« PreviousContinue »
need to prevent the floods along the Missouri as soon as possible is recognized by all, but when a river development plan for all purposes is before Congress it seems wholly unnecessary to jeopardize other interests in the river to accomplish this one purpose.
Under this bill these flood-control structures cannot be built until after the war, and I submit that if the amendment here proposed is adopted an orderly procedure will have been provided under which differences will be adjusted and these flood-control works can be built.
In closing, I wish to point out that the problems involved in a plan for the development of the Missouri are not peculiar to that basin.
They exist in other basins of the United States. A settlement on the Missouri in a piecemeal fashion will not serve to prevent a recurrence of the same controversy in other river basins. The amendment which we urge your committee to approve provides a policy and procedure applicable to all river basins. It will go far to afford a sound basis for adjustment in an orderly fashion of the water resources of the Nation.
I hereby submit a statement of attitudes from three of the larger cities of the State sent me as testimony for this hearing.
Now, I have three letters which I would like to file, calling attention to resolutions passed by the respective groups meeting in our area. I would also like to file a copy of a resolution by the Aberdeen Civic Association.
Senator MILLIKIN. Mr. Chairman, I ask that that which he says he is going to file be entered in the record.
Senator OVERTON. Very well, that will be done. (The letters and resolution are as follows:)
Sioux FALLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Sioux Falls, S. Dak., June 10, 1944. Mr. E. C. MCKENZIE,
Huron, S. Dak. DEAR MR. MCKENZIE: Our attitude regarding the proposed plans to develop the various possibilities in connection with the Missouri River Basin remains the same as when we sent the following telegram to Gov. M. Q. Sharpe while he was attending a governors' conference in Omaha, Nebr., March 13, 1944:
"We feel certain that South Dakota's interest in Missouri River development plan is mainly irrigation and flood control and that any conclusions which do not include these will be contrary to the State's interests."
We understand that you have been designated as the official representative of
Sioux Falls CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
MITCHELL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Mitchell, S. Dak., June 10, 1944. Mr. E. C. MCKENZIE, President, Huron Chamber of Commerce,
Huron, S. Dak. DEAR MR. MCKENZIE: This will be your authority to represent the Mitchell Chamber of Commerce before the Senate committee now holding hearings on the so-called 9-foot channel bill, a bill which has for its purpose the maintenance of a 9-foot channel of water in the Missouri River, from its mouth to Sioux City, Iowa, for navigation purposes.
It is our very strong conviction that the waters of the Missouri River, originating as they do in Montana, North and South Dakota, should first be used for the
purpose of stabilizing agriculture in the upper Missouri Valley Basin States, and
MITCHELL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
ABERDEEN CIVIC ASSOCIATION,
Aberdeen, s. Dak., June 10, 1944. Mr. E. C. MCKENZIE, President, Huron Chamber of Commerce, In Care of National Press Building,
Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We enclose copy of resolution approved and adopted by the board of directors of this association as of May 3, 1944, relative to pending legislation on development of the Missouri River.
We understand that you will possibly make an appearance before one of the committees at Washington, D. C., relative to this subject.
The conservation committee of this association should like you to feel free to represent the Aberdeen Civic Association in accordance with the language of our official resolution. Sincerely yours,
C. E. ARNOLD, Executive Secretary.
RESOLUTION OF ABERDEEN CIVIC ASSOCIATION Whereas H. R. 3961, commonly known as the river and harbor bill, has now been approved by the House of Representatives in Congress and will soon be scheduled for committee hearings in the Senate; and
Whereas the development of irrigation in our State and the assurance of supplementary water supply for domestic uses is of paramount importance to the future stability and well-being of our people: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Aberdeen Civic Association, That we most urgently request all the members of the delegation from South Dakota in the Congress of the United States to use every effort and give their fullest support to the preparation, consideration, and final adoption of such amendments to H. R. 3961 that may be submitted with the specific intent of guaranteeing to Missouri River Basin States a sufficient amount of water from the Missouri and its tributaries for irrigation and domestic uses; and be it further
Resolved. That we, the directors of the Aberdeen Civic Association, convened in Aberdeen, S. Dak., on May 3, 1944, suggest that the following amendment will accomplish that purpose :
“Prorided further, That no navigation project herein or hereafter authorized, and requiring the use of waters of any river or tributary thereof having its source west of the ninety-seventh meridian, shall be appropriated for or constructed until the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with such Federal agencies as may be concerned, have integrated their plans for flood control, irrigation, power, navigation, and other uses and submitted to the Bureau of the Budget and the Congress such joint or several recommendations as they may deem appropriate, within a time to be fixed by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget ; and that the use of water west of the ninety-seventh meridian for domestic, irrigation, mining, or industrial purposes made available by works and improvements under any integrated plan approved by Congress shall be unimpaired by claims for water to maintain navigation."
NELS F. FIELD,
President, Aberdeen Civic Association, Approved and adopted: May 3, 1944.
Mr. MCKENZIE. It happens that my town is located in the center of the James Valley. We are also in the center of the Dust Bowl which the Saturday Evening Post wrote up telling you how you get your dust back East.
Senator OVERTON. All right. We are very much obliged to you.
Senator MilliKIN. Now, Mr. Chairman, we have Mr. Svendby.
Senator OVERTON. Will he take more than 5 minutes? I have to leave in 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF ARTHUR SVENDBY, SOUTH DAKOTA LEGISLATIVE
MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL RECLAMATION ASSOCIATION, AND REPRESENTING THE SOUTH DAKOTA RECLAMATION ASSOCIATION
Mr. SVENDBY. I think I can finish in that time. I have just a short statement.
Senator OVERTON. You may proceed. If you dont' get through we can take it up in the morning.
Mr. SVENDBY. My name is Arthur Svendby, and I represent the South Dakota Reclamation Association and am South Dakota legislative member of the National Reclamation Association.
Senator OVERTON. What are you by profession?
Senator OVERTON. Have you had occasion to make a study of floodcontrol problems?
Mr. SVENDBY. Yes, sir; I have.
Mr. SVENDBY. Yes. I have been operating on this program for the last 9 years.
Senator OVERTON. In what capacity ?
Mr. SVENDBY. As a member of small organizations we have had in our own State and as a member of the South Dakota Reclamation Association for the last 8 years.
Senator OVERTON. All right.
Mr. SVENDBY. This program of water conservation and irrigation is not a new program to me.
In 1935 the Western Dakota Water Conservation Association was formed, and in 1936 I directed a letter to Mr. W. R. Ronald, chairman of the South Dakota Planning Board, at. Mitchell, S. Dak., relative to the building of irrigation dams in western South Dakota, and this proposal took in all the streams of the western portion of South Dakota. At that time, we also advocated the impounding of waters for stock water in small farm dams, and now over 16,000 of these stock-water dams dot tho plains of South Dakota.
Congressman Case of the Second District, in which I reside, told you previously that he desired the western portion of South Dakota to get irrigation water to alleviate the conditions that existed during he dry years of 1930 to 1940. Those, too, are my wishes.
South Dakota needs irrigation, as is shown during the last decade. During that period, 1930 to 1940, the lack of rainfall, in comparison to the climatological recording in South Dakota, shows the loss of 48 inches of rainfall in comparison with the average up to 1930. This same average precipitation was lowered from 20.76 inches in 1930 to 18.87 inches, or nearly 2 inches loss, by 1940, in the average annual precipitation. The State of South Dakota had a precipitation record of 15.90 inches for the 10-year period of 1930 to 1940, which varies by divisions in which the State is divided, as the western, central, and
eastern, the low for a single year of the 10-year period being Potter County, central division, with only 3.66 inches of precipitation in 1936. During this period, the assessed number of cattle dropped 32 percent in the western division and gained 5 percent in the eastern division, which division had an average rainfall of 18.90 inches, and this was based on 1,400,000 cattle in the State in 1930. These data are not calculated on the extremely high number of livestock in the State nor the extremely low number of animals assessed in 1937, but for the beginning and end of the decade.
During this same decade, the loss of civil population in South Dakota was 7.2 percent, with the urban population showing a 20percent increase, whereas the rural farm areas show a loss of 21 percent.
South Dakota had 83,175 farms in 1930. By 1940 this had decreased to 72,454 farms, a decrease of over 10,000 farms. By 1940 these remaining farms increased from 438 acres to 554 acres in average size, but the value had dropped 50 percent during the 10 years.
The factor that stabilizes our population and our economy in South Dakota is water. This is clearly established where it is shown that during the drought period of the 1930's population trends are toward the areas of adequate humidity, or where irrigation is adequate to maintain basic economic needs.
In relation to this, I wish to present a thesis on the economic benefits from irrigation to South Dakota from developing the Missouri River by Dr. Lyman Jackson, president of South Dakota State College, Brookings, S. Dak., which was made at the request of Governor Sharpe and distributed to those interested in South Dakota.
Further, in contention of the necessity of irrigation, I wish to present these comparative photographs taken in 1934—I will give you these photographs. You may wish to look at them, sir—taken in 1934, from the reclamation area at Belle Fourche, and those showing the drought conditions that existed in the vicinity of Huron, S. Dak., during the same year. No. 1 shows a barren field near Huron, compared to an irrigated alfalfa field from which the third crop is being cut, near Belle Fourche on September 11, 1934. No. 2 shows a wheat field irrigated near Newell, whereas in comparison we have photographs of a farm in the James River Valley with barren cultivated fields. No. 3 shows a farm home in the irrigated valley near Belle Fourche in comparison with another on the wind-blown area in the James River Valley of South Dakota, where fence posts are nearly covered with eroded top soil.
Senator OVERTON. Let me interrupt you. Are these photographs of exactly the same land before and after irrigation?
Mr. SVENDBY. No, sir; they are comparing different areas of the State, one that is now irrigated and one that is not irrigated.
The results of the use of water during 1934 show that the average income per acre on all crops on the Belle Fourche project was $23.56, whereas in the vicinity of Huron, livestock had to be sacrificed due to the fact that they had no crop at all and cattle were sold as low as $10 a head, and calves were slaughtered and buried.
During 1936, when a very serious drought condition again existed in western South Dakota, the average yield per acre on the Belle Fourche project was $26.05 per acre, and of this the greatest total income was from alfalfa, a feed crop the remainder of the State lacked.
I wish to present and file these data with your committee.
Senator MILLIKIN. Is that essential to the exposition of your case, to
Mr. SVENDBY. What we have had so far-
Mr. SVENDBY. In respect to the amount of crop obtained from the
Senator OVERTON. Of South Dakota ?
Crop yield report—7—316 (May 1926)