We are glad to have Mr. Matthias here. He is known to the members of this committee. Frankly, we did not know the matter was coming up. You understand the situation.

Mr. BROOKS. You can understand how vitally interested the Red River Valley is by virtue of the fact that the secretary of that association travels all night to be here this morning.

The CHAIRMAN. Give us your name and position and the group you represent and whether you favor or oppose the pending bill that has been described by the distinguished Senator and Representative from Oklahoma.

STATEMENT OF L. R. MATTHIAS, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE RED RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION

Mr. MATTHIAS. Mr. Chairman, my name is L. R. Matthias, executive secretary of the Red River Valley Association, domiciled in Shreveport, La., and representing the people in the Red River Basin in the States of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana.

Mr. Chairman, in accordance with a decision reached by our association on their twenty-fourth annual convention in Shreveport on April 7 and 8 of this year, we are opposed to the bill.

Due to the time limit, we are unable to have prepared papers ready to submit to the committee this morning; so with your permission I would like to briefly point out some of the reasons why we feel that the Red River should not be included in this legislation and to read a resolution which represents the views of our association.

The CHAIRMAN. You would like to incorporate the resolution with your remarks?

Mr. MATTHIAS. Yes, sir; I would.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed.
Mr. MATTHIAS. Thank you, sir.

Shreveport, La., April 19, 1949, resolution opposing the creation of the United States Commission on the Arkansas-White and Red River Basins.

It has come to our attention that a bill may soon be introduced in Congress to create the United States Commission on the ArkansasWhite and Red River Basins, defining the powers and duties thereof. We are unalterably opposed to this or any other scheme that attempts to take over the Red River Basin, and to incorporate it with one or more other river basins to form an authority, administration or any similar organization, no matter what name it may be given.

It is our sincere belief that such an administration is unnecessary and undesirable, in fact, we believe it to be detrimental and injurious to the best interests of the citizens in the river basins mentioned, and to the economy of the United States.

We completely approve the present plan, whereby the Corps of United States Army Engineers has charge of flood control and navigation projects on Red River and its tributaries, in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture, whereby the United States Soil Conservation Service and the United States Forest Service are giving attention to the development of the land and water resources of the watershed with reference to prevention of soil erosion, preventing too rapid water run-off, maintaining soil fertility, conservation of water

for industrial, domestic and municipal uses, reforestation, forest fire prevention, forest harvesting and selective cutting demonstrations and other useful and beneficial services to the citizens of the basin.

The present plan for the development and maintenance of the land and water resources in the Red River watershed is sound, the work is progressing harmoniously, and the citizens have full confidence in the integrity of the Army engineers, Soil Conservation Service and the Forest Service. Now, all that is needed is the appropriation each year of adequate funds by Congress to complete the projects and programs as fast as the various agencies can efficiently use the money: Now, therefore be it

Resolved, That the Red River Valley Association unequivocally opposes any change from the present Federal Government plans now under way in the Red River Basin, and that the governors, United States Senators, and Representatives to Congress of the States of Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas be notified of our opposition by the secretary of this association within 10 days.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, I have had the privilege of appearing before you many times in behalf of Red River projects representing the people in that area. The Red River is some 1,300 miles long. Its headwaters rise in the State of New Mexico and flows through four States. We have had quite a problem down there. This Congress and other Congresses preceding this have been most sympathetic. I think possibly we get a little impatient at times that the funds are not forthcoming as rapidly as they should; but living in that area and knowing that the hazard that exists today has existed, we feel that we are justified in being a little nervous.

I have a current map here. Mr. Chairman, that shows the status of the Red River Basin today. With your permission, I would like to briefly point out the various features.

Mr. DONDERO. Show us where the Red River rises.

Mr. MATTHIAS. It originates here [indicating] across the New Mexico line and flows in a southeast direction, forming the borderline of Oklahoma and Texas, crossing over into a corner of Arkansas and then almost due south through the heart of Oklahoma, coming in to Old River and then joining at times, varying the height of the Mississippi or the Red; its course is determined as to whether it goes into the Atchafalaya or into the Mississippi of which you gentlemen have had quite a bit of discussion lately.

Now, the black area shows the watershed which is 66,000 square miles. The first project of any consequence is the Denison Reservoir which was built and completed in the year 1943, which bisects Red River at mile 720. That was the first protection of any kind that we had had on that big basin. When it was completed, a lot of us thought that our problems were eliminated: that we had control of the water. Along in 1945, a flood came that broke all records on Red River but it all fell below Denison Dam. In some areas in Texas and in Arkansas, as much as 18 inches of rain fell in a 56-hour period. Of course, our river at the time was almost at flood stage so with that avalanche of water, levees broke; we lost about $17,000,000, conservative estimate, in damages, and we lost four lives.

Well, now, the speed with which Congress acted and with which the Corps of Engineers and other agencies acted, I think is best illustrated

by the fact that in January, when Congress authorized the survey to return an interim report to correct this situation, it was 1 year later that a bill was here before you and went through the Seventy-eighth, I believe, Congress and we had a program to prevent that flood.

Now, we took that program from 1946 and went forward with it. Today, the Texarkana Reservoir here on the Sulphur River in Texas is under construction. This Congress, this appropriation bill going through today, provides $200,000 for the Millwood Reservoir, or its alternates, with a view toward returning next year a project study on that reservoir. Seventy-five thousand dollars has now been included for Ferrell's Bridge Reservoir on Cypress Creek; another $65,000 has been included for a project study of the Mooringsport Reservoir on Caddo Lake in Texas and the Louisiana section of this corner of the State here.

Up to the Boggy Creek in Oklahoma $100,000 has been included in the bill for a project study on that, leaving only one reservoir out of the total of six that were authorized in 1946 on which no action has been taken.

The CHAIRMAN. Where is Conchas Dam out in New Mexico?
Mr. MATTHIAS. That is not on this map.

The CHAIRMAN. Anyway, just for your reminder, that dam was constructed before the Denison Dam.

Mr. PICKETT. May I ask the gentleman one question?

As I understand it, the authorized projects and those already constructed are principally flood-control projects with, in some instances, power generation as an auxiliary development from it?

Mr. MATTHIAS. Power, Congressman, has been recommended on only one, the Denison Reservoir, which is now completed and in operation. The other six are single-purpose reservoirs: flood control only.

Mr. LARCADE. May I make one observation? I would like to say that the testimony of the gentleman corroborates the statement which, I made on the Old River project, when it was being considered, to this committee a few days ago, that most of the water of 54 rivers that flow into the Mississippi River find their way to the Atchafalaya River. The CHAIRMAN. For his satisfaction, his statement did not need any corroboration.

Mr. MATTHIAS. Mr. Chairman, we are extremely grateful that the program on the Red River and its tributaries has progressed to the point it has. We feel that through the procedure that has been used, economy has been effected and all means are exhausted to do that job with the greatest of savings.

We need more, of course; we could really use more money and speed the program up. But our people feel that if there is any money to be spent toward a plan of which we feel now that we have all of the agencies sufficiently trained, sufficiently in possession of the evidence and the justification that makes these projects possible, we feel that we in the limits of economy should use those agencies and apply any addi tional funds towards the construction of projects that we have already authorized or under way.

We recognized, back shortly after Governor Kerr left the Governor's chair in Oklahoma that certainly coordination of the States involved in the reservoir, in the Red River Basin would be desirable. We formed what we called the Four-State Planning Committee composed

92329-49- -64

of the engineers of the States and the directors of the public works departments of those States. We had meeting after meeting after meeting at which we took on these problems. We discussed them; we analyzed them; and we tried to work out a program of assistance to the various agencies that were preparing these plans for submission to Congress.

Mr. McGREGOR. Without any Federal cost.

Mr. MATTHIAS. We in the area felt it was our duty to help prepare these plans and to voice the people's wishes in those plans so that when they came here we would all be united. We knew what we wanted and we had contributed our share of study and thought toward that plan. The Soil Conservation Service today is preparing an over-all comprehensive soil-conservation program for the development for the Red River Basin. It started about 6 months ago. It was late. We should have had it earlier but they are under way with it.

In addition to this interim plan which has been authorized by the Congress, a review of reports from the Corps of Engineers is now in the hands of the Board of Engineers of Rivers and Harbors. I think, and my people think, that it would be very foolish to take this plan and put it into effect until we have the answers from that report which is on its way up to this committee. The answers may be there. It will satisfy everybody. Certainly it will be a big improvement and a big help.

Furthermore, we feel that civilians taking a post on a commission of this kind cannot be qualified nor are they able to judge these things from the technical standpoint that they must be judged from. You gentlemen sitting here on this committee are the judges on that.

We feel that the machinery is set up; you get the technical data, then you decide whether that project is economically justified from the standpoint of the Government expenditure.

To show that Government agencies do have access to information from one agency to the other, I remember back in 1946 when the Overton waterway was being considered by this committee. I think we spent about 2 hours there while we listened to the Fish and Wild Life of the Department of the Interior tell us about the catfish in Red River; and it seems to me that Senator Overton who was here at that time said that he had been living on the banks of the Red River since his boyhood and as far as he knew there was only garfish in there.

We do know, of course, that all agencies interchange their reports. They interchange their findings; their data; and they are condensed. They are coordinated and brought to you gentlemen.

Salinity control is nothing new in the lower end of Louisiana. The Mermentau project which is in the present appropriation bill today indicates $1,807,000 to prevent salt intrustion in the locks in the lower rice country; but there is no salinity problem on the Red.

We have no objection to the Arkansas and the White being included in the commission; but we honestly feel, gentlemen, that with the progress that has been made on Red River, and with the program that we have before us today, that a commission or an administration or a valley authority would be a detriment and would set us back years. The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to interrupt you, but while you are very fair in making your statement, you are speaking with respect to the Red River Basin because you represent that basin. As a

citizen, don't you think the same arguments that you make with respect to the Red River Basin are generally applicable to that of the Arkansas, the White Basin, or any other basin, as far as that is concerned, in the country where we are asked to make authorization?

Mr. MATTHIAS. I would say this, Mr. Chairman, that anyone who is vitally interested in developing the resources of their area of the country, if they went into this, and carefully considered it, I think they would find instead of being at the present time a benefit or an asset to their problem, I think in the long run they would find that it would be a deficit.

The CHAIRMAN. That is your statement; I am not contradicting it. Mr. MATTHIAS. Of course, Mr. Chairman, I am better informed because the condition on the Arkansas and the White River is entirely different; they might not have made the progress that we have and progressed to the point where we can see finally a goal where we are going to accomplish the purposes for which it was set up.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to interrupt you, but do you have any further statement you want to make about the matter?

Mr. MATTHIAS. No, sir; I do not, except to express on behalf of my people my thanks and the thanks of the association for the opportunity of coming here today and expressing our views in regards to this legislation.

Mr. LARCADE. I ask unanimous consent that the witness be permitted to extend and revise his remarks and file a further statement for the record at this point.

The CHAIRMAN. Don't file it, because you will have a hard time to improve on what you have said. You have made a very helpful statement.

Mr. DONDERO. Don't change it.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Matthias; you have been very helpful and fair in your statement.

Mr. ALLEN. I would like to present to the committee Mr. E. Leory Chandler, who is at present one of our State officials and on one of the river levee boards. He can speak officially.

The CHAIRMAN. We are glad to have Mr. Chandler with us. You may proceed, sir.

STATEMENT OF E. LEROY CHANDLER, PRESIDENT, BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF RED RIVER, ATCHAFALAYA, BAYOU BOEUF LEVEE DISTRICTS, LOUISIANA

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am Leroy Chandler, president of the board of directors of the Red River, Atchafalaya, and Bayou Boeuf levee districts in Louisiana. The CHAIRMAN. Where is your headquarters?

Mr. CHANDLER. Alexandria. We have a large levee district. You have heard Mr. Matthias' statement. He voices not only my sentiments and opinions but I think the sentiments of everyone concerned with floods and levees throughout our district and throughout the State of Louisiana.

We who live behind the levees in Louisiana are understandably concerned over any bill that could possibly defer action on construction of reservoirs. We think we have in view relief from floods with appro