Page images
PDF
EPUB

The growth of California, both from a standpoint of population and economy is well known and I will not repeat the story here. Likewise, the maldistribution of California's water supplies, causing some areas to be stricken by floods while others suffer from drought, also has been explained here previously.

I would, however, like to point out a further paradox of nature which occurred in California last winter and which has an important bearing on the matters before you.

The State is in its second straight dry year-in fact, probably the second driest in recorded history. Only last week the San Joaquin River flow dropped to its lowest point since records have been kept. Yet during the course of this water year in which both agriculturists and city dwellers are conserving every drop of water possible, damaging floods took place in several areas of the State. Heavy damage occurred, and lives were lost along the Eel River, where just 5 years ago scores were drowned and loss was measured in the millions. At Yuba City, where on Christmas of 1955, 30 lives were lost and an entire city almost wiped out, a flood alert was called and levees were anxiously patrolled. I mention these incidents to demonstrate that California can never rest until its unpredictable rivers are finally controlled, both for protection against ravaging floods, and for conservation of water so vitally needed to sustain the State's existing economy and its growth.

While we are before you asking that the Federal Government assist us in this objective, I point out that the people of California are doing their full share also. To date the State has either expended or committed some $225 million for water development. In addition, the State has appropriated $81,100,000 to date in cooperation with the Federal Government on federally authorized flood control projects. Since the end of World War II the annual rate of expenditure for flood control and conservation has been $150 million at all levels of local government. In November of 1960 a bond authorization in the amount of $1.750 million will be submitted to the voters for their approval. This undertaking will be the beginning of a vast State water resources development program to augment necessary Federal and local activity. While these are impressive figures, we do not maintain by any stretch of the imagination that the State of California can do the water development and flood control job alone. On the contrary, as I have always maintained, the combined efforts of Federal, State, local, and city governments and those of private industry are required to accomplish the immense but necessary task.

We in California are deeply grateful for Federal funds which have made possible the Central Valley project and other equally productive reclamation projects. We are appreciative of the protection already afforded by Federal flood control projects. Your generous actions in the past reflect a sincere consideration of California's problems.

Now just a few words concerning our request for 1960-61. Representatives of the California Water Commission will speak in more detail for the official water agencies of the State, and other witnesses will present the individual projects.

We are asking $51 million for flood control work, including various investigations; $62 million for the Central Valley project; a little over $5 million for other reclamation projects; $23 million for projects authorized under Public Law 984; and $9 million for projects under Public Law 130.

Concerning the survey and investigation program for flood control projects: I have noted a decreasing trend in the amount appropriated nationwide over the past 4 years. This is in spite of the great development taking place throughat the country in our great river basins, which is certain to continue on an accelerating pace. I earnestly ask that you consider raising the level of the survey program to keep pace with this national development, and so that the vitally needed projects which should be on the drawing boards now will be ready when the need arises.

In conclusion, let me state that I realize California has been speaking in large sums of money, and that you gentlemen are besieged annually by similar requests from all of the States. May I point out, however, that we are speaking of an investment in the future of the Nation. I need not tell you of the national benefits derived from such projects. They not only pay big returns to the Federal Treasury in the form of an expanded tax base, but more important, in the future strength and virility of our Nation.

National defense is not a term which is uniquely applicable to military matters. To defend against the ravages of floods and water shortages is as im

portant to our people as is the building of bulwarks against attack by an power.

Again, I thank you for the opportunity to present my views. I reiterat strong support for the appropriations to be requested this afternoon b California Water Commission, the State reclamation board, and by the agencies represented before you.

Mr. CARR. We will present this to you in this way, and we save a lot of time: First, our witnesses here today represent four grams that come before this committee: One, flood control proj second, reclamation projects; third, the group of loans for s projects; fourth, the group of loans for irrigation distrib projects.

We would like to proceed in this order taking first flood co Under flood control I would like to present witnesses in this o Those witnesses here on budgeted items will go through them rapidly.

Then the advance engineering and design requests.

Then the surveys for authorized surveys in California.

Last, we will take up the seven items where we have requests the budget amount. We will proceed in this way and keep in order.

First, we will proceed on those budgeted projects that begi page 6 of the tabulation.

CARBON CANYON DAM

STATEMENT OF MR. H. GEORGE OSBORNE

I will introduce Mr. H. George Osborne, chief engineer of Orange County Flood Control District, who will speak on Ca Canyon Dam.

Mr. OSBORNE. I represent the county of Orange in the matte the Carbon Canyon Dam. I would like to present these statem We request $1,207,000, which is sufficient to complete this pro The completion of this project is very important to Orange Co We have approximately $3 million in downstream projects read construction which are dependent upon the dam for their opera These are being financed with local money. The funds are a able, rights-of-way have been acquired, the plans are being compl Your approval of the budgeted amount will be deeply appreci (Mr. Osborne's statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF H. G. OSBORNE, FLOOD CONTROL ENGINEER, ORANGE COUNTY CONTROL DISTRICT

H. G. Osborne, flood control engineer for the Orange County Flood Co District, represents the county of Orange in the matter of the Carbon Ca Dam project now under construction in the northeast corner of Orange Co This project, when completed, will retard the runoff from 19 square mil the drainage area of Carbon Canyon located within the Chino Hills partly w Orange, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles Counties.

Under present conditions floodwaters from Carbon Canyon periodically westerly across Orange County, inundating large areas of developed an developed land. Large flood flows from Carbon Canyon do not occur every but when occurring are characterized by sudden high velocity and high runoff. The last flood of consequence from Carbon Canyon occurred durin winter of 1951-52, when widespread inundation was produced with its atter property damage. It appears that Orange County has been particularly f nate in not having experienced any disastrous floods from Carbon Canyon the 1951-52 season. Appropriations for the Carbon Canyon Dam planning

construction since that last flood season have now brought the project to a point where completion is possible prior to the 1960-61 southern California flood season. The Orange County Flood Control District is entering the late stages of a $42,600,000 locally financed flood control program. Several of the projects of this program are directly connected with the Carbon Canyon Dam project, being for the purpose of channelizing, controlling, and spreading for beneficial uses the controlled release flows expected from the Carbon Canyon Dam project. Some of this downstream work has been accomplished where it has been legally possible. The remainder of the work connected with the Carbon Canyon Dam project is being prepared for construction during the summer and fall of 1960 in anticipation of the completion of the dam late in 1960 or early in 1961. It is reported by the Corps of Engineers that an amount of $1,207,000 will be required for the completion of the Carbon Canyon Dam project. This amount has been included in the Bureau of the Budget recommendation for the fiscal 1960-61 appropriation for this project. An appropriation of this amount for fiscal 1960-61 will permit the completion of the construction at a rate such that closure can be accomplished prior to the beginning of the 1960-61 flood season. Realization of this schedule for the dam along with the contemplated scheduling of the downstream projects will result in a large portion of Orange County receiving the flood protection contemplated by the integrated projects.

For the reasons recited above, it is respectfully requested that the fiscal 1960-61 appropriation of $1,207,000 for Carbon Canyon Dam be approved.

SANTA ANA RIVER PROJECTS

STATEMENT OF MR. MARTIN A. NICHOLAS

Mr. CARR. Next we have Mr. Martin A. Nicholas, chief engineer of the San Bernardino Flood Control District, who will speak on three separate items shown on page 6.

Mr. NICHOLAS. We have a prepared report which we would like to submit for the record. I think the report in itself will give you much more detail.

(The report referred to follows:)

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS.

San Bernardino, Calif., April 1, 1960.

Hon. CLARENCE CANNON, CHAIRMAN: On behalf of the people of the county of San Bernardino, Calif., the Board of Supervisors of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District wishes to again express appreciation to the committees for their interest and resulting accomplishments in the Santa Ana River and tributaries and the San Antonio dam and channel projects in California. The Santa Ana River and tributaries, California projects were authorized by act of Congress, approved May 17, 1950, Public Law 516, 81st Congress, 2d session. The San Antonio dam and channel project was authorized by the 75th Congress, session, Document No. 688 (Flood Control Act approved June 22, 1936, and as amended August 28, 1937).

Subsequently, appropriations have been made toward construction of the Devil, East Twin, Warm, and Lytle Creeks and the Mill Creek levees units of the Santa Ana River projects; and toward the San Antonio dam and channel project.

In view of the urgent necessity for these projects, the board of supervisors of this district, respectfully requests approval of appropriation of $1,300,000 which is considered a minimum for the continuation of the Devil, East Twin, Warm, and Lytle Creeks unit; and $503,000 for the completion of Mill Creek levees unit of the Santa Ana River and tributaries, California project; and $1.336,000 for the completion of the San Antonio channel project. The foregoing projects and amounts are as recommended in the President's budget for fiscal year 1960-61 and within the capabilities of the Corps of Engineers.

The board of supervisors is also grateful to the committees for their interest in the urgent needs of the people of the county, through the authorization of a survey for flood control on Cucamonga Creek by the House Public Works Committee on February 24, 1960, and authorization of a survey on the East Branch of Lytle Creek by the Senate Public Works Committee on August 28, 1959. In

pursuance of these reports on survey, it is respectfully requested th sums of $20,000 for Cucamonga Creek and $15,000 for the East Branch of Creek be approved and allotted to the U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, to i the authorized surveys.

Your approval of these programs will insure the future of urgently flood control measures in the San Bernardino Valley.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,
S. WESLEY BREAK, Chair

STATEMENT BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE SAN BERNARDINO C FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT REGARDING CUCAMONGA CREEK, SANTA ANA AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

Cucamonga Creek is the second largest tributary to the Santa Ana Ri the western portion of the San Bernardino Valley. It rises in the south of the San Grabriel Mountains with 10 square miles of precipitous wat ranging in elevation from over 8,900 feet to 2,500 feet at canyon mouth. logically, the watershed produces the highest flood water runoff rate canyon in the Upper Santa Ana River Basin.

Upon emerging from the mountains, floodwaters from large floods over wash areas along unpredictable courses, historically passing ov downstream alluvial cones in poorly defined channels subjecting over 17,000 of developed valley area to overflow. Within this overflow area lies subst portions of the cities or communities of Upland, Ontario, Chino, and Cucan It is estimated that there is a population of 70,000 persons and property in excess of $300 million affected by Cucamonga Creek. This same area is engulfed in the explosively expanding Los Angeles metropolitan area a though presently highly developed, it is still expected to double in popu within the next 20 years.

Cucamonga Creek and flood damage therefrom is of great importane concern not only locally but of national and regional character. Di crossing the path of floodflow are the three main transcontinental rail three major transcontinental highways including one existing and two pro freeways, and telephone and telegraph, oil and gas lines linking the Pacific to the rest of continental United States. Of regional nature and of the h importance are major electrical power transmission lines and water aqu lines upon which the Los Angeles metropolitan area is dependent.

Directly astraddle Cucamonga Creek and vulnerable therefrom i Ontario International Airport, a multimillion-dollar development upon the metropolitan area is rapidly becoming dependent as a major air s terminal augmenting existing Los Angeles central facilities. This is also a of the Air National Guard.

Local interests have long recognized the flood threat from Cucamonga and within their abilities have provided limited measures in coping wit problem. However, at best these can only be considered as inadequate to with any flood of importance and the resulting extensive damage to both and private property with probable loss of life. Accordingly, it is the of of local interests that the proper solution to the Cucamonga Creek flood pr lies in a Federal flood control project of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer the local people are prepared to cooperate in the project.

STATEMENT BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CONTROL DISTRICT REGARDING EAST BRANCH LYTLE CREEK SANTA ANA AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

Lytle and Cajon Creeks, the largest tributary to the Santa Ana River i San Bernardino Valley, in passing directly through the most highly deve and inhabited area of the Upper Santa Ana River Basin, has through hist times devastated the cities of San Bernardino and Colton together with out areas including the repeated taking of life. As an emergency measure national emergency conditions, the Lytle-Cajon Creek improvement project. existing, was approved by Congress in the Flood Control Act of Decembe 1944. The existing project provides for partial conveyance of floodflow

the improved project channel, the balance of floodflows apportioned to the natural watercourse known as the East Branch of Lytle Creek, an undeveloped stream.

Subsequent to the Lytle-Cajon Creeks project, that portion of the city of San Bernardino traversed by the East Branch of Lytle Creek has experienced unprecedented growth of residential, commercial, and industrial nature now established within the overflow area. Also included are the Santa Fe and Pacific Electric Railroads and U.S. Highway 395, a freeway and major Federal interstate route. The area of overflow, damage, and possible loss of life now exposed to unimproved East Branch Lytle Creek is inseparable economically and physically with both the cities of San Bernardino and Colton with population of 115,000 and property values of $560 million.

In view of the foregoing and at this date, there is an urgent need for the improvement of the East Branch of Lytle Creek to provide a proper level of food protection consistent with the growth and development within the affected area. Because such improvement by nature forms a continuation of the existing Lytle-Cajon Creeks improvement and is beyond the means of local agencies, proper solution in this instance can be obtained by a Federal project of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the local people are prepared to cooperate in the project.

Mr. NICHOLAS. These projects are within the President's budget at the moment and they are also within the capabilities of the corps. We beg your consideration of this item for approval for the county of San Bernardino.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT

STATEMENT OF MR. M. E. SALSBURY

Mr. CARR. Our next witness is Mr. M. E. Salsbury, chief engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District.

Mr. SALSBURY. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am M. E. Salsbury, chief engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. I am appearing in support of the budget amount of $13,100,000 for The Los Angeles County drainage area project.

I will make a short verbal statement. I have a written statement. With your permission I would like to insert it.

(Mr. Salsbury's statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF M. E. SALSBURY, CHIEF ENGINEER, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD

CONTROL DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, my name is M. E. Salsbury, and, as chief engineer of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, I have been directed by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to report the flood control needs of our area for fiscal 1961 to your committee.

Recent population figures indicate that Los Angeles County currently has in exess of 6 million residents with the vast majority of these residing in the mastal valleys and plains of the region. Ringing these coastal valleys and plains is a precipitous range of mountains which is about 20 miles wide and abruptly reaches an elevation of 10,000 feet. Rivers and streambeds extending from the mountains and fanning out across the plains are deceptively arid during a substantial part of the year, because heavy precipitation in the basin area normally occurs only in the winter months.

The advent of our storm season results in a startling metamorphosis in this apparently tranquil and misleading picture. Extremely severe Pacific storms descend upon the area and frequently deposit copious amounts of precipitation in the higher elevations of Los Angeles County. Quickly saturating the mountainsides, the waters combine to gorge the normally dry streambeds with swift Loving, debris-laden overflow. On numerous occasions, before departing eastward, these storms have triggered tragic floods which have claimed the lives of many of our citizens and caused millions of dollars of property damage.

Since its creation in 1915, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District has been a focal point in expressing the desire of our citizens to meet this problem

« PreviousContinue »