the 1928 act, if converted to current value, would reflect a local cooperation of about $1 billion. We think this legislative history shows quite clearly that the Congress did not intend to apply the A B C's to this and similar basins in the lower valley for various substantial reasons. The existing requirement, finally spelled out in the act of 1946, that the local interests maintain the levees, is in harmony with the original act of 1928. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the St. Francis Levee District of Arkansas, since its organization in 1893, has never shirked a responsibility or failed to fulfill an obligation. For many years before the entrance of the Federal Government into flood control and related work, we attempted to provide our own protection to the limit of our, at times, meager resources. We estimate that based on present-day values, local interests within the St. Francis Basin of Arkansas have spent on the order of $200 million in an effort to help protect themselves from the Mississippi and St. Francis Rivers. We in our own district are still paying on this old indebtedness and will be paying on it for several years to come. Stated simply, we believe it to be fair and equitable for the Federal Government to continue the St. Francis Basin project on the same basis as it has heretofore been prosecuted. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Thank you, sir. Mr. TINDALL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the next witness is Mr. A. L. Story, of Charleston, Mo. Mr. Story. Mr. STORY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is A. L. Story and I reside at Charleston, Mo. I am president of the board of supervisors of the St. John Levee and Drainage District of Missouri and also speak for Levee District No. 3 of Mississippi County, Mo., the other district involved in the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers concerning the Birds Point-New Madrid Floodway. Our two boards urge this committee to retain in this legislation the language appearing in S. 2300 which provides "that any modified easements required in the improvement of the Birds Point-New Madrid Floodway shall be acquired as provided by section 4 of the act of May 15, 1928." In the review report, which you are now considering, the Chief of Engineers, with reference to the floodway, recommended that the fuse plug levee be raised in grade to the equivalent of 60 feet on the Cairo, Ill., gage; that the frontline levee be strengthened, and that the plan of operation for the floodway be modified to permit breaching of the fuseplug or levee at any point by artificial means. Because of this last recommended change the Chief of Engineers believed that modified flowage easements in the floodway will be required and recommended that these new easements be furnished by the local interests as a project condition. The levee boards involved did not then and do not now believe that such a condition is proper. Even if we were financially able to meet this requirement we do not believe that we should be required to pay for our own bondage because the floodway area, approximately 131,000 acres, will continue to be used in times of major flood for the protection of others at the damage and destruction of our property. In its report the Senate Committee on Public Works has very succinctly stated the issue and I quote: Operation of the floodway is part of an overall plan for controlling floodwaters of the Mississippi River. The floodway is put into operation in order to protect areas outside of the floodway at the expense of lands in the floodway. Flowage easements for the presently authorized project were obtained by the Federal Government, as were similar easements needed for other floodways in the Mississippi River alluvial valley. By the way of history, prior to the 1928 act, which was the beginning of Federal participation in the flood control program as we now know it, our boards, with their own funds had built levees to protect this area. In the formation of the engineering plan adopted by the 1928 act, the Corps of Engineers determined that a bypass channel was required to protect other areas in times of great floods, the most important of which was Cairo, Ill. Our area was designated for this purpose and to that extent the Flood Control Act of 1928 worsened rather than helped our situation. The area is approximately 33 miles long and 10 miles wide and contains 131,000 acres of rich alluvial land. Our people fought this proposition without success. The servitude has been put upon us and remains to this day. While our neighbors can expect adequate protection from any known flood of record, we can expect from time to time to be inundated as we were when the floodway was utilized in the 1937 flood. There was a long period of litigation when the Federal Government undertook to obtain these easements. They paid an average of $21 per acre for what they took in the early thirties. Considering the bondage under which we have been placed and present-day values that figure is ridiculous and yet they would recommend that we continue under this servitude and pay the price for the chains which bind us. Admittedly, the proposed work would improve our situation, but our lands, our improvements, and our livelihood would still be in jeopardy for the benefit of others. "Frequency of flood" is a nice term but it is meaningless in a situation such as ours. The "once in 25 years" or "once in 50 years" can come in any year and can occur in successive years. If we were being asked to repay the amounts paid originally by the Government for the easements in exchange for the same protection enjoyed by our neighbors even that would be manifestly unfair. Our neighbors have furnished rights-of-way and maintained the levees. We already had the rights-of-way and the frontline levees which we have maintained through the years on our own initiative. As a representative of these thousands of people who live, own, and maintain a livelihood within this Birds Point-New Madrid spillway area, I wish to express to this committee our sincere hope and fervent prayer that you will retain the proviso in the bill as reported by the Senate committee. Thank you, sir. Mr. JONES. Thank you, sir. Mr. TINDALL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the next witness is Mr. Calvin T. Watts, assistant director of the Department of Public Works of the State of Louisiana. Mr. JONES. Mr. Watts, it is always a pleasure to have you with us. You have been of great assistance to the committee, and it is always a great pleasure to have you before the committee. Mr. WATTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Calvin Watts, assistant director, Louisiana State Department of Public Works, Baton Rouge, La. In Louisiana the department of public works is the official representative of the Governor and the State on matters pertaining to development of our water resources. Louisiana is acutely conscious of the danger of flooding from the Mississippi River and the protection provided through this flood control project. One-third of the State's total land area is vulnerable to the river's high water, and this same area contains 72 percent of Louisiana's population, most of its industry, major cities, and two of the Nation's principal ports. With so much at stake, Louisiana's interest in work recommended in the Mississippi River and Tributaries Comprehensive Review Report is of major importance. We concur in all recommendations on Louisiana items contained in the report with one exception. And that is with reference to the Red River backwater area which General Davis mentioned in his presentation. I will discuss it briefly. New work recommended for the Red River backwater area includes a pumping plant for the Tensas-Cocodrie area at a cost of $7 million. Requirements for local cooperation contained in the report are to provide rights-of-way, hold, and save the United States free from any damages, and operate and maintain the works after completion. Local interests are in agreement with these requirements with the exception of that to operate and maintain the facility after completion. They believe this to be a Federal responsibility, for which the estimated annual cost is in the neighborhood of $110,000. With regard to the recommended pumping plant and the area it will serve there are 209,000 acres of land partially protected by the Tensas-Cocodrie backwater levee. This area serves as a midriver reservoir for the storage of floodwaters originating in other regions of the country during major floods. These 209,000 acres of land are being used for flood storage for the benefit of other areas without the Federal Government having to pay for the servitude placed on these lands. It is true that during lesser floods protection is afforded to this area by the levee. During these times, however, drainage must be accomplished by pumping, as the gravity drainage is blocked by the floodwaters in the unprotected backwater area. We believe it would be only just for the Federal Government to undertake the maintenance and operation of the pumping station to compensate in part the owners for the use of their land for the storage of floodwaters. In view of past Federal legislation on flood protection of similar areas in the Mississippi River and tributaries project, this is a reasonable request. A pumping station has been authorized and constructed in the White River backwater area. Other pumping stations have been In au authorized in the St. Francis and Yazoo backwater areas. thorizing these pumping stations, Congress has deemed it proper for the Federal Government to assume the responsibility for maintenance and operation. All we are asking is that the terms of local cooperation on the Red River backwater pumping station be the same as required by Congress in other backwater pumping stations of like nature which have been authorized in the valley. The Senate recognized this as a Federal responsibility and provided in Senate bill 2300: That the pumping plant in the Red River backwater area shall be operated and maintained by the Corps of Engineers. We request your concurrence with this Senate bill provision. The Fifth Louisiana Levee Board is the State agency that will be required to furnish local cooperation on this pumping station. They are represented here today by its president, Mr. E. H. Stewart, of Tallulah, La.; Mr. W. C. Falkenheiner, a member from Vidalia, La.; Mr. Clyde D. Guthrie, a member from Waterproof, La.; and Mr. Troyce Guice, a member from Ferriday, La. They have a prepared statement to file for the record setting forth their views concerning this item. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. JONES. Thank you, sir. The clerk will receive the statement and it will be made a part of the record. (The statement follows:) STATEMENT OF BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, FIFTH LOUISIANA LEVEE DISTRICT RELATIVE TO THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES REVIEW REPORT (H. Doc. 308, 88TH CONG., 2D SESS.) The Fifth Louisiana Levee District is a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana, comprising four parishes and having local responsibility for flood control and maintenance of the levee system from the Arkansas State line to Old River (a distance of approximately 200 miles) and the secondary or backwater levee system along the Red, Black, and Tensas Rivers (a distance of approximately 93 miles). Concordia Parish is located in the southerly end of the levee district and is located immediately north of the confluence of the Red-Ouachita River systems with the Mississippi River system at Old River. Accordingly, the parish is bounded on the east by the Mississippi River and on the west by the Red, Quachita, and Tensas Rivers, and is entirely within the area designated by the Corps of Engineers as the Red River backwater area. The parish is now protected to some extent from backwater by a ring levee, which was completed about 12 years ago. This levee was the first step toward providing flood protection for the area, and the economic development which has taken place since the completion of the backwater levee has more than justified its relatively small cost. The next phase in providing flood control for this area involves the problem of providing for drainage during the period (sometmes quite extended) when natural drainage is blocked by higher backwater from the Mississippi River system, the Red River system and the Ouachita River system. The plan approved for the solution of this problem involves the building of a pumping plant in the lower end of Concordia Parish to pump water out of the area protected by the backwater levee into Red River. The plan of the Corps of Engineers is set out in detail in the Mississippi River and Tributaries Review Report (H. Doc. No. 308, 88th Cong., 2d sess.). Local interests, including the Board of Commissioners, Fifth Louisiana Levee District, strongly approve and support the plan of the Corps of Engineers as set forth in the review report, and on behalf of local interests pledge our assistance and cooperation to the fullest extent of our ability. It has many times been stated that Federal responsibility for the erection of flood control works along the Mississippi River is basically derived from the fact that this river provides a drainage outlet for the floodwaters of a major portion of the United States. The drainage problem in the lower end of our levee district which requires the proposed pumping plant is created not by local conditions but by the congregation in the area involved of floodwaters from the Mississippi River Valley and system, which is sufficient in itself to justify Federal responsibility, but there is also added the floodwaters of the Red River system and basin and the Ouachita River system and basin, either of which may at times be considerable. This makes the Federal responsibility in this area even greater. In a letter to the Secretary of the Army, dated April 6, 1962 (H. Doc. No. 308, p. 41), the Chief of Engineers makes the following recommendation: "i. Red River backwater area. Construction of a pumping plant at an estimated Federal cost of $5,937,000, including $366,000 for lands and development for the mitigation of fish and wildlife losses, provided local interests (a) provide, without cost to the United States, all other lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for construction and operation of the project; (b) hold and save the United States free from damages due to construction work; and (c) operate and maintain the works after completion." While, as stated above, local interests wholeheartedly approve the plans for the pumping plant and have pledged our assistance to the fullest extent of our ability, we are forced to take exception to the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers that local interests be entirely responsible for operation and maintenance of the works after completion (estimated to be $110,000 per annum). We also believe that the economic justification for the project is far greater than that shown in the review report and are not completely satisfied with the method of assessment of wildlife losses to the project. Our principal exception is the proposed assessment of the entire cost of operation and maintenance of the facility against local interests, as we are of the opinion that this is a Federal responsibility because of the magnitude of the problem and of the fact that the situations which create the very large drainage problem are ones which do not arise from local sources, but are situations created by conditions far removed from the locality. The Old River closure project has now been completed and the entire west bank of the Mississippi River is leveed, so that water leaves the Mississippi River into the Red River-Atchafalaya drainage basin through the Old River control structure (the low sill structure and the overbank structure). The operation of these two structures will materially affect the level of the backwater against our backwater levees, thereby extending the time during which local drainage is blocked. The operational control of the Old River control structures have been retained by the Corps of Engineers because of their effect on upstream and downstream Mississippi River conditions and also because of the requirements for water for navigation in the Atchafalaya River system. Moreover, the waters through the Mississippi River enter the backwater area 6 or 7 miles farther upstream than was formerly the case when these waters entered the area through Old River. All of these factors illustrate the fact that the condition sought to be alleviated by the pumping plant is created by conditions and influenced by factors having regional and nationwide application. We therefore are of the opinion that burdening purely local interests with the entire cost of operation and maintanenance of the works after completion is unjustified and unreasonable and would be an abdication of Federal responsibility in the premises. We endorse the review report on the lower Mississippi River as reported to the Senate by the Senate Public Works Committee and as passed by the Senate which provides that the Corps of Engineers assume responsibility for operation and maintenance of the Red River backwater area pumping plant, Concordia Parish, La. Mr. TINDALL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the committee. for hearing us. I would like to state that we have prepared written. statements incorporating what we have said verbally to you today. There are also other written statements on various aspects of the projects in the lower Mississippi River. We would like to submit those. Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman, I have a question. |