« PreviousContinue »
Mr. ODOM. Yes.
Senator OVERTON. In the construction of levees they levied across these streams?
Mr. Odom. Yes.
Mr. Odom. Yes, sir; the slopes are flat in that area there. There is very little erosion.
Senator OVERTON. What is your ratio of cost there?
Mr. ODOM. I worked out the total benefits from 1940 tonnage plus benefits to agricultural lands of $5,000,000.
Senator OVERTON. What is your percentage?
Mr. Odom. Well, the percentage would be a little less than 21.99.
Senator OVERTON. What was the total tonnage you expect to carry on this waterway?
Mr. ODOM. One million seven hundred and thirty-two thousand.
Senator ROBERTSON. One million seven hundred and thirty-two thousand?
Mr. ODOM. No, 1,712,000.
Senator ROBERTSON. One million five hundred thousand tons probably?
Mr. ODOM. Yes.
Senator ROBERTSON. So when this waterway is built you are taking that away from the railroads? That will mean a definite reduction in the railroad operations, and apart from the actual profit to the railroads it will mean the employment of so many less men on the railroads.
Mr. Odom. If this project goes into construction the railroads will get a lot of hauling for about 5 years that they have never had before in carrying up stuff there to build it. By that time the increase in activity probably will give them more tonnage than they had before.
Senator OVERTON. Wouldn't the development of the valleyMr. Odom. I don't want to take any tonnage away from them.
Senator OVERTON. Wouldn't the development of the valley, through the operation of the canal so increase the different industries and businesses and give freight to railroads that the railroads themselves instead of losing would profit by it?
Mr. ODOM. Yes.
Senator OVERTON. They would have increased tonnage over what they are at present enjoying?
Senator ROBERTSON. Well, is that ti je?
Senator OVERTON. That is not only true of this valley but through every valley where there has been any river improvement, I think.
Mr. Odom. There is a considerable justification that could be worked up on this project from a military standpoint that we haven't taken up. The fact that we have all this military activity in this area isduring wartime you are very much interested in saving steel. You can increase your carrying capacity of the waterways much more economically in steel than you can on any other type.
Senator ROBERTSON. I understand from the hearings on the bill we passed in 1944, or January 1945, that it showed an actual decrease in the amount of freight carried on the waterways entirely because it was so slow as compared to the speed with which the railroads carried it and the speed with which the Army and Navy required it.
Senator OVERTON. Do you mean all freight?
Senator OVERTON. Here is a graph and here are your figures. Here is 1944. It runs way up there to the peak. Here it starts in 1932. It went up in 1933, down a little in 1934, and from then on it runs up almost perpendicularly. In 1944 in ton-miles 31,000,000,000 in round figures; in 1943, 26,000,000,000; 1941, 26,000,000,000; 1940, 22,000,000,000; 1939, 19,000,000,000; 1938, 1,000,000,000; 1937, 16,000,000,000; 1936, 15,000,000,000; 1935, 13,000,000,000; 1934, 9,000,000,000; 1933, 10,000,000,000; 1932, 7,000,000,000; 1931, 7,000,000,000; 1930, 9,000,000,000; 1929, 8,000,000,000; 1928, 9,000,000,000; 1927, 8,000,000,000.
So you see from 1927 to 1944 it has about quadrupled.
Senator CORDON. That graph actually does show, however, a reduction in the war years.
Senator OVERTON. Yes.
Colonel FERINGA. May I explain what happened there? At this point water transport was engaged to the maximum of its capabilities. There was some shuffling around in order to put the barges and the towboats in the best location. No matter what we did we couldn't get any steel to build more barges and towboats. It was not until some construction had been resumed through the ODT, I think, that we could again put them on the waterways.
I think the statement that Senator Robertson referred to was made by the railroads, that waterway transportation had been reduced. was here at the time, and the statement was that waterway transportation carried by common carriers had been reduced. Actually, as you know, we are required by law, the Corps of Engineers, to maintain a record of all the commerce carried by water, and the shippers must by law give us the figures. Therefore these figures are definite, and they are bound to be accurate.
Senator ROBERTSON. They are private carriers as well as common carriers?
Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir; all waterway traffic, private and common carriers.
Senator CORDON. Colonel, I note from the graph there that while there was a reduction from 1941 through 1942, and 1943, no doubt due to your reshuffling at the beginning, 1943, when presumably you had reoriented your traffic, there was a sharp increase for 1945 which is also a war year.
Colonel FERINGA. That is right. That is when we got that extra transport on the water.
Senator OVERTON. I think maybe some of us will recall we had hearings before, when the East wanted oil so bad and what to do. So we called upon those connected with water-borne transportation to see what could be done. My recollection is that they said they were perfectly willing to go ahead or go further if they had more towboats and more barges. Then there was quite a discussion as to what kind of barges could be constructed; concrete barges, wooden barges, whether wooden barges were safe to transport oil in, and so forth. Finally they did get to work and did get additional towboats and barges, and it went on up.
Very well. Thank you, Mr. Odom.
Colonel FERINGA. Mr. Chairman, may I correct a statement I made?
You asked me if there was any opposition to the waterway. I said none except the railroads. The Department of the Interior submitted a more or less noncommittal letter which was presented before the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the House. They presented it at the last of the hearings. The statement was made therein, as I recall, that the Fish and Wildlife Service had not had an opportunity to complete its study of the effect on the fish of the Red River and indicated it might be severe. That is in the House report.
Of course, when our report is published that letter will be included.
Senator OVERTON. I asked if there was any further opposition from the Department of the Interior.
Colonel FERINGA. The gentleman from the Interior Department invited my attention to that.
Senator OVERTON. Is he here?
Senator OVERTON. If you are opposing it in any way, I would like to hear from you, and I would also like to know what fish there are in the Red River.
Mr. Power. A representative from the Wildlife Bureau will be here tomorrow and explain that to you.
Senator OVERTON. I wish he could be here this afternoon because we are going to take up other projects tomorrow.
Mr. POWER. In response to your request this morning I went back and contacted a man with respect to Yaquina Bay. While the report is not ready, it having gone out of our office last Thursday, I was told I might tell you we agree with Senator Cordon there is no conceivable reason why we should object to Yaquina Bay. They will have a report ready to that effect.
Senator OVERTON. Someone wants to come here and testify about this Red River project tomorrow?
Mr. POWER. Yes.
Mr. Power. Well, as you know the officials of the Fish and Wildlife are in Chicago. I am not so sure they would oppose it.
Senator OVERTON. There was notice published of it 2 weeks ago in the Congressional Record and notice given to the press. I gave it as wide publicity as I could. Certainly the Department of the
Interior as an agency of the Government ought to keep up with these hearings. I don't think I addressed a letter direct to the Department of the Interior.
Mr. POWER. I am sure you did not, but they should have been here.
Senator OVERTON. I did not address a letter to the engineers, either, but I see they are here. I didn't address it to the railroads particularly, but they are here. I am keen, though, to hear him because I was born and reared on the banks of the Red River, and if there is any fish in the Red River I would like to discover that fact. It is such a silt-bearing stream there is no fish in it, as far as I know.
Mr. POWER. That I don't know. Senator OVERTON. There are some alligators there, I think that is all. Alligators are fish, aren't they?
Mr. POWER. They are reptiles, I believe.
Senator OVERTON. You are not connected-you are not acquainted with the fish and wildlife down there?
Mr. POWER. Unfortunately not.
Senator OVERTON. We may have some testimony about wildlife on the Red River.
Mr. POWER. The chairman would be more familiar with that than I would. I have never been on the Red River.
Mr. ODOM. Mr. Chairman, I would like to file one of these briefs.
Mr. POWER. Mr. Chairman, suppose we have the Fish and Wildlife file its statement.
Senator OVERTON. I would like to examine them. I want to find out about those fish. Is he here in Washington?
Mr. POWERS. I think so.
STATEMENT OF ROY MATTHIAS, REPRESENTING RED RIVER
VALLEY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, SHREVEPORT, LA.
Mr. MATTHIAS. Secretary for the Red River Valley Improvement Association.
Senator OVERTON. Aren't you connected with some chamber of commerce?
Mr. MATTHIAS. No, sir; I am not.
My full time is spent for the association in flood-control work and other water matters throughout the whole Red River Valley. Our association is composed of members throughout the four States that are interested in improving the valley with respect to navigation, flood control, and various drainage and reclamation projects.
Senator OVERTON. The membership is composed of representatives from the Red River Valley throughout the four States of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana?
Mr. MATTHIAS. Yes.
Senator OVERTON. Is there any opposition to this project on the part of any members of your association?
Mr. MATTHIAS. No.
Senator OVERTON. Is there any opposition that you know of on the part of local interests in the State of Louisiana, or individuals?
Mr. MATTHIAS. None that I know of, sir.
Senator OVERTON. Is there any so far as you know in any of the other three States?
Mr. MATTHIAS. On the contrary, Mr. Chairman, those folks are very anxious to see us open this because they feel once one part of it is built, you may say the first step, they will be fortunate enough to secure an extension of it up as far as the Denison Dam.
Senator OVERTON. Now, will you proceed and make what statement
desire? Mr. MATTHIAS. I have no statement because of the fact that all of our members of the association were here in January and also before the House hearings, the House committee hearings, but I have several short factual statements that I would like to put into the record.
Senator OVERTON. Before you do that, were rou present at the hearings before the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors?
Mr. MATTHIAS. In January?
Mr. MATTHIAS. No, sir; I was not. My president, Mr. Dixon, was there with many others. I attended the hearings before the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the House.
Senator OVERTON. You made a statement then?
Senator OVERTON. Is there anyone else here from Shreveport make a statement?
Mr. MATTHIAS. Mr. Bryant from Shreveport and Mr. Homer Harris from Alexandria.
Senator OVERTON. I mean before the House committee-besides yourself—from Shreveport?
Mr. MATTHIAS. Oh, yes; Mr. Webb, Fred Webb, who is president of the Caddo police jury; Edgar Fullilove, commissioner of the Bossier levee district, and V. V. Whittington, who is president of two local banks in that area.
Senator OVERTON. Very well.
Mr. MATTHIAS. I have a statement from the J. B. Beaird Co, who are fabricators, machinists, and founders in the city of Shreveport. They are a large organization and they have expressed their views as to this project in a statement, which I would like to offer for the record.
Senator OVERTON. It may appear in the record.