You have an item of $50,000 budgeted to continue the interior drainage studies in the East Side Levee and Sanitary District. The district engineer in the St. Louis office feels that an additional $10,000 would be necessary to review and analyze these studies, which they hope may be completed by May 1961. Mr. CANNON. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. CANNON. Proceed. Mr. PRICE. I am requesting that the committee add to the budget figure $10,000, making a total of $60,000 for the continuation of the interior drainage studies of the East Side Levee and Sanitary District. My second request is for a new item of $20,000 for a report of survey for flood control for the Chouteau Island Levee and Drainage District. This study was authorized by the House Public Works Committee, or the old Committee on Flood Control, in July 1946, and because of the fact funds have never been appropriated the study has not been undertaken. Recent floods in the area, and I imagine the threat of floods this spring, have caused the drainage district to become greatly concerned. I would like to leave copies of letters from the Corps of Engineers with the staff. Mr. CANNON. Would you like those to be inserted in the record? Mr. PRICE. Yes, sir. Mr. CANNON. They will be included in the record at this point. (The letters follow :) U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ST. LOUIS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, Hon. MELVIN PRICE, DEAR MR. PRICE: The sum of $60,000 to continue the interior drainage studies, which we quoted in our letter of January 18, 1960, is the maximum amount that could be utilized in fiscal year 1961. This estimate was arrived at after giving consideration to the necessity of completing field investigations and economic and hydraulic studies. Based on the $50,000 contained in the President's budget, it is estimated that work to be performed under contract with the consulting engineering firm of Russell and Axon, St. Louis, Mo., to furnish hydraulic data and estimates of damages, benefits, and costs will not be completed until about May 1961. The additional $10,000 would be expended in review and analysis of these studies during the remainder of the fiscal year. In either event, the report could not be completed in final form until fiscal year 1962. Accordingly, the full $85,000 could not be utilized in fiscal year 1961. Sincerely yours, RUSSELL J. WILSON, Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Acting District Engineer. U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ST. LOUIS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, Hon. MELVIN C. PRICE, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PRICE: It is estimated that a report of survey for flood control for the Chouteau Island Levee and Drainage District would cost approximately $20,000 and would require about 12 months to complete after date funds were made available. I trust that the above information will serve your purpose at this time. Sincerely yours, CHARLES B. SCHWEIZER, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 1960. KASKASKIA RIVER VALLEY PROJECT WITNESS HON. PETER F. MACK, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Mr. CANNON. We are glad to have with us the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Mack. Mr. Mack, you desire to be heard on the Kaskaskia River Valley project? Mr. MACK. That is correct. Mr. CANNON. You may proceed. Mr. MACK. Mr. Chairman, I appear before your committee today to make a strong appeal for the continuation of the development of the Kaskaskia Valley and, specifically, to request an appropriation of $250,000 to continue planning the proposed reservoir at Shelbyville, Ill. It is my understanding that the Corps of Engineers has requested this amount as necessary for orderly planning of this very important project. The development of two Kaskaskia reservoirs, one at Carlyle and the other at Shelbyville, will, in my opinion, bring the greatest boom the heartland of Illinois has had since the advent of the railroads. The development of this great river basin with an adequate water supply will eliminate very difficult economic conditions caused by the elosing of the coal mines in southern Illinois. I am confident that this great industrial boom will be associated with the completion of these projects. For many years Illinois has had an inadequate water supply. Because most of the State is bounded by major rivers, efforts never were made to construct reservoirs and provide adequate water supplies in other areas of the State. The Kaskaskia River, which lies in the geographical center of the State and is Illinois' second largest river, has been permitted to run uncontrolled throughout the 142 years that Illinois has been a State of the Union. Ironically, the first capital of Illinois was located near the Kaskaskia River, and, because of the treacherous floods, it had to be abandoned. As a matter of fact, the site of the original capital is now completely under water. The Corps of Engineers has relocated two reservoirs on the Kaskaskia to control floods. They have indicated that it is essential that the double reservoir system be employed to do the proper job. I am hoping that you will continue to support this program so that this river basin can again serve a useful purpose. It has been called to my attention that within 3 years alone, according to a report from the Agricultural Extension Service, $4 million worth of crops has been washed out in this valley to say nothing of the extensive damage to other property. However, in the same 10year period when the floodwaters were doing this tremendous damage it has been vividly driven home that our water supply in Illinois is totally inadequate. In the last 10-year period we have had two droughts which caused nearly one-half of our cities to be without an adequate water supply. On one occasion Lake Springfield, the second largest manmade lake in our State, went dry. I realize that this reservoir will serve many useful purposes other than flood control and water supply but these two consideraations are vitally important to my constituents in Illinois. These two lakes will by far be the largest in our State and will have a tremendous recreational value. These twin projects also will help navigation in the lower Mississippi. The Army Engineers have estimated that the lake project at Shelbyville, Ill., will cost $27,470,000. This of course is a substantial sum but it must be remembered that the Federal contribution is only $18,500,000 and nearly one-third of the cost, approximately $9 million,. will be contributed by State and local agencies. The recent floods emphasize the importance of this project. Just last week 15,000 acres of farmland were under water in Shelby and Moultrie Counties alone. Almost every year we have a repetition of this as the Kaskaskia goes on a rampage, inflicting thousands of dollars worth of damage to crops in the valley. The crop damage in the valley came to more than $3 million in the 3 years of 1956, 1957, and” 1958, not to mention the damage to other property. The Kaskaskia Valley Association has developed enthusiastic and virtually unanimous support for this project. I want to dispel any idea that anyone might have that the people of Illinois, and especially the people of Shelby and Moultrie Counties, have any objection to this project. I have been familiar with this project for 5 years. During that time I have not had a half dozen letters in opposition to this program. The five letters I did receive were from property owners who would be forced to sell their property. They did not oppose the program but expressed some regret that they would be forced to sellTM their property. I make this statement because I understand that some newly organized group is to appear and express opposition to the program. It is my understanding that they do not come from my area in Illinois and that, in fact, their membership includes not one resident of either Shelby or Moultrie County. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to testify before your committee. I want to commend you on the great job you are doing. Every dollar you appropriate for these projects which conserve our natural resources is an investment in America and, as a result, will make our great country richer. Mr. CANNON. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. CANNON. Thank you, Mr. Mack. Mr. MACK. I might say also, Mr. Chairman, that the original capital of Illinois was Kaskaskia, Ill., and it was moved from Kas-kaskia because of the devastating floods that they had.. Mr. CANNON. That is right. Mr. MACK. By this time the site where the original capital was located is in the center of the Mississippi River. Mr. CANNON. Thank you, Mr. Mack. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 1960. OPPOSITION TO KASKASKIA RIVER VALLEY (CARLYLE AND WITNESSES WALTER MEYER, CENTRAL ILLINOIS WATERSHED ASSOCIATION GLENN FRANCIS, CENTRAL ILLINOIS WATERSHED ASSOCIATION Mr. CANNON. Mr. Meyer, I believe you desire to be heard in opposition to the Kaskaskia River Valley project? Mr. MEYER. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. CANNON. We will be glad to hear from you at this time. Mr. MEYER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank you for the privilege of permitting us, smalltown people, to come before you and present our views and our problems which we are facing on the Kaskaskia in Illinois. We cannot do this everywhere and we are gald to have this opportunity. We represent a number of people who we think are adversely affected in the Kaskaskia flood plain by these Carlyle and Shelbyville projects. We believe in flood control, but we believe in a different approach from the present program. These are some reasons for our opposition to the present program: We flood more land in this project than we partially protect. This is a big project. It comprises about 5,800 square miles in central and Southern Illinois. It represents an initial cost of about $70 million. And this land we are flooding, the agricultural and mineral resources go with the land and the taxes and revenues from the land will be lost. They will have to made up in some other way by the surrounding territory. Before the project is completed the costs will go up. In the last 2 years the costs on Carlyle Dam have gone up $8.5 million. The benefits do not necessarily go up with the costs. There will have to be a relocation of railroads and there will be the cost of making the annual half-million-dollar oil from Boulder Field accessible. There are 25 or 30 producing oil wells in the area that Lave to be made accessible. We have the pollution problem. The State and Federal laws will have to be complied with. This will increase cost. These are some of the stumbling blocks. The State geologist says deep oil strata have only been scratched. That we are covering up more oil than the benefits from this project will produce. We will have losses incurred when levees, roads, cemeteries, pipelines, and even perhaps towns must be moved because of this project. In the past 2 years land values have gone up $2.5 million in the Carlyle area and still landowners feel they are not getting a fair price for the land. We have records of appraisals, purchases, and offers to verify this statement. Landowners have certain property rights; many feel that people will have to go to court to protect these rights and they do not want to sue the Government. They say the Government is too big. They have an aversion to going to court. But some have not sold and their only recourse is long-drawn-out litigation in the Federal courts. They cannot afford to lose too many of these cases because if they do it raises the cost of this entire project, and if the cost is raised it disrupts the benefit-cost ratio. Is it more important to keep the cost-benefit ratio in line on this project or to pay the farmers and landowners a fair price for their land? I believe they are asking this year $3.5 million. I would request the members of this committee to take a second look at this to see if some of these things cannot be adjusted. They still have approximately 50,000 acres or more of land to acquire in Carlyle and 30,000 acres in Shelbyville. There are other reasons. Some of us question the benefits on a project as controversial as this one. Local flood control benefits increased 50 percent in 2 years. On what basis are these increases figured? They have set aside $607,000 annual benefits. How will they justify that? They are destroying more land than they protect in this area and the land they partially protect will cost the local interests and the Federal Government $1,000 per acre on land worth maybe $200 or $300 per acre. We think this is an exorbitant price for the protection of land. This project does not control floods above the dam. Mr. CANNON. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. CANNON. Proceed. Mr. MEYER. So we only partially protect the land downstream. Many times the water table is so high below the dam that the farmers cannot even put in a crop, the people below the dam are not all in favor of this project. We have evidence of this. If lakes are built, how much will they lower the water level in the middle and lower Mississippi? How much will be saved in levee construction all along the Mississippi River? How much of this can be done by upstream development? There are hundreds of small watersheds in the Mississippi Valley. Little Sioux, Mule Cup, and Sandstone have proven their worth. In some counties over 50 percent of the land in the upper areas are in soil conservation. This, too, prevents downstream floods. Unless we protect the upper streams in the river valleys, dams and levees downstream will only be of a temporary nature and a waste of the taxpayers' money. Soil and water are our most valuable resources, but when they become part of a muddy stream going down a river, they change into a worthless substance and create many new downstream problems. Here is one sentence, Channing Cope, and if you do not remember anything else, remember this: The most important thing to a Nation is to hold soil and water where the rain falls. All else is secondary. If we keep the water on the land during abundance we recharge our underground supply. |