Mr. ELLSWORTH. That is fine, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that. What we are faced with now, as I believe the committee may have been told earlier today, is this. The CHAIRMAN. We went into the details of the amount that has been authorized, the appropriation, the names of the dams, the amount that is available and the amount needed. Mr. ELLSWORTH. Was the point brought up that the current work will just about exhaust the existing authorization, and that it will be necessary to have an interim authorization of about 55,000,000 so that planning may go forward for 1951? Was that point brought before the committee? The CHAIRMAN. The necessity for additional appropriations was brought before us, and they gave us the over-all financial picture. Mr. ELLSWORTH. The sole point then that I want to add is that regardless of whether or not congressional action is had on the whole subject of the basic report The CHAIRMAN. Your point is that there should be an increase in the amount of authorization for the Willamette River project. Mr. ELLSWORTH. It should be a simple increase of about $55,000,000 in the Willamette Basin authorization now, and the remainder of it can be covered under the complete study and authorization. Mr. ELLSWORTH. I live at Roseburg, Oreg. My home is south of the Willamette Basin, itself. There are three river basins in the district I serve, the Willamette on the north, the next is the Umpqua, and then the Rogue River. The CHAIRMAN. Salem is in your district? Mr. ELLSWORTH. That is just north of my district. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, very much, sir. Mr. ELLSWORTH. My district begins just north of Albany. The CHAIRMAN. If you want to make an additional statement, that is quite agreeable with the committee. As I say, we went pretty carefully into appropriations this morning. Mr. MACK. I would like to ask the permission of the committee to insert in the record at this point telegrams from Abe Moawad, manager of the port of Kalama, from N. H. Jacobson, manager of a large plywood plant, telling about the closing of four industries due to the high water on the Columbia at this time, and a third telegram from the Fruit Valley Home Owners Association, Harry Worthington, president, from Vancouver, Wash., telling about the damage that is being done at the present time to 330 homes in the Fruit Valley section. of Vancouver. The CHAIRMAN. Those telegrams will be inserted. (The telegrams referred to follow :) Hon. RUSSELL V. MACK, Member of Congress, KALAMA, WASH., May 20, 1949. House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: The Columbia River flood waters are again damaging our industries and flooding port properties on which they are located. Four industries are flooded out, putting over 175 men out of employment and damaging mill installations. This is a serious blow to our community at present and discouraging for future devel opment. Could something be done to hasten proposed projects to prevent these losses and protect jobs and property investments? ABE MOAWAD, Manager, Port of Kalama. Hon. RUSSELL V. MACK, VANCOUVER, WASH., May 20, 1949. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: Last year you will recall the great damage caused by the flood to 330 Fruit Valley homes, formerly a Federal housing project in Vancouver, Wash. Again the water is at our doorsteps. The city of Vancouver has pledged their facilities to construct a dike but are stymied by lack of funds. It is estimated $20,000 will give us immediate protection in the form of a dike. Since this was once a Government project we feel justified in soliciting Government aid and your personal effort for immediate funds to prevent another disaster will be appreciated. FRUIT VALLEY HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION, KALAMA, WASH., May 19, 1949. Representative RUSSELL MACK, Washington, D. C.: Columbia again on the rise, plant entirely surrounded by water, operations suspended indefinitely, 125 men jobless. N. H. JACOBSON. The CHAIRMAN. Colonel Weaver, will you come up again, please. Mr. Angell wants to ask you one or two questions. Mr. ANGELL. Colonel Weaver, what I would like, if it is possible, is to have justification for these three items that I mentioned that are in the 308 report, of an emergency nature, and to be covered by the three bills that I introduced. Is it possible for the Army engineers to insert that in the record? Colonel WEAVER. We will be glad to give the insertion, Mr. Angell. That was for peninsula districts 1 and 2? Mr. ANGELL. And Johnson Creek. Colonel WEAVER. I think we have given you a correction on that bill for the money on Johnson Creek. But we will see that the Chief Engineer's office supplies you with the additional information. Mr. ANGELL. I would like, Mr. Chairman, for the record, for the Corps of Engineers to supply the justification which is in their report, being the projects in my bills, H. R. 3774, H. R. 3968, and H. R. 3969. The CHAIRMAN. I think that is a reasonable request, and it occurred to me that since previously today they were asked about those projects that the committee request that the colonel extend his remarks and justify those three projects at that point. I believe that would be the appropriate thing to do. Mr. MACK. Does that include Longview? Mr. ANGELL. That would include lower Columbuia in H. R. 3969. Colonel WEAVER. I would like to ask Colonel Gee of the Engineer's office to do that. (The information requested is as follows:) JOHNSON CREEK, OREG. (H. R. 3774) DESCRIPTION Johnson, Creek, a minor east side tributary of Willamette River, rises near Cottrell in the low hills south of Sandy River and flows in a westerly direction to a confluence with Willamette River about 18 miles from the mouth of the Willamette River. Johnson Creek drains an area of approximately 54 square miles lying in a long, relatively narrow strip between Clackamas and Columbia Rivers. The generally meandering channel has a natural capacity varying from a minimum of 700 second-feet in critical locations to a maximum of 3,860 secondfeet in a short reach near the mouth. Channel capacity is quite generally impaired by accumulations of debris and by the encroachment of trees and brush from both banks. Numerous bridges span the creek and one industrial establishment, the southeast Portland Lumber Co. mill, is built athwart the water course. Certain of the bridges are so constructed that the supporting bents are within the channel, and together with the accumulation of drift on the upstream sides, tend to further impair the channel capacity. The flood plain is highly developed and quite populous. The town of Gresham is situated at mile 15 while the villages of Cotton, Linnemann, and Jenne lie between Gresham and mile 9.5. Between mile 9.5 and the mouth the stream passes through the environs of southeast Portland and at a number of points lies within the city limits. FLOOD PROBLEM Flooding by Johnson Creek, which occurs almost annually, results in heavy damage to the adjoining residential and business properties, interrupts transportation, damages bridges, floods septic tanks and cesspools, contaminates wells, and reduces the value of real estate. PLAN OF IMPROVEMENT Improvements recommended for Johnson Creek include channel enlargement and rectification, cut-offs, in several localities, riprapping of curves and an auxiliary channel to provide for increased flood capacity. The proposed plan would give protection in the Gresham area against floods with expected requency of once in 7 years, which is equivalent to the 1943 flood. In the area between mile 5.19 and 7.79 the proposed project would provide protection against a flood with the expected frequency of once in 25 years; and in the remaining part of the channel floods with frequencies ranging from 5 to 100 years would be controlled. COSTS AND ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION The total first cost of the project is estimated at $544,000, of which the local interests would assume $212,000. The over-all benefit cost ratio of this project would be about 2.66 to 1. It is, therefore, considered that this plan is amply justified economically and, because of the serious flood problem, should be considered for construction at an early date. PENINSULA DRAINAGE DISTRICT No. 1 (H. R. 3968) DESCRIPTION The peninsula drainage district No. 1 is located on the left bank of the lower Columbia River at river mile 105, northerly of Portland, and on the peninsula between the Columbia and Willamette Rivers. The district contains 301 acres including farm land, industrial developments, and transportation Improvements. A railroad fill, which formed part of the protective works for this area, failed during the 1948 flood, causing inundation of this district and destruction of Vanport City, Oreg. PLAN AND COST OF IMPROVEMENT The proposed project for peninsula drainage district No. 1 would provide a new levee inside and parallel to the railroad. The project would be designed to protect against 1894 flood levels, and would include toe drainage and pumping facilities. The estimated cost of the work, at January 1, 1948, prices is $1,580,000, of which $1,137,000 would be Federal, and $143,000 would be nonFederal. ACCOMPLISHMENTS The proposed improvements would provide protection against a flood of the magnitude of the 1894 flood for the land and improvements in this drainage district. Because of the seriousness of the flood problem in this area, it is believed that the improvements proposed should be constructed at an early date. LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER LEVEES (H. R. 3969) DESCRIPTION About 70,000 acres of the 170,000-acre flood plain area of Columbia River are not protected from overflow during flood periods. The principal flood plain areas are located downstream from Bonneville Dam. Population density, the fertility of the soil, and the favorable climate combine to make these areas of considerable value. Levees have been adopted as the principal means of protection against flooding in these areas. The economic development of the extreme lower river area gave rise to the first levee construction at Warrenton in 1899. Subsequently, in the period 1915 to 1921, 11 or more drainage districts were organized and the areas protected by dikes provided with tide boxes and pumping plants. The development continued and was accelerated in the period 1935 to 1940 when new districts were organized and old ones reorganized in order to comply with the provisions of the 1936 Flood Control Act and thereby obtain Fdal assistance. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing development along lower Columbia River may be classified as municipal, industrial, and agricultural. Towns on or adjacent to the Oregon shore include Warrenton, Astoria, Clatskanie, Rainier, St. Helens, Portland, and Troutdale. Along the Washington shore are Ilwaco, Chinook, Cathlamet, Longview, Kelso, Kalama, Woodland, Vancouver, Camas, and Washougal. Industrial developments centering at the mouth of the river and at Portland are, in the main, not protected by levees. Lands which, if protected, would be potentially of industrial importance exist in the Portland area and in areas near Washougal, Vancouver, and Kalama. The greater part of the land protected by existing levees and land worthy of future protection, however, is devoted to agriculture or dairying. IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED To secure adequate protection of lands within the flood plain of lower Columbia River generally would require construction of levees or seawalls. Such structures would confine the flood waters and, at the same time, increase stages slightly and accelerate velocities of flow. These effects would subject the improvements and unprotected banks to increased erosive attack. Therefore, to assure the permanency of existing banks and the existing or proposed levees, bank protection of some type would be required. Correction of erosion conditions at 66 locations by installation of 123 800 lineal feet of stone revetment at a cost to the Federal Government of about $4,900.000 is proposed. The improvement of the 26 existing diking and drainage districts and protection of 6 new areas by diking and drainage is proposed at a total cost of $42,459,000 of which $10,764,000 would be provided by local interests. The improvements proposed would include levees to protect Peninsula drainage district No. 1. ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION The estimated capital cost of bank protection, levee and drainage improvements is $47,359,000. Of this amount, the estimated Federal and non-Federal costs ar $36,595,000 and $10,764,000, respectively. The total annual cost is estimated at $1,600,700. Benefits, including reduction of flood damages and increased land use, total $14,498,200 and would accrue from these local protection works and from upstream storage dams. Initially, however, practically all reduction of flood damage and increase in land use would be creditable to local protective works. In consideration of the many variable factors involved both in the interim and when the main control plan has been effected, an arbitrary distribution of benefits has been made with a resulting average benefit cost ratio of 1.29. These proposed projects would be required, even with upstream flood control storage, to confine floods and provide the degree of flood protection considered desirable for the lower Columbia River flood plain. These improvements are urgently needed at the present time for the security of residents in the flood plain. The proposed improvements to existing projects and the rehabilitation of new areas are feasible and justified for immediate accomplishment. Section 5 of the Flood Control Act, approved 22 June 1936, is hereby modified to extend the existing authority and provide additional authority to construct bank protection works along lower Columbia River at 66 locations at an estimated cost of $4,900,000, and provide for the following listed improvements for flood-control in the lower Columbia River Basin, all improviments to be constructed substantially as set forth in a special report on record in the Office of the Chief of Engineers: Sandy drainage district, estimated construction cost $236,000; Multnomah County drainage district No. 1, estimated construction cost $1,365,000; Peninsula drainage district No. 2, estimated construction cost $1,103,000; Peinsula drainage district No. 1, estimated construction cost $1,437,000; Sauvie Island (areas A and B), estimated construction cost $900,000; Columbia, drainage district No. 1, estimated construction cost $630,000; Bachelor Island, estimated construction cost $920,000; Scappoose drainage district, estimated construction cost $459,000; Lewis River area, estimated construction cost $300,000; Cowlitz County diking improvement districts No. 5 and 11, estimated construction cost $1,100,000; Deer Island drainage district, estimated construction cost $105,000; Cowlitz County diking improvement districts No. 2 and 13, estimated construction cost $630,000; Consolidated diking improvement district No. 1, estimated construction cost $4,880,000; Cowlitz County diking improve ment district No. 15, estimated construction cost $60,000; Ranier drainage district, estimated construction cost $576,000; John drainage district, estimated construction cost $50,000; Beaver drainage district, estimated construction cost $837,000; Clatskanie drainage district, estimated cost $100,000; Magruder drainage district, estimated construction cost $30,000; Midland drainage district, estimated construction cost $130,000; Woodson drainage district, estimated construction cost $25,000; Puget Sound area: Wahkiakum diking districts No. 1 and 3, estimated construction cost $1,269,000; Tenasillahe Island, diking district No. 6, estimated construction cost $100,000; Wahkiakum diking district No. 4, estimated construction cost $400,000; Clatsop County diking district No. 4, estimated construction cost $30,000; Clatsop County drainage district No. 1, estimated construction cost $50,000; Washougal area, estimated construction cost $820,000; Hayden Island, estimated construction cost $198,000; Portland area, estimated construction cost $14,000,000; Vancouver Lake area, estimated construction cost $1,462,000; Kalama River, south area, estimated construction cost $420,000; Clatskanie River area, estimated construction cost $73,000.” COLUMBIA SLOUGH CHANNEL-H. R. 4679-NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION Columbia Slough is a narrow back channel which roughly parallels Columbia River, skirts the north limits of Portland, and empties into Willamette River about one-half mile above the confluence of that stream with Columbia River. The upper end of the slough originally connected with Columbia River, but this connection was replaced by a controlled ditch, and the upper portion of the siough now serves only as an interior drainage ditch for Multnomah County drainage district No. 1. The width between levees averages about 320 feet in that stretch extending southward from Columbia River. The width downstream from this channel averages about 200 feet. At extreme low water, the controlling depth is about 5 feet in a narrow channel. Five highway bridges and two railroad bridges cross Columbia Slough. Vertical clearances vary from 27 to 41.78 feet, at low water, and horizontal clearances vary from 60 to 149 feet. All but one of these bridges are considered for improvement. Improvement of Columbia Slough, near Portland, for shallow draft navigation was recommended in a report |