We have had serious floods in this entire area. We have had a serious shortage of hydroelectric power. This dam is perhaps considered a multipurpose dam, and it will relate both to flood control and hydroelectric power, both matters being of primary importance to the people of the area concerned.

I would like to mention briefly a significant development in our

area.

We are seeing a change, a very striking change, from row cropping in a highly developed tobacco-growing area, from row cropping to dairy farming and poultry production and other farm endeavors which require the extensive use of electric power.

We are also experiencing a great change in the industrial development of the area. There are any number of instances of large industrial plants coming into the area which require a great amount of electricity, as already mentioned before this committee by a representative of the Appalachian Power Co., such as the Aluminum Co. in the area, which will consume a tremendous amount of electricity.

These are very significant facts in the change in the economic pattern of this area, and we are trying to plan ahead now to avert any serious shortage of electricity in the future.

The Roanoke River Basin Association has endorsed this project as the third project in the development of the basin area, and we do not expect to get construction started on this before 1952.

Now, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce to the committee Mr. Thomas Noland, town manager of Altavista, who will say just a word on the flood conditions there.

STATEMENT OF THOMAS B. NOLAND, TOWN MANAGER,
ALTAVISTA, VA.

Mr. DAVIS. Do you have a written statement, Mr. Noland?
Mr. NOLAND. No, sir; I do not have.

Mr. DAVIS. Give your full name and position to the reporter.
Mr. NOLAND. Thomas B. Noland, town manager, Altavista, Va.
The CHAIRMAN. All of these gentlemen are those who wanted to
come up and be heard today?

Mr. BURTON. Yes.

Mr. Lambeth is chairman of the Roanoke River Basin Association, and these other gentlemen are here with him.

Mr. DAVIS. Proceed, Mr. Noland.

Mr. NOLAND. Besides being town manager of Altavista, I am also a member of the board of directors of the Roanoke River Association. The town of Altavista gets its water supply from the Roanoke River, which is known as the Staunton River locally.

Their water-purification plant is subject to partial inundation by floodwaters of the Roanoke River; and the resulting problem is, of course, a mess, because of the shortage of pure water and the shortage of water for fire protection because of possible flood damage to the water-purification plant.

During extreme floods the town of Altavista is divided into two sections by the water backing up from the river. The industrial section is separated from the business and residential section, so that a part of the town suffers from inadequate fire and police protection during a major flood, of which there have been several.

During high water along this river, also, our school children suffer because of enforced absenteeism because some of the school busses are unable to get to school because certain roads are blocked off by high water along the river.

Besides the school children, the workers in our industrial plants are sometimes affected because they cannot get to work; and, since Altavista is an industrial town, this is very important to the workers.

Further, along the industrial angle, I would like to state that there are approximaely 80 acres within the corporate limits of the town which have been zoned for industry, but which, because of the frequent high water we have had, all of this area has been inundated three times in the past 9 months, approximately.

The CHAIRMAN. The clerk reports to me that we have a call to vote on an important bill over in the House. We understand that you are for this project, and if the witness could extend his statement at this time I think it would probably be of benefit, Mr. Burton, with your permission.

Mr. BURTON. That is fine. I know that you have to be on the floor of the House if there is a vote.

The CHAIRMAN. That is agreeable with you, is it?

Mr. BURTON. Or he can write it and put it into the record. We have another witness who desires to be heard.