soil conservation practices on the land, supplemented by about 38.7 miles of channel improvement. The soil conservation practices include such measures as conservation cropping systems, cover and green manure crops, stripcropping, pasture and hay planting, and tile drains.

The 38 miles of stream channel improvement are both for the purpose of flood prevention and drainage. It is estimated that the project will produce benefits of $239,500 a year. The estimated area benefited is 57,232 acres. The estimated cost of the project is $2,855,700 in total, of which a high proportion or $1,871,000 consists of land treatment measures. Of the total project cost, $869,000, roughly, or 30 percent, will be borne from Public Law 566 funds and the remainder from other funds. The estimated benefit cost ratio is 3.9 to 1, and the estimated structural cost per acre benefited is $10 an acre.

I might point out that the figure that I have given on estimated benefits includes an item of redevelopment benefits of $6,340: Without that benefit the benefit-cost ratio drops from 3.9 to 3.8.

Mr. POAGE. That is one of the best ratios we have and a small cost per acre and a very large contribution on the part of the local people; extremely large.

Are there questions? If not, we are very much obliged to you.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN L. MCMILLAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Mr. MCMILLAN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am well acquainted with this Meadow Creek project since I was born and raised within 15 miles of this proposed watershed. I certainly can think of no worthier project if the Federal Government wants to assist with flood and drainage control in this country.

I remember quite often that we have had as much as 10 inches of rain in that territory, and it destroyed all the crops within 15 or 20 miles. I would like to state that the majority of the national champion potato growers of the United States for the past 10 years have come from this territory or in that immediate section. These are sweetpotatoes. During the past 10 years the A. & P. Stores have given the sweetpotato champion grower a trip to New York and several other wonderful prizes of that nature. I believe these awards have come to this territory every year during the past 10 years.

Some of the boys grow 400 bushels per acre. I hope the committee will take favorable action on this proposal. I voted and worked for your soil conservation and watershed bills since I have been a member of this committee and up to the present time have not had any real benefits in my district or State. I thank the committee for giving consideration to this project. If you would like to have some additional figures on this project I will be glad to furnish the committee

with them.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you, Mr. McMillan.

We appreciate your interest in this watershed and appreciate your making this presentation. Are there any further questions?

WILLIS RIVER WATERSHED, VIRGINIA

Mr. POAGE. If there are no further questions, we will pass to the Willis River watershed.

WILLIS RIVER WATERSHED WORKPLAN

Size and location: 176,700 acres in Buckingham and Cumberland Counties. Tributary to: James River-Chesapeake Bay.

Sponsors: Robert E. Lee Soil and Water Conservation District, Buckingham County Board of Supervisors, Cumberland County Board of Supervisors.

Principal measures: Soil conservation practices on farms; and structural measures consisting of 11 floodwater retarding structures and 14.91 miles of channel improvement. Storage capacity of the structures ranges from 469 acrefeet to 2,845 acre-feet.

Number of beneficiaries: About 120 landowners will benefit by flood prevention.

1 This is primarily the cost of applying land-treatment measures by landowners. Cost sharing from Federal funds appropriated for the agricultural conservation program may be available if included in the county program developed each year in consideration of approved State and National programs and the annual authorization by the Congress.

2 Consisting of

Land, easements and rights-of-way.

Administration of contracts..

$48, 172 1,480

The value of measures already applied ($597,936) increases this to 49 percent.

Benefit-cost ratio: 1.2 to 1.

Prorated Public Law 566 structural cost per acre benefited: $100. Carrying out the project: The Robert E. Lee Soil and Water Conservation District assumes all local responsibilities for installing, operating, and maintaining the structural works of improvement. The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $6,005.

Mr. WETZEL. The Willis River watershed is located in Buckingham and Cumberland Counties, Va. It is about half and half. The county line runs through here. It is an area of about 177,000 acres and the river is tributary to the James River which in turn is tributary to the Chesapeake Bay. This is strictly an agricultural watershed. There are no towns within the watershed area. The agricultural flood plain land as shown in yellow is subject to annual flooding. Most of it occurs during the cropping season with resulting high losses in the crops that have been planted and a loss of the fertilizer and time that has gone into setting the crops.

Major flood losses have occurred in 1928, 1935, 1940, 1944, 1950. As a result of the floods the higher income crops have been moved out of the fertile flood plain land up onto the eroding hillside lands, and the sediment production rate has increased quite substantially.

There also have been substantial damages to roads and bridges at 24 different locations throughout the watershed, and at one location a railroad-or rather Route 60, which cuts across this point-at one point that has been flooded several times.

The agriculture, as such, is concentrated above this route 60 and in the Hatcher Creek tributary. The lower part of the watershed is primarily wooded, and damages have not been as great in the lower part of the watershed as up in the intensive agricultural area. The program that is proposed consists of 11 floodwater retarding structures as shown on the map and about 15 miles of channel improvement. These floodprevention measures will control the runoff in the upper 26 percent of the watershed.

The protection provided will be a minimum of 5 years' protection above route 60 in the concentrated agricultural area with a lower level of protection in the wooded lower part of the watershed. The benefitcost ratio is 1.2 to 1. It does include 17 percent of secondary benefits. However, excluding the secondary benefits, the average annual benefits will amount to $44,315, while the average annual cost will amount to $42,836. So the project has a favorable benefit-cost ratio, excluding the secondary benefits.

About 120 landowners in the upper part of the watershed will benefit from the proposed flood-prevention measures. The total cost of the project is $1,920,000, which the local people have agreed to pay 33 percent, or $630,000, and Public Law 566 funds will provide 67 percent, or a total of $1,290,000. The prorated cost per acre of protecting the average acre of agricultural land is $100.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you very much. Are there any questions?

Mr. TEAGUE. I have one question just for the sake of consistency. Will you tell us what the secondary benefits amount to in this project and what they are?

Mr. WETZEL. Congressman, the secondary benefits are those that stem from the project. As Mr. Swigart explained, the indirect are those that are related to the primary benefits while secondary are those that stem from the project. They are the increased profits, the increased income to the processor, to the trucker, to the various people who serve this agricultural community. When you say specifically what they are, they are not identified as such in the work plan. That is, the type of individuals who will benefit are not identified in the work plan. The procedure is to work through a formula based on the type of watershed and the type of industry that is going on in the

watershed; you get the ratio of the secondary benefits to the direct benefits through this formula.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you. We have our colleague, Mr. Abbitt, with us. Would you like to give us a few kind words for this project?

STATEMENT OF HON. WATKINS M. ABBITT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. ABBITT. Yes, sir.

Mr. POAGE. Tell us just where it is. It is not given on the map. Is it northeast of Appomatox?

Mr. ABBITT. Yes; it starts practically on the Appomatox County line, just northeast of the county line. It is a long watershed, as has been explained. I am wholeheartedly in accord with and approve the project and hope very much that this committee will see fit to approve it. I met with the sponsors a number of times and the sponsors had hoped to include additional territory in that, but in an endeavor to make it feasible and the cost ratio to come out proper, the Soil Conservation Service in Virginia did not approve all that was requested by the sponsors. But I think in the long run this will be of tremendous value.

I found widespread approval of and support for the project in the I have gotten numerous letters about it.

area.

I won't bore the committee any longer, but I do appreciate the opportunity to be heard and I hope very much that the committee will give its approval to the project.

CUB CREEK, NEBRASKA

Mr. POAGE. We will now take up the Cub Creek watershed. They have presented me with a very attractive cover. I suppose that is a

Baylor Bear.

Mr. CALLAN. That is the first homestead in the country. That is the Homestead National Monument.

Mr. POAGE. We will have an explanation of the project.

CUB CREEK WATERSHED WORK PLAN

Size and location: 92,350 acres in Jefferson and Gage Counties.
Tributary to: Big Blue River-Kansas River-Missouri River.

Sponsors: Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District, Gage County Soil and Water Conservation District, Cub Creek Watershed Conservancy District.

Privately owned: 99 plus percent.

Federal land: 160 acres.

Number of farms: 340.

Size of farms: About 270 acres average.

Purposes: Watershed protection and flood prevention.

Principal measures: Soil conservation practices on farms; and structural measures consisting of 17 floodwater-retarding structures and 12 grade-stabilization structures. Storage capacity of the structures ranges from 305 acre-feet to 2,344 acre-feet.

Number of beneficiaries: Owners and operators of 87 farms in the flood plain plus 42 benefiting from reduced gully erosion damage in the uplands. Area benefited: 5,535 acres.

Project costs

This is primarily the cost of applying land treatment measures by landowners. Cost sharing from Federal funds appropriated for the agricultural conservation program may be available if included in the county program developed each year in consideration of approved State and National programs and the annual authorization by the Congress.

• Consisting of

Land, easements and rights-of-way.
Administration of contracts..

3 The value of measures already applied ($1,218,900) increases this to 65 percent. NOTE.-Prorated Public Law 566 structural cost per acre benefited, $132.

Benefit-cost ratio: 2.1 to 1.

$301, 000 11, 700

Carrying out the project: The Cub Creek Watershed Conservancy District assumes all local responsibiilties for installation, operation, and maintenance of the structural measures. The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $3,300.

Mr. SWIGART. The Cub Creek watershed is located in Jefferson and Gage Counties in southeastern Nebraska. It comprises 92,350 acres of level to moderately sloping land. The Cub Creek itself joins the Big Blue River 3 miles northwest of Beatrice. You will notice there are two creeks really, Battle Creek that joins within a short distance of Cub Creek. There are two creeks covered in this particular Cub Creek watershed area. The watershed is privately owned practically entirely except for this Homestead National Monument that Mr. Callan referred to. The average annual precipitation in the area is about 29 inches.

The population is 1,475 folks that are engaged in agriculture. Sixty-nine percent of the area is in cropland and that cropland is devoted primarily to corn, milo, wheat, and alfalfa. The economy is based on cash grain and cattle feeding, with 40 percent of the feed grains consumed on the farm. There are about 340 farms in the area averaging 270 acres each and ranging in size from 80 to 1,120 acres. There is a dual problem of severe erosion and severe flooding. The gullies that are of much the same type described for the Iowa project also occur in certain parts of this watershed.

There are about three floods annually that affect some 4,491 acres; that is, the larger floods affect that many acres. The proposed program for this area consists of the usual soil and water conservation