In all of our experience it has never come to our attention that there was any movement of phosphate rock out of the Tennessee fields by water, and I am quite certain that there has been no appreciable movement, if any at all. Now let us turn to sugar, which is the fourth item on my exhibit 2. The engineers claim that there is going to be 461,000 tons of sugar with a saving of $388,000. That is a very considerable increase, you will notice, over the figures in the 1939 report. I am perfectly frank and willing to admit to you that sugar is a commodity that does move by water, and I think that is borne out by Mr. Prince's exhibit which shows that there is a considerable movement of sugar by waterways. For example, on the Ohio River there were 38,216 tons; on the Warrior River, 34,111 tons. But there was none on the Tennessee River. This is supposed to be a connection for the Tennessee River; that is one of the principal purposes. I cannot help believing that this sugar tonnage is overestimated. I will admit that there is going to be a considerable movement of sugar, but I do not believe it is going to be anything like what the engineers claim it is going to be, over this waterway. Let us again refer to exhibit 2. We find on line 6, asphalt. Here the engineers claim that there is going to be 123,000 tons of asphalt, and $184,000 in savings, though when they made the 1939 report they did not think that asphalt was going to move by water. Referring again to Mr. Prince's exhibit, you will find 335 tons on the Ohio River; none on the Tennessee River, and none on the Warrior River. The reason that asphalt does not move by water is very plain. It moves to points where there is road construction. In cold weather it has to be heated to get it out of the tanks. One of the largest asphalt refineries in existence is at Baton Rouge, La.; and if we look at Mr. Prince's exhibit again, and look down opposite the asphalt item, we find that on the river, that is, the Mississippi River, in the first column, there are the words "Baton Rouge to, but not including, New Orleans." If there ever was a chance to move asphalt by water, it is on that stretch of the river. But there is only 23,292 tons in all directions, on all waterways. While we are talking about asphalt, there has been, and probably will be again, an attempt to show that they are not talking about asphalt, but about asphalt rock. We know about asphalt rock. It is produced around Margerum. It has not moved for years. It never moved in any graet quantity. Margerum is located closer to the Tennessee River than it is to this new waterway. The last item on my exhibit 2 is rice. That turned out to be an error on the part of the Engineers and should be corn and Mr. Prince made the remarks that are to be made in connection with that. I am quite certain that if you consider these three exhibits that I have presented, and the ones presented to you by Mr. Prince, you are going to find there is considerable tonnage and considerable savings claimed by the proponents in this case that is not going to materialize. That is all I have to say, gentlemen. Thank you very much. (The exhibits referred to by the witness are as follows:) EXHIBIT 1.-Comparison of prospective tonnage and savings by use of TombigbeeTennessee Canal as estimated by the Army Board of Engineers in 1939 (H. Doc. 269, 76th Cong., 1st sess) and as estimated by the same body in 1946 (H. Doc. 486, 79th Cong., 2d sess.) EXHIBIT 1.-Comparison of prospective tonnage and savings by use of TombigbeeTennessee Canal as estimated by the Army Board of Engineers in 1939 (H. Doc. 269, 76th Cong., 1st sess) and as estimated by the same body in 1946 (H. Doc. 486, 79th Cong., 2d sess.)-Continued EXHIBIT 1.-Comparison of prospective tonnage and savings by use of TombigbeeTennessee Canal as estimated by the Army Board of Engineers in 1939 (H. Doc. 269, 76th Cong., 1st sess.) and as estimated by the same body in 1946 (H. Doc. 486, 79th Cong., 2d sess.) on a few particular commodities—Continued RECAPITULATION Amount of increase claimed in 1946 report as compared with tonnage in 1939 report EXHIBIT 2.-Comparison of prospective tonnage and savings by use of TombigbeeTennessee Canal as estimated by the Army Board of Engineers in 1939 (H. Doc. 269, 76th Cong., 1st sess.) and as estimated by the same body in 1946 (H. Doc. 486, 79th Cong. 2d sess.) on a few particular commodities EXHIBIT 3.-Statement comparing length of waterways, population of counties touched by waterways, and average population density per mile of waterway of the Tombigbee River, Tennessee River, Mississippi River, Ohio River, and Warrior River COUNTIES TOUCHED BY THE TOMBIGBEE RIVER-MOBILE TO PICKWICK DAM Population, COUNTIES TOUCHED BY THE TENNESSEE RIVER, KNOXVILLE TO PADUCAH |