"Because he believes that the greater part of the tangible benefits of the improvement will accrue to coal consumers in many States, the district engineer proposes that the United States bear all the costs of new work for bridge alterations, except as local interests would benefit by increases in useful lives of structures or reductions in maintenance costs, and bear all the costs for flowage and remedial works included therein. On this basis he estimates the first cost to the United States at $65,644,680 including $84,120 for aids to navigation. Annual costs are estimated at $3,437,820 including $10,370 for operation and maintenance of navigation aids and $593,340 for operation and maintenance of the locks, dams, pumping facilities, and channels." The last paragraph on page 10 of the engineers' report should be of interest to those of us who will pay the bill: "Improvement of the streams in the Big Sandy Basin for flood control and related purposes, other than navigation, is not economically justified at this time except as may be accomplished under the approved comprehensive plan for the Ohio River Basin." I also quote the final paragraph, of the report, containing the recommendations of the Board: "The Board recommends modification of the existing project for Big Sandy River, W. Va. and Ky., including Levisa and Tug Forks, to provide for securing a channel with project depth of 9 feet, 200 feet wide on Big Sandy River, 150 feet wide on Levisa Fork to Russell Fork by the construction of locks and dams and channel excavation, generally in accordance with the plans of the district engineer as shown on the accompanying drawings and the above comments and with such modifications thereof as in the discretion of the Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers may be advisable, at an estimated cost to the United States of $82,300,000 for new work and $600,000 annually for maintenance and operation; subject to the conditions that local interests agree to establish, operate, and maintain adequate terminal and transfer facilities, and that they maintain all parts of railroads, highways, bridges, and utilities which would be altered or constructed as a part of the improvement." An undated letter from Lieut. Gen. R. A. Wheeler, Chief of Engineers, addressed to the House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, concerning the report on this project, carries in paragraph 3 this statement: "After due consideration of these reports, I concur in the views and recommendations of the Board." Paragraph 4 of his report is made a part of this statement for the clarification of the record: "With respect to flood control on the Big Sandy River and tributaries, present authority for the Dewey Reservoir and the general authority under the approved comprehensive plan for the Ohio River Basin provide adequately for flood control at this time." This project is opposed by more than 2,000 businessmen, bankers, railroad and mining employees, railroad coal producers, farmers, and citizens in the States of Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia. It is my understanding that many of the coal producers in the locality of the proposed project have voiced their disapproval. The need now for food production and all available housing is acute. While these are two items not taken into account by those opposing the project, they are of primary importance at the moment and there is nothing to indicate this critical condition will not continue for some time. The loss of taxes to the Federal and State Governments, while important, is not so important as the fact that this loss, together with the cost, whatever it may be, will, of necessity, be paid by the taxpayers. This includes our service men and women who, in most cases, are at the beginning of their taxpaying life. If this project is developed, they, and all other taxpayers, will be contributing since it is to cost the United States $600,000 annually for maintenance, or a greater amount. This is in addition to the cost to local interests which will be charged with operation and maintenance of adequate terminal and transfer facilities, all parts of railroads, highways, bridges, and utilities which would be altered or constructed as a part of the improvement. A further point which I consider very vital is the opposition of the people living in the vicinity of the proposed project. Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. We also have a letter from Congressman Burch, of Virginia, in opposition to the proposal, and without objection, his letter will be placed in the record. 87050-46- -14 (The letter referred to is as follows:) Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Chairman, Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I am informed that on May 6 and 7, your committee will consider the proposal of the Army engineers to construct a dead-end canal in the Big Sandy River and Tug and Levisa Forks thereof, Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia. The proposed canal would parallel existing transportation facilities on the Norfolk & Western Railway and the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway, and such facilities are considered adequate. I am of the opinion that it would be unwise to authorize an appropriation for the proposed canal as the general public would receive little benefit from such a project. I hope your committee will reject the proposal. It will be appreciated if you will make this letter a part of the hearings on the matter. Sincerely yours, T. G. BURCH. Mr. RANKIN. Do we have a telegram here from John L. Lewis? Mr. LAWSON. His representatives are here and will be heard if they have a chance. Mr. RANKIN. If the coal strike keeps on, you will not need the railroad nor the canal, either. Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. Would the committee like to read from whom these telegrams are from? Mr. RANKIN. I believe it would be best to just insert them in the record. Mr. PETERSON of Georgia. They will be inserted in the record at this time. I understand that 41 local unions have sent in telegrams in opposition to the project. (The communications referred to are as follows:) JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, M. C., Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, LOGAN, W. Va., April 17, 1946. House of Representatives: This is to advise you that our membership is 100 percent against the canalization of Tug River because it reduces the use of coal and will eliminate thousands of coal miners from employment who are employed today on account of this project. RIVERS AND HARBORS COMMITTEE, F. T. ROGER, President. COLUMBUS, OHIO, May 6, 1946. New House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: City of Columbus, Ohio, has taken official action against the proposal of Big Sandy Canalization. Such a project would cause drastic unemployment among railroad employees, who make up a large segment of Columbus population. Consider this a formal protest by city of Columbus, Ohio. JAMES A. RHODES, Mayor. Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, HIGHCOAL, W. Va., April 17, 1946. Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, Officers and members of our local union request that you use your influence in opposing the canalization of Big Sandy River. LOCAL UNION No. 2542, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA. COAL FORK, W. Va., April 17, 1946. Hon. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, Officers and members of this local union oppose the canalization of Big Sandy River. LOCAL UNION NO. 4592, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, M. C., Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: LOGAN, W. Va., April 17, 1946. The United Mine Workers of America of this local union No. 5740 urge you to use your influence to help to defeat the canalization of the Tug River because it will eliminate thousands of workers out of employment and in particular the United Mine Workers of America in this section. G. L. JEFFREY, Secretary. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, M. C., House Office Building, Washington, D. O.: LOGAN, W. VA., April 16, 1946. We the officers and members of local union No.. 5813, United Mine Workers of America, having a membership of 520 wish to inform you and the members of your Committee on Rivers and Harbors that we are against the canalization of the Tug River watershed in West Virginia as we think that it will only benefit a chosen few, and thereby cause a large number of people to be thrown out of work or either choose some other field of employment. To be plain, we think this project is just a waste of money and would tend to swell the public relief rolls. JOHN FURNER, President. E. J. HUSTON, LOGAN, W. Va., April 16, 1946. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, M. C., Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: Local Union 5853, with a membership of 750, ask you as chairman to do all within your power to help defeat the proposed canalization of the Tug River because it will put thousands of workers in coal mines and railroads out of employment. JAMES NUNLEY, President. NEPOLIN GILBERT, Secretary. JOE J. MANSFIELD, BLUEFIELD, W. Va., April 17, 1946. Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Local Union, No. 6050, United Mine Workers of America, Pocahontas, Va., is opposed to the Sandy River project because, first, it's a waste of money; second, it will benefit only a few mines; third, it's a stick or whip to crack the head of the carriers who have developed and served the coal fields for over 50 years; and last, but not least, it will cause a lot of miners to be cut off from work. Please consider this position. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman, Rivers and Harbors Committee, JOHN H. MASON, President. DANIEL DRASCO, Coal Miners Committee. E. L. JACKSON, Recording Secretary. HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. New House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of Local Union. No. 5736, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River as we feel that it would be the means of putting a number of small coal operators out of business and throwing a lot of men out of employment and we are against this project going through and hope that you will use your good influence against it. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, ARNOLD PRICE, President. HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of local union 5773, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River as we feel that it would be the means of putting a number of small coal operators out of business and throwing a lot of men out of employment, and we are against this project going through and hope that you will use your good influence against it. ANCO, KY. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, JESS P. TURNER, President. HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946.. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of local union 5780, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River and we feel that instead of a benefit to the coal industry that it would be destructive to the coal industry in the eastern part of the State of Kentucky, and we ask you to use your good influence in seeing that this project don't go through. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman of Rivers and Harbor Committee, WM. EVERSOLE, President. HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of local union 5781, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River and we are depending on you to see that this project don't go through. We feel that this project would ruin the coal industry in eastern Kentucky. We feel that your good influence will defeat this project. MATT JOHNSON, President, LOTHAIR, KY. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman of Rivers and Horbors Committee, HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of local union 5782, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River as we feel that it would be the means of putting a number of small coal operators out of business and throwing a lot of men out of employment. And we are against this project going through and hope that you will use your good influence against it. KODAK, KY. J. F. LONG, President. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of the local union No. 5788, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River as it would be destructive to the coal industry of eastern Kentucky and we are against this project going through, 100 percent. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, HARLIN CALDWELL, President. HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of local union No. 5789, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River as it would be destructive to the coal industry of eastern Kentucky and we are against this project going through, 100 percent. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, ABE NEWBERRY, President. HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of Local Union No. 5793, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River, 100 percent, and hope you use every effort to see that this project don't go through as we feel that it would be destructive to the coal industry in eastern Kentucky. Hoping that you use every effort against it. ARTHUR CORNETT. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We the members of local union No. 5808, are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River, 100 percent, and hope that you use every effort to see that this project don't go through as we feel that it would be destructive to the coal industry in eastern Kentucky. Hoping that you use every effort against it. ALBERT HALZAUR. JOSEPH J. MANSFIELD, HAZARD, KY., April 22, 1946. Chairman of Rivers and Harbors Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We, the members of Local union No. 5811 are against the canalization of the Big Sandy River, 100 percent, and hope that you use every effort to see that this project don't go through as we feel that it would be destructive to the coal industry in eastern Kentucky. Hoping that you use every effort against it. CHARLES LEE. |