it is equally suitable and probably equally desirable for the flood-control bill now under consideration, because it suggests cooperation between the Federal Government and

Senator OVERTON. What amendment did you say that was?

General WADHAMS. It was submitted to this committee as an amendment to the rivers and harbors bill earlier this month, which you were then considering, but the rivers and harbors bill and the flood-control bill are so overlapping it is applicable to either of them. If one is amended, the other should be, it would seem to me; otherwise it would be ineffective. The gist of that amendment was that works or improvements proposed shall be authorized for construction only after the Secretary of War has made an investigation thereof, in cooperation with the governments of the States affected thereby, and after approval by Congress of a report by the Secretary of War based on such cooperative investigation. Such report shall set out, among other things, the views and recommendations of the affected States with respect to the proposed works. That in no wise abridges or curtails the authority that the Secretary of War now has.

Senator OVERTON. That is correct, but may I interrupt you. As I understand, in all these projects, the Corps of Engineers, beginning with the district engineer, does consult with and undertake as far as practical to cooperate with the local interests, as well as with other agencies of the Government. That didn't happen in this case? I don't mean that they adopt the views of the States.

General WADHAMS. No. I understand that.

Senator OVERTON. Or municipalities, or local subdivisions, or local interests, but they do consult with them, according to the testimony by them in connection with this bill and the rivers and harbors bill, and get their views.

General WADHAMS. I think it is generally true, Mr. Chairman, but in the case of this particular reservoir, when it first came into the picture, it was 1 of 24 in the complete program which was laid out and presented to the States in 1936. It was called the Newfane Reservoir at that time and was a flood-control reservoir. It was cbjected to by the States at the time and it was left out of the program, as I recall, because of that objection. Other sites were to be found which would answer the purpose. It occured later under a different name, West Dummerston and Williamsville, and it grew over the years from a four- or five-million-dollar flood-control reservoir to a thirty- or thirty-five-million-dollar power reservoir.

Now, as to conferences with the State, I think there were conferences. Being in Vermont, I was not as closely connected with it. Senator Aiken could probably tell us better about that, but I do know when this bill came before the Rivers and Harbors Committee for hearing a short time ago, the chairman, Mr. Whittington, seemed very much surprised that this flood-control reservoir was now a very large power development, with 80 percent or more of the thirty or more million dollars for power development and only the balance for flood control. So, I think there must have been some slip there in the cooperation, Mr. Chairman. This would simply make it a joint endeavor with naturally the good will to be attained by full clarification of just what the project is to consist of.

Senator OVERTON. Now, the House passed a bill providing for a low dam, in so many words, without any definition of what a low dam is. First, are you in favor of a low dam at this West Dummerston site on the West River? That is the first question I wanted to ask you. Or, do you object to that dam?

General WADHAMS. Yes; unless no alternative site or sites are available.

Senator OVERTON. Have you an alternative plan of dams?

General WADHAMS. I would not present that, sir, but I think the Vermont engineers have such a plan or have made surveys that would indicate there are feasible methods that would avoid the construction of a very large dam.

Senator OVERTON. Coming back to the Williamsville Dam, would it improve the provision to prescribe the height of that dam and say this committee agrees with the House version that it should be a low dam and then state what a low dam would be, of a height not to exceed 462 feet above sea level, which the record shows what is really meant by the low dam.

General WADHAMS. I would not be able to answer that because I don't know how much water would be impounded by a lower dam. The Army engineers, of course, can give you those figures. They would know whether by lowering that dam to 150 feet, say, that would give them enough storage of water to compensate and justify the cost of such a dam. That I would not know, sir.

Senator OVERTON. All right.

General WADHAMS. I think, Mr. Chairman, that that is all I have to say. I think I have made Connecticut's position in this matter clear. We need flood protection urgently. We hope some method can be found of securing it and that it might be by an alternative dam to this Williamsville Dam which is so destructive to property values and sentimental values to the State of Vermont.

Senator OVERTON. Let me see if I understand clearly now. The opposition of the State of Connecticut is clearly to the construction of the Williamsville Dam. Is that as to whether it is a low dam or a high dam, or both?

General WADHAMS. I would say we would prefer to see no dam built there at all.

Senator OVERTON. No dam. All right. As to the other items in the series of dams that enter into the whole picture of the Vermont situation, is Connecticut opposed to the-over and beyond the Williamsville Dam-is it opposed to the series of dams now recommended by the Chief of Engineers?

General WADHAMS. No, sir; I think not.

Senator OVERTON. Then its opposition is confined to the so-called Williamsville Dam?

General WADHAMS. I would like to state, Mr. Chairman, that is not the only ground of our opposition. We object very strenguously to any Federal agency coming into our State and taking our land without any consultation with us for any purpose whatsoever, except those authorized by the Constitution.

Senator AUSTIN. May I ask the general a question, Mr. Chairman? Senator OVERTON. Yes, indeed.

Senator AUSTIN. I noticed something in your reference to the letter of Governor Baldwin relating to an amendment, and I call your at

tention to an amendment offered by Senator O'Mahoney to H. R. 3961, which is the rivers and harbors bill [reading]:

Such works hereafter authorized

First it deals with such works as are herein authorized

Works herein authorized shall not be undertaken until an investigation and report thereon have been made and approved by the Congress as provided in (b) where the Governor of any State in which the works or any part thereof are located or in which arise any of the waters which are required therefor, files a written objection thereto with the Secretary of War within three months after the date of this Act.

Then paragraph (b) reads as follows:

Such works hereafter authorized for construction shall not be undertaken until after the making of an investigation and the submission to and approval by the Congress of a report as provided in this paragraph.

I won't read the whole of it.

The investigation and report shall be made to the end, among other things, of providing for the coordination of plans for the construction and operation of the proposed work with other plans for the use of waters that would be affected thereby. In conformity with this requirement the Secretary of War is hereby directed to investigate such proposed works for navigation or flood control in cooperation with the State or States in which the works or any part thereof are to be located and in which arise any of the waters that would be required therefor, and, in the case of works that might require the use of waters arising west of the ninety-seventh meridian, in cooperation also with the Secretary of the Interior.

Do you identify that as the same amendment to which the Governor referred?

General WADHAMS. No, sir; I don't think that had been written at the time the Governor wrote the letter. The letter was dated May 1, 1943.

Senator AUSTIN. This amendment was introduced May 5.

General WADHAMS. I believe so.

Senator AUSTIN. But the subject matter is the same?

General WADHAMS. Practically the same.

Senator AUSTIN. Yes. That is all.

Senator CORDON. May I make one or two inquiries of the General at this time?

Senator OVERTON. Yes, sir.

Senator CORDON. You mentioned a four-State compact in 1936. General WADHAMS. It was started in 1936 and concluded in 1937. Senator CORDON. 1936-37; and stated that after the compact had been entered into the several States appropriated funds to carry out this agreement. Was that compact a compact providing for the floodcontrol projects in the four States?

General WADHAMS. Yes, sir; exactly.

Senator CORDON. Well, did you have at that time a plan for the flood control?

General WADHAMS. Oh, yes. Yes, sir. The engineers, the Army engineers had a tentative plan which became a definite plan. Our compact provided for the immediate construction of seven of the reservoirs included in that compact and our appropriations were made to cover the State's share. I don't suppose you are interested in the details, but the States under that act had to pay certain parts of

the cost of the work, which we considered a very wise provision. We were very willing to pay our share of those costs.

Senator CORDON. Was it considered at that time that the project as it was outlined was adequate to give the necessary flood protection! General WADHAMS. I think it was a very adequate program. Any plan that has been presented has had-would require local protective works at a few places along the river and those have practically all been constructed and completed, as I understand.

Senator CORDON. Did that plan include a dam such as is proposed here for Williamsville?

General WADHAMS. No, it didn't.

Senator BURTON. Have you finished your questions, Senator?
Senator CORDON. Yes. That is all.

Senator BURTON. General Wadhams, are you a professional engineer?

General WADHAMS. No.

Senator BURTON. But you are chairman of the State water commission?

General WADHAMS. Yes, sir.

Senator BURTON. And in that capacity you approved this solution that is in the 1937 compact as a proper solution?

General WADHAMS. Oh, yes. We were delighted with it.

Senator BURTON. And you approve it now?

General WADHAMS. Yes.

Senator BURTON. Therefore, in the opinion of your commission and yourself, this Williamsville Dam was not then and is not now necessary to solve this thing?

General WADHAMS. That is my opinion, sir. We were guided in our conclusions by the Army engineers entirely. We worked in close cooperation with them. I think there was a representative present at every meeting of our Commission, which lasted over a month. We relied on their judgment entirely. We still do.

Senator BURTON. I suppose that the compact plan differed in some other particulars from the present engineers' plan?

General WADHAMS. There have been a number of minor changes, a reservoir changed from this site to another site, and a few new ones and some of the old ones have gone out as more thorough surveys were made.

Senator BURTON. From your knowledge of that additional planning, is there anything arising from the steps taken by the Army engineers that would still make it impractical to leave out the Williamsville project?

General WADHAMS. Well, I think it would have to be compensated for by other reservoirs on the tributaries or higher up on the main stream. I have no immediate personal knowledge of that, but I assume there are other sites where one reservoir would perhaps impound the same amount of water as the flood reservoir at Williamsville.

Senator BURTON. What I was driving at, would the provision for the alternative to the Williamsville Dam under the old compact still be feasible under the present engineering program? Is there anything that interferes with it?

60479-44- -12

General WADHAMS. I think the Army engineers could answer the question with much more soundness, but that is my understanding. Senator OVERTON. Thank you very much, General. We are very glad to have had your statement.

Senator AUSTIN. May I ask General Robins a further question? Senator OVERTON. Yes; I was going to put him back on the stand right now.

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. THOMAS M. ROBINS, DEPUTY CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY

Senator AUSTIN. I would like to clear up, if convenient, this difference between the Williamsville site and the Dummerston site of the dam under consideration. It is called in your report to which we have referred before, Williamsville, is it not?

General ROBINS Yes, sir.

Senator AUSTIN. And yet the dam is not to be built there, where it was then considered that it would be built; is that right?

General ROBINS. My understanding is that West Dummerston is the nearest place to the dam site.

Senator AUSTIN. How far down the river is West Dummerston from Williamsville?

General ROBINS. I don't remember exactly. It is about 3 miles; something like that.

Senator AUSTIN. How much of a fall is there in the river?

General ROBINS. I don't know exactly.

Senator AUSTIN. Is it a steep fall or not?

General ROBINS. I don't think it is very steep; no, sir.

Senator AUSTIN. These estimates and plans for the dam in this report are based on locating the dam at Williamsville, are they not? General ROBINS. In the project document, that was the site on which the estimates were based.

Senator AUSTIN. Now then, the new site of West Dummerston is somewhat different from that at Williamsville, is it not?

General ROBINS. We considered it a better site.

Senator AUSTIN. Well, regardless of that, it is different, isn't it? General ROBINS. I don't know. Having never been to those sites, Senator, I could not just say how different it is.

Senator AUSTIN. Well, don't your records show that in order to impound the same amount of water that was intended to be impounded at the Williamsville site, the dam at West Dummerston would have to be 90 feet higher than the dam at Williamsville?

General ROBINS. I will answer that, no.

Senator AUSTIN. Isn't there a fall in the river between Williamsville and West Dummerston?

General ROBINS. There is a fall, of course.

Senator AUSTIN. You don't know whether it is higher or loweris it a fact you don't know how much of a fall that is?

General ROBINS. It is, because I haven't got the information here. Senator AUSTIN. Let me ask you if you know whether there is a difference in the content due to the difference in width of the valley at Williamsville and at West Dummerston?

General ROBINS. Well, of course wherever the valley is the widest you will get the most storage capacity.