Mr. Max Bookman, county engineer, Riverside County, and Mr. Mr. DAVIS. We are glad to have your statement, Mr. Sheppard. The CHAIRMAN. And you may extend your remarks, if you like, in the record. Mr. SHEPPARD. Thank you. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN PHILLIPS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Phillips, the committee will be delighted to hear you. Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record my name is John Phillips; I represent the twenty-second congressional district of California. I am going to speak briefly. I want to supplement what Mr. Sheppard said that we appreciate the interest this committee has shown in what has become an increasingly urgent problem with us. Mr. William Slape, a member of the Board Supervisors of Riverdale, Calif., and Mr. Earl Redwine and Mr. Max Bookman, our engineer, are here to represent the area, and they will answer any specific questions which the committee may desire to ask. Now, very briefly may I impress upon the committee that there is no geographical dividing line separating Mr. Sheppard's district and mine. When we are talking about the necessity of flood control and the protection of one area there is no geographical differentiation between the districts we are talking about, because the problem of one is the problem of the other, and it has become an increasingly serious question as protective measures have been built and plans for the protection of the upper part of the basin have thrown more and more pressure on the lower part of the basin. The CHAIRMAN. Will you point out on the map the area covered by your district? Mr. PHILLIPPS. Yes; my district starts up here [indicating] north of Riverside and covers this area in general [outlining on map]. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Mr. PHILLIPS. I want to supplement what Colonel Gee said, that in addition to the railroads and industrial plants, which include the railroad shops, we also have the very urgent situation of the water supply of the Riverside area, because as the upper area is flooded it forces the flood waters down against the rocks of the city of Riverside. During the last war, appropriations were made for flood protection because of the fact that the railroads and the highways come through this little area in the mountains, so that this protection program has become a matter of national concern as well as of a matter of local interest. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Phillips. We have heard considerable talk in the the last few days that most of these projects are saturated with "fat" which should be fried out. Does that accusation apply or have any reference to projects we are discussing here? Mr. PHILLIPS. No; not in the least. These have been favorably considered for years by the engineers, and if there had been any excess appropriation it would have been squeezed out by your committee long before this. Mr. ANGELL. Do you agree, Mr. Phillips, with the premise that in the development of our natural resources, of a great country like ours, both north and south, and east and west, that it is a sound legislative program to provide not only for the preservation and for the full utilization of these natural resources but also for the improvement and development of them as well? Mr. PHILLIPS. I not only agree with you, Mr. Angell, but I think it is a conservation measure to make it possible for people to build, to operate farms, to operate business and industry in areas where they may have protection from dangers of flood over which they have no control. In an area where you can see houses with holes in them caused by boulders that you could not possibly move by hand, boulders which have come down in the floods, then you can realize how spending a very modest amount of money, in comparison to the productive value of the area you are protecting, you can realize what effect it has in developing the industry of the United States. Mr. ANGELL. Is it not also true that the amount of destruction from floods is tremendously greater than the amount which the Government is spending in the area for the protection against these floods? Mr. PHILLIPS. The gentleman is correct, and from his own experience on this committee and his experience in the area from which he comes, he knows what he is talking about. Mr. ANGELL. Is it not also true-and I am asking this for the purpose of the record-that before any projects are initated they first have had the consideration of a committee of the Congress, of the House or the Senate, and before the Army engineers take any action looking toward the initiation of any project they are authorized to do so by the Congress? Mr. PHILLIPS. That is correct. Mr. ANGELL. And there has to be a preliminary examination made before there is the expenditure of any money made on any project in the way of construction? Mr. PHILLIPS. That is correct. Mr. ANGELL. And all preliminary reports by the Army engineers come back to this committee before any authorization for construction is made by the Congress, which is for the purpose of determining whether the project is justified before the authorization is given. After the authorization is given, is it not true that those who are sponsoring the project and the Army engineers must go before the appropriations committees and justify the expenditure, and that there another very careful examination is made by a committee of this Congress, not only in the House but on the other side before any money is actually appropriated to be expended on the project? Mr. PHILLIPS. Yes. I can speak as a member of the Appropriations Committee and can testify in support of the last statement, and I am glad the gentleman is putting it in the record, because there have been some rather loose statements made recently in the public print. Mr. ANGELL. Do you not believe that if we are to carry forward the great program that we have undertaken with respect to the rehabili tation of the world and helping other nations overseas, involving the expenditure of billions of dollars-some $30,000,000,000 since the close of the war-we must keep our country strong and develop our own natural resources if we are to carry on such work? Mr. PHILLIPS. Yes. I have felt for a long time that if we are going to try to support the rest of the world we had better make it possible for our own citizens to pay the taxes. Mr. ANGELL. And is not the project that you are supporting here this morning an ideal example of where the Federal Government is authorizing the expenditure of taxpayer's money to develop and protect the natural resources of this country, which brings back to the country many fold the money that is expended? Mr. PHILLIPS. Which makes it possible for the taxpayers to pay taxes. Mr. ANGELL. Thank you very much. Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. STATEMENT OF LOCHLAN MACLEAY, PRESIDENT, MISSISIPPI VALLEY ASSOCIATION, REDLANDS, CALIF. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Chairman, as you gentlemen all know, Mr. Macleay is and has been for many years president of the Mississippi Valley Association, with headquarters at St. Louis. The Mississippi Valley Association is interested in the development of rivers and our natural resources. Mr. Macleay is one of the first men in that great work, and we are glad to have you here this morning, Mr. Macleay. Mr. MACLEAY. Mr. Chairman, for 27 years I have been working for flood control in the midcontinent area of the United States, and 9 years ago it became necessary, on account of the health condition of my wife and one of our children to move to California. And I am very deeply grateful to California because my family are in very fine condition at the present time. We have a home at Redlands. During this period of 9 years I have been coming back and forth between my work in the Mississippi Basin and I have no idea of relinquishing my interest in it. I have been in contact with these various projects and have been interested, as Judge Whittington well remembers for some time, and you will recall particularly that during the war we had hearings on another Santa Ana project to protect three of the great railroad systems, the Santa Fe, the Southern Pacific, and the Union Pacific which converge at Colton from a recurrence of such floods as happened in 1938 which completely tied them up for several weeks. I believe Colonel Gee said the damages resulting that year were estimated at $21,000,000. Colonel Gee referred to losses, as I listened to them, since 1916, which total in excess of $30,000,000 in the basin. Those were flood losses which the engineers of the Army figured on the basis of property flood damage alone, that is, for farms and buildings, highways, railroads, and so forth. There is nothing in their figures to indicate the incalculable losses to the people of this country from the losses of investment, the losses of business, which go along with these things, and the fact that these losses are total fosses; there is no salvage; there is no insurance. I have seen those things happen time and time again all over the Mississippi Basin, in the North and the South and the same thing applies to the basins out in California, and particularly to this basin, which is a key basin. I have been connected with it, as I say, now, for some 9 years, and the losses out there in the past have been terrific. My neighbors out there are wonderful people. They are willing and have been freely putting up a lot of money to take care of themselves. From the standpoint of the welfare of that part of the country, as well as the United States as a whole, and particularly with regard to the three railroads, this is a very important project. In case of another great emergency, in the event of another great flood, the whole of southern California could be without railroad transportation for every one of the important industrial areas. And personally, I regard it as a very important undertaking, Mr. Chairman, and I hope the committee will act favorably on it. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Macleay. STATEMENT OF M. E. SALSBURY, SENIOR ASSISTANT CHIEF ENGINEER, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD-CONTROL DISTRICT Mr. DAVIS. We will hear at this time Mr. Salsbury, of the Los Angeles County flood-control district. Mr. MCDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman, may I say that Mr. Salsbury is an engineer of the Los Angeles County flood-control district, and has been for many years, and is perhaps as familiar with the problems in this area as the Army engineers themselves, inasmuch as he has the obligations of maintaining the projects that have been constructed. Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Salsbury, I believe you have a prepared statement which you may, if you like, insert in the record and give us an oral summary of it. Mr. SALSBURY. Mr. Chairman, my name is M. E. Salsbury. I am senior assistant chief engineer, Los Angeles County flood-control district. With your permission, I should like to file for the record a brief statement. Mr. DAVIS. Without objection, it will be included in the record. (The statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF M. E. SALSBURY, SENIOR ASSISTANT CHIEF ENGINEER, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD-CONTROL DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA, TO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MAY 23, 1949 Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, we appreciate this opportunity to appear before your committee on behalf of the Los Angeles County drainage-area project. I will not take up your time in attempting to show the great need for flood protection in Los Angeles County, since that has been so adequately covered in testimony before your committee at previous hearings and has been recognized by the Congress in the various Flood Control Acts. I am here to emphasize the need for further authorization for our project to assure a continued and orderly construction program aimed at completion of the project within a reasonable period of time. We believe that in order to accomplish this an additional authorization in the present bill of at least $75,000,000 is necessary, and you are urgently requested to recommend this amount to the Congress. The Flood Control Act of 1941 approved the general comprehensive plan for flood control in Los Angeles County, known as the Los Angeles County drainagearea project, and provided partial authorization for it. The current estimated cost a erty that is subject to damage by flood than in the Los Angeles drainage area. Over the years, because of the demand for homes, subdividers have been given the privilege of building in areas that were supposed not to be in the normal flow of the streams, but we find that in a flash flood, and a large flood, in these stream beds where normally the streams flows towns have been washed out. I have seen boulders half the size of this room washed down the precipitous sides of the mountains and go right through buildings and destroy towns and buildings. So, the amount we are asking for for the reestablishment of much of the wealth of southern California, putting it back on the assessment rolls is small in comparison. In other words, the total valuation of property in Los Angeles County is about $4,000,000,000. That is the assessed valuation, and in order to protect a large part of that $4,000,000,000, the Federal Government up to now has contributed $87,000,000, and the county of Los Angeles has contributed $85,000,000, and we are asking now because of the increase in population that additional authorizations be granted so that we can supply additional work and complete it, not within the 6year period that the Army engineers have recommended, but within an approximate 8-year period, so that we will not lose the lives and we will not lose the property of many thousands of people from your States. Most of the people who come to California are from States in other parts of the United States who come out there to make a living. There is another thing that I think we ought to realize, and I think it has not been emphasized in any of these hearings, and that is we are approaching a period where in the heavily populated areas there is an unemployment problem developing. According to the last figures from California, there are some 500,000 people who are unemployed, and whatever the figures are in the • State of California, Los Angeles County has about 70 percent of the problem, so that we have a large number of unemployed, and anything in the way of public works that will absorb any of these people who come there without any assurance of employment, that will provide employment for them, we should be thinking of now instead of waiting until it becomes too big and then having to seek authorizations for public works on the spur of the moment like we did all during the thirties when we had to look to WPA projects to provide employment. I just wanted to include that as an important phase of this project. Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the gentleman a question? Mr. DAVIS. Yes, Mr. Pickett. Mr. PICKETT. I am interested in your unemployment situation. Maybe you build structures differently in that area than in some places I have seen, but most of those construction projects that I know anything about require comparatively little besides skilled personnel to do the work. They do not take the pick and shovel crowd that are generally first unemployed, but take very few of them on that type of work. How is that going to help your unemployment situation? Mr. MCDONOUGH. Mr. Pickett, the situation as far as skilled and unskilled labor employment in Los Angeles is concerned is very grave. We had a large number of skilled men during the war in various |