STONE'S TOWBOAT & HARBOR, Point Pleasant, W. Va., August 8, 1945. Subject: Proposed improvement for Big Sandy River of West Virginia and Kentucky. CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Due to the fact that being a licensed pilot 15 years and having navigated shallow-draft vessels over the present waterways of Big Sandy, as well as that of Ohio and Kanawha Rivers, I am of the opinion that it will be hazardous to navigate the proposed elevated water of Tug or Levisa Fork, which, as you note, carry the water to make that of Big Sandy River; due to the deep curves and narrow channel for 66 miles on Tug and approximately 98 miles on Levisa Fork, with a proposed tow of four standard-size coal barges, 175 feet long, 26 feet wide, drawing 9 feet, powered or propelled by a 550-horsepower boat at a rate of 5% miles per hour continuous speed, or 640 miles per hour with the same four barges empty, upstream, with approximately 1 foot draft; due to many factors retarding speed, thereby rendering the operation of moving coal very expensive. Yours very truly, C. C. STONE, M. P. BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS, Washington, D. C. AUGUST 8, 1945. GENTLEMEN: It has been brought to my attention, through various transportation concerns here in Huntington, W. Va., that the United States Engineers Department has a favorable report for the channelization of the Big Sandy, Tug Fork, and Levisa Rivers. As a master and pilot over the Monongahela to Point Marion, Allegheny River to lock No. 2, Ohio River lock No. 27, Letart to Cincinnati, Ohio, head of navigation Kanawha River over a period of 28 years, in this period and more recently I have had an opportunity to study the Big Sandy, Tug Fork, and Levisa Rivers. Under these studies and reading the reports of the United States Engineers Department, of intentions of bringing a four-barge standard tow with a 550horsepower boat out of Tug Fork and Levisa Rivers, it would not be possible for such a tow to travel at a speed of 5.3 miles per hour downstream. Nor would it be possible to travel upstream at 6.5 miles per hour because of such a sharp radius of curves. This speed would almost diminish 75 percent. It also will be a very hard river to maintain because of sand, and the locks would be very expensive to operate under same conditions. After operating on the above rivers, whereas the rivers are 300 to 450-foot channels at the narrowest places, I am very confident that 150-foot wide channel with the proposed tonnage could not be accomplished. Therefore, as a pilot, I believe that this river should not be channelized under the circumstances, as the per ton-mile cost would be so much higher than the all-rail rate now existing. I trust that your honorable body will give this sincere consideration. GENTLEMEN: Some time ago, I read in the Huntington papers whereas the United States Engineers Department, district engineers office, Huntington, W. Va., had completed their survey of the Sandy River Valleys including Tug Fork and Levisa Rivers to be canalized. Various river interest has contacted me in reference to my opinion as to the possibilities to navigate this new proposed river project. Being a master and pilot on the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers and most of their tributaries for over 30 years, I became very much interested to see what possi bilities these rivers had for economical transportation. I have made a study throughout these rivers and find that the report as turned in by the United States Engineers Department, from the standpoint of navigation only, would not be practical with a four-barge tow, standard size (175 by 11 by 26) barges, at the rate of speed specified (5 and 6 miles per hour.) The bends are so numerous that it would be almost impossible at anytime to even pick up a speed of 3 miles per hour, as the speed would have to be reduced again for the next bend. In order to navigate most of these bends with a narrow channel of 150 feet and not over 225 feet in width, in bends, this again would reduce the speed to about 11⁄2 miles per hour. One wheel would have to be backing and one wheel coming ahead in order to swing the boat and tow around the bends 90 percent of the time in both the Tug Fork and Levisa Rivers. A signal system something like the railroads would have to be set up so as to notify the upstream boat to lay aside until the down stream tow had safely passed, if possible with a four-barge tow. Under these circumstances, with my experience navigating most of our treacherous tributaries and rivers that are two to three times as wide and very much straighter, I can safely state that the speed on these two fork rivers would be less than 2 miles per hour average, under the most favorable conditions. Not to speak of delays at locks, dredging of channels continuously, fog and ice gorges, repairs to screw propellers, damages to boat and barges, and numerous other conditions. Very little navigating at night can be done as it would be dangerous to the sleeping crew aboard in making bends, as the timbers would crack the cabins of overhanging trees, probably seriously injuring some member of the crew. Locking the boat would be very dangerous in time of a rise, as they are set in out of channels and will fill with sand. I believe that your honorable committee will give this proposed uneconomical improvement further consideration as to the cost and maintenance of these rivers, as unsound for economical transportation. It is another very small Missouri River. Cheap transportation is already in operation compared with what these rivers could ever possibly be operated for per ton, which I understand is 55 cents per net ton. Very truly yours, ROLLA F. ROGERS, Master and Pilot, Mississippi River and Tributaries. Sworn to before me this 11th day of August 1945. [SEAL] My commission expires March 31, 1954. JOHN P. WALKER, Jr., POINT PLEASANT, W. VA., BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: As a riverman and a taxpayer, I wish to enter a protest against the canalization of the Big Sandy River and its Tug and Levisa Forks. I consider the project to be impractical from both a financial and navigation standpoint. As I understand it, the survey requires transportation of 15,000,000 tons of coal annually by boats with four-barge tows (size of barges 175 by 26) through a channel 150 feet wide on the forks and 200 feet on Big Sandy. These tows to move at an average speed of 5 miles per hour both day and night. I have been over this proposed route several times and am familiar with it. It will take a lot of four-barge tows to move 15,000,000 tons annually. It would be dangerous for tows to pass at 5 miles per hour with only 46 feet clearance to be spaced between boats and channel line and boat and boat. One boat would have to land and the other work at very slow speed until clear. This is on straight stretches. On sharp turns, of which there are over 90 on this route, they cannot pass at all. One boat will have to wait until the other has traveled the bend before proceeding. When there is current the downstream boat will have to stop and flank these turns, which takes time. Consider the number of boats in operation, time lost in passing each boat, then add to that the number of times they meet at a sharp bend and have to wait until one has run the bend and this will add up to a lot of lost time. Most of these turns will have to be run at slow speed. Lots of the straight stretches are so short that you would no more than reach maximum speed until you would have to slow down to run the next turn. This also cuts down your average. There will be lots of nights that these boats cannot operate due to the narrowness of the channel and the closeness of the hills which will cast a shadow clear across the river which will make the shore line and river look alike at the head of the tow. True, these boats will be equipped with searchlights but any pilot will tell you there are lots of nights with atmospheric conditions under which you cannot see objects clear with a searchlight. On this narrow, crooked channel the pilot will have to see clearly with his light or not run. There are frequent flash floods in this region lasting from one to several days which produce a current that could not be operated upon either up or down. All of this makes lots more lost time. I have not taken into consideration time lost for fog and ice and probable difficulties with pumps supplying the upper pools during the low-water season. My opinion is that it would be difficult to maintain a schedule involving this many boats exceeding 2 or 21⁄2 miles per hour. This river is well known as being one of the worst rivers in the country for carrying silt and sand. After visiting the old locks on the upper reaches, with their lock chambers filled to the top with deposit, one can visualize the equipment and time required to keep these proposed locks in operation. High lift dams till up. They have just finished dredging operations at the entrance and exit of the Gallipolis Dam on the Ohio River which carrys very little deposit compared with the Big Sandy. I say this project, based on moving 15,000,000 tons of coal annually with a certain number of boats with tows of four barges each moving at an average speed of 5 miles per hour, cannot be done and will be a losing venture. As a taxpayer, I protest the spending of the proposed $68,000,000 on this project. I hold masters' license of unlimited tonnage for Mississippi River and tributaries since 1924 and first-class pilot's license covering the Ohio River from Louisville, Ky., to Pittsburgh, Pa., and the Kanawha River from the mouth to Boomer, W. Va. Respectfully, JOHN R. DOUGLASS. POINT PLEASANT, W. VA., August 14, 1945. BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: I understand there is a project in view for the canalization of the Big Sandy River and its Tug and Levisa Forks. As I understand the situation, transportation of 15,000,000 tons of coal is to be taken out annually by boats with four-barge tows. This would call for something over 40 boats to move this tonnage as proposed, working 24 hours per day. It so happens that I have been over the Big Sandy River and the Tug and Levisa Forks within the past few days and being a riverman I looked at them from that standpoint, as to the possibilities of navigation and expense, and in my opinion the project would not only be impractical from a navigation viewpoint but financially extravagant. I am a licensed master and pilot and work at it daily from the head of Kanawha River at Harewood, W. Va. to Cincinnati, Ohio. I hold master's license for the Mississippi River and its tributaries and have since 1930. My first-class pilot's license covers the Ohio River from Hughes Bar, Ky. to Long Bottom, Ohio, and on the Kanawha River from Point Pleasant, W. Va. to Mount Carbon, W. Va. I am master of one of the largest steamboats that tows coal on the Kanawha River. We handle tows from 8 to 16 standard barges of coal making the tows run from 12,000 to 20,000 tons each. I make this statement to prove that I have a foundation for my statements in this letter. The subject project calls for a clearance of 150 feet for the Levisa and Tug Forks and 200 feet for the Big Sandy and they have to move 15,000,000 tons annually with boats and tows of four barges each, moving at an average speed of 5 miles per hour. This route is full of short bends that boats will have to slow down to make and impossible to pass other boats until a straight piece of river is reached. On Diesel boats you cannot hear whistle signals for any distance. Many times boats would be waiting in the bend and one of them would have to back out if they see each other in time to avoid an accident. The safest thing to counteract this difficulty would be a signaling system on shore devised so boats would know 87050-46- -17 when the way was clear around the bend. When boat meets boat not at a bend one will have to stop while the other passes at a very slow speed, and if at a bend one will have to wait until the other has cleared out of the bend. Considering the number of boats involved, this adds up to much lost time. On the Monogahela River it is a common sight to see a number of from 8 to 10 boats waiting for the same lock. This will happen here many times. The way the locks will be constructed they will fill up. A tremendous amount of money would have to be spent to keep these locks in operation. Another very important phase of this summary is the lights. I have not been able to think of any possible lighting system that could be used at night. The channel is so narrow and the hills so close that a shadow is cast across the river which leaves no way of distinction between the shoreline and the river from the head of the tow. The expense for a lighting system would be very great if a lighting system could be devised but personally I doubt if a practical one could be. This area is also subject to more than the usual amount of fog, as well as numerous flash floods which are cause for ceasing of operation. From my personal experience on the upper part of the Kanawha River I am sure there will be many times when boats must cease operation entirely. I estimate about 3 months out of each year this situation will arise. I don't think that even an average speed of two miles per hour can be ascertained over this route with this number of boats. A four-barge tow just cannot be steered around a bend at this speend and with the numerous amount of bends it is easily understood what a slow speed must be taken. I have not mentioned the time that woll be lost for ice and the many difficulties encountered by pumps supplying the upper pools during the low-water season. After seeing this and hearing the estimated cost of this job I have come to the conclusion that the project would be a very foolish and very extravagant task to undertake and I offer my protest. Very truly yours, Capt. OTTO F. AEIKER. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of August 1945. [SEAL] My commission expires April 20, 1948. Capt. PHIL C. ELSEY, H. A. JOHNSON, Notary Public. RAYMOND CITY COAL & TRANSPORTATION CORP., Huntington, W. Va. DEAR CAPTAIN ELSEY: It has come to my attention that the United States engineers of the Huntington district have submitted figures for the canalization of the Big Sandy River and the Levisa and Tug Fork streams of that system. I am led to believe also that in the engineers' figures they report that 15,000.000 tons of coal is available for movement from various points to Catlettsburg, Ky., at a savings of 22 cents per ton over the rail rate of 55 cents per ton. With some knowledge of river transportation I have received in the last 17 years, I firmly believe the canalization and the coal movement as outlined by the engineers, is impossible. I have discussed the Big Sandy project with Capt. F. E. Wright and Capt. Arlin Austin, of our steamer Taric, along with river operators here in the Cincinnati district, and everyone is of the same opinion that the movement of 15,000,000 tons per year in four-barge tows from such a small stream is impossible. Discussing with both the above navigators, I speak herewith for them in questioning the practicability of navigation on the above streams. Since it is practically impossible for two boats to pass in Red House Chute in the Kanawha River and impossible for two boats to pass in Dago Bend, Kanawha River, how will it be possible to move any distance at any rate of speed with all the sharp bends and a narrow channel in the Levisa and Tug Forks? We say it cannot be done with any success. The movement of 15,000,000 tons in four-barge tows over such a narrow stream will necessitate so many boats and barges that movement will be practically impossible. We say it cannot be done. Or, can be done with no success. With the understanding that there is not half as much water in these streams as in the Kanawha River, we cannot visualize passing other moving tows nor fleets moored at various points without mishap due to the draw of the moving tow. And, with so many tows passing, it is our belief that mishaps and accidents or movements by capstan engines or mules will be prevalent for navigation on these streams. We say it cannot be done with any success. Boating 15,000,000 tons per year of 297 days, as outlined in the engineers' report, will mean that there must be 14 tows each day arriving with loads and leaving with empties from Catlettsburg. Handling 112 barges each day is going to make harbors in the vicinity of this town mighty busy. We say it cannot be done with any success. A boat arriving every hour and 42 minutes and leaving at the same rate is going to necessitate a police patrol boat to direct traffic at the mouth of the Big Sandy. We say it cannot be done with any success. The above statement from Captain Wright and Captain Austin are just a few of the many that can be made regarding the impossibilities for navigating on the Big Sandy system. I believe it wise to place such information in your hands in order that it might be included as data to be used to save taxpayers money in the amount of $68,000,000 on such a poor investment as the dream outlined for the Big Sandy canalization. It is my feeling and hope, however, that the cooperation the river operators have received in the past from the Engineers Department will still prevail, and we will still reciprocate as we have in many problems that have arisen heretofore. Again speaking for Captain Wright and Captain Austin and myself, I would like for you to feel that we know you, Captain Elsey, as a man who has done everything in his power to bring advantages and betterments to the river industry as a whole. One who has given his daily hours in thoughts and duties to the rivers and navigators thereon without prejudice to any. For these reasons we feel that you are the one man to handle wisely the above information and our own thoughts on river transportation on the Big Sandy system. If there is anything further I might do to assist you in any of your problems as an advocate of advanced river transportation, please feel free to call on me. Sincerely yours, RUSS E. RICHTER. Actual operating time and tonnage moved for 3 vessels (550 to 600 horsepower) now operating on Ohio and Kanawha Rivers Note: Average tons per year, 3 vessels, 678,895; average miles per hour, 3 vessels, 1.57. The statistics contained herein are from 3 vessels which have operated in the past 5 years and are operating at present on the Ohio and Kanawha Rivers. They show that under the most favorable navigating conditions over established river routes, the average speed realized over a 5-year period is 1.5 miles per hour. If tonnage from mines had been available, the mile-per-hour figure would have been increased to 3 miles. Numerous mine shut-downs due to strikes, etc., accounted for one-half time delay in these operations. Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Without objection, the committee stands adjourned until 1:30. (Whereupon, at 12:15 p. m., the committee recessed until 1:30 p. m., this same day.) AFTER RECESS (The committee reassembled at 1: 30 p. m., pursuant to recess, Hon. John E. Rankin, presiding.) Mr. RANKIN. The committee will be in order. Mr. LAWSON. Mr. Chairman, at this time I desire to present Mr. Tom Raney, member of the international executive board of the United Mine Workers of America. |