The State Legislatures of Indiana and Illinois approved the Wabash Valley compact with only one dissenting vote. We then sent it to the Congress of the Tnited States. The compact was approved during the final hours of the session and was signed by President Eisenhower on September 23, 1959. We feel this is a very progressive and aggressive step for the two States and shows that Indiana and Illinois recognize the need for flood control and an overall comprehensive program to develop the Wabash River Basin. It has been estimated that the annual flood damage in the Wabash River Basin has exceeded $15 million per year in the last 4 years. Our association believes this is a very conservative estimate. If present projects are constructed at the maximum rate, we will lose many millions of dollars in flood damage before my of these projects are completed. Knowing full well the projects we are seeking construction money for in fiscal year 1961 will have very little effect on floods in the basin, we ask for funds to survey the many rivers that are tributaries of the Wabash; namely White River, the West Fork of White River, East Fork of White River, Patoka, Little Wabash, Skillet Fork, Vermillion, Eel, Muscatatuck, and Embarrass Rivers and ther creeks and tributaries of all these rivers. It is also felt that, with these survey funds, each of these rivers and their tributaries should be surveyed with the idea and thought in mind of developing all possible resources such as recreational facilities as well as water for community and industrial use. These surveys should also be made in such a way that Be total resources of our valley, as far as water is concerned, would be developed. The State of Indiana, recognizing the need for immediate action, appropriated 15,000 in the general assembly of 1959 for the next biennium to study and arvey the rivers of Indiana for flood control, water conservation, and related rposes. This is over three times the amount the Federal Government authorbed for surveys in fiscal 1960. We therefore ask you to increase survey study oney for fiscal 1961 to the amount of $110,000 in the Wabash River Basin. To further the important program of flood control in the Wabash River Basin, recommend the appropriations indicated below. We wish to emphasize the allowing recommendations as minimum amounts which can be economically used the Corps of Engineers in fiscal 1961. ntinued construction: Evansville, Ind., flood wall___. bitiate construction: Monroe Reservoir, Ind., (assuming the use of $325,000 State ntinue advance engineering and design: Huntington Reservoir, Ind___ Mississinewa Reservoir, Ind__ altiate advance engineering and design: Levee Unit No. 5, Wabash $450,000 275,000 495,000 300,000 100, 000 100, 000 125, 000 156, 000 50,000 20,000 60, 000 10,000 Wabash River, Mt. Carmel___. Indiana: White River Basin_-_ 20,000 Areas adjacent to the Wabash Valley have great economic value to our entire ea in Indiana and Illinois, therefore we strongly urge that you consider favorbly the advance planning money on the Cannelton and Uniontown projects as ecommended by the Ohio Valley Improvement Association and continuation of Construction funds for the Markland and Dam No. 41 in order that these jects on the Ohio River might be completed at the earliest possible date. The program of the Ohio Valley Improvement Association is strongly endorsed by the Wabash Valley Association. Respectfully submitted. GEORGE D. GETTINGER, Executive vice president, Wabash Valley Association, Inc 54265-60-pt. 441 EXHIBIT A A report of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, published in 1946 recorded following major floods on the Wabash River at Terre Haute, Ind.: The following floods have occurred since publication of the Engineer's rep Flood stage at Terre Haute, Ind., and most measuring stations along the is below the 17.5 foot figure of the Corps of Engineers. Flood waters above 14 feet in the Terre Haute area inundate thousand acres of land. From 1904 to 1946-14 major floods (42-year period) Mr. GETTINGER. I would merely like to say to you that we in Wabash Valley Association are trying to develop the entire waters theory and idea of the Wabash River and all its tributaries. I wo like to report to you that the people in Indiana and Illinois are much concerned with this overall water problem, not only today the future of the water in our valley. It has been a pleasure to appear before you. I would also lik have the privilege of filing at this time a letter in regard to the I coon Creek Watershed Development which is above the Manst Dam, by citizens from Putnam, Parke, Montgomery, and Bo Counties; also a statement in regard to the request for the Embar River Watershed Survey in the State of Illinois. Mr. Cannon. Those two statements will be made a part of record. (The documents referred to follow :) Re Raccoon Creek Watershed Development. RUSSELLVILLE, IND., April 1, 196 Executive Vice President, Wabash Valley Association, DEAR MR. GETTINGER: This letter is to furnish you with a brief résumé of background, the problems and the activities, up to date, concerning the comp watershed above the Mansfield Dam. You are familiar with much of the det but this will serve as a report for your use. The watershed includes lands in Putnam, Parke, Montgomery, and B Counties. For nearly 2 years a rather large group of people, including farm businessmen, civic leaders and others in this four-county area have stu and discussed the problems in the watershed. A great many sound princi if applied would eventually lead to a combination of valuable flood con excellent recreational facilities, a more productive watershed, and preserva of our natural resources. Much of our encouragement to proceed with this project has come fr observations in the Cagle Mill area where we have had an opportunity to what has happened in a watershed where conservation practices and other 1 Note the frequency of floods since 1947. sion control measures have not been established. Excessive siltation has made the lake unattractive for maximum recreational use. Fishing is now poor and confined to catches of species which are relatively undesirable. Therefore, we are most anxious to see that protective measures are established in Raccoon Watershed before excessive silt is deposited in the lake. Our studies and contacts have convinced us that the benefit from flood control, recreational facilities and preservation of natural resources in a watershed control program is far reaching and effects our entire residential and industrial population for at least 60 miles in every direction from the Mansfield Lake which will be created by this flood control project. Furthermore, actual flood control benefits to farmers will be great below the dam and we feel that we cannot expect those farmers above the dam to stand all of the expense of a control program. We wish to point out that the flood control dam itself is far upstream in the watershed with approximately two-thirds of the benefit area, as far as protected bottom land and industrial possibilities, being in the already protected area below the dam. Our Raccoon Watershed Development Committee would like to point out that we have a problem that will be duplicated many times in the construction of future proposed flood control structures to be built by the Army Engineers. It is our feeling that there is a definite need for a watershed control and stabilization program in practically every one of these cases. At this point we would Ike to have recognized our position where the dam is already constructed and provisions have been made for this work. We feel that we have enough background and basic information to establish this as an experimental area for the benefit of those to be constructed in the future if funds and authorization ould be made for this study in our specific watershed. In reviewing the basic thinking advanced at congressional hearings held prior the passage of our present watershed development programs, it has been recgnized that those receiving the greatest benefits should share the most in the st. Continuing this basic thinking, we believe the greater share of the cost the area such as this should be paid by public funds and the farmers in the area required to carry only their fair share of the cost. We are also injecting Into this thinking the greater aesthetic and recreational values which we realize no one has been able to put a definite price tag on but are being recognized all present thinking, especially when you consider that $10 million has been gent to construct the present structure, the additional cost in soil conservation practices and developments in the watershed would seem negligible. Inasmuch as this is the second of this type of flood control structure to be contructed in Indiana, it is imperative that considerable research be done in this the Raccoon) watershed in order that adequate funds can be allocated to future projects. We feel that after some 8 years we are already in some difficulty in he Cagle Mill area and we certainly want to prevent such problems in the Mansfield area if at all possible. Any allocations or authorizations that will contribute to getting this job done DONALD R. HAZLETT, Chairman, Raccoon Creek Watershed Development Committee. Hon. Clarence Cannon, chairman, Public Works Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. From: The Wabash Valley Association. Subject: Embarrass watershed survey, request for The Wabash Valley Association respectfully requests favorable consideration for a survey by the Corps of Engineers of the Embarrass river watershed in the State of Illinois. The Embarrass River is 132 miles long, drains an area of 2,310 square miles and is, intermittently, a major contributor of floodwaters to the Wabash River. The stream arises in southern Champaign County and flows through the wet prairie lands of Champaign, Douglas, and Coles Counties. In the middle portion of the watershed the river flows through a canyon-like valley in the rough land of the Wisconsin terminal moraine. In its lower reaches the river flows through a moderately wide valley which becomes broader as it approaches the Wabash. Poor drainage and upstream flooding plague the rich agricultural lands an the communities in that portion of the watershed which lies within Chan paign, Douglas, and Coles Counties. More than 80 drainage districts are locate on this upland prairie; each has been extended to drain all possib'e pond swamps, and sloughs. Tile lines and drainage ditches carry, in a few day water which, under natural conditions, took weeks or possibly months to rea the river. This overloading, coupled with that contributed by villages a towns and the cities of Champaign and Urbana, has placed an impossible burd upon the low-banked, sluggish, winding prairie stream. Excessive inflow h in part nullified the effectiveness of the drainage systems which have produced That additional rural land drainage or the improvement of existing drai age is hampered by the condition of the river channel is evidenced by the tern nation of the Scattering Forks watershed project, developed under Public La 566, nearly 3 miles from its outlet into the Embarrass River. The conditi of the lower channel of Scattering Forks and the adjacent portion of t Embarrass is such that increased benefits of the project could not be gain without river channel improvement. At this time, it is proposed that a storm sewer for Champaign-Urbana emptied into the headwaters of the Embarrass River and steps are being tak to legally establish such an outlet. Should this project be completed it wor include channel improvement immediately below the outlet which will furth aggravate flooding conditions downstream. Immediately below these prairies the Embarrass River has cut a de steep-walled channel through the morainal ridges. These rolling hills e tribute large quantities of runoff water which produce additional flood wate Overflow of this narrow bottom is not considered a major hazard since much the land remains in poor quality forest and grass vegetation. Excessive c centration of water in this section of the valley does, however, pose a thr to the broad, cultivable bottom lands below. The Embarrass River bottoms from Cumberland County southward rep sent a major agricultural resource for this part of Illinois. These fert lowlands cannot contribute materially to the welfare of the people with loss from flooding as high as three crops in four. Expenditures for drainage ditel and levees in this bottomland have only partially alleviated the loss of er from excessive moisture and have not effectively deterred the continuing loss the soil resource through the deposition of infertile sands and gravels on t rich valley bottom. Additional loss of taxable property and income and loss through damage land and public and private improvements is incurred in the small commu ties of the lower Embarrass Valley. Sporadic and spasmodic attempts to e trol or eliminate these losses have resulted in inadequate and relatively ine cient projects which have, in effect, aggravated the problem in the valley a whole. Benefits which may accrue within the Embarrass watershed other than existing resources are those of improved water supply for present usage, acq sition of water in quantities sufficient to attract industry to the area and ba needed recreational facilities. Few communities in the watershed have ott than underground water supplies of questionable quantity. The small rumb of water reservoirs in the area are sufficient only to provide supplies for limit municipal use. Most communities using surface water sources face severe sho ages during periods of extended drought and in many instances have limited st plies during the late summer and early autumn normally low rainfall periods. community in the watershed can boast adequate water for even small indust Recreation facilities for the population of this watershed are essentially no existent. Two small lakes have been created under the Dingell-Johnson p gram and are restricted to limited fishing. One additional fishing lake is und an experimental fishing program which restricts both the time of fishing a number of fishermen. No facilities for water sports are found within the mo than 2,300 square miles of the watershed. The development of these additional resources, and the improvement a protection of existing resources, will prove to be a valuable investment of Fe eral funds for the benefit of thousands of people in southeastern Illinois an southwestern Indiana. It is the sincere belief of the Wabash Valley Association that a survey of th entire Embarrass watershed is required to effectively ascertain the variou facets of a water control program essential to develop and maintain control the flow of the Embarrass River. Such control will not only protect the r sources basic to the welfare of the people in the area of Illinois but will materially alleviate the flood hazard on the Wabash River below the mouth of the Embarrass. Mr. ROUSH. I would like to present Mr. J. Roy Dee, president of the Wabash Valley Association, who is also mayor of Mount Carmel, I believe. STATEMENT OF MR. J. ROY DEE Mr. DEE. Not at this time. I am president of the Wabash Valley Association. I was its first president. It was organized about 3 years ago. I have no private ax to grind. I have nothing to gain very much. Unless you think I am crazy, I am trying to do something I think would be good for the people of the States of Illinois and Indiana. I think probably our two States have received less in benefits than any two States of their size and wealth in the country in regard to floods. I am not going to go in any detail into the different projects that are going to be presented here on our reservoirs in upper Indiana. I am the only man from Illinois, but I know the reservoirs in upper Indiana will benefit southern Illinois if they hold back some of the water. I am in favor of those levees in the appropriation that is asked for. In my opinion, it is a very small amount compared to the good and the value they will do. In the last 3 years I think the floods are estimated to have cost the farmers and the people up and down the valey more than $60 million. We have the wealthiest valley, probably, developed in the world, the watershed of Indiana and Illinois, some million acres, involving 22 million people. I have always wondered why we were not able to get a little more help from the Fedral Government. Maybe I learned something this afternoon that Idid not know anything about. I have never been much in politics and I did not know about any ch law, but I certainly know somebody must have made a whale of a mistake a few years ago because they need the aid and the FedPeral Government is the only one they can come to to take care of what they need in Illinois and Indiana. That is, the tributaries of the Wabash River. We have everything probably that you need in this Fountry in that undeveloped valley. We have the oil, we have the al, we have the building material, we have the good farmland, we have the climate, we have the people. Mr. CANNON. We have the men. Mr. DEE. We have the men, that is right, make no mistake about that. I think what we are asking for is very little. As far as the Nate of Illinois is concerned, I am the only representative, I think, here from the State of Illinois, as president of our organization. Illinois is asking, I think, $10,000 for a survey to be made at Mount Carmel. That would offset some of the opposition, maybe, to the levee that is being asked for across the river from Mount Carmel. I do not think there would be the big objection to it if they did not think it would harm Mount Carmel and some people there. I cannot answer that question, but I think the engineers could do it if $10,000 were might eliminate a lot of controversy right here. appropriated for that little measure there, and it The State of Illinois is asking $20,000 for a survey on the Amra River. That is the entire amount of money being asked for by the |