all of our understandings and agreements, before a start is made on the program, my generation will not live long enough to see any progressive steps accomplished. And, in the meantime, these recurring floods, which last year and already this year have caused damage totaling about $100,000,000, will go on causing untold loss, taking human lives, working incalculable hardships and retarding the development of a great and potentially rich area because nothing will have been done to stop them. We have the plan with which to start. We are ready to go. We ask the Congress to give us our chance.

Senator OVERTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Trustin.

Mr. TRUSTIN. I appreciate your allowing me to come here to talk before this group so often.

Senator CORDON. Mr. Chairman, the witness mentioned the Pick plan, and I have heard references to it a number of other times. As you know, I am new to this committee and to this work, and I do not recognize just what is meant by the Pick plan. I wonder if we can get one of the Army engineers to at least outline roughly what is included within the Pick plan.

Senator Overton. The Army engineers outlined the Pick plan before the Rivers and Harbors Subcommittee. Colonel Reber presented a rather full and comprehensive statement of the Pick plan; and then he also appeared before the Flood Control Committee of the House and presented it rather fully in those hearings. That is correct, is it not, Colonel?

Colonel REBER. Yes, Mr. Chairman; that is correct.

Senator OVERTON. We can, if you desire, at this time have Colonel Reber make a statement in reference to it. It was my thought that since the Pick plan is already in the House bill, we would hear from the opposition and then put the engineers on. I do not know what the opposition is or upon what it is based; that remains to be developed, if there is any opposition. Then we will hear from Colonel Reber and General Robins and other Army engineers in answer to any objections that there may be to the Pick plan.

Senator CORDON. For my information, it would put me in a better position to understand what the objections are if I knew what the plan was to which they were objecting. If it would not take too long I would appreciate just a short statement, enough to cover an outline of the plan. I am sorry that I have not had an opportunity to bring myself up to date on the House hearings.

Senator OVERTON. Certainly, Senator. We will do that now.
General Robins?

General ROBINS. Colonel Reber will make the statement, Mr. Chair

man.

Senator CORDON. It does not have to be comprehensive; just to indicate what the plan is, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OF COL. MILES REBER, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UNITED

STATES ARMY

Colonel REBER. Mr. Chairman, in compliance with a resolution of the Flood Control Committee of the House of Representatives, dated May 13, 1943, calling upon the Corps of Engineers to study previous reports on the Missouri River between Sioux City and the mouth to

determine whether or not any modifications in our previous plan should be made to provide for flood control in that section of the river, the Missouri River division, under the direct charge of then colonel, now general, L. A. Pick, prepared a comprehensive flood-control plan for that section of the Missouri River.

Briefly, the plan consists of a series of multiple-purpose reservoirs above Sioux City to catch the run-off of the upper portion of the basin. It consists of a system of main-line levees running from Sioux City, on both sides of the river, to the mouth, and it consists of a series of tributary reservoirs in the lower basin to take care of the surplus run-off in that area.

Because of the very definite problems of drought and flood and because of the excellent possibilities of developing multiple-purpose reservoirs in the basin to provide a large block of hydroelectric power and to furnish water for navigation, this plan was tied into and made a general framework for the entire basin, since that is the only sensible way of approaching the specific problem of flood control between Sioux City and the mouth of the river.

The division engineer, the Chief of Engineers, and the Engineer Department contemplate, expect, and desire that this plan will be augmented and supplemented by additional work of other Federal agencies who are specifically charged with definite duties regarding the use of water under existing Federal laws. What I mean by that statement is that we want this framework to be supplemented by the studies of the Bureau of Reclamation for irrigation, the studies of the Federal Power Commission for power, the studies of the Department of Agriculture for the prevention of soil erosion and retardation of water flow, and the studies of other agencies on their specialties.

Senator ROBERTSON. Has any such arrangement been in effect. already, or are you hoping that that will happen in the future? Colonel REBER. Do you mean, by specific authorization, Senator? Senator ROBERTSON. No. Has there been any get-together between the Army engineers and the Reclamation engineers with reference tothis whole Missouri River Basin?

Colonel REBER. Yes, sir; I consider that we have gone a long way toward coordinating our plans. We have had numerous conferences. with them. I have personally participated in at least three conferences while I was division engineer of the Missouri division for 21⁄2 months last year.

Senator ROBERTSON. Has there been any definite agreement arrived at?

Colonel REBER. Yes, sir; very definitely, I believe.

Senator ROBERTSON. Would you like to explain that as you go along? Colonel REBER. I shall be very glad to, Senator.

The Corps of Engineers' plan on the main stem contemplates five multiple-purpose reservoirs. Going upstream from Yankton we have the Gavins Point Reservoir, which is primarily a reregulating reservoir to catch the surges of water which come down from the other reservoirs, and to smooth out the flow for the navigation channel. Senator ROBERTSON. What is the capacity of the Gavins Dam? Colonel REBER. Two hundred thousand acre-feet, sir.

The next reservoir upstream is the Fort Randall Reservoir, which is located just above the South Dakota-Nebraska State line. That.

reservoir has a capacity of approximately 6,000,000 acre-feet. Field surveys may show that it is slightly less than that. That is for flood control, for water conservation-and by water conservation I mean the storage of water both for irrigation and navigation—and it also is an excellent power project.

Going upstream from Fort Randall we find that the next dam is Oahe just above Pierre. That dam is also a multiple-purpose project. Here we strike the first indication that there might be a real difference of opinion. I would like to show very clearly that there is no difference of opinion between the studies of the Bureau of Reclamation and ours on this site. The Pick plan, as it now stands, provides for a dam with a capacity of approximately 6,000,000 acre-feet at the Oahe site. The Bureau of Reclamation plan provides for a high dam at that site with a capacity of approximately 19,000,000 acre-feet.

One of the most important features of the Pick plan is that it is flexible; that it provides for such modifications thereof as may be found advisable, in the discretion of the Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers, as we proceed with the plan. The only reason why General Pick made this dam a low dam, so to speak-I am trying to get away from the controversy that we had a few days ago between high and low dams; but this is a so-called low dam-at the time General Pick made his report our foundation investigations had not proceeded sufficiently far to indicate whether or not it was practicable to build a high dam at that site. We thoroughly believe that if those foundation conditions are satisfactory and it is decided that the high dam should be built-and I understood the other day that the Bureau of Reclamation testified that they had found those conditions suitable

Senator ROBERTSON. You say the engineers would favor 19,000,000 acre-feet?

Colonel REBER. Yes, sir; very definitely. We are required by Congress to look a little further into the economics of the situation. Senator ROBERTSON. That would possibly change the upper plans, would it not?

Colonel REBER. Only in this respect: It would eliminate the next dam in the Pick plan as it now stands on paper.

The next dam upstream from Oahe is the Oak Creek structure which is just above Mobridge, S. Dak. It also has a capacity of approximately 6,000,000 acre-feet. If the high dam can be built at Oahe, that will eliminate the Oak Creek project. In the first place, it will eliminate the necessity for it, and in the second place it will flood out the site.

So there is no real difference of opinion of any consequence, I am positive, right up to this point in the river [indicating] the Garrison Dam.

Senator ROBERTSON. The Bureau of Reclamation Engineers-I think Mr. Sloan, in his report before the River and Harbors subcommittee, stated that they felt that the high dam at Oahe would solve the floodcontrol problem on the Upper Missouri River. Do you agree with

that?

Colonel REBER. No, sir; I cannot agree with that statement. I believe that additional storage is necessary. I can go into that subject in some detail. I planned to do it later, but I can do so now, if you

desire, Mr. Chairman, because that, frankly, is a very important point. What I understood that I was to do now was to give an outline of the Pick plan.

Senator OVERTON. Yes.

Senator ROBERTSON. What I mean is, provided the extensive irrigation storage that the Bureau of Reclamation has in view in the Sloan plan is put into effect, would the Oahe high dam then take care of the flood conditions; that is, in addition to the irrigation?

Colonel REBER. Not in my opinion, and not in the opinion of the Chief of Engineers. He so stated.

The next is the Garrison Dam, which has a total capacity of 17,000,COO acre-feet. Here there is a difference of opinion, up to date, in the plans of the two organizations. I should like to say, however, that I do not think there is any conflict. I think it is merely a difference of opinion.

We propose this dam for multiple-purpose use to provide an additionly block of approximately 4,600,000 acre-feet of flood storage, and we believe it is also necessary for cyclic storage to carry over water through dry cycles for irrigation, navigation, and power.

There has been considerable discussion in connection with that latter subject. I shall not go into details now, but I should like to make some remarks about it later.

With the Corps of Engineers' plan there can be a diversion into the Dakotas from the Garrison Dam. The Bureau proposes a diversion into the Dakotas from the existing Fort Peck Dam. The take-off is below Fort Peck, just below the mouth of the Milk River and goes across here [indicating on map] into the Souris Basin.

Those, frankly, gentlemen, are the only two points where, in my opinion, we are not in complete accord with the plan of the Bureau of Reclamation-the diversion into the Souris, and the Garrison Dam.

Senator ROBERTSON. What difference would there be in the area to be irrigated in North Dakota if the Bureau's plan is followed by diverting the water into the Souris about 10 miles below Fort Peck, or if the Army Engineers' plan were followed of taking water out at Garrison? Colonel REBER. Frankly, there would be this difference, sir, in the initial stage. The plan we have for diversion, which is shown by the heavy line running from the Garrison Dam over to the Sheyenne Basin and the James River Basin, does not in its initial stages provide for the irrigation of approximately 1,000,000 acres in the Souris Basin. Later on, however, if that irrigation is found to be economically justifiable the final decision can then be made. But that is, frankly, Senator, a detail of irrigation in which we will bow to the judgment of the experts on irrigation after they are convinced that it is economically sound and does not work to the detriment of the lower basin. From here on up [indicating] there are apparent conflicts, but those conflicts are only apparent for this reason: The Pick plan as outlined contains two dams, one at the Boysen site on the Big Horn River above Thermopolis, Wyo., the other at the lower canyon site on the Yellowstone River just above Livingston, Mont. We have stated specifically in the Pick plan that these are parts of the framework for the development of the upper basin and can be modified when the circumstances warrant changes.

60479-44- -33

Gentlemen, I mentioned the resolution of the House Flood Control Committee at the very beginning for a very specific purpose. These dams in this upper basin area have tremendous value to irrigation. Senator ROBERTSON. That is, west of that?

Colonel REBER. As a matter of fact, all of them do, but I am just making this one point right now. They have tremendous value to irrigation and they should be so developed.

The House committee called upon us for a report on flood control between Sioux City and the mouth. We did not feel that we could properly develop the details of irrigation in this upper area with such a directive from the Congress. We always endeavor to comply strictly with our congressional directives. Besides the Bureau is the Federal agency responsible for irrigation. So, when the Bureau's plan came out, which reached us, I believe, on the 22d of April 1944, we replied on the 25th of April. We were requested to submit our comments as rapidly as possible. I think that we were asked to get them in by the 25th of April. We stated in a letter which I have inserted in the record of the hearings on the rivers and harbors bill, H. R. 3961—and this was the official letter of comment by the Chief of Engineers-that we were in thorough accord with the Bureau's plans for the tributaries. So there is absolutely no conflict on the tributaries whatsoever. The only real differences of opinion-and I repeat this for emphasis-in the two plans that I see at the present moment is the Garrison Dam and the diversion into the Souris. The different ideas on reregulation on the main stem just above Yankton, S. Dak., can easily be straightened out, I am sure.

I shall not discuss the lower tributaries, the Platte and the Kansas Rivers, because there is no difference of opinion there. There may be some minor details that have to be worked out as we go along.

Thus the Pick plan is a framework for flood control and for the multiple-purpose development of the entire Missouri Basin.

Senator OVERTON. You might mention the dams and reservoirs in the lower tributaries so as to give a complete picture of the entire Pick plan.

Colonel REBER. I should be delighted to, sir.

Senator ROBERTSON. In addition, the plan is for navigation?

Colonel REBER. It is for multiple-purpose use which of course, frankly, includes navigation as well as irrigation, power, and other uses; but there are no specific works in the Pick plan for navigation alone.

The Pick plan also recommended the construction of five additional reservoirs on the Republican River in Nebraska, in Kansas, and in Colorado. These are small multiple-purpose dams, the Medicine Creek Dam, the Red Willow Dam, the Enders Dam, the Beechers Island Dam, and the Hale Dam.

Mr. Chairman, in addition to those dams which I have indicatedthose five on the Republican River, the five on the main stem of the Missouri below Fort Peck and above Sioux City and the two in the upper basin-there are already authorized, under the Flood Control Act of 1938 and the Flood Control Act of 1941, additional dams and reservoirs in the lower basin which are an essential part of the overall plan for the Missouri Basin.