Page images
PDF
EPUB

areas lying only a few feet above sea level at the mouth of the bayou. Commercial timber at one time covered the upper portion of the basin and although most of the timber has been cut, lumbering is still an important industry. The lower portion of the basin is devoted principally to farming, raising of livestock, and the production of crude oil. Crops produced include rice, corn, grain sorghums, and vegetables. The rice lands are irrigated from an extensive system of canals fed from Sabine River. Local interests have constructed about 74 miles of drainage channels in Cow Bayou and tributaries within Orange County ending at mile 20.3, above Orangefield.

3. Population of the Cow Bayou Basin in 1940 was about 4,800. There are no incorporated towns within the watershed, the most important unincorporated places being Buna and Orangefield with populations of about 500. Beaumont, Port Arthur and Orange, important industrial and marketing centers, are within 15 miles of the basin. Many summer homes have been built in the lower part of the basin between mile 7.2 and mile 14.3 Most of the residents are employed in Port Arthur and Orange. The bayou is crossed by conuty highways at mile 7.16 and at Orangefield (mile 17.32) and by State Highway No. 87 at mile 12.5, which furnish transportation facilities to that part of the basin.

4. Floods resulting from intense rainfall are of frequent occurrence on Cow Bayou at Orangefield and below and have produced stages above mean low tide up to 10.4 feet at Orangefield and 5 feet at the mouth. The flood plain area below the upper limit of the oil field at Orangefield (mile 18) is 6.638 acres, of which 2.613 acres are used for grazing and farming, 150 acres are in Orangefield and the adjacent oil field and the remainder is marshland. Above Orangefield, flood damages are not serious. It is estimated that 44 damaging floods occurred in the Orangefield area during the period February 1917 through September 1945, of which the most damaging occurred July 1943, and May 1944. Estimated direct and indirect damages to agricultural, residential, business, oil field, transportation and utility properties by a flood equivalent to that of May 1944 amount to $148,000. Estimated average annual damages amount to $39,000 of which $30,000 is direct and $9,000 is indirect.

5. Local interests unanimously desire protection from floods in Cow Bayou at Orangefield and below. One group proposes a channel for diversion of floodwaters from Cow Bayou at a point above Orangefield to Neches River. The Orange County Conservation and Reclamation District No. 1, supported by local organizations and property owners propose a navigation and flood control channel from Orangefield generally balong Cow Bayou to Sabine River. Proponents of the latter plan state that benefits from the prevention of flood damages, disruption of traffic and of normal activities, and improved health conditions would be obtained by its construction together with savings in transportation costs on commerce in crude oil, mud shell, building materials and miscellaneous commodities of over 100,000 tons annually, and that sites for industrial development would be provided. In connection with this plan, they offer to connect the existing drainage improvements in Orange County with the requested Federal improvement and to maintain such portion of the channel as required, to furnish such rights-of-way and spoil disposal areas and such alterations to county highway bridges as may be required for the Federal improvement, and to hold the United States free from all damage claims due to the improvement.

6. The district engineer has investigated both plans of improvement suggested by local interests and finds that the combined flood control and navigation channel would provide the greatest benefit with respect to cost. He proposes construction of a channel 100 feet wide and 13 feet deep at mean low tide and about 7.7 miles long extending from the Sabine River at a point 3,000 feet downstream from the present mouth of Cow Bayou, to a point 0.5 mile above the county highway bridge at Orangefield, with a turning basin 300 feet wide by 500 feet long and 13 feet deep at Orangefield. Estimated first cost of the improvement, including $1,500 for aids to navigation, is $355,400, of which $322,800 is Federal cost of construction including alterations to pipe lines and cables crossed in land cuts, and $31,100 is non-Federal cost of rights-of-way and alterations to submerged pipe lines and cables. Federal annual carrying charges, including $5,000 annually for maintenance, are estimated at $18,200 and total annual carrying charges at $20,300. Estimated annual benefits, allowing for abandonment in 25 years of the oil field properties subject to flood damages, is $34,740 of which $30,040 is for direct and indirect annual flood damages prevented and $4,700 is estimated savings in transportation costs on 26,000 tons of mud shell that is moved into the area annually. Since the ratio of estimated annual benefits to costs is 1.71 to 1.00 and additional intangible flood control benefits and unevaluated navigation benefits would be realized the district engineer concludes that the proposed improvement is economically justified and recommends its construction by the Federal Government subject to the conditions that no dredging shall be done by the United States within 50 feet of any existing wharf or structure except the State highway bridge at mile 12.5 and the county highway bridge at. Orangefield and that local interests provide free of cost to the United States all necessary rights-of-way and spoil-disposal areas and agree to maintain that portion of the project above the proposed turning basin and to hold and save the United States free from any damages that may result from the construction and maintenance of the project. The division engineer concurs generally in the conclusions and recommendations of the district engineer. While he concurs in recommending authorization of the project, he believes construction of the proposed turning basin should be deferred until the need therefor is clearly demonstrated. He recommends that improvement of Cow Bayou be subject to the additional conditions that local interests agree to make all necessary alterations requested by the Secretary of War to any highway bridges maintained across the improved waterway and to maintain and operate such structurees after completion of the project, and agree to bear the expense of any necessary alterations of all pipe lines and submarine cables at crossings where the improvement occupies the existing channel of Cow Bayou.

VIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND

HARBORS !

7. The Board concurs in general in the views and recommendations of the reporting officers. Cow Bayou at Orangefield, Tex., and below is subject to damaging floods which could be alleviated by the proposed improvement and in addition substantial navigation benefits would be secured. The Board considers the proposed channel and turning basin to be suitable for the improvement of Cow Bayou, and as the benefits to be expected are in excess of the costs, the project is justified.

8. The Board recommends improvement of Cow Bayou, Tex., by the construction of a channel 100 feet wide and 13 feet deep at mean low tide and about 7.7 miles long, extending from the navigation channel in Sabine River to a point 0.5 mile above the county highway bridge at Orangefield, Tex., with a turning basin 300 feet wide, 500 feet long, and 13 feet deep at Orangefield, generally in accordance with the plans of the district engineer at an estimated cost to the United States of $323,000 for construction including alterations to pipe lines and cables in land cuts, and $5,000 annually for maintenance, subject to the conditions that no dredging shall be done by the United States within 50 feet of any existing wharf or structure except the State highway bridge at mile 12.5 and the county highway bridge at Orangefield, and that local interests furnish assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of War that they will (a) provide free of cost to the United States all rights-of-way and spoil-disposal areas for initial construction and subsequent maintenance when and as required; (b) maintain after completion that portion of the project above the proposed turning basin in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of War; (c) make all necessary highway and highway-bridge changes and maintain and operate such structures after completion of the project; (d) bear the expense of any necessary alterations of pipe lines and submarine cables at crossings where the improvement occupies the existing channel of Cow Bayou; and (e) hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction and maintenance of the project. For the Board:

R. C. CRAWFORD,
Brigadier General,

Senior Member.

[graphic]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

WAR DEPARTMENT,
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS,

Washington. The CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON FLOOD CONTROL,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. The Committee on Flood Control, House of Representatives, by resolution adopted March 20, 19 requested the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors to review the report on Sabine River, Tex., submitted to Congress on April 5, 1944, with a view to determining whether any modifications of the recommendations contained therein with respect to flood control and the utilization of water for power development are advisable at this time. I enclose the report of the Board in response thereto. It is also in review of an interim report by the district and division engineers on preliminary examination and survey of "Sabine River, and tributaries, Tex., in the interest of navigation, flood control, and other water uses,” authorized by the River and Harbor Act approved March 2, 1945. A final report in response to the above authorizations will be submitted at a later date.

2. After full consideration of the interim reports secured from the district and division engineers, the Board recommends improvement of Cow Bayou, Tex., by the construction of a channel 100 feet wide and 13 feet deep at mean low tide and about 7.7 miles long, extending from the navigation channel in Sabine River to a point 0.5 mile above the county highway bridge at Orangefield, Tex., with a turning basin 300 feet wide, 500 feet long and 13 feet deep at Orangefield, generally in accordance with the plans of the district engineer at an estimated cost to the United States of $323,000 for construction including alterations to pipe lines and cables in land cuts, and $5,000 annually for maintenance, subject to the conditions that no dredging shall be done by the United States within 50 feet of any existing wharf or structure except the state highway bridge at mile 12.5 and the county highway bridge at Orangefield, and that local interests furnish assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of War that they will (a) provide free of cost to the United States all rights-of-way and spoil disposal areas for initial construction and subsequent maintenance when and as required; (b) maintain after completion that portion of the project above the proposed turning basin in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of War; (c) make all necessary highway and highway bridge changes and maintain and operate such structures after completion of the project; (d) bear the expense of any necessary alterations of pipe lines and submarine cables at crossings where the improvement occupies the existing channel of Cow Bayou; and (e) hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction and maintenance of the project.

3. After due consideration of these reports, I concur in the views and recommendations of the Board. Very truly yours,

R. A. WHEELER,
Lieutenant General,

Chief of Engineers. Senator OVERTON. Is there any opposition to Grand Bayou? (No response.] The Chair hears none.

Is there any opposition to the Cow Bayou project? [No response.] ) The Chair hears none.

Senator CORDON. May I ask, Colonel, what you have in reference to the Yaquina proposition?

Colonel FERINGA. The Yaquina project was also considered by the Board at the time these other two projects that I have just explained were considered. That report is still before the Department of the Interior and has not been returned to our office with their comments; hence we have not been able to send it to the Bureau of the Budget.

Senator CORDON. How long has that report been before the Interior Department?

Colonel FERINGA. I think about a week, Senator Cordon.

Senator CORDON. How long, Mr. Chairman, do we expect these hearings to continue on this bill?

Senator OVERTON. I expected to get through with them in 3 days.

« PreviousContinue »