Page images
PDF
EPUB

183

Therefore, we earnestly solicit your cooperation and approval of recommenda-
Tous contained in this brief.
Cordially yours,

Kent COLLIER, Secretary-Manager. 3. Mr. BREEDING. I would like to introduce Mr. Floyd H. Ward, city youncilman of Great Bend, Kans.

STATEMENT OF MR. FLOYD H. WARD

Mr. WARD. Mr. Chairman, I can elaborate no more on Mr. Weltmer's statement. We are here because we are in trouble and our primary concern now is flooding.

Mr. BREEDING. Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce to you and the committee Mr. Herbert C. Callon, city engineer of Great Bend, Kans.

STATEMENT OF MR. HERBERT C. CALLON Mr. CALLON. I do not want to belabor the point. I would like to draw your attention to the exhibits on pages 2, 3, and 4 of the report which has been inserted in the record.

Mr. BREEDING. We have with us Mr. Edward R. Moses, city attorney of Great Bend, Kans., whom I would like to introduce at this time.

STATEMENT OF MR. EDWARD R. MOSES

Mr. Moses. Mr. Chairman and members, I want to assure the committee that the city of Great Bend, and its citizens, are 100 percent behind this project. If we can get the thing off the ground by a feasibility study which these funds would grant

us I am sure we will be wel on our way to support any kind of a project that the Corps of Engineers would recommend.

Mr. BREEDING. I would further like to state, in regard to the testimony which has been presented here today, that I concur wholeheartedly with all which has been made, with that of the group of Missouri as well as the group from Kansas who have been here and testified. Mr. Chairman, I would further like to introduce to you again at this time our colleague, Congressman George, of Second Congressional District of Kansas. |_Mr. GEORGE. I merely wanted to say that Denver D. Hargus of the Third District, who was mayor of Coffeeville, is otherwise occupied and he wanted me to say he thoroughly endorses these projects.

I also will say that everyone will agree Willard Breidenthal should be Mr. Flood Control No. 1, and Emil Heck No. 2, but where does Mr. Paramore fit, because he does such a wonderful job. Mr. Cannon. Have you concluded, Mr. Paramore?

Mr. PARAMORE. Yes, sir. 1 Mr. Canyon. We will place in the record two telegrams dealing

(The telegrams referred to follow :) (This telegram to Hon. Clarence Cannon, Chairman Appropriations Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.)

Kansas City Mo., April 4, 1960. LEW PARAMORE, Mayflower Hotel, Washington D.C.

The rapid runoff from the heavy snows in the valleys of the Missouri and Kansas Rivers and their many tributaries has once again resulted in distress and heavy financial loss to many of the citizens of this midcontinent area. The

with these projects.

suffering and property losses have a most serious effect on the over all ecomas of the entire area. As mayor of Kansas City, Mo., and as a public oociali seriously concerned with the entire metropolitan area, I urge and plead wh! you to exert your able influence to accelerate by every means possible the earts; completion of projects needed to put the Kansas River under control to pretend serious flooding and also to conserve our water resources in times of drought I urge that the completion of the first and key project in the Army Engineers program in the Kansas River Basin be advanced more rapidly by increasing the proposed appropriation to Tuttle Creek Dam from $164 million to $21 million. As a matter of strictly local concern to the two Kansas Cities. We urge that construction funds in the amount of $500,000 be provided to raise the Kansas City terminal railroad bridge above the possible flood plane and remore the impediment which prevents the full utilization of the flood protection system which we now have.

Your continued interest and support will be appreciated and long remembered by the people of these valleys.

H. ROE BARTLE, Mayor.

FAIRBURY, NEBR., April 4, 1964. LEW PARAMORE, Mayflower Hotel, Washington, D.C.:

Statement of Clarence E. Henkel, steering committee secretary, Little Blue flood control project, before the Public Works Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, April 4, 1960.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, during this last week the State of Nebraska has been undergoing some of the most disastrous floods in its history. A part of this flooding occurred on the Little Blue which in some areas reached unprecedented heights. We are informed that the turbulence and velocity of this river at Fairbury, Nebr., has been so great that the river gauge house was washed away by the ftood. The wastefulness of rampant water, destroying property and routing people from their homes in a region of seasonally insufficient rainfall, is evident to all.

We know that through reclamation projects such as the Little Blue unit at Angus, the same water could have been an investment in agricultural stability through irrigation. It could have been an investment in homes and businesses made secure from flood disasters. We believe that river control can be achieved most efficiently by regulated multipurpose dams with supporting land treatment.

In view of an existing emergency we urge the Congress to make appropriations for completion of Little Blue unit feasability surveys with all possible speed.

CLARENCE E. HENKEL

MONDAY, APRIL 4, 1960.

KAYSINGER DAM

WITNESSES

HON. CHARLES H. BROWN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF MISSOURI HON. CALVIN HOLLOWAY, MEMBER, MISSOURI STATE LEGISLATURE

Mr. CANNON. We shall hear from our colleague, Congressman Brown.

Mr. Brown. The people of Osceola, Mo., in St. Clair County, have a problem in connection with the Kaysinger Buff Reservoir as now proposed with a low pool level and no provision for water storage.

The Honorable Calvin Holloway, a member of the State legislature from that district, asked me to arrange for his appearance before the committee to bring out the objections of the people of Osceola. He has a story that deserves to be heard.

I would appreciate it very much if you would hear him. Mr. HOLLOWAY. Gentlemen, I am here representing the Chamber of Commerce of Osceola, Mo., and the citizens of St. Clair County, to

ippose the construction of the Kaysinger Dam, which as now planned s only a flood control project. We do not believe the construction of this dam is economically à sound project or that the benefits derived from it will justify the costs and damages. At a critical time like this, it is our opinion that the money required for this project could be put to a much better use, or that this would be a good place to economize,

In general, we base our arguments on our knowledge of the basin and on information given us by the Corps of Engineers at Kansas City. Colonel Laurion came to Osceola and discussed this project, later the mayor of Osceola, and I met with them in their office in Kansas City. I wish to say that no one could have been more courteous, accommodating, or sincere than they were. They stated that their preliminary survey showed the benefits exceeded the costs by a small percentage. Also, that a complete survey might make some changes and they admitted that it was possible that the costs could exceed the benefits.

This proposed dam is on the Osage River in the upper end of the Lake of the Ozarks, approximately 40 miles above the Bagnell Dam, and there could be no benefits along the lake except as a silting basin. The Bagnell Dam is approximately the same distance from the junction of the Osage and Missouri Rivers. The Engineers estimate 26,000 acres along the Osage River will be protected. This land is already partially protected by the Bagnell Dam and it represents less than

60 percent of the acreage affected in our county alone. They estimate 55 160,000 acres along the Missouri River will be protected. This makes

a total of 186,000 acres partially protected, with 164,000 acres damaged. The total estimated cost of the dam project is from $100 to $130 million. This, then, will show a cost for partial protection of $500 to $700 per acre. This cost seems excessive to us and we do not believe that it can be justified, and especially so with 164,000 acres either inundated or damaged. I now wish to point out the effect on the area above the dam and

show that much of the damage cannot be counted in terms of dollars I and cents. The full reservoir level of the Lake of the Ozarks is 660

feet, and places the upper end of the lake near the eastern edge of our county. This leaves open water from here to the small dam at Osceola. This section of the Osage and its tributaries is one of the better fishing areas in the State and attracts many tourists and visitors. The permanent pool level of the proposed Kaysinger Dam is 673 feet, or a raise of only 13 feet, and covers approximately one-half of the open water above mentioned. This pool is intended only as a sediment basin and will completely fill up in time.

We are told that the height of the Kaysinger Dam, as now planned, will be 733 feet and that at full reservoir it will cover 164,000 acres in Benton, Henry, St. Clair, Bates, Vernon, and Hickory Counties. Of

acreage, only that part inundated or expected to overflow once in 5 years will be purchased. The land above that will remain on our taxbooks in the owner's name; however, much of it will be taken out of profitable production and it should be assessed at a much lower value. The owner will

be paid one lump sum for flowage easement and for perpetual right to flood the land, when required for flood control operation of the reservoir.

If this dam is built and the reservoir filled, it will practically cut our county into two parts. We would expect our main highways to be

that

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

raised above the full reservoir level, but we do not believe it would be practical or possible to raise all roads. We would expect many of our mail routes, school bus routes, and milk routes to be cut or relocateina Many of our farm families whose land is well above full reservoir level, who now think they will not be affected and who, of course, could receive no payment, will find their neighbors moving away, their schools affected, and many roads cut off. With 47,000 acres either removed from the taxbooks or the valuation sharply reduced, the entire county will be affected.

We who have studied this proposed dam and have tried to determine what this will do to our schools, our churches, and communities, and who realize that many of our most productive fields will be groing up in weeds and willows, can only think that nothing much worse could happen to our county.

In a meeting recently, it was estimated that 1,000 cabins, cottages, and homes would be flooded. According to our information, these buildings would be removed and no building could be constructed under full reservoir level in the future. The homes in our community would generally be smaller homes that could not be expected to sell, or be paid for, at a very high price and the owners would generally find that to buy or to build to replace their homes would cost much more than they expected. Moving people from their homes, with inadequate funds to buy another home comparable to what they had, and no available rural dwellings, may cause them to move to rented city quarters. With the mother and father looking for work, and the children cast into unfamiliar surroundings, such problems as unemployment and juvenile delinquency are sure to increase in our State.

Three of our towns would be directly affected, not only by losing some homes, but by having their streets flooded and closed, and by being cut off from many of their customers, as well as the other damages and losses previously mentioned. Osceola, the largest town, would find the power dam put out of commission, their sewer system flooded, the hospital grounds partially flooded, and a big reduction in income from tourist trade.

If this were a permanent pool, with provisions for power, it would not be so objectionable, but to be inundated for the partial benefit of those on the river below and then to have the water let out as soon as the river channel below would take it, leaving us with mud flats, dead and decaying vegetation, the stench and the health problem, makes the construction of the dam seem very unfair to us when the cost, which will be cash, is very little below the estimated benefits.

We have contacted some of the people in the other communities affected and they seem to feel as we do about the proposed dam.

On March 31, 1960, the president of the Chamber of Commerce in Clinton (Henry County) wrote me of a poll they had taken of their membership. The results of that poll are as follows: 3 votes for the dam as now proposed, 24 votes against the dam as now proposed, 66 votes for the dam only if a higher pool level could be obtained so that we might derive some benefit from recreation facilities.

He said, “As you can see a vast majority of our people do not want the dam as it is now proposed (groups 2 and 3), they feel that the great harm the dam would do to our farming area, roads, trade areas, etc., would far more than offset the slight benefits received."

We, in St. Clair County, are, and will always be, opposed to the ere onstruction of the Kaysinger Dam for flood control only, as now $? planned.

In summarizing, I have tried to show that we oppose the construcetion of the Kaysinger Dam, as proposed, as (1) we believe the estie mated benefits are less than the actual costs and damages, some of I which have not been counted; (2) we believe that the inundation and serious damage to 164,000 acres cannot be justified by partial protection of 186,000 acres; (3) we believe that smaller dams near the headwater, such as Pomme De Terre and Stockton Dams, would be worth more to the people and would be just as effective; (4) we believe that when an amount of money, such as is necessary to construct this dam, is to be spent, it should provide for power. We may not need this power at present, but with our coal, oil, and gas reserves being rapidly used up; in time, we must have something to replace them, where possible. "In view of these objections, we respectfully request that consideration of the construction of the Kaysinger, as now proposed, be dropped.

If Congress determines that an appropriation should be made at this time, we ask that it be limited to amounts necessary to complete the survey, so that the people and Congress may make a more careful study of it before appropriating funds for construction.

Mr. CANNON. Thank you, Mr. Holloway.
Mr. Brown. Thank you very much for letting Mr. Holloway appear.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

HON. QUENTIN BURDICK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
HON. DON L. SHORT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
HON. JOHN E. DAVIS, GOVERNOR, STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
BILL LONG, UPHAM, FARMER, PRESIDENT, NORTH DAKOTA IRRI-

GATION DISTRICTS DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION MRS. DAPHNA NYGAARD, JAMESTOWN, MEMBER OF GOVERNOR'S

COORDINATING COMMITTEE ON GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT MARK ANDREWS, MAPLETON, FARMER, DIRECTOR, GARRISON

DIVERSION CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
MILO W. HOISVEEN, BISMARCK, STATE ENGİNEER
ROY A. HOLAND, LaMOURE, CHAIRMAN, GARRISON DIVERSION

CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
VERNON S. COOPER, BISMARCK, SECRETARY-TREASURER, GARRI-

SON DIVERSION CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
OSCAR N. BERG, MINOT, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NORTH DAKOTA

WATER USERS ASSOCIATION
FRED J. FREDRICKSON, WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE, GREATER
NORTH DAKOTA ASSOCIATION, AND PLANNING COORDINATOR,
NORTH DAKOTA STATE WATER CONSERVATION COMMISSION
E. W. RISING, WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE, GARRISON DIVER-
SION CONSERVANCY DISTRICT

« PreviousContinue »