Page images
PDF
EPUB

bill, or the section in the river and harbor bill, dealing with the same subject as section 6 of this bill. May I call your attention to the fact that there is added to the amendment, presented by Senator Millikin, and the one which I discussed in my testimony, these words-referring now to section 6 as amended

but the foregoing requirement shall not prejudice lawful uses now existing, nor shall this section apply to any dam or reservoir heretofore constructed, in whole or in part, which provides conservation storage of water for irrigation purposes.

That section will have a very limited application, and its application, and its application will be confined I should say to one or two flood-control reservoirs in the West, where there are conservation capacities, where provisions have not been worked out with respect to the use and distribution of the water for irrigation. In the particular instance I have in mind, the use of the water conserved in that particular flood-control reservoir is being studied and that involves the interests in two States. Therefore, we believe that it is in the interests of the interested Federal agencies as well as the States and the water users within those States that nothing be put into this bill which will subject that project to the provisions of section 6 of H. R. 4485. We very strongly urge that that limitation be incorporated in the amendment, in the language which you may lift from the river and harbor bill.

I would much prefer that the language in section 6 offered by Senator Millikin be used, since it is substantially the same as that which appears in the river and harbor bill, and that these last few words which I have just read be thereby incorporated in the amendment. Senator OVERTON. All right, Judge.

Mr. STONE. That is all I have to submit, Mr. Chairman, unless there are questions.

Senator MILLIKIN. Mr. Chairman, may I make one brief addition? Senator OVERTON. Yes.

Senator MILLIKIN. I wish to state for myself, and I feel quite sure that many others in the reclamation States would agree with me, that there is nothing that has been offered by way of amendment that concedes any right of the Federal Government to the ownership of the waters in the reclamation States.

Senator OVERTON. All right.

Is Mr. Kinsey here?

Mr. KINSEY. Yes, sir.

Senator OVERTON. And where do you live, Mr. Kinsey?

Mr. KINSEY. St. Louis.

Senator OVERTON. Can you stay here till Monday or Tuesday?

Mr. KINSEY. No, sir; I cannot.

Senator OVERTON. Take the stand.

STATEMENT OF MILTON M. KINSEY, PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF PUBLIC SERVICE, CITY OF ST. LOUIS, MO.

Senator OVERTON. Are you the president of the board of public service, of the city of St. Louis, Mo.?

Mr. KINSEY. Yes, sir.

Senator OVERTON. Your name is Milton Kinsey?

Mr. KINSEY. Milton M.

Senator OVERTON. All right, sir.

Mr. KINSEY. I might say that I am a city official. I am the chief engineering officer for the city, and am the head of the board of public service, which controls all operating functions of the city with the exception of tax collection and law enforement.

Senator OVERTON. All right, Mr. Kinsey.

Mr. KINSEY. The city of St. Louis is the center and nucleus of a metropolitan area containing nearly 2,000,000 people. The part played by the Mississippi River and its tributaries in the history and growth of our city is so widely known that I do not feel justified in taking the time of this committee to go into that in detail. I will say only that any program which affects the Mississippi River or any of its tributaries is of vital and immediate interest to St. Louis, and I appear here for the purpose of calling attention to some of the more important phases of the flood control bill, H. R. 4485, now being considered by this committee, as they affect this metropolitan area.

Practically all of this area draws its water supply from the Missouri River. At Howard Bend, on the Missouri, approximately 15 miles northwest of St. Louis, the city has its newest and most modern waterworks. Here our investment totals $8,000,000, and we have capacity to draw 240,000,000 gallons per day from the river, or about 40 percent of our total supply. Approximately 1 miles downstream from our plant, a privately owned company serving the suburban area of St. Louis County, has a substantial but somewhat smaller waterworks.

At Chain of Rocks, on the west bank of the Mississippi, about 3 miles below the mouth of the Missouri, St. Louis has its second and largest source of water supply. Due to the location of the intakes, this plant also depends largely on the Missouri River. Here our investment exceeds $15,000,000 and our capacity is 320,000,000 gallons per day. We are now preparing plans for a $19,000,000 expansion program at these two points. Below Chain of Rocks, and on the east bank of the Mississippi, a private company has a plant serving the East St. Louis, Ill., area.

Senator OVERTON. Is all that water taken from the Missouri and the Mississippi? I mean these different plants to which you refer. Mr. KINSEY. The first will take their water, which comes chiefly from the Missouri. The first two are exclusively from the Missouri. Senator OVERTON. Yes; I understand.

Mr. KINSEY. The Chain of Rocks plant is so located that it is practically all Missouri River water, and the last plant that I mentioned is practically all Mississippi water, although it is just at the mouth of the Missouri. It is on the east side of the river.

The unprecedented floods brought upon us by the Missouri during the past 2 years have endangered all these plants. In the case of an ordinary industry, the damage caused by a flood is often confined to a short cessation of operation, some physical damage, and the expense of clean-up after the flood has receded. But to cease operations and cut off the water supply from a modern metropolitan area of 2,00,000 persons is quite a different matter. Should the floodwaters inundate the settling basins or clear well of a water works, death-dealing germs. bacteria, and filth might be forced into even the most remote parts of the distribution system. The calamity would be beyond my power to describe.

At Howard Bend, during the 1943 floods, we put up an expensive and valiant fight against the Missouri and when the crest was reached we were only 7 inches ahead of disaster! Although we are making plans, we are not absolutely sure that our proposed $250,000 program will protect us from all future eventualities.

While the situation is possibly not so acute at our Chain of Rocks station, still we have through the years suffered frequently and extensively from flood damage. We are apprehensive of the future, however, because a given volume of water coming down the Missouri today produces higher flood stages than that same volume produced in years past. It has been estimated that a repetition of the record flood of 1844 would result in river stages at St. Louis on the order of 6 feet above that actually experienced in 1844. This is largely due to the encroachments of civilization, as in East St. Louis or Kansas City, for example, where enormous areas have been developed industrially and for residential purposes and subsequently protected by levees, thus withdrawn from the floodways. The restricted channel therefore produces higher elevations of water for any given volume of flow.

Water supply is endangered by too little as well as by too much river flowage. Some cities, but not St. Louis, encounter extreme difficulty in constructing intakes which can reach the water and secure sufficient volume at low stages.

But a far more serious consideration which has received too little attention is that of pollution. In summer months the percentage of industrial waste and sanitary sewage as related to the total flow in the Missouri is so high in certain districts as to warrant concern. It is certain that from the standpoint of public health alone no diversion of water should be permitted at times of extremely low stage, but on the other hand, flow at such times should be increased if possible, to the end that wastes and sewage be diluted within safe limits. This is a point that cannot be overemphasized.

We in St. Louis have many indications that we are destined to become the aviation capital of the Midwest. In preparation, we are energetically expanding present airport facilities and acquiring new ones. The officially adopted policy is to locate an airport in the socalled Columbia Bottoms, which lies at the confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi. Here we are to acquire more than 4,000 acres of land and construct one of the world's finest super air terminals. Our total expenditure may well run over $25,000,000 eventually. This site is subject to frequent and extensive overflow from the Missouri, necessitating large expenditures for protection and maintenance. For reasons not necessary to explain here, the city of St. Louis has no other available alternative site. It may fairly be said, therefore, that an adequate flood-prevention program on the Missouri will have an important bearing on the aviation future of St. Louis.

The year 1944 is the second successive year that tremendously destructive floods have ravaged the lower Missouri River Valley. These floods have affected the city of St. Louis both directly and indirectly, because the losses in the trade territory of St. Louis are reflected in a very definite loss to the business interests of the city. Flood losses are nearly always completely uninsured and often result in complete impoverishment of the people who would otherwise be good customers.

St. Louis is historically a center of navigation activity on the inland waterway system, and the great increases of water-borne traffic that have been developing in recent years promise benefits from this source beyond anything known in the past. The opening of the Missouri River to modern navigation is something which cannot help but have tremendous beneficial effect in our city. Furthermore, uninterrupted flow in sufficient volume from the Missouri River is necessary for maintenance of the channel in the Mississippi River between the Missouri and the mouth of the Ohio.

We in St. Louis realize that there are other interests besides flood control and navigation in this vast Missouri River Basin, the principal of which are power development and irrigation. We desire to cooperate to the fullest extent to the end that all interests are developed as far as possible. Indeed, I believe that it would be totally impossible to develop a formula or policy now, which would adequately and fairly deal with the shifting requirements of each of the localities in each of the years to come. I make this statement in spite of the fact that my present inclination is to assert the primary importance of flood control.

From all the information available at this time it appears that no danger of any water shortage exists, but we hear the demand made that a fixed policy be laid down to be followed by the Government if some conflict shall arise in the unforeseeable future. The position of St. Louis is that no such policy should be adopted, but that if it should occur that such a conflict arise the values existing at the time of the conflict must govern, with all disputes to be settled by conference or by Congress itself in the event that conference fails satisfactorily to resolve the issues.

The position of St. Louis is that any other course will needlessly jeopardize the interests of our community and probably make impossible the task of administering the development of the Missouri River Basin.

It is our considered opinion based on careful study of all information available that the so-called Pick plan of Missouri River development as it appears in the flood-control bill, H. R. 4485, is the proper plan to be adopted at this time because of its flexibility, which will allow it to meet conditions as they arise during the several-year development period. We respectfully ask that this plan be put into effect without any amendments designed to give advantage or priority to any particular interest.

In my opinion, there is considerable merit in the demands which have arisen in certain quarters for a central, unified Missouri River control covering both planning and policy and embracing navigation, flood control, power development, irrigation, water supply, and the many other associated factors. I do not believe, however, that such central control could be attained through the establishment of a new independent agency of the T. V. A. type. The problems of the Missouri Valley are much more extensive and have wider ramifications than have those of the Tennessee Valley. There is much greater diversity of interest as to water control and uses, as well as geographically along the Missouri. Further, Missouri River development must be fully coordinated with that of the Mississippi and other streams. It cannot be handled independently. A central control, if

established, should incorporate several existing governmental agencies, for example, the Federal Power Commission, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Agriculture, and most important of all, the United States Corps of Engineers. Local representation from the affected States should also be provided. The details of such arrangement could be provided in various ways, but unless called upon to do so, I will leave the furnishing of them to others. Senator OVERTON. Thank you very much.

That concludes the testimony this morning.

Senator MILLIKIN. Mr. Chairman, may I offer for the record three resolutions--one by Montanans, Inc., one by the Montana Stockgrowers Association, and the other on behalf of the Montana Reclamation Association:

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

STATEMENT OF THE RECLAMATION AND AGRICULTURAL COMMITTEES OF
MONTANANS, INC.

Whereas the Reclamation and Agricultural Committees of Montanans, Inc., observing that efforts are now being made by industrial interests in the lower basin States of the Missouri River to secure the enactment of legislation by the Congress of the United States, which would forever dedicate the remaining waters of the Missouri River and all its tributaries to the purposes of navigation, to the complete exclusion of the further development of lands susceptible of irrigation, which have been estimated to total 22,000,000 acres in the States of the arid West; and

Whereas the further development through the use of the waters for irrigation, domestic, and other beneficial uses is so important in the creation of a more stable economic situation for all of the semiarid States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That this annual meeting of Montanans Inc., held this 3d day of June 1944, define its attitude with regard to the uses of water from the streams of the West as follows:

It should be the duty of Congress to recognize the interests and rights of the States in determining the development of the watersheds within their borders and likewise their interests and rights in water utilization and control; to preserve and protect to the fullest possible extent established and potential uses for all purposes of the waters of the Nation's rivers; and to limit the authorization and construction of navigation works to those in which a substantial benefit to navigation will be realized therefrom and which can be operated consistently with the appropriate and economic use of the water of such rivers by other users; that in connection with the construction, operation, and maintenance of navigation works, water for the use thereof arising west of the ninety-seventh meridian shall be subordinate to and shall not adversely affect at any time the beneficial consumptive use, west of the ninety-seventh meridian, of such waters for domestic, irrigation, mining, or industrial purposes.

RESOLUTION No. 1, WATER CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION

Whereas the Montana Stockgrowers Association is an organization of 60 years standing, whose members have witnessed during those years, the disastrous effects of periodic droughts upon the livestock populations of the Great Plains States with resultant dislocations of many other economies; and

Whereas in the course of those 60 years, the cattle-raising States have come into greater and greater production of forage and feed through the use of water for irrigation; and

Whereas such production of feed and forage has enable cattle-producing States to stabilize the industry to the extent of meeting the unprecedented demands of a world-wide war, for meat, and related products; and

Whereas efforts are now being made by industrial interests in the lower basin States of the Missouri River to secure the enactment of legislation by the Congress of the United States, which would forever dedicate the remaining waters of the Missouri River and all its tributaries to the purposes of navigation, to

« PreviousContinue »