7 4

. P %//<>

7 4 4 3 PENDING WATERSHED WORK PLANS "DGOVERNMENTDM ENTS

Storage p 1 6 IS Zb

K A H iA sir - U^v'.RS.TV HEARINGS

_ _ _ BEF ORE TH E

■ s 3MM ITTEE ON WA TER RESOURCES

J

~ - zr OF THE

IMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS 

■ S UNITED STATES SENATE

= 3 NIN ETY-F OURTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

ELK CR EEK, W. VA.

McN AIRY-CYPR ESS CREEK , TENN.

ELM CREEK, TEX.

COTTONWOOD WALN UT CREEK, N. MEX. 

ZUN I PUEBLO, N. MEX.

COUNTRY LINE CREEK, N.C.

SECOND BROAD RIV ER, N.C.

JU NE 3 AND 18, 1976

SE RIAL NO. 94-H 43

Pr inted for th e use of th e Comm ittee on Public Work s

74-696 0

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1976
V.

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

JEN NING S RANDOLPH, West Virginia, Cha irma n

EDMUND S. MU SKIE , Maine 

JO SE PH M. MONTOYA, New Mexico 

MIKE GRAVEL, Alaska

LLOYD M. B ENTSE N,Texas 

QUE NTIN N. BURDICK, No rth D ako ta 

JOHN C. CULVER, Iowa

ROBE RT MORGAN, No rth Carolina 

GARY HART, Colorado

HOWARD H. BAKER, J r., Tennessee 

JAM ES L. BUCKLEY, New York 

ROBE RT T. STAFFORD, Vermont 

JAM ES A. MCCLURE, Idaho 

PE TE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

M. Barry Meyer, Chief Counsel and Chief Clerk

Bailey Guard, Mi nority St aff D irector

Leon G. Billings a nd Richard D. Grundy, Senio r Professional St af f Members

J ohn W. Yago, Jr., As sistan t Chief Cle rk; P hil ip T. Cummin gs, Ass ista nt Chief Counsel

Harold H. Brayman, Sen ior Professional St af f M ember (M ino rity )

Pro fessional and research staff: Karl R. Braithwaite, J ames W. Case (A ssistant Counsel),

P aul Chim es , Trenton Crow, Katherine Y. Cudlip p, P aul F. Ebeltoft, Jr ., Georgb

F. F enton, Jr., Randolph G. F lood, Kathaleen R. E. F orcum, Ann Garrabrant, 

Richard T. Greer, Richard M. Harris (A ssistant Cou nsel), Wesley F. Hayden, Ric hard E. Herod (A ssista nt Counsel, Minority ), Veronica A. Holland, Ronald L. Katz, 

J udy F. P arente, J ohn B. P urint on, Jr ., J ames D. Range, W. Lee Rawls, Charlene

A. Stur bitts, E. Stevens Swain, Jr., Sally W. Walker, and Haven Whit eside

Subcomm ittee on Water Resources

MIK E GRAVEL, Alaska, Chairma n

LLOYD BENTSEN, Texas PE TE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

QUENTIN N. BURD ICK, No rth D ako ta JAMES L. BUCKLEY, New York 

JOHN C. CULVER, Iow a ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Verm ont

ROB ERT MORGAN, N orth Carolina JAMES A. McC LURE, Idaho

GARY HART, Colorado

( II )
C O N T E N T S

List of projec ts: Base Elk Creek, W. Va_________________________________________4, 91,133

Cottonwood-Walnut Creek, N. Mex_____________________________ 8

Elm Creek, Tex____________________________________________ 15

McNairy-Cypress Creek, Tenn________________________________ 25

Second Broad River N.C______________________________________ 74

Country Line Creek, N.C_____________________________________ 74

Zuni Pueblo, N. Mex_________________________________________ 86

OPENING STATEMENTS

Gravel, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator from the State of Alaska______________ 1

Randolph, Hon. Jennings, U.S. Senator from the State of West Virginia. 1,133 

LIST OF WITN ESSES

June 3, 1976

Blackwelder, Brent, Environm ental Policy Center, Washington, D.C., accompanied by Steve Sham burek________________________________ 117

Prepared statem ent__________________________________________ 119

Farmer, Ryland S., chairman, Caswell County Planning Board, Yanceyville, N.C., an d Lynn B. Satterfield, chairman, Caswell County Commissioners ______________________________________________________ 126

Hamlin, J. J., chairm an, Rutherford County Waters hed Commission, Rutherfordton, N.C________________________________________________ 129

Mitchell, James W., Assistant Deputy Adm inistrator for Water Resources,

Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, accompanied 

by Robert L. Caldwell, Rich ard D. Parker, Joseph S. Haugh, and Donald 

B. Von Wolffradt, soil conservationists___________________________ 3

June 18, 1976

Brantner, David, president, West Virginia Wildlife Fed eration ________

Fetty, I. N., chairman, Board of Supervisors, West Fork Soil Conservation District, Clarksburg, W. Va., accompanied by Gerold Unterkoefler, 

county planner, Harrison County Commission; Hon. S. James Shaffer, 

mayor, Clarksburg; Daniel L. McCarthy, presiden t Harrison County 

Commission, Clarksburg, W. Va .; Porter Nester, supervisor, Tygarts Valley Conservation District, Philippi, W. Va .; David Bra ntner, president, 

West Virginia Wildlife Fed eration; Hon. D. F. Oliverio, mayor, Stonewood, W. Va.; James Toothman, Elk Creek Wa ter Pollution Control Committee, Clarksburg, WT. Va.; Victor Gonzales, represen ting the town of 

Anmoore, W. Va.; Hon. Joh n Carder, mayor, town of Nutter Fort, W. 

Va .; and James Michael, area conservationist, Soil Conservation Service, 

Philippi, W. Va________________ _______________________________

Gonzales, Victor, representing the town of Anmoore, W. Va___________

Malcolm, Pearle, Philippi, W. Va__________________________________

Prepared statement___________________________________________

Maxwell, Ike, Lost Creek, W. Va., accompanied by Joseph Wagner, Bridgeport, W. Va.; Ralph McDonald, president, Elk Creek W atershed Association, Bridgeport, W. Va.; Pea rle Malcolm, Philippi, W. Va.; Richard Seibert, Philippi, W. Va.; Peter Poth, Jr., Mount Clare, W. Va .; Norma 

Davis, Lost Creek, W. Va.; Edward Lanham, Bridgeport, W. Va.; and 

Arnold Smith, Lost Creek, W. Va_______________________________

143

136

142

155

153

(in)

145
IV

Page

McDonald, Ralph, president, Elk Creek Watershed Association_________ 153

Nester, Porter, supervisor, Tygarts Valley Conservation District_______ 142

Oliverio, D. F., mayor, Stonewood, W. Va___________________________ 141

Shaffer, S. James, mayor, Clarksburg, W. Va_______________________ 140

Unterkoefler, Gerold, Harrison County Commission__________________ 138

Wagner, Joseph, Brideport, W. Va_________________________________ 155

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

Cottonwood-Walnut Creek, N. Mex.:

Responses to additional questions from :

Senator Gravel__________________________________________ 9

Senator Domenici________________________________________ 12

County Line Creek, N.C.:

Responses to writte n questions from :

Senator Gravel__________________________________________ 75

Senator Domenici________________________________________ 78

Morgan, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator from the Sta te of North Carolina, 

stateme nt of______________________________________________ 79

Elk Creek, W. Va.:

Responses to written questions from :

Senator Gravel___________________________________________ 5

Senator Domenici________________________________________ 6

Watershed projects in West Virginia___________________________ 98

Elkins, W. Va., Intermountain, artic le from ______________________ 143

Harrison County and Elk Creek Pollution Control Committee, Inc.,

state ment of______________________________________________ 145

Petition in opposition_________________________________________ 161

Letters in opposition_________________________________________ 170

Elm Creek, Tex .:

Statements o f:

Tower, Hon. John G., U.S. Senator from the S tat e of Texas_____ 16

Bentsen, Hon. Lloyd, U.S. Senator from the Sta te of Texas_____ 20

Responses to writte n questions from Senator Domenici__________ 23

McNary-Cypress Creek, Te nn .:

Responses to questions from :

Senator Gravel___________________________________________ 27

Senator Baker ___________________________________________ 31

Let te rs:

Bodiford, Ray, representative, Tennessee House of Representatives _________________________________________________ 36

Greer, W. T., president, American Boat Co., Inc______________ 37

Bolton, Wayn e___________________________________________ 38

Martin, Ted, Bolton & Martin Real Estat e____________________ 39

Droke, John, J r __________________________________________ 40

Durw ard, L. S___________________________________________ 41

Durward, Mrs. Nellie____________________________________ 42

Sparks, Richard, alderman, town of Selmer__________________ 43

Foresythe, O. D., president, First National Bank of Selmer_____ 44

Fredrickson, James E____________________________________ 45

Johnson, Mrs. W. B______________________________________ 46

Jones, M. L____________________________________________ 47

Chapman, D. D., plant manager, General Electric Co_________ 48

Gray, Jack, alderm an, town of Selmer_____________________ 49

Hickman, Ha rry H_______________________________________ 50

Landreth, Noel P________________________________________ 51

Lee, Pat ________________________________________________ 52

McNatt, Tra vis P________________________________________ 53

Mitchell, Robert D_______________________________________ 54

Moore, Anita J __________________________________________ 55

Ashe, Wilburn Gene, county judge, McNary County, Tenn---------- 56

Simpson, Paul, president, McNary County Chamber of Commerce- 57

Howard, Terry, president, McNary County Far m Bureau_____ 58

McNary County Soil Conservation D istric t:

Ayers, Robert W., supervisor_________________________ 59

Treece, C. S., president________________________________ 60

Boling, J. O., president, Pickwick Electric Cooperative_________ 61
V

McNary-Cyprees Creek, Term—Continued

Letters—Continued P a ? e

Reynolds & Deusner_____________________________________ 62

Roberts, W. M___________________________________________ 63

Estes, Dorthene, alderwoman, town of Selmer_________________ 64

Fisher, Pa ul____________________________________________ 66

Glover, Billy J., mayor, town of Selmer_____________________ 66

Whittington, James C., alderman, town of Selmer-------------------- 68

Smith, Jim ______________________________________________ 70

Sparks, Mrs. M. E________________________________________ 71

Teaque, Willis R_________________________________________ 72

Maxedon, I’. J ___________________________________________ 73

Zuni Pueblo, N. Mex.:

Responses to written questions from Senator Domenici___________ 87

Montoya, Hon. Joseph M., U.S. Senator from the Stat e of New Mexico, 

statem ent of________________________________________________ 131

PENDING WATERSHED WORK PLANS

THURSD AY , JU N E 3, 1976

U.S. Senate,

Committee on P ublic Works, 

Subcommittee on Water Resources,

Waskingrton, D.G.

Th e subcomm ittee met at 10 a.m., pu rsua nt to call, in room 420 0, 

Dir kse n Sen ate Office Building , Hon. Mike Gra vel (ch airma n of the 

subcomm ittee) presiding.

Pr es en t: Senator s Randolp h (ch air ma n of the full comm itte e), 

Gra vel and Baker.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE GRAVEL, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF ALASKA

Se nator G ravel. Good m orning. Today the Subcommittee on W ater 

Resources will receive testimo ny on seven pen ding pro jec ts un de r 

con side ration for aut horization un de r the Public Law 83 -5 66 pr ogram .

These pro jec ts consist of works of imp rovement in sma ll wa tersheds for the purposes of pre vention of erosion, floodwater, and relate d dam ages . Some also con tain rec rea tion and wa ter supply 

benefits.

The basic au thority is Publi c Law 83 -566 , the Wa tershe d P ro ­

tection and Flo od Pre vention Ac t of 1954. Th is act authorizes the 

Secretary of Ag riculture , throug h the Soil Con servation Service, 

to assist local organizations in planning and carry ing out thes e improvemen ts.

Before we proceed with our witnesses, I would like to hav e the 

cha irm an mak e a statem ent because I know he is vitally intere sted 

in this are a and I know th at some of the pro jects imp act on his fine 

State.

Senator Ra ndolp h.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JENNINGS RANDOLPH, U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGIN IA

Senator R andolph. Th ank you, Mr. Chairma n. I wish the record 

to indicate th at I am, as cha irm an of th e committee, inte nsely in ­

tere sted in the work of the Subcom mittee on W ater Resources, as I 

am on all subcommittee activity.

I commend Se nator Gravel, the chairma n of the subcommittee, and 

all members of t hat subcommittee, for their attention to the prob lems

(1)
2

which are of continuing concern to our constituencies and to the 

citizens of the country generally. These concerns cause us, withi n the 

structur e of the Publi c Works Committee and its Subcom mittee on 

Wate r Resources, to take actio n which leads to autho riz ati on of 

pro jects and pro grams.

The subcommittee meets tod ay to receive testimo ny on seven Soil 

Conservation Service work plan s. These have been ref erred to our 

committee un de r Pu blic Law 83-566. We are to give our appro val or 

take such action as would be in the pub lic good, based upo n the in ­

formation th at we will receive from those persons who are expe rt in 

this field.

The pro gra ms of th at law pro vid e assistance to local organizations to pre vent erosion and to give pro tection from floodwater and 

sediment dam ages on watersh eds of riv ers and streams.

West Vi rgini a has been called the m oth er of rivers. There are othe r 

States, of course, th at could qualify pe rhaps for such a designatio n. 

But we do headwa ter man y, many rivers. The very terrain of our 

State creates a very real prob lem with flashfloods which cause very 

extreme damages , no t only to prop ert y, livestock and the economy of 

comm unities, bu t oft en lead to the loss of life itself.

We a re very conscious o f the need fo r a continuin g pro gra m to pro ­

vide for wa ter resource developm ent for these sma ller areas. Th e lakes 

and rivers th at carry the huge ton nag es of coal and steel, and have 

rid ing on their waters the commerce of many sections of the cou ntry 

are ma intain ed un der the pro gra m of the Cor ps of Engineers. Th e 

water resource prob lems which concern us tod ay are those of he ad ­

waters and other areas where the c ons ervatio n of pro perly imp ounded 

water can be of very real benefit.

Du rin g our he aring testimony will be presen ted by our Soil Conserv ation Service.

The first pro jec t, Mr. Chairm an, I believe th at will be considered, 

according to the age nda th at I hav e before me, is the waters hed work 

pla n for El k Creek, We st Vir ginia.

Elk Creek is in Ha rri son County, the cou nty in which I was born . 

I was born in Sale m, West Virgi nia . In th at area of Ha rrison County 

we hav e done some pioneer ing in past yea rs in connection with impoundm ents of water. These have been very valuable.

Ba rbour County, which is also withi n the watershed, is a county 

with which I am very fam iliar. I t is no rth of the county in which 

I live.

Th is pro jec t w’ill provide flood pro tec tion for man y communities 

in the watershe d area. The benefits to the are a are n ot only those t hat 

I have mentio ned gen era lly th at flow fro m these pro gra ms, bu t also 

the recrea tional develop men t whi ch occurs around these impoundments.

I do wa nt to ind icate that the pro jec t, the Elk Cree k pro ject, has, 

as I un derst and it, the una nim ous su pp ort—and I would wa nt to be 

corrected if th is is not exact—th e unanimo us support of the local 

governm ents in this watersh ed.

We do know th at inte rested and concerned citizens in the area have 

worked tog eth er to assist and coopera te wi th the Soil Conserv ation 

Service.
3

Incide ntally, the Soil Conserv ation Serv ice came in to bein g in 1935. 

I have t he d istinc tio n, whatever th at m igh t amount to, of having been 

a pa rt of the wor k on th at legislation and support ed it in the House 

of Repre sen tative s in th at year.

Those watershe d pro gra ms, which hav e come as a result of the 

pas sage of the original act, have been in ma ny instances of immeasurable benefit to the coun try.

Th is pro jec t pro vides sub stantia l assistance to the areas. I t is essen tial th at the pro jec t move for wa rd because it is not an expenditu re of funds bu t an investme nt.

Th e Soil Conservation Service will ta lk with us throug h their 

representativ es. We will have pro jec t sponsors. The Senator from 

Tennessee has a pro ject, the McNairy-Cyp ress Creek workplan.

Th ere are others from Texas, New Mexico and No rth Carolin a. I 

know th at if possible the cha irm an of ou r subcomm ittee will find reason to develop one even tod ay in Alaska. So we will understand, of 

course, if th at is done.

Bu t these seven waters hed work pla ns have been form ula ted and 

they have been caref ull y identified wi th the need for water resource 

man agemen t.

Ag ain , I comm end the chairman and the members of the subcommittee fo r the work th at they have been doing in this very impo rtan t area of public works.

Senator Gravel. Th an k you very much, Mr. Chairma n.

Th e Senator from Tennessee.

Senator Baker. M r. Chairma n, than k you very much. I don’t have 

any ope ning statement. I am Mere to introd uce my rep resentativ es 

fro m Tennessee since you previously men tioned the M cNa iry- Cyp ress 

pro ject.

Senator Gravel. We will move to our first witness, Mr. Jame s 

Mit chell, Assistan t De pu ty Ad ministrator for W ater Resources, Soil 

Conservation Service. If you will introd uce yo ur colleagues at the 

desk with him, the n you can proce ed as is most com fortable for 

you, sir.

STATEMENT OF JAMES W. MITCHELL, ASSISTANT DEPUTY

ADMINISTRATOR FOR WATER RESOURCES, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT L. CALDWELL, RICHARD D. PARKER,

JOSEPH S. HAUGH, AND DONALD B. VON WOLFFRADT, SOIL

CONSERVATIONISTS

Mr. Mitch ell. Th an k you very much, Se na tor Gravel. I t is my 

pleasure to be here and appe ar before this comm ittee. Th is is m y first 

tim e ap peari ng befo re the comm ittee where we have watersh ed work 

plans app roved in my new capacity .

Le t me intr odu ce the members of the staff th at I have here who 

will assist me in any tech nical aspects of the questions th at mi gh t 

come up on those watersh eds.

To my fa r left is Mr. Rober t Caldwell. Nex t to him is M r. Richard 

Pa rk er, and Mr. Jo e Hau gh to my rig ht. An d Mr. Don ald V. von
4

Wolffra dt, who is going to try to run some slides here if we can get 

the lig hts down.

We are pleased to appear befo re your comm ittee tod ay with info rmation about waters hed projects. These pro jec ts are sim ilar to those 

which you have considered in the past. They serve com munities ha ving s ignificant flood and oth er wa ter m ana gem ent problems.

Local people have dem onstrated a str on g com mitmen t to these 

projects by agr eeing to provide a significant portion of the costs. 

Many of the pro jec ts are mu ltip le purp ose.

The pro ject pla ns dem onstra te the flex ibility inh ere nt in Pu blic 

Law 566 to meet wa ter and lan d ma nag ement objectives in upstream 

watersh eds and con trib ute significantly to ru ra l development.

En vir onme nta l statem ents for these proje cts have been filed with 

the Council on En vir onme nta l Qu ality.

I will now give a brief s umm ary of each proposed plan. Im po rtan t 

features on the d isplay maps will be poin ted out du ring the testim ony.

I wish to apologize. I don ’t think our slides are goi ng to show up 

very well in this ligh tin g cond ition .

Senator Gravel. Maybe we can dim the light s.

Mr. Mitchell. I w ould suggest, Senator, if th ere a re any p ar ticu la r 

fea tures on these watershed s th at someone wants to relate to we can 

pu t th at slide on and see i f we c an get it. We can tr y it here.

Senator, we can proceed in any order th at you wish.

ELK CREEK, W. VA.

Senator Gravel. L et ’s proceed wi th the Elk Creek, West Vi rginia, 

one first and then McNairy- Cypress in Tennessee.

(Sli de show n.)

Mr. Mitch ell. T hat is n ot a v ery good pic tur e there for you to see, 

bu t I think you can get some of the fea tures on there .

Th e Elk Cree k Watershed consists of 78,000 acres in Ba rbour, 

Ha rrison and Up sh ur Counties. Th e area is in cen tral West Vi rgini a 

near the city of Cla rksburg.

The proje ct pla n provide s for the ins tal lat ion of conserv ation lan d 

tre atm ent, 12 floodwater retard in g structur es, one multiple-purpo se 

structur e for flood prev ention and r ecr eation , recreation facilities, and 

1.3 miles of channe l work.

Th e proje ct measures are expected to :

O ne : Reduce average ann ual erosion rat es in the uplan d areas.

Tw o: Reduce ave rage ann ual sediment yield from the waters hed 

from 117,600 to ns to 44,600 tons.

T hre e: Reduce average ann ual flood dam ages by about 90 percen t.

Fou r: Prov ide a 190-acre recreation pool and provide opportu nities 

for abo ut 165,000 annual vis itor day s of recreation.

The tot al ins tal lat ion cost of thi s pro jec t is estima ted to be $20.7 

million of which the local spon sors will fu rn ish $10.1 or 49 percent. 

The average annual benefits are estimated to be $1.4 m illion and the 

resulta nt benefit-cost ratio is 1.3 to 1.

[Questions fro m Sen ators Grave l and Dom enici fo llo w:]
5

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR GRAVEL

ELK CREEK, WEST VIRGINIA

Question: The be ne fits of th is projec t appear to be TOO percent urban.

Are there no agricultura l be ne fits to be provided by these 

dams?

Answer: There are agricultura l be ne fits but because of th e ir scattered

nature and small size as compared with the urban be ne fits, the 

agricultura l be nefits were not evaluated.

Question: The work plan Ind icates that urban development w il l take place 

along the lower reaches of the watershed even without a pr ojec t. 

Since Harrison County 1s partic ip ating in the Federally subsidized 

flo od insurance program, Is n 't the county required to prac tic e 

flood plain reg ula tion? I f so, how can such development take 

place?

Answer: The unincorporated portio n of Harrison County is not a partic ip ant

in the Flood Insurance Program. Land use projec tions Indica tin g 

urban development is anticipated to take place in the 

unincorporated parts of the county.

Question: How much of the 100-year flood damages of $20 m illio n w il l be 

prevented by the project?

Answer: A l i t t l e over 90 percent of the direct flo od damages 1n the

watershed w il l be reduced as a re sult of In sta llin g the proposed 

projec t measures.

Question: How much of the 100-year flood pl ain w il l s t i l l be subject 

to flood ing aft e r the projec t 1s built?

Answer: There w il l be 94S acres of flo od plain subje ct to remaining

flooding from the 100-year frequency storm with the proposed 

projec t in place.
6

ELK CREEK,

Question:

Answer:

Question:

Answer:

•QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

WEST VIRGINIA

I t appears as i f the be nefits of th is projec t are entire ly urban. 

Are there any agric ultu ra l be ne fits provided by the pro jec t? 

There are ag ricultura l be ne fits but because of th e ir scattere d 

and small size as compared with the urban be ne fits, the 

agricultura l benefits were not evaluated.

Question:

Answer:

How much of the 100-year flood damages of $20 m illion w il l be 

prevented by the project? How much of the 100-year flood plain 

w il l s t ill be subject to flood ing aft er the projec t is built?

A l i t t l e over 90 percent of the direct flood damages in the 

watershed w il l be reduced as a re sult of in sta llin g the proposed 

projec t measures. There w il l be 945 acres of flo od plain subje ct 

to remaining flooding from the 100-year frequency storm with the 

proposed projec t 1n place.

The cost of the structures is estimate*/ at $14,255,000 to protec t 

296 acres. That works out to a cost of about $48,000 per acre. 

What is the present estimated market value of th is land?

Two hundred and nine ty-s ix (296) acres w il l be protected from 

the 100-year flood and there w il l be reduced flood stages on 

an ad ditio na l 945 acres of flo od pla in . Not counting the 

improvements, land values range from $5,000 to $10,000 per 

acre fo r in dustria l and conmercial pro perty. Residential 

values range from $4,000 to $50,000 per pro perty.

Question: Please describe the recrea tio na l fea tures of th is pr ojec t. 

Are recrea tio na l sit es located on pr ivat e lands, and 1f so, 

w il l pu blic access be provided?
7

Answer: The recrea tio n feastures include fa c il it ie s fo r capping, picn icking ,

swimming, fishin g, boating, nature walks, w il d li fe photography, and 

scenic and w il d li fe observation. The fa c il it ie s w il l be su ff ic ie n t 

to handle an annual usage of 164,700 vis itor-days. The fa c il it ie s 

are to be located on public land and w il l be open to public access.

Question: What eff ect w il l the projec t have on land use?

Answer: Embankments, spillway s, and borrow w il l ph ys ically disrup t 102 acres

which are presently being used as 50 acres o f grassland and 52 acres of 

fo re st land . Lakes, consisting of sediment pools and the recreation 

lake, w il l change land use on 432 acres which is pre sently being 

used as 363 acres of grassland and 69 acres o f fo re st land. A to ta l 

of 717 acres of land w il l be used fo r temporary floodwater storage 

in the fu tu re of which the present land use w il l continue except 

fo r seven acres of urban land and 20 acres of surface mining.

About 2,061 acres of land w il l be acquired fo r recrea tional fa c il it ie s 

and use which is now in 1,340 acres of grassland and 721 acres of 

fo re st land.

Question: Please describe the redevelopment be ne fits that account fo r 

almost 20 percent of projec t be ne fits.

Answer: Redevelopment be ne fits include estimates fo r employment op po rtu nities

fo r unemployed or underemployed labo r, which w il l be created 

during the pr ojec t in sta lla tio n period and during the operation 

and maintenance of the projec t measures. Ad ditio na l employment 

be ne fits w il l stem from the constru ction and use of supplemental

improvements caused by the projec t.
8

Mr. Mitchell. Do you wan t me to go thro ug h all seven of them 

first?

Senator Gravel. Yes.

COT TON WOOD-WALNU T CREEK, N . MEX .

Mr. Mitchell. F ine . Le t me go back a lit tle b it to the order I h ave, 

if we are going to tak e it th at way. We w ill take u p the Cottonw oodWaln ut Creek Wate rsh ed in New Mexico next.

Th e Cottonwood-W aln ut Creek Wate rsh ed consist of 228,000 acres 

in Chaves and Ed dy Counties in sou the ast ern New Mexico near the 

town of Artesia .

The proje ct pla n consists of conservation lan d tre atm en t; 11 

floodwater retarding structur es; one mu ltip le-purpo se str uctur e fo r 

flood pre ven tion and recrea tio n; about 10 miles of channel w ork ; and 

14 miles of floodwater diversions.

The proje ct measures are expected to :

One : Pr otec t the soil resource in the up lan d areas.

Tw o: Reduce average ann ual flood dam ages withi n the watershed 

by about 91 percent.

T hre e: R educe sedimen t yield to the Pecos River from abo ut 23,000 

tons annually to abo ut 12,000 tons ann ual ly.

Four: Create a new recreation lake of about 120 acres to pro vid e 

fishing, boating , wildlife, and oth er relate d activitie s. The num ber 

of average ann ual recreation visits per year is estimated to be 64,000.

The total ins tal lat ion cost of th is pro jec t is estimated to be $12 

million, of whi ch local spon sors will fu rnish $3.3 million or 27 pe rcent. The average an nu al benefits are estimated to be $767,900 and 

the r esult ant benefit-cost rat io is 1.2 to 1.

[Qu estions from Senat ors Grave l and Dom enici follow :]
9

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR GRAVEL

COTTONWOOD-WALNUT CREEK, NEW MEXICO

Question: I note that a po rtion of the be ne fits cred ite d to th is projec t 

are the prevention of forecasted fu tu re urban flood damages, 

inclu ding futu re growth. Since the c it y of Artesia has been 

id en tified by the Flood Insurance Ad ministration as a flood 

hazard area, how can development be foreca st in the flo od pla in? 

Pursuant to the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Artesia 

could be deprived of future Federal assistance i f i t does not 

implement a flo od plain management program to eliminate unwise 

land use.

Answer: Artesia lie s 1n the combined flo od pla in of the Pecos River and

the Cottonwood and Walnut Creeks, and the nearest su ita ble area 

fo r urban development out of the flo od pl ain lie s 5 to 10 miles to 

the west of it s present loca tio n. In such circumstances, nearly 

a ll communities w il l expand in to nearby areas rather than bear the 

costs o f a new urban in frastructu re at a considerable distance from 

the ol d, with the attendant problems of community dis in te gra tion.

Although th is plan was formulated p ri o r to passage of the Flood 

Disaste r Protection Act of 1973, 1t 1s recognized th at be nefits 

should have included either (1) the reduced in frastructu ra l costs of 

bu ild ing 1n a protected hazard area as opposed to bu ild ing at 

some dis tan ce; or (2) the saved cost of bu ild ing in the protected 

hazard area withou t having to elevate or flo od pro of a ll structures 

in the hazard area. I t is estimated th at the les ser of such be ne fits 

would have been comparable in magnitude to the be ne fits claimed from 

protec tin g fu tu re development, and therefore the proper eva luation 

of these ef fe ct s would have had l i t t l e Impact on projec t formu lation 

or ju s ti fi c a ti o n .
10

I t is recognized th at Artes ia would li k e ly be deprived of future 

Federal assistance i f i t does not implement a flood plain management 

program. The c it y is already partic ip ating in a flood Insurance 

program and is undertaking steps to enact appro priate flood plain 

regu lations .

Question: Is the high evaporation of the recreation lake to be off set by

waters cu rrent ly being used fo r irrigation? Hasn't the de clining 

water table already been a problem to ir rig a ti o n fanners in the 

area?

Answer: The water rig ht s acquired to off set evaporation from the recreation

lake had been used in the past fo r ir rig a ti o n . However, th at land has 

been id le fo r some yea rs, and i t is our understanding th at the 

water rights have not been exercised in recent years.

A de clining water table was a problem in the past due to excessive 

withdrawals by Ir ri g a to rs , and due to th at, a ll wells have been 

metered. Since these meters were In sta lled, there have been no 

fu rther problems with a de clining water table.

Question: You claim $6 per day 1n hunting be ne fits. How does th is projec t 

co ntrib ute to hunting which is already being conducted in the 

area? How was the $6 per day fig ure determined?

Answer: In sta llation of the multiple-purpose re se rv oir w il l supply a small

amount of a c ti v it y v is it s fo r hunting waterfowl at trac ted by the 

lake. There is cu rrent ly no other waterfowl ha bita t or waterfowl 

hunting in the watershed. This w il l be a unique experience engaged 

in by few re cre ationis ts , with a high personal expenditure fo r
11

partic ip ation. Senate Document 97 authorized the Ose of planning 

of $2 to $6 as the value of such an experience. I t should be 

noted th at i f the plans were updated to use the amount cu rrent ly 

authorized by the Principles and Standards, the value could be up 

to $9 per hunter v is it .

74 -695 0 - 76 - 2
12

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

COTTONWOOD-WALNUT CREEK, NEW MEXICO

Question: The Museum o f New Mexico has reconmended excavation o f several 

h is to ric and p re h is to ri c ru in s. Does SCS have a plan to und ertak e th is excavation?

Answer: In s ta ll a ti o n o f the watershed works o f improvement w ill a ff e c t

8 o f 14 ar ch eolo gical site s loca ted by the Museum o f New Mexico. 

Although th e ir re port in dicate d th at none o f the site s was o f 

s u ffic ie n t imp ortance to wa rra nt li s tin g on Nationa l or State 

re g is te rs o f s ig n if ic a n t s it e s , 1t was s t i l l f e lt th a t some 

fu rt h e r in vestigation was warrante d. The watershed plan Includ es 

pro visi ons to und erta ke ar ch eological reco ve ry and salvage work 

on these site s p rio r to in it ia tio n o f any co nst ru ct io n or othe r 

work which would dis tu rb them. Th is recovery and salvag e 1s 

estim ated to have a co st o f $20,000 and is the re s p o n s ib il it y o f 

the Na tio na l Park Se rvice .

Question: How much w ill the str u ctu ra l measures Inclu de d in th is plan 

reduce average annual flo odwate r and sediment damage in the 

watershed? When was the flood o f record and what were the 

damages?

Answer: In s ta ll a ti o n o f the str u ctu ra l measures includ ed 1n the plan w ill

reduce the average annual co st o f flo odwate r and sediment damages 

w ith in the pro je ct area by $278,000 annually . In additio n, 

those measures w il l reduce damages outs id e the watershed by 

anoth er $186,000 an nu ally fo r a to ta l annual re du ction o f 

$464,000. The re du ction o f damages is about 91 perce nt in 

a g ri c u lt u ra l areas and 100 percen t in urban are as.
13

The most damaging flo od of record occurred in October 1954.

Among the losses from that flood were 1,000 bales of cotton,

250 tons of a lf a lf a , lower qualit y of ad ditio na l cotton and 

a lf a lf a , and loss of liv es to ck . About 400 acres o f irrigate d 

land damaged by th is storm had to be releve led . The major eff ect 

of th is storm was f e lt in the northern po rtion of the watershed, 

and the urban areas around Artesia escaped with only minor 

damage. In 1954 prices , the to ta l damage was from th is storm 

estimated to be about $275,000. In 1975 prices , damages from 

th is storm would have been about $555,000.

Question: Have studies been undertaken to determine i f mineral resources 

would be lost?

Answer: Known mineral resources with in the watershed at present are two

producing gas and o il wells. There are no known m eta lli c minerals 

in the area. Onsite fie ld inve stigations of the surface and 

subsurface form ations indica te that no sig nific a nt mineral 

resources w il l be affected by in s ta lla ti o n of the pr oje ct.

Question: I noted th at the pro je ct would commit about 7,445 acres of rangeland and 200 acres of cropland fo r structu ra l measures. Can you 

evaluate how th is loss of land from agricultura l use and production 

w il l be compensated by increased pro ductivity on the protected 

areas?

Answer: The ir rigate d cropland areas taken out of production by in sta lla tio n

of the pr oje ct are currently subject to flo od ing and have an 

estimated net income of $105.00 per acre per yea r. Therefore, the
14

Question:

Answer:

loss of 200 acres w il l reduce to ta l net pro ductivity by $21,000 

annually. The 7,445 acres of rangeland would have net return s 

of about $2 per acre per year i f in good co nd ition . Although 

some of th is land w il l not be lo st from pro duction, and some of 

i t w il l become more produc tive, an assumption of to ta l removal 

from agriculture yie ld s a net loss of about $15,000 annually.

The to ta l loss of agricultura l production is $36,000 per year.

The net value of production from the 3,600 acres of land protected 

by the pr oje ct w il l increase by $216,000 per yea r. Thus the 

projec t is expected to re sult in an increased net value of 

agricultura l production of about $180,000 per year.

Is there any program planned to off set the high evaporation of the 

rec reation lake?

At present, there is no pr ac tic al way to off set high evaporation 

rates from the recrea tion lake. The lake has been designed with 

a shape th at minimizes the exposure of surface area to evaporation; 

however, the losses are planned to be made up through the water 

rig hts acquired fo r th is purpose.
15

ELM CREEK, TEX.

Mr. Mitch ell. E lm Creek (Ce n-T ex) Wate rsh ed, Texas, comprises 

about 20(,000 acres in Bell, Milam, Fa lls and McL ennan Cou nties in 

cen tral Texas. Th e city o f T emp le lies on the watershed divide.

The pro jec t plan p rovides for co nservation lan d tre atm ent p ractices 

and 45 sing le-purpose floodwater retarding stru ctures.

Th e pro jec t measures w il l:

On e: Reduce up lan d errosion by 590,000 tons annually.

Tw o: Reduce flood damages by 68 percen t on 21,481 acres of 

flood plain.

Th ree: Prov ide op po rtu nity for more intensiv e management of 

about 1,650 acres of p asture lan d.

Fou r: Provide incide ntal sources of livestock wate r.

The total insta lla tio n cost of thi s proje ct is estimated to be $6.7 

million, of which the local sponsors will furnish appro xim ate ly $2.5 

million or 37 percent. Th e average annual benefits are estimated to be 

$575,000 an d the resu lta nt benefit-cost ratio is 1.9 to 1.

[Statem ents from Sen ators Tower and Ben tsen and questions from 

Senator Domenici fo llo w:]
16

TESTIMONY OF SENATOR JOHN G. TOWER 

JUNE 3. 1976

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES 

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

MR. TOWER:

Mr. Cha irm an , I am pre se nt toda y to of fe r my su pport an d en co ur ag em en t

for yo ur sp ee dy ap pr ova l of the Elm Cre ek W atersh ed Pr oj ec t in Cen tral

Tex as . Th e wo rk plan se t fo rth in do cu men ts alr ead y pro vi de d yo ur

Com mittee cle arl y show s th e en ormou s ne ed fo r co nse rv at io n m ea su re s,

an d the be ne fits wh ich wi ll ac cr ue to the are a of Bell, Fal ls , McL ennan, an d

Milam Cou nties on ce the pr oj ec t is ac co m pl ishe d.

Elm Creek W ate rsh ed co ve rs mo re th an 200,0 00 ac re s, 95 p er ce nt 

of wh ich is in agri cult ura l an d p ast ure usa g e. Th e fa rm s in the are a of

the Elm Cre ek W ate rsh ed are pri m ar ily fam ily fa rm s—that is , thos e which 

emplo y a minimum of ou ts id e help to su pp le m en t family la bor. Each y ear, 

more th an a th ir d of th es e fam ily farm s su ff er som e ki nd of da ma ge from

flo od ing. Th e an nu al co st is abov e a ha lf-m illion d o ll a rs. Some two

hu ndre d of the families en ga ge d in farm ing acti vit ie s re q u ir e ou tsid e

em plo ym ent by th e fam ily to ma intain a min imu m st andard of li vin g. Th ese 

are th e pe op le who su ff er most from lo ss , an d th ey a re the le as t ab le to

corr ect th es e pr ob lem s on th eir ow n.
17

What Is cle arl y nee de d, Mr. Cha irm an , is a co ns er vat io n effo rt

wh ich will mi nim ize the ef fe cts of flo od ing, ero si on, an d se di m en ta tion .

We need an effo rt which will free th is ar ea from the re c u rri n g lo ss of 

qu al ity fa rm la nd an d ra ngela nd. The Elm C re ek W ate rshe d Pro je ct , 

we bel ie ve, is th e p ro p er veh ic le for ac co mplishing th es e obj ec tives .

Be ca use the ma jor prob lem as so ciated with the Elm C re ek W ate rsh ed 

is flo od ing, which not on ly de st ro ys cr op s but de la ys th eir pl an ting or 

h arv est, the p ri n cip le co ns er va tion m ea su re s to be em ploy ed un d er the 

plan ar e the co nst ru ct io n of some 45 flo od water re ta in in g str u c tu re s, 

an d the es ta bl is hm en t of st ora ge ca pa city to hold gr ound w ate r. The 

an nu al be ne fit to be ga ined for im prov ed land an d cr ops is es tim ated to 

be $24 6,2 00. O ther benefi ts , in cl ud in g im po rtan t re cr eati on an d no nagri cult ura l im pr ov em en ts, are estim ate d to be $329,40 0.

Thi s is the an nu al be ne fit to be gai ned . Ove r th e lif e of the

pro je ct , be ne fits will ou tw eig h co sts by alm ost tw o-t o-o ne, a hi gh ly 

fa vo ra ble ra tio. It is cle a r, Mr. Cha irm an , th at th is is a lo ng -ter m 

in ve stm en t on be ha lf of the peop le of the Un ited St at es which wi ll

yield su bst anti al publ ic go od .
18

Not on ly will ad op tio n of the Elm Creek W ate rsh ed Work Pl an

re du ce the an nu al mon etary loss to the fa rm er s who in hab it th es e

Cen tra l Tex as co unties . It wi ll also in cre ase the ag ri cu lt u ra l

pr od uc tio n of the a re a , pri m ar ily co tto n, sm all g ra in s, an d so rg hum s.

The re is a trem en do us need to maxim ize ou r pr od uct io n on the nati on's

fa rm s. We ca nn ot affo rd the lu xury of all ow ing co ntin ue d dest ru cti on

of agri cult ura l acre ag e from w in d, ra in an d oth er nat ura l fo rc es . Th e

pro gre ss which we fo re se e under an ag g re ssi v e pro gr am of man ag in g

the soil an d w at er re so urc es of the Elm Cre ek W ate rshe d is p ro g re ss

we cann ot aff ord to pas s up .

Mr. Cha irm an , I would be dere li ct in no t re co gn iz in g th os e

in di vi du al s wh ose hard wo rk ha ve go ne int o the pre par at io n of the

Work Pla n an d the En vironm en tal Im pact State me nt for the Elm C re ek

Wate rsh ed Pro je ct. Al tho ug h we do not ha ve the time toda y to ac kn ow ledg e

ev er yo ne who ha s be en invo lv ed an d will co nt in ue to be in volv ed, I

would lik e to com mend the in div id ual s w or ki ng th ro ug h th e Elm Cre ek

Wate rsh ed A uth ori ty , the Cen tral Tex as an d McLen nan Cou nty So il and

Water C on se rv at io n D is tr ic ts , an d the Com miss ione rs Cou rts fo r Bell,

Fal ls , Mc Le nn an, an d Milam Cou nt ie s. Wit hout the as si st ance of the

many, many pe op le wor king w ithi n, an d th ro u g h , thos e org aniz ati ons,
19

I would no t ha ve the honor of bein g here to day on behalf of th is 

p ro je c t. E specia lly im port ant is the ag re em ent am ong a ll the se 

org aniz ations to deve lo p a s e lf-h e lp pro gra m fo r th e ir are as. T his 

ex am ple of coopera tion ought rig h tly to ha ve o u r de ep es t re spect and 

a dm iration, fo r o n ly w o rk in g to geth er can we tr u ly acc om plis h the 

gre at obje ctives we se ek.

M r. C hairm an, I want to co ncl ude my te stim ony by ag ain askin g 

fo r yo u r close st consid era tion of o u r re quest fo r th is p ro je c t. It is 

g re a tl y ne ed ed , as the fa ct s sh ow , an d we w ould be deeply g ra te fu l 

fo r yo u r appro val of th is p ro je c t.
20

STATEMENT OF SE iATOR LLOYD BENTSEN 

ELM CREEK WATERSHED

SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES 

June 3, 1976

MR. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I appre ciat e th is opportunity to te s tif y 

in favo r o f the Elm Creek Watershed P ro je ct.

The Elm Creek Watershed is in central Texas about 20 mile s south o f th e 

C ity of Waco and about 60 mile s no rth o f Austin. It comprises an area 

of 207,360 acres and is a va luab le a g ri c u lt u ra l area . Ap proximately 59^ 

of the area is cr opla nd, 30? is improved pa sture and rangeland. As 

th is co un try becomes in cre asin gly food conscio us, i t is v it a l th a t such 

areas are ab le to produce to th e ir fu ll p o te n ti a l. However, floodwate r, 

eros ion and sediment damage is fru s tr a ti n g the areas pote ntial and causing 

s ig n if ic a n t economic lo ss .

In May of 1965, ra in fa ll in the watershed inundated ap prox im ately 18,000 

acre s and cre ated damages of over S I,200,000. And th is s it u a ti o n can be 

expected to rep ea t it s e lf if pro per flood control e ffo rts are not ta ke n.

The 1965 flood was o f a lev el th a t can be expected ap proximately every 

10 years.

In additio n to th is major p e riodic flood damage, the average annual 

damage to ta ls an es tim ated $580,500.

'lo odw c’er damage makes up a major port io n of th is annual loss , 

occurrin g on ov er 22,900 acre s o4

 the are a. Crocs are often cestroyed by
21

th e fl o o d w a te rs , end s ig n ific a n t ha rd ship and economic lo ss is ge ne ra te d 

bec ause o f de laye d p la n ti n g s and h a rv e s ti n g s . These dela ys not o n ly ra is e 

the co s t o f p ro d u c ti o n , but o ft e n re s u lt in lower cr op y ie ld s as w ell as 

lower cro p qua I i t y .

Mr. Cha irm an , w ate r re la te d ero sio n is a ls o a m ajo r dam aging fa c to r 

in th is w ate rs hed. The pre sent annual gr os s ero sio n ra te fo r th e a re a 's 

p a stu re la nd t o t a ls ab ou t two and o n e -h a lf to ns pe r ac re and 9 to n s pe r 

ac re on th e cro p la n d . These ra te s are s ig n ific a n tly above wh at is 

co nsid ere d th e p e rm is s ib le ra te s . This is la nd , Mr. Ch air man , th a t is 

eroded away, lo s t fo re v e r to th e o r ig in a l are a.

P a r tic u la r ly fo r fa rm la nd, th is is a m ajor h is to r ic a l lo ss.

As a re s u lt o f th is e ro s io n , fl o o d p la in sc ou r is damaging an averag e 

o f 3, 188 acre s o f cro pla nd a n n u a ll y . This damage to ta ls over 53 8,52 0 

a n n u a ll y , and o ft e n re s u lt s in th e to ta l lo ss o f an area fro m fu r th e r 

a g ric u lt u r a l p ro d u cti o n .

This sco u ri n g c o n tr ib u te s to re tr e n c h in g , th e proc es s whereby th e STrcams 

cut co m plet e new channels . A lread y, aporo xim a-a ly 400 ac re s o f once pro ­

d u cti ve land nav e been le s t to t h is pro cess.

Mr. Cha irm an , se dimen t accum ula tion is als o a major pr ob lem . Sedim ent 

acc-muI a ti o n s ^ tc de pths o f more th an 3 fe e t have damaoed 3,73 7 acr es o f 

p ro d u c ti v e a g r ic u lt u r a l la nd . .n is is a pr oc es s th a t must be re vers ed.

Tne av er ag e annual le ss to th is damage is 52 9,68 0.
22

Mr. Chairman, the farmers and ran chers in th is area are ha rdwo rking, 

in dustrio us pe op le. Many of them have tr ie d , and are attempting in div id ual 

co ns erva tio n e ffo rts to reduce the flood re la te d damages to th e ir lan d. 

However, these e ffo rts are fr u str a te d by the lack o f a la rg e, are a-wide 

e ffo rt. The necessary si ze o f the e ffo rt and the tech nology needed make 

Federal Government inv olv em ent necessary and pr op er .

The Soil Con se rvation Se rvice has completed a work plan to meet the 

problems 1 have o u tl in e d . The pla n would no t on ly m itig ate the flo odwate r 

problems but i t would allo w the loca l pe ople, at th e ir own expense, to 

b e tt e r the area w ith road improvements, sa nitary la n d fil ls and in div id ual 

land improvement e ffo rts .

Mr. Chairman, the plan carr ie s a fa vo ra ble b e n e fit- co st ra ti o o f 1.9 

to I . It en joys the stro ng supp ort o f the loca l o ffic ia ls and of 

Congressman Bob Poage who has follo wed the form ation of the pla n c a re fu ll y 

I, to o, have made a deta iled stu dy of the plan , and request th at th is 

Subcommittee give its fu ll app roval to the Elm Creek Watershed P ro je ct.
23

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

ELM CREEK, TEXAS

Q uestion: As I un de rsta nd i t , 7 o f th e dams (Nos. 11, 20 , 28, 29, 31, 33, 

and 35) each c o n tr o l ru n o ff fro m h a lf a sq ua re m il e or le s s .

T h e ir e ffe c t on th e fl o o d in g problem o f Elm Creek o rig in a ti n g 

in 20 7,36 0 ac re s o f wa tershe d appears to be n i l . Ye t th e cost 

1s ab ou t $3 00 ,000 . What ar e th e b e n e fi ts o f th ese dams?

An sw er: A ll o f th e s tr u c tu ra l measures were eva lu ate d as an In te rre la te d

u n it in o rd e r to ach ie ve a le ve l o f p ro te c ti o n adequa te to su pport 

th e li v e s to c k and cash crop use o f th e a g ric u lt u r a l fl o o d p la in .

I f th e seven s tr u c tu re s are d e le te d , a channel s im il a r to th e one 

desc ribed in a lt e rn a tiv e #3 on page 41 o f th e fin a l en viro nm en ta l 

im pa ct st at em en t wou ld need to be added to pro vid e th e le v e l o f 

p ro te c ti o n .

Q uestion: Secon dary b e n e fi ts ac co un t fo r ove r o n e -f o u rt h o f to ta l b e n e fi ts . 

What s p e c if ic se condary b e n e fi ts are expe cte d?

An sw er: Secon dary b e n e fi ts were est im ate d fo r th e e ff e c ts o f red uce d

fl o o d damage and reduced fl o o d ha za rd which wou ld re s u lt in 

a d d it io n a l a g ric u lt u r a l pro duct s be ing put in to th e marke t pla ce 

fo r a d d it io n a l seed , f e r t i l iz e r , la b o r, h a rv e s ti n g , tr a n sp o rta tio n , pro cessin g, and m ark eting. The se co nd ary b e n e fi ts 

were based on "In p u t - Outpu t Model o f th e North C entral 

Region o f Texa s" , which was de ve lope d by th e Texas In te ra gency 

P ro je c t, O ff ic e o f th e Gov er no r, D iv is io n o f Pla nnin g 

C o o rd in a tio n , A p ril 1972. Secondary b e n e fi ts were computed 

to show to ta l eco nom ic im pa ct and are not ne ce ss ar y fo r p ro je c t 

ju s t if ic a t io n .
24

Question: The Texas Department of Agr icultu re has questioned the d e s ir a b ilit y 

of converting 17,000 acres from cropland Into rangeland. What are 

your comments upon th is conversion? Have net be ne fits been assigned 

th is conversion?

Answer: The proposed watershed pr oje ct does not contain a conversion of

cropland in to rangeland. Alte rn ativ e #2 as discussed on pages 40 

and 41 o f the environmental impact statement does consider such 

a change; however, th is altern ative is not proposed fo r implementa tion.

Question: How many farm un its w il l be ne fit from in sta lla tio n of the proposed 

measures? How many of these farms are "fam ily -typ e" operations?

Answer: The proposed stru ctur al measures w il l be ne fit 530 farm un its of

which 450 are "fam ily -typ e" opera tions.

Question: The pr oje ct w il l take 526 acres of cropland and 1,108 acres of

pasture land and rangeland out of fu rt he r agricultura l pro duction. 

Another 428 acres w il l have re str ic te d use. On the oth er hand, 

i t is expected that about 1,650 acres of pasture land w il l be 

managed more in te ns ively. What would be the to ta l net eff ect on 

agricultura l production?

Answer: The proposed Elm Creek Watershed pr oje ct w il l increase agricultura l

production in the be ne fitted areas by a to ta l of $237,000 annually 

and a decrease of about $57,000 annually in the area of the 

structu ra l measures. The re su lta nt net increase of agricultura l 

production is estimated to be $190,000 annually .
35

MC NAIRY -CY PRE SS CREEK , TE NN.

Mr. Mitchel. Th e Mc Nairy- Cypress Creek Wate rsh ed, Tennessee, 

consists of 109,600 acres in McNairy County in the sou thern par t of 

west Tennessee. The watershed lies alo ng the Tennessee-Mississippi 

bo rder abo ut 80 miles e ast o f Memphis.

The pro ject plan pro vides for the ins tallation of conserv ation lan d 

tre atm ent, 18 floodwater retarding structur es, two mu ltiple-purpo se 

structur es for flood preven tion , rec rea tion, and water supp ly; rec rea ­

tion fac ilities a nd abo ut 5 miles of stre am c han nel work.

The pro jec t measure s are expected to :

One: Stabiliz e abo ut 4,000 acres of cri tic all y ero ding up lan ds and 

road ban ks.

T w o: Reduce flood damages on 12,470 acres of floodpla in by about 

59 percent.

Th ree: Provide an op po rtu nity for an estimated 60,000 vis itor 

day s of recreation use.

Fo ur : Prov ide an adequa te wa ter supply fo r the city of Selmer.

The total insta lla tio n cost of this pro jec t is estimated to be $7.9 

million , of which th e local sponsors w ill fu rnish $2.5 million or 32 p ercent of the total. Th e average ann ual benefits are estima ted to be 

$800,700 and the resu lta nt benefit-cost ratio is 1.7 to 1.

Senator Baker. Mr. Chairma n, I have some questions I would 

like to ask if this is the time.

Senator Gravel. I t will be satisfactory .

Senat or Baker. Recreatio n acco unts for almost a qu arter of the 

tot al benefits on this pro ject, I am told. W ha t pub lic recreation al 

resources curre ntl y exist in the region?

Mr. Mitchell. Bob Caldwell, do you hav e th at inf orma tion?

Mr. Caldwell. I do n’t have th at off th e top of m y head, sir.

Senator Baker. L et me suggest this, Mr. Chairma n. In view of the 

fac t th at they do n’t have the inf orma tio n dir ectly availab le to them, 

I have th at and three o the r questions deali ng w ith th e level of p rotec ­

tion to be pro vided th e da m s: witho ut cha nneliz atio n, the des crip tion 

of the flood con trol situation generally, questions on the freq uen cy 

of flooding in the waters hed , the estimated dam age, the dam ages 

pe r acre annuall y on an average basis, tog eth er with certain oth er 

questions deali ng with the water supply for the city of Selmer.

All of them are fa irly deta iled questions and, rather than bu rden 

you, Mr. Ch air ma n, and this record at this point, could I submit 

these questions and ask these g entl emen to supply the answ ers ?

Se nator Gravel. Ve ry well. We will hold the reco rd open fo r the 

answers.

Mr. Mitchell. W e will be pleased to supply the answers.

["The questions and answers a pp ear at p. 31.]

Senator Gravel. We have oth er questions which we will pro vid e 

to you and you can resp ond for the record.

[Senato r Grave l’s questions ap pe ar at p. 27.]

Senator Baker. Th ere are a series of let ter s on this proje ct ad ­

dressed to you, Mr. Chairma n, and I would like to pu t them in the 

record.

Senator Gravel. T hos e w ill be placed in the record.
26

Senator Baker. I would like to introd uce three Tennesseean s who 

are here and ava ilab le in case their testimo ny is necessary. Mr. Cha irman, I would like to introdu ce Mr. Bill Moore of the Soil Conservation Service. Mr. Moore, will you sta nd up?

Mr. Wayne B oltma n, who is an attorney fo r t he city o f Selmer, a nd 

Mr. William Rob erts , who is the general ma nager of the Pic kw ick 

Elect ric Co-op.

Senator Gravel. Th an k you, gentlemen .

Senator Baker. Th an k you very much.

Senat or Gravel. T ha nk you, Senat or Baker.

Senator Baker. Tha nk you.

[Senato r Gr avel’s and Sen ator Ba ke r’s questions and the letter s 

ref err ed to by Se nator Bak er fo llo w:]
27

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR GRAVEL

McNAIRY-CYPRESS CREEK, TENNESSEE

Question: The work plan states that channel improvement was included aft er 

i t had been determined th at the land treatment and floodwater 

retard ing structu res would not provide an adequate level of flood 

pr ot ec tio n. What level of protec tio n would be provided by the 

retarding str uctures without the 4.78 miles of channelization ?

Answer: The statement that "...c ha nn el improvement was included aft e r i t

had been determined that the land treatment and floodwater retarding 

structures would not provide an adequate lev el of flood pro te ctio n .. ." 

is erroneous, and was included in the curre nt plan by mistake.

The statement was tru e when w ritten, since i t applied to an e a rl ie r 

version of the plan which included about 31 miles of channel work.

More than 26 of the 31 miles of channel work were deleted from the 

plan due to the desire to avoid adverse environmental effects . This 

de letio n resu lted in the curre nt form ula tion which proposes only 

4.78 miles of channel work, included sole ly to protec t an exist in g 

environmental resource, the bottomland hardwood fo re st.

The level of protec tion provided by floodwater retarding structures 

in the agricultura l and urban portions of the watershed is es sentially 

unaffected by the 4.78 miles of channel work. In the rura l areas, 

flo od ing w il l be less freq uent than once in three years on 75 percent 

of the flood plain. In the urban areas, a ll residences w il l be 

protected from the 100-year event. Future urban flo od ing w il l be 

lim ited to roads, brid ges, yards, and several storage warehouses, 

and fo r those item s, a ll flo od ing w il l be eliminated from events 

less severe than the 25-year event. Inclu sio n of the channel has 

no eff ect upon these lev els of pr otec tio n.

7 4 -6 95 0 - 76 - 3
28

S im il a rly , the flo od water re ta rd in g str uctu re s have no e ff e c t 

upon the swamping-out s it u a ti o n a t the o u tl e t o f the watershed. 

Heavy sedim entation in th is area has reduced the o u tl e t channel 

depth to one fo ot or le ss . Runoff from the upper watershed cannot 

escape through th is are a, causing swamping, and a re su ltin g d ie -o ff 

o f bottom land hardwoods. The 4.7 8 mile s o f channel work was 

includ ed in the pro je ct pla n at the requ est o f lea ders o f the 

Tennessee sta te fis h , game and re cr eation agencies, co ns erva tio n 

gro ups, and landowners in the area who des ire to pro te ct th is 

fo re s t resource. The channel work co nsist s o f clea ning ou t 

sediment which has accumulated in th is area sin ce i t was la s t 

cleaned in 1947. The work w ill no t s ig n if ic a n tly a ff e c t or b e n efit 

any croplan d or urban land use in the watershed.

Question : The c it y o f Selmer's current wa ter needs are su pp lied by thre e 

w ells which provide 1,800 gallons per minute, or nearly 2.6 

m il li o n ga llo ns per day. This w il l s a ti s fy a po pu latio n o f 

about 21,000. The pr ojected popu latio n fo r Selmer and nearby 

East View by the year 2000 is 7,0 00. I have d iffic u lty see ing 

the need fo r additio nal water su pp ly. Can you please comment on 

th is .

Answer: The c it y o f Selmer's wa ter supply c u rr e n tly serves an estim ated

po pu latio n o f 3,900. This number is expected to more than 

dou ble by the year 2000. I t is our understandin g th at the present 

wa ter supply has been committed to about it s maximum ca pacity fo r 

th is popu latio n and fo r two in d u str ie s. The c it y o ffic ia ls are 

c u rr e n tly attempting to a ttra c t additio nal in dustry to the area 

to prov ide new opport unitie s fo r Income and employment. They 

have been approached by se veral in d u str ie s which would not co ns ider 

lo ca tin g in the area because o f the uncertain ty o f the e x is ti n g
29

ground water supply. The po tential fo r d ril li n g ad ditio na l we lls 

would not provide the degree of assurance needed by an indu stry. 

Therefore, the c it y o ff ic ia ls wish to have a re adily av ailable 

surface water supply fo r fu tu re in dustria l use.

The qu an tity of water needed was ascertained by the c it y and it s 

cons ulting engineers as being th at amount necessary to a tt ra c t 

the most li k e ly and desirable in du stries .

In view of the c it y of Selmer's expressed desire fo r th is qu an tity 

o f water and th e ir signed agreement to pay 100 percent of the costs 

of pro vid ing i t , the water supply feature appears to be reasonable. 

Inclu sio n of th is water supply in the re se rvoir allows the oth er 

pr oje ct purposes to be achieved at a lower to ta l cost and at a 

lower cost to the Federal government.

Question: Was sin kin g another we ll considered as an altern ative to satisfy 

water supply needs? Such a well certain ly would not cost $192,000 

and would be a fa r less cost ly alte rn ative.

Answer: In sta lla tio n of ad ditio na l wells was considered as an altern ative

water source as indic ated in the response to the preceding question 

This altern ative was rejected as unacceptable because of the 

un ce rta inty expressed by po te nt ia l in dustria l users.

Question: A d is tr ib u tion system fo r the water supply is not mentioned in 

the pr oje ct repo rt. How w il l the water get to the customers?

What is the cost of such a system, who w il l pay fo r i t , and why 

is n 't i t lis te d as pa rt of the pro je ct costs?

Answer: I t is recognized th at the new water supply source w il l requ ire a

d is tr ib u tio n system. This is also true fo r the leas t costly 

alte rn ative source of that water. I f the dis tr ib u tion system
30

costs were added to projec t costs, they would also have to be 

added to pr ojec t be ne fits, since the water supply be iie fits are 

calcu lated as the cost of the leas t co st ly alte rn ativ e water 

source. Since the dis tr ib ution system cost would be equal fo r 

either altern ative, both be ne fits and costs would be raised 

by a like amount, with no eff ect on net be ne fits. Such a 

mathematical ca lculat ion was determined to have l i t t le value, 

and would tend to fu rther complicate a pr ojec t with deta ils about 

a c ti v it ie s which are not pa rt of pr oje ct actions and which have no 

sig nific a nt fed eral financia l assista nce . The c it y of Selmer 

is responsible fo r the dis tr ib u tion system and w il l make arrangements fo r it s in sta lla tio n when i t is determined where and to 

whom the in dustria l water supply w il l be de livered.
QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BAKER

McNAIRY-CYPRESS CREEK, TENNESSEE

Question: Recreation accounts fo r almost a qu arter of to ta l be ne fits. What 

pu blic recrea tional resources cu rrent ly exis t in the region? In 

ca lculatin g the rec reation al be ne fits, was an evaluatio n made of 

possible diversion of re crea tio nists away from ex istin g resources?

What w il l be the impact on Big H il l Pond State Park which was 

acquired through fina nc ia l assistance from the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund?

Answer: There are no exist in g public recreation fa c il it ie s of any sig nific an ce

with in the watershed, or with in McNairy County. The nearest 

rec reation fa c il it y is Chickasaw State Park about 30 miles to the 

northwest. This park is an 11,200 acre wooded area catering 

prim aril y to picn icking , camping, and nature tra il s . Shiloh 

National M ilita ry Park, a C iv il War shrin e, is located about 15 

miles southeast of Selmer. TVA's Pickwick Dam and Lake are located 

about 20 miles southeast of Selmer near Shiloh M ilita ry Park.

The Tennessee Department of Conservation ind ica ted in it s Statewide 

Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan th at these fa c il it ie s are 

heavily overcrowded, and in fa ct, they note th at th is region is 

short more than one m illion a c ti v it y occasions annually in each 

of the follo wing a c ti v it ie s : fishin g, boating , picn icking , hunting, 

swimming, and pla yin g outdoor games. Although the pr ojec t w il l 

provide recrea tio n, as w il l the Big Pond State Park when completed, 

the rec reation uses are in no way comp etitiv e. Big H il l Pond 

State Park w il l be developed fo r a wilde rne ss-type experience which 

w il l complement the water based orienta tion of the rec rea tion 

developments of the McNairy-Cypress Watershed projec t.
32

An additio nal imp act the pro je ct w ill have on Big H il l Pond State 

Park is to help pre serve the bottom land hardwood fo re st occ urrin g 

in the Park area. These tre es are pre se ntly being swamped-out 

and k il le d and the 4.7 8 miles o f channel work in the pro je ct have 

been inclu de d to prov ide an o u tl e t fo r the excess wa ter and 

sediment cau sing th is damage.

Question: Structu ra l measures fo r flood prev en tio n are estim ated to co st 

$3,937,000 in Pub lic Law 83-566 fun ds. What is the frequency 

o f floodin g in the watershed and what have been the estim ate d 

damages from rece nt floods? What are the annual damages per 

acre and what would be the co st o f pro te ction per acre?

Answer: Flooding in the watershed is a co ntin ua l problem. Some portio ns

o f the watershed begin floodin g fo llo w in g a ra in fa ll o f 1.5 inches 

w ith in 24 hours. Flooding from small or medium storms occurs 

on an average o f three to fo ur times per ye ar. At the time the 

plan was fo rm ulat ed , the la rg est re ce nt storm occurred in A p ri l 1963 

This storm had a rec urrence frequency o f about 25 ye ar s, and caused 

damages o f about $464,000 (1974 price le ve ls ) in Selmer. Since 

th a t tim e, two additio nal major flo ods have oc cu rre d, one in 

May 1973, and one in March 1975. Both exceeded the 1963 flood 

in terms o f depth o f flo odin g and in damages. The damages from 

each storm were estim ated to be about $2.5 m il li o n .

To tal flood damages o f a ll types are es tim ated to average about 

$38 per acre per ye ar . The to ta l co st o f str u ctu ra l measures 

to reduce th is damage by about 59 pe rcen t is $14 per acre per ye ar .
33

Question: What level of protec tio n would be provided by the dams witho ut the 

4.78 miles of cha nnelization ?

Answer: The level of protec tio n provided by floo dwater retarding str uctures

in the agricultura l and urban po rtion s of the watershed is 

es sentially unaffected by the 4.78 miles of channel work. In the 

ru ra l areas, flood ing w il l be less frequen t than once in three 

years on 75 percent of the flo od pla in . In the urban areas, a ll 

residences w il l be protected from the 100-year event. Future urban 

flo od ing w il l be lim ite d to roads, bridges, yards, and several 

storage warehouses, and fo r those item s, a ll flood ing w il l be 

eliminated from events less severe than the 25-year event.

Inclu sio n of the channel has no eff ect upon these levels of 

protec tio n.

S im ilarly, the floo dwater retarding structures have no effect 

upon the swamping-out situation at the ou tlet of the watershed.

Heavy sedimentation in th is area has reduced the outlet channel 

depth to one fo ot or les s. Runoff from the upper watershed cannot 

escape through th is area, causing swamping, and a re su lting d ie -o ff 

of bottomland hardwoods. The 4.78 miles o f channel work was included 

in the pr ojec t plan at the request of leaders of the Tennessee state 

fi s h , game and rec reation agencies, conservation groups, and land - 

owners in the area who desire to protec t th is fo re st resource.

The channel work consists of cleaning out sediment which has 

accumulated in th is area since i t was la st cleaned in 1947. The 

work w il l not sig nific a ntly aff ect or be ne fit any cropland or 

urban land use in the watershed.
34

Question: I understand that the c it y of Selmer's curre nt water needs are

supplied by 3 we lls pro viding 1,800 gallons per minute (2,592,000 

gallons per day). This is estimated to satisfy a population of 

about 21,000. What is the c it y 's pro jected population by 2000? 

Could you give us deta ils on the need fo r the water supply 

component, and the reason that ad ditio na l wells were reje cted?

Answer: The c it y o f Selmer's water supply currently serves an estimated

population of 3,900. This number is expected to more than double 

by the year 2000. I t is our understanding th at the present 

water supply has been committed to about it s maximum cap acity 

fo r th is populatio n and fo r two in du stries .

The c it y o ffic ia ls are cur re nt ly atte mpting to att ra ct ad ditio na l 

indu stry to the area to provide new op po rtu nitie s fo r income 

and employment. They have been approached by several indu strie s 

which would not consider loca tin g in the area because of the 

un certa inty of the ex istin g ground water supply. The po tential 

fo r d ril li n g ad ditiona l we lls would not provide the degree of 

assurance needed by an indu stry. Therefore, the c it y o ffic ia ls 

wish to have a re ad ily av ailable surface water supply fo r future 

in dustria l use.

The qu an tity of water needed was ascerta ined by the City and it s 

consulting engineers as being th at amount necessary to a tt ra ct 

the most li k e ly and desirable in du st ries .

In view of the c it y of Selmer's expressed desire fo r th is qu an tity 

of water and th e ir signed agreement to pay 100 percent of the costs 

of pro vid ing i t , the water supply feature appears to be reasonable.
35

Inclusion of this water supply in the rese rvoir allows the other

projec t purposes to be achieved at a lower to ta l cost and at a

lower cost to the Federal government.
36

RAY BODIFORD

REPRESENTATIVE

70th REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT

P O BOX 218

SELMER. TENNESSEE 38376

jsrtafr uf ‘ojcitttcsscc

NASHVILLE

Wqy 25 , 19 76

H on or ab le Mike G ra vel 

D ir k sen S enate O ff ic e B u il d in g 

W as hin gto n, D. C. 20^15

Dea r S e n a to r G ra v e l:

I am w rit in g in su p p o rt o f th e a p p ro p r ia tio n f o r th e M cN air yC yp re ss W at er sh ed P r o je c t.

As a r e s id e n t of McN airy Co un ty and the S ta te R e p re s e n ta ti v e 

of t h i s d i s t r i c t , I am w e ll aw ar e of th e v a s t ne ed fo r th i s 

p r o je c t in o u r a re a .

A gr ou p o f d e d ic a te d p eo p le ha ve b een m eeti n g fo r s e v e r a l 

y e a rs in a n t i c ip a t io n o f th e r e a l i t y of t h i s w a te rs h e d .

I s tr o n g ly urg e th a t you do e v e ry th in g w it h in your c a p a b i l i t i e s 

to a s s i s t th e fa rm ers and r e s id e n ts th a t t h i s p r o j e c t w ill 

b e n e f i t .

I th a n k you in ad va nc e fo r your c o o p e ra ti o n and a s s is t a n c e in 

t h i s m a tte r .

S in c e r e ly

RB: jn

cc : S en ato r Howard Bbk er 

S e n a to r W illiam B ro ek
37

[I

K B O A T

2^

CO Tv dI=> A.3S rY , I N C .

f25L2f£!£LI2iJ------------«um«. TtNmsm mvs

May 24, 1976

TELEPHONE M l) Mi-5441

Senator M ike Gravel

Dirksen Senat e Office Buil ding

Washington, D. C. 20510

Re: McNairy-C ypr ess C ree k Wate rshed

Dear Senator Gravel:

Ple ase allow me to introduce m ys el f:

I am a lifel ong resi dent of M cNa iry County, am in the 

pri nting busi ness in S elmer as well as bein g President 

of Ame rican Boat Company, Inc. I am al so a lifel ong 

hunter and conservationist.

Over the years, I have o bserve d the floo ding d estroy 

mor e and more of the best farm land in the county, 

kill good timber and destr oyi ng wil dlife habitat.

Several mo nth s ago the floodwaters came across the 

Ameri can Bo at Comp any pr ope rty and alm ost into the 

buildi ng and this has never bef ore happene d in the 

past 50 years.

We e arn est ly solic it yo ur support of this vital project.

Sincerely,

W. T. Greer, Pres ident

WTG :pc p

cc: Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
W A Y N E B O L T O N

PHONE (901)645-5281

149 WEST COURT AVENUE 

SELMER, TENNESSEE 38375

May 24, 1976

Hon. Mike Gravel 

U. S. Senator

Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D. C. 20510

Re: McNairy-Cy press Creek Watershed

Dear Mr. Gravel:

I am writing this letter as a private citizen of 

McNair y County and as Chairman of McN airy County 

Chamber of Com merce Committee for the implementation 

of the McNairy-Cypress Creek Wate rs he d.

As a director of the McNairy County Chamber of 

Commerce for several years, we w orked for and 

supported this project and c ontinue to do so as 

an interested citizen familiar with the need of 

this area. The need for the implementation of this 

project grows with each passing day.

There were public hearings held locally with not a 

single voice heard in opposition to this project. We 

feel that concessions have been m ade to make this a 

sound and wort hwhile project from the environmental 

standpoint and the project is long overdue.

We humbly solicit your concern and support in this 

matter which we understand is pre sently before your 

com mit tee .

Yours very truly,

WB:pcp

cc: Senator Howard Baker

Senator Bill Brock
39

BOLTON & MARTIN

Real Es tate

PHONE 645 55 11

149 WEST COURT AVE. • SELMER. TENNESSEE 38375

W-yne Bolton. Broker — 64 5-6 1 85 Ted Mertm. Broker — 645-5195

May 24, 1976

Senator Mike Gravel

Dirksen Senate Office Build ing

Washington, D. C. 20510

Re: McN air y-Cypress Cr eek W atershed

Dear Senator Gravel:

I a m a life long resident of McN air y C oun ty and have 

been in the real estate busine ss her e for ma ny years.

My occ upa tio n takes me into all part s of the county and 

pres ents me wit h op por tun ity to o bse rve the d estruction 

caus ed by flooding in this area, whic h gets pro gre ssively 

wor se wi th each passi ng year.

I whole hea rte dly support the McNair y-C ypr ess Creek 

Wat ershed proje ct and hum bly soli cit y our aid and the 

aid of your committee in fun ding this most vita l 

project. I pers onally k now of no local opposi tio n to 

this project.

Yours very truly.

Ted Martin

TM:pcp

cc: Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
40

Route #1

Bethel Springs, Tennessee 38315 

May 15, 1976

Honorable Mike Gravel 

U. S . Senate

Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Gravel:

As a life-long resident of McNairy County, Tennessee and 

(now) employee of the General Electric Company of Selmer, 

Tennessee, McNairy County, I feel that the Cypress Creek Wate rshed Project is absolutely essential to all farming, residential, 

private business and private industry located near or on 

Cypress Creek.

It is most important that our County, State and National 

leaders follow up and insure that the Cypress Creek Watershed 

Project is started and completed in the near future.

Sincerely

CC: Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
41

16 0 Tammy D ri v e 

S e lm e r, T en n e ssee 38 37 5 

May 1 5 , 1976

H o n o ra b le M ike G ra v el 

U. S . S e n a te

D irk s e n S e n a te O f f ic e B u ild in g 

W ash in g to n , D.C . 20 51 0

As an em plo yee o f G e n e ra l E l e c t r i c i n M cN ai ry C o u n ty , 

T e n n e s s e e , I w is h to s u p p o r t th e C y p re ss C re ek W ate rs h ed 

P r o j e c t .

I n th e p a s t 3 y e a r s my p ic k u p h a s b een th ro u g h w a te r 

above th e a x le s more th a n 30 tim e s . I am c o n c e rn e d , as th e 

f lo o d s a r e b ecom in g mor e f r e q u e n t and m or e s e v e re e a c h y e a r . 

One d a y , e a c h o f th e l a s t tw o y e a r s , th e w a te r was to o d e ep 

t o g e t t o w ork and wh en we d id g e t t o w or k we had to c le a n 

mud o u t o f th e e n t i r e p l a n t and w as h an d d ry e l e c t r i c a l 

com ponents t h a t w e r e n 't s c r a p p e d .

P le a s e do w hat yo u can t o e x p e d ite re d u c e d f lo o d in g 

fr om C y p re ss C re ek .

S i n c e r e l y ,

CC: S e n a to r Ho wa rd B ak er 

S e n a to r B i l l B ro ck
42

160 Tammy Drive 

Selmer, Tennessee 38375 

May 15, 1976

Honorable Mike Gravel 

U. S. Senate

Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Gravel:

I want your support in the funding of the McNairy County 

Cypress Creek Watershed Project.

We have had several floods in this county in the last few 

years that have flooded our General Electric Plant where my 

husband works. It has put many people out of work for days 

plus thousands of dollars worth of damage.

Thank you for your su pport.

Sincerely

Mrs. Nellie Durward

CC: Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
43

TRENTON, I GLEASON. ANO SELMER. TENN.

rfufo ‘Ponte cutd Z^C/uM ttt f a

•W H O LESA LE JO BB ER S*

May 24, 1976

Senato r Mike G ra vel 

D irks en Sen at e O ff ic e B uildin g 

W as hing ton, DC 20510 

De ar S enato r G ra vel:

RE: Cyp re ss Cr eek W atersh ed P ro je c t

My name i s R ic har d Spa rk s, owner o f Ev er ea dy Au to P a rts , 

lo c a te d a t 221 E a st Cou rt Avenue in Se lm er , Ten nes se e. My fo o tage i s about 300 f e e t from th e cre ek .

On th e n ig h t o f March 12, 1975, bec au se o f he av y ra in s th a t 

da y th e cre ek ov er flow ed i t s ba nk s and ca us ed th e w ate r to ba ck 

up in to my b u il d in g and put me out o f b u sin ess f o r th e next two 

d ays. I t ca us ed appro xim ate ly $5 ,0 00 w orth o f damage to th e b u il d ­

in g and s u p p li e s w it h in my b u il d in g .

Be ca use o f th e tr e e s w it h in th e cre ek ba nks , i t has bl oc ke d 

th e flow o f w ate r to su ch an e x te n t th a t i t has not pla ce to go 

o th e r th a n th e o v erl y in g p ro p e rti e s such as I own.

I wo uld a p p re c ia te yo ur ut m os t a tte n tio n to t h i s m a tt e r, as 

we w ill continue to ha ve t h i s prob lem u n le ss th e C yp re ss Creek 

W atersh ed P ro je c t i s ap pr ov ed .

C o rd ia ll y yours ,

R ic ha rd Sp ar ks 

Alderm an, Town o f Se lm er

RS: sbg

cc : S en ato r Howard Ba ker 

S en ato r B ill Brock

74 -6 95 0 - 76 - 4
44

C . D . F O R E S Y T H E

’ ■‘ ES ID E N T

F ir st Natio nal Bank

P . O . B O X IO

S E L M E R , T E N N E S S E E 3 8 3 7 5

May 24 , 1976

S e n a to r Mike G ra vel 

D ir k sen S en ate O ff ic e B u il d in g 

W ash in gto n, D. C. 205 10 

Dea r S e n a to r G ra vel:

I t i s my u n d e rs ta n d in g t h a t a c tio n w i l l be ta k en 

by your co m m itte e on a p p ro p r ia tio n s f o r th e Mc Na iry 

Co un ty W at ers hed Pro gr am a t an e a r ly d a te . On b e ­

h a lf of th e c itiz e n s o f Mc Na iry Cou nt y, T en ness ee 

who w i l l be v i t a l l y a f f e c te d by t h i s p r o j e c t, we 

s tro n g ly u rg e your a f f ir m a tiv e a c tio n in ca u sin g 

a p p ro p r ia tio n s to be made f o r an e a r ly im ple m enta ­

tio n of t h i s p r o je c t. Ove r o n e - th ir d o f th e c it iz e n s 

o f McN airy Co un ty a re a f f e c te d by th e annual flo o d in g 

o f v a lu a b le cro p la n d s an d co m m er ci al an d r e s i d e n t i a l 

s t r u c t u r e s .

Any c o n s id e ra tio n th a t yo u g iv e t h i s p r o je c t w i l l be 

m ost a p p re c ia te d by a l l c it iz e n s o f Mc Nairy C ou nt y, 

T enness ee.

S in c e r e ly ,

C. D. F o re sy th i 

P re s id e n t

CDF:dg

c c : S e n a to r Howard B ak er

c c : S e n a to r B il l Brock

M e m b e r

FDIC
45

May 2 5 , 19 76

S e n a to r Mike G ra v e l 

D ir k s e n S e n a te O f f ic e B u ild in g 

W ash in g to n , D .C . 20510 

D ear S e n a to r G r a v e l:

I am a r e s i d e n t o f M cN ai ry C ounty an d a s s u c h , I wou ld l i k e to 

e n co u ra g e yo u t o do w h a te v e r yo u c an to a s s i s t th e im p le m e n ta ti o n 

o f t h e C y p re ss C re ek W ate rs h ed p ro g ra m .

I am em plo yed b y th e G e n era l E l e c t r i c Co mpany , w hic h h a s b een 

s e r i o u s l y d i s r u p t e d ma nv ti m e s i n th e l a s t f i v e y e a r s due t o 

f lo o d in g o f C y p re ss C re ek . In a d d i t i o n , manv o f mv n e ig h b o rs 

h av e l o s t w ag es an d p r o p e r ty to t h i s sam e p ro b le m .

Yo ur c o o p e r a tio n an d a s s i s t a n c e on t h i s r r o l e c t w i l l be g r e a t l y 

a p p r e c i a t e d .

S i n c e r e ly y o u rs ,

Ja m es E . F r e d r ic k s o n 

RR# 2 Box 173A 

S e lm e r, T en n e ssee 3837 5

cc : S e n a to r Ho wa rd B a k er 

S e n a to r W il li a m B ro ck
46

12 3 S u n ris e Cove 

S e lm e r, TN 3^ 37 5 

May 24, 19 76

S e n a to r Mike G ra v e l

D ir k se n S e n a te O ff ic e B u ild in g

W ash in g to n , DC 20 51 0

RE: C y p re ss C re ek W ate rs h ed

P r o je c t

D ea r S i r :

I u rg e y o u r su p p o rt in th e fu n d in g o f th e 

M cN ai ry C ounty C y p re ss C re ek W ate rs h ed P r o j e c t . 

T h is w a te rs h e d i s d e s p e r a te l y n eed ed a s many o f 

o u r i n d u s t r i e s a re flo o d e d an d f a rm e rs a re in

need o f i t a l s o .

S in c e r e ly ,

M rs . W. B. Jo hnso n

W BJ :sb g

cc: S e n a to r Ho wa rd B aker

S e n a to r B i l l B ro ck
47

May 25 , 1976

S e n a to r G ra v e l;

Let me re q u e s t you r v o te and su n p o rt f o r th e C ypre ss Creek 

W ater sh ed p r o je c t in Mc Na iry C oun ty .

T own a fa rm In th e flo o d p l a i n o f lo w e r C y n re ss C re ek and 

h av e s e rv e d a s C hai rm an o f th e '-’a te r s h e d D i s t r i c t B oard s in c e 

i t was Cor ne d s e v e r a l y ° e r s a ^ o .

We h a v e w or ke d ma nv h o u r s , a tte n d e d m e e ti n g s an d t o u r s t o 

d e v e lo p a p la n s u i t a b l e f o r a l l g r o u p s .

We u n d e r s ta n d t h " t th " s o la n h a s be»n ro 'd o w p d b y a l l 

c o n c e rn e d g ro n n s end e l l Q u e s tio n s r® so l' -e d .

Th e q u e s tio n s ro u se d b v *he E n v ir o n m e n ta l P o lic v C e n te r 

I'm s u re w ill he r e s o lv e d b v o u r T e c h n ic a l A gen c^ , th » S o i l 

C o n s e rv a ti o n S e r v i c e . The two a l t e r n a t i v e s s u g g e s te d w i l l n o t 

so lv e o u r p ro b le m .

c c : S e n a to r Ho ward B ek er 

S e n a to r W il li a m B ro ck

*
48

GEN ER AL ELE CTRIC

GE NE RA L ELECTRIC C O M P A N Y . FO U R TH STREET. SELMER. TE NN ES SE E 3 8 3 7 5

TE LE PH ON E 9 0 1 /6 4 5 -6 1 2 1

May 25, 1976

DISTRIBUTION

ASSEMBLIES

PRODUCT

DEPARTMENT

Honorable Mike Gravel 

U . S. Senate

Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator G rav el:

In the last five years our plant in McNairy County, Tennessee 

has been damaged by thirteen floods. Some could be considered 

minor, some occurred on weekends, but two occurred during the week 

and were so severe that people couldn't get to work. As a result, 

four thousand man hours were lost.

We support the Cypress Creek Watershed Project as a method 

that would reduce the severity of local flooding if it is 

accomplished immediately.

Sincerely yours

D. A. Chapman 

Plant Manager

DC/bc

CC: Senator Howard Baker

Senator Bill Brock
49

May 24 , 197 6

S e n a to r Mike G ra v e l

D ir k sen S en ate O ff ic e B u il d in g 

W ash in gto n, DC 20510

RE: C ypre ss Cr ee k W ate rs hed P r o je c t

D ea r S e n a to r G ra v e l:

My name i s Ja ck G ra y. I own th e A m er ic an O il S ta tio n lo c a te d 

on Hi ghwa y 45 in S elm er, T en n ess ee. My p la c e o f b u s in e s s i s 

a p p ro x im a te ly 1 ,0 0 0 f e e t o f f th e ba nk o f C ypre ss C re ek .

On th e n ig h t o f March 12 , 19 75 , th e c re e k o v e rf lo o d e d o u ts id e 

i t s banks c au sin g a w a te r b u il d -u p a p p ro x im a te ly 2,0 00 f e e t be yo nd 

th e c re e k b ank. As a r e s u l t o f t h i s flo o d , th e w a te r p e n e tr a te d 

in to my underg ro und s to ra g e ta n k s c a u sin g an ap p ro x im ate $6,0 00 

lo s s an d r e s u lte d in my h avin g to c lo s e th e b u s in e s s f o r a p p ro x im a te ly th r e e d a y s.

Ea ch fl o o d a lo n g th e C ypre ss Cre ek i s be co ming p r o g r e s s iv e ly 

w o rs e, th u s th r e a te n in g many b u s in e s s e s an d homes in my a r e a .

I r e s p e c tf u l ly re q u e s t your u rg e n t a t t e n t i o n to th e C ypre ss 

C re ek W at ers hed P r o je c t a s b ein g th e o n ly m ea su re a v a ila b le to 

p re v e n t a f u tu r e d i s a s t e r to th e b u s in e s s an d r e s i d e n t i a l s e c tio n s 

o f th e town o f S elm er.

C o rd ia lly yo urs .

Ja ck G ra y (J

A ld er m an , Town o f Sel m er

JG :s bg

cc : S e n a to r How ard B ak er 

S e n a to r B i l l Bro ck
50

SOUTHLAND MOTOR LODGE 

" I t ' s So N ic e an d Q u ie t" 

S e lm e r, TN 3^375

May 2 4 , 1976

S e n a t o r M ik e G r a v e l

D ir k s e n S e n a te O f f i c e B u il d in g

W a s h in g to n , DC 20510

RE: C y p r e s s C re e k W a te rs h e d

P r o j e c t

D e a r S e n a t o r G r a v e l:

The d e v e lo p m e n t o f t h e M c N a ir y C o u n ty C y p re s s 

C re e k W a te rs h e d P r o j e c t i s o f v i t a l n e c e s s i t y t o 

t h e s e c u r i t y o f a l l a r e a r e s i d e n t s .

Th e c o n t i n u a l t h r e a t o f f l o o d i n g , an d t h e c o s t 

o f p a s t f l o o d i n g c a n o n ly b e r e l i e v e d b y t h e 

e a r l y c o m p le tio n o f t h e a b o v e w a te r s h e d p r o j e c t . 

T h e re i s no v a l i d r e a s o n f o r a n y o b j e c t i o n t o 

t h i s p r o j e c t . We u r g e t h e c o m m it te e t o v ie w 

t h i s p r o j e c t a s we d o h e r e — n e c e s s a r y t o o u r 

c o n ti n u e d g r o w th .

R e s p e c t f u l l y ,

H H H :sbg

c c : S e n a t o r Hov ;ard B a k e r

S e n a t o r B i l l B ro c k
51

146 Sunrise Cove 

Selmer, Tenn. 38375 

May 24, 1976

The Honorable Mike Gravel

United States Senate

Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Senator Gravel:

I am a citizen of McNairy County, Selmer, Tennessee. I own 

a home on Crooked Creek about two miles before it dumps into Cypress 

in the h eart of Selmer. A number of times in the last three or four 

years 1 have had six to ten inches of water under my house. The 

flooding problem grows worse each y ear as Cypress Creek continues 

to fill up with sand and s ilt.

I am a member of the McNairy County Chamber of Commerce and 

have helped to work on th is Cypress Creek project for about fifteen 

years. Local objections have been worked out as evidenced by the 

County Court voting to sponsor it along with two towns. The plan, 

along with the environmental impact statement, has taken its route 

through local, state, and national organizations with the required 

time for questions and objections. All these were answered and worked 

out to the satisfaction of those concerned. It is ridiculous now at the 

last minute to allow some objection to stop this much needed watershed 

project.

I sincerely hope and beg you to s tee r this project through your 

committee as quickly as possible to a favorable conclusion.

Thanks for your help and consideration.

Sincerely,

NPL:sbg

cc: Senator Howard Baker, Jr. 

Senator Bill Brock
52

TEXACO PETROLEUM

PRODUCTS

H. P. L E E

C O N SIG N EE

TEL EP HONE 64 5-54 56

SELMER . TENN. 38375

FIR ESTONE RUBBER

PRODUCTS

May 24 , 1976

S e n a to r Mik e G ra vel

D ir kse n S enate O ffic e B u il d in g

W as hi ng to n, DC 205 10

RE: C yp re ss Creek W at er sh ed P ro je c t

Dea r S e n a to r G ra v el:

My name i s P a t Lee , owner o f Lee O il Company, lo c a te d on E rv in 

S tr e e t, Sel m er , T enness ee. My p la c e o f b u s in e s s i s ap p ro x im ate ly 

200 f e e t o f f C ypre ss C re ek .

On th e n ig h t o f Ma rch 12 , 1975 , a f t e r hea vy r a in s , th e cre ek 

over flow ed i t s banks on b o th s id e s cau sin g w a te r t o b u il d -u p in 

our o i l company b u ild in g . We wer e out of b u sin e ss f o r a p p ro x im ate ly 1+8 h o u rs because of t h i s w a te r. I t a ls o ca use d dam age to 

our b u ild in g s and eq uip m en t. The e sti m a te d damage was a p p ro x im ate ly $24,0 00.

Bec au se o f th e fre q u e n t fl o o d in g alo n g th e cre e k , i t has become 

in c r e a s in g ly co n g este d . T h is r e p re s e n ts a trem en dous hazard n o t 

o n ly t o o u r b u s in e s s b u t a ls o to th e hom es su rr o u n d in g our 

b u s in e s s .

I t i s my p e rso n a l b e l i e f t h a t u n le s s we ha ve some ty p e o f f e d e r a l 

flo o d c o n tr o l pr og ra m many s e c tio n s o f th e Town o f Se lm er w i l l 

p o s s ib ly fa c e f u tu r e d i s a s t e r f lo o d s .

I am o f f e r in g my su p p o rt to th e McN airy Cou nt y W at er sh ed P r o je c t.

Ver y t r u l y y o u rs ,

P a t Lee

PL :sbg

cc : S e n a to r Howard Bak er 

S e n a to r B i l l Brock
53

1 M o lli e D riv e

S e lm e r, T e n n e sse e 3^3 75

May 2 9 , 1976

S e n a to r Mike G ra v e l

D ir k s e n S e n a te O f f ic e R u i l d i n g

W a sh in g to n , D .C . 20 91 0

D ear S in • #

I h a v e b e e n a s s o c ia te d v r t h th e tr e n d or

 C ym -e ss C re e k s^ 'nce 

b o y h o o d , b a c k in th e e a n ly t w e n t i e s . T h is C r° e k hn 

g

 gon e fr om 

on e o f th e b e s t ^ is h ^ n g s tre a m s t o a san d H itc h .

In my o p in io n , t* -i s h a s b e r n Hone b v ma ny m et ho H s w hic h hav e 

d e s tr o y e d o u r n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s , su ch as c l e a r i n g o " ma ny s t e e p 

s lo p e s w it h no n r o v i s io n to s t o p e r o s io n =nd s i l t fr o m flo w in g 

i n t o t r i b u t a r i e s qnd on dow n i n t o th e m ain s tr e a m . T h is h a s 

c a u se d a d r i f t , o r lo g 1am, f o r s e v e r a l m ile s on th e lo w e r en d 

o f C y p re ss C re e k .

In ma ny p la c e s th e o ld c h a n n e l i s h ig h e r t h a n th e g ro u n d on 

e a c h s i d e . T h is h a s c a u se d th e w a t° r t o s p r e a d o u t o v e r man y 

h u n d re d s o f a c r e s , k i l l i n g m o st a l l o f some of t h e b e s t h a r d ­

wood f o r e s t I have e v e r kn ow n. A ls o ma ny a c r e s o f go od fa rm 

la n d an d w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t .

In g e n e r a l , I am o p n o se d to new c h a n n e l i z a t i o n . H ow ever, i n 

t h i s p r o j e c t I can s e e no o th e r way to s t o p th e f l o o d in g o f 

tw o m a jo r U .S . h ig h w ay s °n d th e C it y o f S e lm e r b u t t o one n 

up th e o ld c h a n n e l fo r th e w a te r to flo w , r e l i e v i n g t h e ab ov e 

m e n ti o n e d a r e a s .

My kn o w le d g e and e x p e r ie n c e i s su c h t h a t I f e ° l I have a h e t t e ” 

u n d e r s ta n d in g o f t h i s m a t te r t^ a n mA n v l o c a l n e s i d e n t s . I am 

6

Q y e a r s o f ag*>, •’nd gra w no in an d on ou nd C v n re s s C re ° k . T 

am now r e t i r e d fr om B » ll T a le n ^ o n e Com ua nv . I u a v e b e e n 

C hair m an o f T ennes se ® C o n s e rv a tio n L e a g u e , T e n n e sse e N a tu r a l 

R e s o u rc e s C om m is si on, an d am a c ti v e in o t h 0 ” l o c a l Game and 

N a tu r a l R e s o u rc e s n r o i e c t s .

We u r g e n t l y ask y o u r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t H s p r o j e c t .

R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m itte d

T r a v is P . M cN at t

c c : S e n a to r Ho wa rd B ak er 

S e n a to r W il li a m B ro ck
54

177 W. Court Avenue 

Selmer, TN 38375 

May 24, 1976

Senator Mike Gravel

Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D. C. 20510

Re: McNairy-Cypress Creek Watershed

Dear Mr. Gravel:

As a business man and lifelong resident of McNairy County, 

I urgently endorse the funding and construction of the 

McNairy-Cypress Creek Watershed project.

I have also served as Alderman for the Town of Selmer for 

four years and am aware of the urgency of this project as 

well as the local support for said project.

This project will restore the lands of high productivity, 

reduce timber kill, prevent flood damage to farm land, 

road bridges, city streets, industry and generally 

improve the economy of the area.

I have reviewed the plans and environmental impact 

statement, and am well aware of the urgent need to 

get this project implemented as soon as possible.

I understand that this project is presently before your 

committee and would appreciate your support in getting 

it approved.

RDM:pep

cc: Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
55

128 Sunrise Cove 

Selmer, Tenn. 38375 

May 24, 1976

The Honorable Mike Gravel 

United States Senate 

Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D. C. 20510 

Dear Senator Gravel:

I urge your support of the McNairy County Cypress 

Creek Watershed project. This watershed is desperately 

needed as our county is often flooded.

Thank you for your help in this needed proje ct.

Sincerely,

cZ

Anita J. Moore

cc: Senator Howard Baker, Jr. 

Senator Bill Brock
56

j Wilburn Gene fVhe

MteesAaw sown jlwie

SELMER. TENNESSEE 38375 / AREA CODE 901/646-3472

M C N A IR Y C O U N T Y ,

T E N N E S S E E

County Court Meets Second 

Monday of Each Month at 70 0 P M.

. Hay 2b, 1976

Senator Mike Gravel

Dlrksen Senate Office Building *

W ashing ton, D. C. 20510 

Senator Gra vel:

This le tte r is in re fe re nc e to a he ar in g be fore your Committee

conce rning the McHairy-Cypress Creek Watershed. «

As a cit iz en of McNairy County and as County Judge, I cert ain ly 

encourage your favo rable re ac tio n to th is re qu es t for ap pr ov al.

There is se ve ra l hundred ac re s of ex cel le nt farm land and tim ber 

land th at has been rendered us el es s due to flo od ing in the lower 

end of our county, which can be solved by the McNairy-Cyoress 

Creek Watershed.

Not only do we have much damage to far ml and, bu t the c iti e s of 

Ramer and c elmer su ff er s much lo ss due to flo od in g. Hany homes 

and se ve ra l in dust ri es have been flo oded in the ci ty of Selmer 

re su lt in g in much fi n an cia l lo ss and many hours of la bo r wa sted.

Let me assure you th a t the peo ple in th e ar ea of the watershed 

are in sup port of th is pro je ct and st ro ngly encourage your help 

in so lving our problem .

Sinc erely,

c c : S e n a to r Howard ® ak er 

S en a to r W il li am B ro ck
Unique Metural Resources for Industrial Growth, Pleasur

P. 0 . BOX NINE / SELMER. TENNESSEE 38375 / TELEPHONE 645-6360

McNAIRY COUNTY

May 24, 1976

The Honorable Mike Gra vel 

United States Senate 

Dirke en Senate Off ice Building 

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dea r Senator G rave l:

Re: McNairy County Cy press Cr ee k Watersh ed Project

I am President of the McNairy County Chambe r of Com mer ce and 1 als o 

practic e law in Selme r and am the Gen eral Sessions Judge of McNa iry 

County, the refore , I am writing this letter as an inte rested offic ial and 

citize n of McNa iry County and I would app reciate you presenting this letter 

to y our Sub-Comm ittee.

Th ere is pending before your Sub-Comm ittee the above pro ject w hich is of 

vit al concern to all citizens of McNairy County. The McNa iry County 

Cham ber of Com merce has adopted th is pro ject by unanimous a gree men t 

with the mem bers of the Cham ber of Com merce, the offic ial s of the city 

of Selmer, the members of the County Cour t of McNairy County and with 

al l the other sponsoring agents of the proje ct.

I be liev e that if this project is not approved, our county w ill in the future 

"lite ra lly " wash away. I have talke d to al l the citizens of McNa iry County 

and I know of no objections from anyone.

Th erefo re, I urge y our support of this pro ject and would a ppr eciate you 

presenting this lett er to the mem bers of y our Sub-Com mittee which w ill 

decide whether this project is approved or not.

PS/gb

Paul Simpson, 'President 

Board o f Dir ect ors

cc: Senator Howard Baker, Jr. 

Senator Bill Brock
58

Terry Howard. Prewdea/ T. W. McBride. Vice- Preiideaf

H J. Maiedon. Jr., /ajureurf A /» »f

Brenda ScxNl, Secretory

DIREC TO RS :

Howard Beane

Joe Olatrottl

J. O. Oardner

fourth/ JaA m dhvmau

555 Mulberry Av en ue

SELMER. TEN NESSE E }8 }7 5

May 25, 1976

Honorable Mike Gravel

Chairman, Subcommittee on Water Resources 

United States Senate 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Senator Gravel:

On behalf of some 1,500 members of the McNairy County Farm 

Bureau we earnestly solicit your support in the ultimate 

completion of the McNairy-Cypress Watershed Project. This 

has been in process for a number of years, we have supported 

it and are hopeful that it will be completed as early as is 

possible. We feel that this is in the best interests of 

the residents of this entire area. We feel that it will relieve problems relative to flooding and the destruction of 

the agricultrual potential in the area affected.

The Board has been aware of the importance and progress of 

the project since its inception and feel that we are qualified to submit the above opinions. This is not a project 

which will aid a limited number but rather one which will 

provide much needed economic and social assistance to this 

County and its some 20,000 residents.

We will be happy, at any time, to support our above claims 

with additional information. We sincerely solicit your 

assistance to this matter and thank you, in advance, for 

any consideration which can be afforded.

Yours very truly,

Terry Howard, President

TH/jh

C.C. Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
59

UPERVISORS

TREECE.

P.O. Bo x 159 Sd lrm r, lenn«$M« 38375

ROBERT W. AYERS. Ramer

HAROLD MITCHELL. Selmer

LARRY w. RAINES. Stantonville

GENE RICKMAN. Milledgeville

Ka y 2 5 , 1976

O.O. FERGUSON

Duirlct ConMrvationist

OAVIO WEAKLEY

Soil Conservationist

JOE V. MOORE

Conservation Coordinator

ELAINE JAMERSON

District Secretary

H o nora ble M ik e G ra vel 

D ir k s e n S enate O ff ic e B u il d in g 

W ashin gto n, D .C . 20 ^1 0 

Dear S e nato r G ra v e l:

I am R o bert A ve rs . I own a fo rm In th e lo w e r p a r t o f 

Cyp re ss C re ek. I ha ve serv ed on t h e W at er sh ed Boa rd d u rin g 

a l l th e se y e a rs . I am a ls o a membe” o f th e M cN airv Cou nt y 

C o u rt, th e Town Boa rd o'" Ha mer, end th e S o il C o n s e rv a tio n 

Board . A l l o f th ese gr oups are spon sors o f t h is p r o je c t.

L e t me urg e yo u and vo u r com m itte e t o su p p o rt t h is 

p r o je c t as we have wo rked so lo n g t o d e ve lo p i t . We th in k 

we ha ve g iv e n c o n s id e ra tio n to a l l lo c a l concern ed e le m e n ts .

I u n d e rs ta n d a l l o th e r in te r e s te d a ge ncie s and gro ups have 

endors ed t h is p la n a ls o .

I b e li e v e the im p le m e n ta ti o n o f t h is p la n w i l l so lv e 

many o f o u r c o n s e rv a ti o n p ro b le m s. Thi3 is th e o n ly pro gr am 

1 ha ve worke d w it h th a t ha s so much lo c a l s u p p o rt. I t is 

v e ry unusual th a t a r u r a l c o u n ty li k e t h is w i l l sponsor and 

p ro v id e lo c a l fu nds f o r a pro gra m .

Your s u p p o rt o f t h is p r o je c t w i l l be g r e a t ly a p p re c ia te d .

S in c e r e ly ,

R o bert W. Aye rs

c c : S e nato r Howard Bake r 

S e n a to r W in in m Bro ck

74 -695 0 - 76 - 5
60

SUPERVISORS

C. S. TREECE. Selmer

P.O. Box 159 - Selmer, Tennessee 38 375

ROBERT W. AYERS. Remer

HAROLD MITCHELL. Selmer

LARRY w. RAINES. Stantonville

GENE RICKMAN. Milledgeville May 2 5 , 19 76

O. D. FERGUSON

OAVIO WEAKLEY

JOE V. MOORE

Conservation Coordinator

ELAINE JAMERSON

S e n a to r G ra v e l:

I am w r itin g to yo u as Cha irm an o f th e M cN air y C ou nt y S o li 

C o n se rv a ti o n D i s t r i c t o f T ennes se e and a sk in g y o u r su p p o rt and 

th e s u p p o rt o f y o u r su bco m m it te e In a p p ro v in g th e M cN al ry -C ypre ss 

Cre ek W ate rs hed P r o j e c t . I t I s o u r u n d e rs ta n d in g t h a t o u r p r o je c t 

Is p r e s e n t ly b e in g co n s ’ d are d by v our g ro u p s f o r a p p r o v a l.

As a member o f th e M eN alr y C ou ntv S o il C o n s e rv a ti o n D i s t r i c t 

B oa rd f o r 25 y e a r s , 1 am v ery ’’e m ill a r w it h th e p la n n in g p ro c e s s 

th » t t h i s p r o je c t h as been th ro u g h to re a c h th e f i n a l p la n ss 

p re s e n te d t o y our su b co m m it te e. Ov er th e y e a rs o f p la n n in g , many 

a l t e r n a t i v e s hav e b e e n in v e s tig a te d and s tu d ie d , much g iv e and 

ta k e and co m pr om ise h as be en made on th e p a r t o f l o c a l sp o n so rs 

in an e f f o r t to be r e s p o n s iv e to th e v a r io u s n e e d s. I t is f e l t 

t h a t a l l c o n c ern s o f th e v ary in g I n t e r e s t g ro u p s hav e b een c a r e ­

f u l l y c o n s id e re d and t h a t th e p la n f i n a l l y a r r iv e d a t w ill g iv e 

much nee de d p r o te c ti o n to u rb an a r e a s , a g r i c u l t u r a l a r e a s , 

en v ir o n m e n ta l co n c ern s and f i s h and w i l d l i f e I n t e r e s t s .

The l o c a l sp o n so rs are q u it e s a t i s f i e d t h a t th e re i s no 

lo c a l o p p o s it io n to th e p r o je c t as p la n n ed by an y o f th e i n t e r e s t 

g ro u p s, in c lu d in g e n v ir o n m e n ta l and f i s h and w i l d l i f e . In f a c t , 

many l o c a l f i s h an d w i l d l i f e ad v o c a te s ha ve s ta t e d t h a t the 

p r o je c t a s p la n n ed w i l l g r e a t l y en hance f i s h and w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t s , 

e s p e c i a ll y n e a r th e lo w er end of th e p r o j e c t . A n o th er a re a in 

whi ch I hav e p e rs o n a l i n t e r e s t i s th e ti m b e r a re a o f th e p r o j e c t . 

W it hout th e p r o j e c t , M cN air y C ou nt y i s lo s in g I n c r e a s in g a c re s 

ea ch y ea r and i t i s o u r fir m b e l i e f t h a t t h i s p r o je c t w ill r e v e r s e 

t h i s tr e n d and en hance ti m b e r h a b i t a t a r e a s .

In c l o s i n g , as a lo c a l c i t i z e n an d o f f i c i a l l y as ch air m an o f 

th e l o c a l s o i l c o n s e r v a tio n d i s t r i c t , I en co u ra g e y our subco m m itte e 

to appro ve th i s p r o j e c t and all o w l o c a l c i t i z e n s to move ah ea d 

j o i n t l y w it h f e d e r a l go ve rn m en t a s s is ta n c e in ’ m nle m enting t h ’ s 

v i t a l l y ne eded p r o j e c t th » t is o v erw h elm in g ly s u p p o rte d by l o c a l 

r e s ' de n t s .

S in c e r e ly

(L-A

C. S . T re e c e , Cha irman 

M cN airv C ounty S o il C o n se rv a ti o n 

D i s t r i c t B oa rd o f S u p e rv is o rs

c c : S e n a to r Howard Bak er 

S e n a to r W il li am Br oc k
Pickwick Electric Cooperative

F. O BOX *

S E L m E R .T E n n 'E S S E E

May 24, 1976

Th e Honorable Mik e Gr avel 

United Stat es Senate 

Dirks en Sena te Of fic e Building 

Washington, D. C . 20510 

De ar Senator Gr avel:

The sm al l co m m er cial bu sin esses, inclu ding the hea dquarte rs of fic e of 

Pic kwick Ele ct ric Co opera tive, located in Se lm er, Te nn essee, needs the 

Cyp re ss Cre ek W ate rsh ed Pro ject imp lim ented.

One of the most serio us th reats, if thi s pr oje ct does not go through, is the 

po ssibl e los s of our largest indu stry in McNairy County -- Ge neral Ele ct ric 

Comp any's bus duct, which in 1975 had app rox imate ly four o r fiv e inches of 

wa ter throughout the plant, which stopped productio n fo r a per iod o f at lea st 

twenty-fou r ho urs.

Some of the most productiv e farm lan d in McNai ry Cou nty, Tenn essee is under 

wat er and w ill soon be off the tax ro ll s. In som e of th e le ss produc tive fa rm ­

land ar ea of the coun ty, low income fa rm er s, the so il is eroding, which can 

only mean le ss productio n fo r tho se alread y su bsist an ce f ar m er s.

I u rgently req uest you to please lend y ou r support to thi s most worth while 

pr oje ct that has been fought fo r by the Mc Nairy County people fo r ne ar unto 

fifteen years . Thank you fo r your sup por t.

Sin cerely,

PICKWICK EL EC TR IC COOPERA TIVE

JOB:am

Pres iden t

cc : Senator Howard Baker, Jr. 

Senator Bill Brock
R e y n o l d s <fc D b u s n e r

A T T O R N E Y S A T LA W

1 7 7 W. Co u r t

P . O. B o x 3 4 7

S e l m e r . T e n n e s s e e 3 8 3 7 5

W J. REY NOL DS TE LEPH O N E

EDWIN KA RL DBU SN ER May 24, 1976 (®O1» A4S-«177

Senator Mike Gravel

Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D. C. 20510

RE: McNairy County

Watershed Project

Dear Senator Gr ave l:

It has come to our attention that your committee 

will conduct hearings in the very near future concerning 

the above captioned project. It is my understanding 

that the major portion of this project will deal with 

flood control. Each year, flooding results in hundreds 

of thousands of dollars worth of damage to the citizens 

of McNairy County as well as the citizens of surrounding areas.

I cannot express to you the importance of this 

project as it relates to the general well being of the 

citizens of this county. The cost factor would be nominal 

considering the benefit to the quality of life of the citizens 

in this area.

I understand that some objections have been raised 

concerning the enviormental impact of the project. It is 

unconceivable that this project would have any adverse 

effect on the enfiroment, and in fact, should the project 

not be approved, the result would be an ad ver sed effect 

upon the environment.

We trust that this project will receive your 

utmost consideration, and after weighing the benefits,

EED: j

cc: Senator Howard Baker

Senator William Brock
63

May 24, 1976 

123 Sunrise Cove 

Selmer, Tenn. 38375

The Honorable Mike Gravel 

United States Senate 

Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Senator Gravel:

1 am writing you in support of the McNairy Cypress Creek Watershed 

project. My home is located on Crooked Creek in east Selmer, inside 

the city limits, and this creek is a tributary of Cypress Creek. I have 

lived at this location for twenty years, and each y ear, as more land is 

filled for comm ercial buildings in downtown Selmer and soil is deposited 

at the mouth of Cypress, due to land erosion, the problem of flooding in 

our section of the town gets w orse.

About two or three yea rs ago our largest industry, in so f ar as number 

of employees is concerned, was flooded and had to lay off over five 

hundred employees until the water receded. We a re told that this 

plant cannot be protected except by the Watershed project. Several 

hundred acres of the most productive farmland in McNairy County has 

been under water, twelve months out of the year, near the mouth of 

Cypress and more a cre s covered each ye ar as the creek fills with soil 

eroded from the rolling hills in the c ree k’s watershed.

Our Watershed project, after almost fifteen y ear s of effort by local 

people, is at last before your committee for approval.

cc: Senator Howard Baker, Jr. 

Senator Bill Brock
64

JjJGw

Tu y Smith

M n.fM yM lc hM i.n9u .

J.T .H eM jn *. StcttMry

c m HALL, SELMER. TENNESSEE 38376

BILLY JOE GLOVER. Mtyo ,

WAYNE BOLTON. Attorney

ANN HENDERSON, Recorder

L G WILKES. C M Defense Director

HUGH KIRKPATRICK. City Judge

WINFRED BROWDER. C /w /0 /Fb*c*

May 24 , 1976

S e n a to r Mike G ra vel

D ir k se n S en ate O ff ic e B u il d in g

W as hin gto n, DC 20510

RE: C ypre ss Cre ek W at er sh ed P ro je c t

Dea r S e n a to r G ra vel :

I am D orthen a E s te s , a member o f th e Se lm er 

C it y C o u n c il . A ltho ug h I ha ve o n ly be en a memb e r o f th e board f o r f iv e m on th s, I ha ve n ev ert h e l e s s been in b u sin e ss in Sel m er f o r over tw en ty 

y e a r s . I ha ve se en th e d e s tr u c tio n and damage 

ca use d by C ypre ss Creek whe n i t g oes on a ra m pa ge . 

I wo uld l ik e to o f f e r t h i s l e t t e r a s my w ho le ­

h e a rte d en dors em en t o f th e McN airy C ypre ss Creek 

W at er sh ed P r o je c t.

S in c e re ly ,

D ort hena E s te s 

Al derwom an, Town o f Se lm er

DE /ah

cc: S e n a to r Howard Bak er

S e n a to r B i l l Brock
65

Ze&rh&iJe+MWce

GAS ANO WATER

COMMISSION

Wtburn Gana Ash'

Troy Smith

Ward Mo on

Mrs. Rubya Michaai. Trass. 

•A T. Hawtons, Sacratary

CITY HALL. SELMER. TENNESSEE 38375

BILLY JOE GLOVER. Mayor

WAYNE BOLTON. Attomay

ANN HENDERSON. Racordar

L G. WILKES. O W Datansa Dtractor

HUGH KIRKPATRICK. City Judos

WINFRED BROWDER. Chiafof Pohca

May 24 , 1976

S e n a to r Mik e G ra vel

D ir k se n S en ate O ff ic e B u il d in g

W as hin gto n, DC 20510

RE: C ypre ss Cre ek W at er sh ed P r o je c t 

Dea r S e n a to r G ra vel :

My name i s P aul F is h e r . I am th e Amoco P ro d u c ts 

D is tr ib u to r f o r t h i s a r e a . My o f f ic e i s lo c a te d behin d 

th e Am er ican S ta ti o n owned by Mr . Ja ck Gra y.

On th e n ig h t o f Ma rch 12 , 19 75 , w a te r from th e C ypre ss 

Cre ek fl o o d ed in to my o f f ic e b u ild in g an d sto ra g e ta n k s 

cau sin g a p p ro x im ate ly $10,0 00 w ort h o f dama ge.

Bec au se o f req u en t flo o d in g , C ypre ss Creek be comes 

more co n g este d w it h ea ch o c c u rre n c e . U n le ss th e C ypre ss 

Cre ek P r o je c t becom es a r e a l i t y , our town and i t s c itiz e n s 

w i l l soon ha ve no p r o te c tio n a g a in s t su ch s im ila r o c cu rr e n ce s

I em ploy you to g iv e your u rg e n t c o n s id e ra ti o n . I 

r e s p e c t f u ll y ask on my p a r t an d many o f my fe ll o w c itiz e n s 

t h a t t h i s p r o je c t be ap pro ved.

R e s p e c tfu ll y you rs ,

P a u l F is h e r

PF:s bg

cc : S e n a to r Howard Bak er 

S e n a to r B i ll Brock
66

ALDERMEN

Jtwmr MMMnafOff

Dorthone Estes, Alderwomen

Richer d Sperks

Jeck Cray

Edwerd Mrtchtjt

GAS AND WATER

COMMISSION

VWdurn Gene Ashe

Troy Smith

Word Moore

Mrs. Rubye Micheei Treee.

J. T. Hewkins. Secretory

CITY HALL, SELMER, TENNESSEE 38375

BILLY JOE GLOVER, Mtoyor

WAYNE BOLTON, Afftxoey

ANN HENDERSON, /te onfcr

L G WILKES. Civil Defense Director

HUGH KIRKPATRICK. City Judge

WINFRED BROWDER. Chief of PoUce

May 24 , 1976

S e n a to r Mike G ra v el

D ir kse n Senate O ffic e B u il d in g *

W as hin gto n, DC 20510

RE: C ypre ss Creek W at er sh ed P r o je c t

Dea r S e n a to r G ra v el:

My name i s B illy J . G lo ver, Mayor o f th e Town o f Selm er. I ha ve 

h e ld t h i s p o s itio n f o r e ig h t y e a rs and se rv ed a s al der m an two 

y e a rs p r i o r t o b ein g e le c te d May or. As you mos t l ik e l y ca n g u e ss,

I ha ve se en an aw fu l l o t o f w a te r go u n d er th e b rid g e ; b u t my 

g r e a te s t conce rn i s in r e la ti o n t o th e w a te r t h a t h as go ne over 

th e b rid g e an d o v er th e ba nks o f C ypre ss C re ek . Our tow n has 

su ffe re d much dam age to p ro p e rty du e to th e flo o d in g o f C ypre ss 

C re ek . On o r about Ma rch 12 , 19 75 , o u r to wn, in c lu d in g c it y 

u t i l i t i e s , c i t y s t r e e t s , and da ma ges t o b u s in e s s ex p eri en ced 

ap p ro x im ate ly $250,0 00.0 0 in lo s s e s . On many o th e r o c ca sio n s 

we ha ve ex p eri en c e d tr em en dous lo s s e s . The Town o f Sel m er ,

McN air y Cou nt y Q u a rte rly C ourt , an d th e G en era l E le c t r i c Compa ny r e c e n tly j o i n t l y sp en t a p p ro x im ate ly $70,0 0 0 .0 0 to c le a r and 

sn ag C ypre ss Cre ek and b u ild som ewhat o f a m odif ie d d ik e sy st em 

ar ou nd th e G. E . P la n t. T h is i s a te m p o ra ry m ea su re and was o n ly 

b u i l t hopin g t o a c t a s a r e ta r d e n t u n t i l su ch ti m e a s th e W at er ­

sh ed P r o je c t could be com ple te d.

We, in th e Town o f Sel m er r e a l iz e th e ec on om ic im pa ct t h a t th e

flo o d in g h a s ha d on o th e r p a r ts o f o u r co u n ty . The so u th end has

p ro b ab ly bee n h i t h a rd e s t w it h flo o d w a te rs cau sin g cro ps to ha ve

to be p la n te d ov er an d on many o c c a sio n s th e la n d s ha ve re m ai ned

we t so lo ng t h a t r e - p la n tin g wa s n o t f e a s i b l e . The re i s a d i r e c t

r e la tio n s h ip bet w ee n th e fa rm e r’s cro p s and th e econom y o f our

to w n. We know t h i s v e ry w e ll becau se eac h y e a r we f e e l more o f

an im p act. T im berl ands a re be co ming flo o d e d , an d th e lo s s o f ,

ti m b e r cro p s a re h av in g t h e i r e f f e c t s , a ls o .
67

Mr. Ch air man and Mem bers o f th e Co mm ittee I co uld go on and on 

d is c u s s in g th e t e r r i b l e lo s s e s as a r e s u l t o f flo o d in g , b u t I 

know your ti m e i s v a lu a b le . And I w i l l n o t b e la b o r th e p o in t

To a la rg e d eg re e th e d e s tin y o f Sel m er and McN air y Cou nty i s in 

your han d s. We t r u s t t h a t you w i l l g iv e u s fa v o ra b le c o n sid e ra tio n in your d e lib e r a tio n s . The p r o je c t i s a good on e, and our 

need s a re g r e a t .

Thank you v e ry much f o r you r ti m e and e f f o r t s in o ur b e h a lf .

S in c e re ly ,

> > Q

B i l l y J . Gl ov ei 

Town o f Sel m er

BJ G:sbg

cc : S e n a to r Howard B ak er 

S e n a to r B i l l Brock

*
68

A IDEBMEN

J b C S n r

GAS AND WATER

COMMISSION

Wtoum GanaAaha

TroySmtth

^rd M o o ra

MnRubya Michaai. Traaa.

J.T .I ‘ “

CITY HALL SELMER. TENNESSEE 38375

BILLY JOE GLOVER. Mayor

WAYNE BOLTON. Anomay

ANN HENDERSON. Racordar

L G WILKES. C M Dafanaa Daactor

HUGH KIRKPATRICK. C/ry Judp*

WINFRED BROWDER. Chiatof Pohca

May 24, 1976

Senator Mike Gravel

Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

RE: Cypress Creek Watershed Project 

Dear Senator Gravel:

My name is James C. Whittington, Manager of City Lumber Company, 

located at 117 East Court Avenue, Selmer, Tennessee. My place of 

business is approximately 300 feet off the banks of Cypress Creek.

On the night of March 12, 1975, after unusually heavy rains, the 

creek overflowed its banks on both sides causing water to build 

up in front of the lumber company. At approximately 2 a.m., March 

13, the pressure caused by the build-up of water eventually broke 

the glass front of the lumber company. In order to keep the water 

from climbing very high in the store, we had to open the backdoors 

to let the water flow through, resulting in a loss of merchandise. 

The total estimated damge was approximately $25,000. If the 

employees of the lumber company had not been able to reach the 

building, chances are we would have had total destruction of building and contents.

Because of the frequent floodings along the creek, it has become 

increasingly congested and today causing the creek to overflow 

much quicker. This certainly represents a tremendous hazard, not 

only to my business but to many other businesses around me.

It is my belief that unless some type of flood control program is 

initiated along Cypress Creek, many sections of the town of Selmer 

will possibly face future disaster floods.
I s in c e r e ly re q u e s t your utm ost a tt e n ti o n to t h i s pro ble m . W ithout 

some ty p e o f f e d e r a l h e lp , I do n o t b e li e v e th e tow n o f Se lm er 

ca n a d e q u a te ly p r o te c t i t s e l f from s im ila r o c cu rr e n ce s in th e 

f u t u r e .

JCW:sbg

cc ; S e n a to r Howard Bak er 

S e n a to r B i l l Brock
70

<759 Q u jl ■

/ ^ / ? 7 4

ZM Zx

^ K x / u ^ t e ^ 

z

 D. c Ife oz /D

r ^ - c w .JX '-' tx t& 'c ^X uZ X -2 •

j U ft

J^XcJ (J^CVLz

CduUvyj, ho ^a J L C ^ J b tt e J J UZvX^ <: ' \jo-X-

■<5 T x ^ e f e - A ^U _>

CO-OXovtA <gkWv

tx J U z C t 

CbC/LXd C'A ^~>>

CLccjl ,

© x Zfc/£> ~

C zl - >UvUl^ ,

CL >7&

C^vuA ^ t d v

" ' £ &

. ^ x
71

147 Sunrise Cove 

Selmer, Tennessee 38375 

May 15, 1976

Honorable Mike Gravel 

U. S. Senate

Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Senator Gravel:

I urge your support in the funding of the McNairy County 

Cypress Creek Project.

We have had many floods in the recent years which have 

been bad for our farmers and many industries have been flooded 

also.

Thank you for your support.

Sincerely

c y- .-t \

Mrs. M. E. Sparks

CC: Senator Howard Baker 

Senator Bill Brock
12

Mav 19 76

M ike G ra v e l, C hair m an 

S u b co m m it te e on W ate r R e so u rc e s 

G ir k s e n S e n a te O f f ic e b u il d in g 

W a sh in g to n , D .C . ? S r 10 

D ear Mr . G ra v e l;

I t i s my u n d e r s ta n d in g t h a t y o u r c o m m it te e w i l l ta i® a c t i o n ♦

on fu n d in g th e M c N a ir y -C y p re ss C re ek W ate rs h ed i n th e n e a r

f u t u r e . As a c i t i z e n and a fa rm e r o f M cN ai ry C ounty who l i v e s

w ith in th e w a te rs h e d a r e a , l e t me ta k e t h i s o p p o r t u n it y to

a s s u r e yo u t h a t I an d my n e ig h b o rs a re s t r o n g l y in f a v o r o f

t h i s w a te rs h e d p r o j e c t . I p e r s o n a lly h a v e 2L(.O a c r e s o f go od *

fa rm la n d t h a t i s t o t a l l y u s e l e s s du e to th e f l o o d i n g of C y p re ss

C re e k .

Any c o n s i d e r a t i o n yo u g iv e th e fu n d in g o f t h i s p r o j e c t w i l l be 

a p p r e c ia te d by th e c i t i z e n s o f M cN ai ry C o u n ty , and e s p e c i a l l y 

th o s e w’-'O l i v e w ith i n th e w a te rs h e d d i s t r i c t .

W illie R . Tea gu e

R t. 1 Box 37

R am er , T e n n e sse e 38 36 7

cc : S e n a to r Ho wa rd B a k e e 

S e n a to r W il li a m B ro ck
73

* . v 2<?, 1 9 7 6

S e n a to r Mike G r» v el 

S ubc om m it te e on W at^ r R e so u rc e s 

W a sh in g to n , D .C .

D ea r S e n a to r G ra v e l:

L e t me ta k e t h i s o p p o r tu n i ty t o in t r o d u c e m y s e lf b r i e f l y to you 

an d y o u r s u b c o m m it te e . I am a l o c a l r e s i d e n t of th e C it y of S e lm e r, 

T e n n e sse e in M cN ai ry C o u n tv . I own a s u p e r m a rk et w hi ch i s lo c a te d 

i n th e f lo o d p l a i n o f th e M cN ai ry -C ypre ss C re e k W ate rs hed w hi ch i s 

b e f o r e y o u r su b co m m it te e f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n a t t h i s ti m e . I am a l s o 

a lo n g -ti m e p r a c t i c i n g c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t , b e in g an a v id h u n te r and 

fis h e r m a n an d am p r e s e n t l y s e r v in g as a me mb er of th e T e n n ess ee 

C o n s e rv a ti o n Lea gu e an d as a C om m is si one r o f th e T e n n e sse e W i ld li f e 

R e s o u rc e s A ge ncy .

I am w r i t i n g t h i s l e t t e r to ask y o u r s u p p o r t i n a p p ro v in g th e 

M cN ai ry -C y p re ss C re e k W ate rs hed p r o j e c t . As a l o c a l b u s in e s s ow ner 

I hav e e x p e rie n c e d flo o d in g i n my b u s in e s s on tw o o c c a s io n s and n e a r 

f lo o d i n g s e v e r a l o th e r tim e s . T here I s a p r e s s in g ne ed f o r fl o o d 

p r o t e c t i o n w it h in th e c i t y o f S e lm e r.

Pr om an e n v ir o n m e n ta l c o n e e -n , I s t r o n g l y su o D o rt a s so un d th e 

p r o j e c t c l a n as p re p a re d and a d o o te d b» th e l o c a l s p o n s o r s . My 

p e r s o n a l kn ow le dg e o f t h i s a re a le a d s me t o b e l i e v e t h a t a l l c o n c e rn s 

w i l l b e n e f i t fr om t v i s p r o j e c t . I °m a l s o aw ar e o f th e man y com ­

p ro m is e s t h a t hav e b ee n made in t h e p la n n in g p r o c e s s t h a t w i l l b e n e f i t 

w i l d l i f e and f i s h h a b i t a t . I t w i l l g i- e muc h ne ed ed p r o t e c t i o n t o th e 

ti m b e r a r e a s a t th e lo w e r end o ' th e p r o j e c t w he re y e a r lo n g s ta n d in g 

w a te r i s c a u s in g e x t e n s iv e ti m b e r k i l l .

B ein g a l o c a l h u n te r , f is h e r m a n , an d c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t , I h a ’’e 

n o te d in a s t dy t h a t th e da m ag e do ne t o w i l d l d 'e fr om f lo o d i n g i n 

th e h a t c h in g and n e s t i n g s e a s o n of b i r d s and r a b b i t s and sp aw ni ng 

s e a s o n o f f i s h la f a r g r e e t e r d u rin g th e h ea v y r a i n s wh ich we hav e 

in th e s p r in g of t h e y e a r . I w i l l a g re e t h a t o v e r 2 , 0 1 0 a c re s o f 

la n d b e in g us ed f o r la k e s w i l l tak B some h a b i t a t , b u t n o t n e a r l y as 

much da m ag e w i l l be don e t o w i l d l i f e by t h i s a s th o u s a n d s of a c re s 

b e in g u n d e r w s te r i n th e s p r in g m o n th s. I am aw ar e o f no l o c a l 

o p p o s iti o n t o t h i s p r o j e c t . The m ost f r e q u e n t com me nt am ong th e l o c a l 

c i t i z e n r y is when ca n we g e t s t a r t e d o n t h i s n r o j e c t .

P le a s e a c c e p t t h i s l e t t e r an d p r e s e n t i t to y o u r s u b c o m n it te e f o r 

c o n s i d e r a t i o n in y o u r d e l i b e r a t i o n s on ou r p r o j e c t . I h e a r t i l y s u p p o rt 

t h i s p r o j e c t as p la n n e d and e n c o u ra g e y o u r e a r l y a p p r o v a l .

S i n c e r e l y ,

co : S e n a to r Ho wa rd B ak er 

S e n a to r W il li a m Br ock
74

Senator Gravel. Please continue.

SECOND BROAD RIVER, N.C.

Mr. Mitchell. Let me continue with the Second Broad River 

Watershed in North Carolina. The watershed is in McDowell, Rutherford and Cleveland Counties and is about 50 miles southeast of 

Asheville.

The project plan provides for the installation of conservation land 

treatment practices, two multiple-purpose structures for flood prevention and recreation, and 10 single-purpose floodwater retarding 

structures.

The project measures are expected to:

One: Stabilize approximately 430 acres of critically eroding uplands.

Two: Reduce sheet erosion by about 35 percent.

Three: Reduce flooding and flood damages on the 4,684 acres of 

floodplain.

Four: Provide an opportunity for an estimated 152,000 visitor-days 

of recreation annually.

The total installation cost of this project is estimated to be $8.9 

million, of which the local sponsors will furnish $3.8 million, or 43 

percent. The benefits are estimated to be $531,400, and the benefitcost ratio is 1.4 to 1.

COUNTRY LI NE CREEK, N .C.

The Country Line Creek Watershed, North Carolina, consists of 

88,800 acres in Caswell and Rockingham Counties in north central 

North Carolina. It lies along the Virginia-North Carolina line about 

15 miles south of Danville, Virginia.

The project plan provides for the installation of conservation land 

treatment, one multiple-purpose structure for flood prevention and 

municipal and industrial water supply storage, one multiple-purpose 

structure for flood prevention and recreation, and recreation facilities.

The project measures are expected to :

One: Reduce sheet erosion in the watershed by about 65 percent.

Two: Stabilize about 67 acres of critically eroding uplands.

Three: Reduce flood damages on 1,920 acres of floodplain by about 

70 percent.

Fou r: Provide for the area’s water supply needs at least until the 

year 2000.

Five: Provide about 104,200 visitor-days of recreation annually.

The total installation cost of this project is estimated to be $7.6 

million, of which the local sponsors will furnish $4.0 million or 53 

percent. The average annual benefits are estimated to be $556,300 and 

the resultant benefit-cost ratio is 1.2 to 1.

[Questions from Senators Gravel and Domenici and a statement 

from Senator Morgan follows:]
QUESTIONS FROM SENA TOR GRAVEL

COUNTRY LINE CREEK, NORT H CAROLINA

Question : I note that both mult iple -pu rpo se dams will provid e recre ation, 

but the recr eati on benefits for one, the Coun try Line Cree k Dam, 

are shown as "in cid ent ial ". Why are the recreatio n bene fits for 

the other prim ary bene fits ? Why isn't cost sharing require d for 

recrea tion benefits in b oth dams?

Answer: Str uct ure No. 1 is pl anne d for floo d preventio n and w ater supp ly

purp oses only. No c ost s— federal or loca l— are prov ided for a 

recreat ion purpose. The Incidental benefits whi ch are shown for 

Stru ctu re No. 1 are a rec ogn itio n o f recreatio n use that 1s 

exp ect ed to resul t fr om the imp oun dmen t of the 390 acre rese rvoi r 

at this site even though no a dditi onal costs are Incurred. The 

recr eati on benefit s for Stru ctu re No. 4 are assoc iate d w ith 

addi tion al storage in the dam spec ifi cal ly for the recr eati on 

purp ose and the developme nt of facilit ies for recrea tion. Cost 

sharing is provided for S tru ctu re 4 for the costs incurre d 1n the 

recreat ion purpose. No cost sharin g 1s pr ovid ed for recr eati on 

in Stru ctu re 1 since no costs are incurre d for the recr eati on

purpose.

Questi on: The North Carolina Departm ent of Natura l and Econ omic Reso urce s 

poin ted out 1n th eir conm ents on the envir onmen tal Impa ct sta temen t that they have two ponds for fre e fishing in the area w hich 

are little used. Thes e ponds are eas ily a ccessib le and prov ide 

excellen t bass and blue gill fishing . Recreat ion oppo rtu nit ies 

also exis t at Kerr Res erv ior wit h its 48,9 00-a cre lake 32 miles 

away, and the 3,75 0-acr e Hugo Res erv oir on ly 10 mi les away.

This appe ars to ma ke the need for additional lake recreat ion 

questiona ble. Woul d you please c omm ent on this?
76

Answer: Other ex istin g recreational fa c il it ie s throughout the area are

recognized in the work plan and environmental impact statement.

The recrea tion planned fo r th is watershed w il l help to meet the

many remaining rec reation needs as pointed out in the North

Carolina Outdoor Recreation Plan and has been coordinated with

state in te re sts . I t is also noteworthy th at loca l sponsors are

pro viding about one-half of the recrea tion costs. *

Question: The pr oje ct re po rt states th at, at normal le vel, the structure 

conta inin g municipal and in dustria l water supply w il l hold one 

b il li o n ga llons. In another pro je ct re por t, Elk Creek, West *

V irgin ia , you stat e that one b il li o n gallon s could serve a 

populatio n of 22,500 people. The pop ulation of Yanceyville, 

the pr in cipal be ne fic iary of th is water, is 1,274, and the 

pop ulation of the en tir e watershed is 6,100. Is not a capacity 

of one b il li o n gallon s somewhat excessive 1n th is case? How 

were the water supply be ne fits determined? Why wasn't the 

"least co st ly altern ative" used as a measure of the benefits?

Answer: The water supply in the pr ojec t w il l exceed the demands fo r

domestic use of the watershed. However, the sponsors' consultant 

and local planning groups agree th at the ad ditio na l water provided 

by the pr ojec t w il l be an inducement fo r indu strie s to move Into 

the area and enhance the local economy. Although storing a smaller 

amount of water would also be very beneficia l, i t was decided to 

sto re as much water as pr actical in order to be tte r u til iz e the 

exce lle nt storage cap acity of the site at only a very small 

increase in cost.

The be ne fits were determined by a value of 10 cents annually, per 

1,000 gallons of storage. The "least cost ly altern ative was
7 7

not used because the only pr ac tic al altern ative fo r,wat er supply

storage 1s a sin gle purpose structu re at the same site which

would cost about the same as the planned multipurpose stru ctur e.
78

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

COUN TRY LINE CREEK, NORT H CARO LIN A

Questi on: Why isn't cost shar ing required on the recr eati on at Count ry Line 

Cree k Dam?

Answer: Stru ctur e No. 1, which 1s located on Coun try Lin e Creek, does not

have any c osts whic h are asso ciat ed with recreati on. The 

recr eati on bene fits associate d with this stru ctur e are an 

incidental effec t and not a planned purpose.

Question: The North Caro lina Departmen t of Natural and Econ omic Reso urces 

note d in its comm ent that it has two near by ponds wi th free 

fishing and these are used very little despite the easy access 

and exce llen t bass and blue gill fishing. Kerr Rese rvoi r is 

32 miles away and Hyc o Reservoir is 10 mile s away. Why are 

additional lakes for recreation needed in the area?

Answer: Othe r exis ting recreati onal facilitie s thro ugh out th e area are

reco gniz ed in the wor k plan and envir onmen tal impac t statement. 

The recr eati on planned fo r this w ate rsh ed will help to me et the 

many remainin g recr eati on needs as pointed out in the Nor th 

Carolina Out doo r Recreat ion Plan and has been coor dina ted with 

state interests. It is also note wor thy that local sponsors are 

provi ding abou t o ne- hal f o f the recreat ion costs.

Question : What area will be serve d by the wat er supply of this project? 

Answer: It is anti cip ate d that the enti re area of Caswell County woul d

be served by the propose d wa ter supply.
79

TESTIMONY OF SENATOR ROBERT MORGAN

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

June 3, 1976

Mr. Chairman, my statement today is to encourage 

this Subcommittee to vote favorably for the Soil 

Conservation Service Watershed workplans of Country 

Line Creek, North Carolina, and Second Broad River,

North Carolina. These two projects would affect a 

total of four counties in North Carolina: Caswell, 

Rutherford, McDowell, and Cleveland. By approval of 

these watershed workplans stimulation in both the economy 

and population will occur.

I would like to make a brief analysis of the two 

different projects in order to point out the many benefits 

these two watersheds will bring to the counties and the 

State.

As Mr. Ryland Farmer of Caswell County stated here 

this morning, his county unfortunately has one of the 

poorest per capita incomes and, ironically, one of the 

highest property tax rates in the State. Due to the lack 

of water, only limited industry exists in the county and, 

therefore, only 101 of the total tax money comes from
80

industry. Also, as a result, 4,000 residents of the 

county are forced to commute everyday to work outside 

the county.

At this very moment there exists an answer to 

some of the Caswell County pr obl ems .... the Country Line 

Creek Project. The watershed would control flooding on 

a total of 1,920 acres of bottomland. Consequently, the 

crops could be moved from the eroding hillsides to the 

rich bottomlands and the hillsides could be planted with 

grass and trees to protect them from further erosion.

The hills could then be returned to their natural condition.

The project would also attract industries to the area 

by providing adequate water. In the past few years, more 

than 20 industries have expressed interest in locating 

in the county because of the available labor force; but 

because of the limited water, they soon lost interest. 

Therefore, the two-fold benefit of attracting industry 

would be to lighten the tax burden on the citizens of 

the county and also stimulate the general economy.

At this moment, Caswell County is at an assessed value 

of 1/3 less than counties surrounding it of similar size 

and population.
81

Another reason to support the Country Line Creek 

Watershed is that it would provide needed recreational 

areas to the county which also help attract industry. The 

watershed is planned to include a park and outdoor camping 

area in the second structure.

As matters stand, Caswell County realistically could 

be thrown into economical turmoil unless plans are made 

for more facilities to attract more industries. The 

impending disaster may be caused by the simple fact 

that Caswell County is predominantly "tobacco country" 

where allotments are regulated by the Department of 

Agriculture. At present North Carolina is the only state 

where tobacco acreage cannot be leased across county lines. 

However, if approved by the voters, this situation will 

change and most of the tobacco acreage will be leased to 

eastern counties where tobacco is raised more easily due 

to the level terrain. Therefore, Caswell has high 

possibilities of being left without tobacco as well.

The people most aware of Caswell County's problems 

and the need for the Country Line Creek Watershed 

are the citizens of that county. They started working 

on the Watershed work plan in 1968 and have worked 

constantly with state, local, and federal soil conservationists 

in developing it. Problems have appeared, but by working
82

together they have solved them. Local funds will 

finance the municipal water supply in the first structure.

As the Subcommittee knows, all the lands must be

purchased as a cost of $4 1/2 million to comply with

Public Law 566. The county recognizes the cost of the

project and is willing to carry its share which will be

about 60% of the total. To this end the county has been *

engaged in extensive fund raising. For example, the county

commissioners have levied a tax every year since 1969 *

to help build the project. Since that time, they have

collected over $320,000. Consequently, the county has

given the Watershed Plan their top priority and I

believe this Subcommittee should devote its attention

to the hard work and sacrifices that Caswell County has

given to the Country Line Watershed Workplans and vote

favorably for passage of the plan.

Secondly, I would also like the Subcommittee to 

focus its attention on the Second Broad River Watershed 

Project which would affect residents of Rutherford,

MaDowell, and Cleveland Counties, North Carolina.

Similar to the Country Line Watershed Workplan 

for Caswell County, the Second Broad River Watershed *

Project would benefit most of the residents of these
83

three counties economically. The need for the project 

is easily recognized by trying to travel through this 

region after a bad storm. The plan would provide needed 

flood control so that local farmers would not be at the 

mercy of the rising water of the river. The flooding 

is not a question of whether it will happen annually, but 

more a question of when it will occur. Therefore, 

farmers experience the frustration of having an entire 

crop ruined within a three to four hour period. I realize 

that the concept is hard to imagine since most of us live 

in a more stable environment. Therefore, the people 

of these three counties are only asking for the chance to 

live a more steady life without the constant fear of 

another flood.

For example, in 1975, the worst storms in the 

history of North Carolina hit the area in less than 

a two-month period. Damages amounted to over $1,050,000. 

The federal government ended up spending over $130,000 

in aid to victims. Unfortunately, this aid did not begin 

to repair all the damage. If the watershed had been 

complete, much of the damage could have been prevented.

This project was begun in the early 1960's by 

farmers on the Cane Creek, part of the proposed watershed

and a tributary of the Second Broad River. Now, the
84

plan has grown to encompass 144,300 acres. To the disappointment of the citizens of those counties, the project 

was hoped to have been long finished by now; but many 

who are old and no longer own the farms that the project 

would have affected still press for passage of the 

plan for the benefit of future generations.

♦

Likewise, the counties have been funding for the 

project since 1965, when the county commissioners were

♦

authorized by referendum to levy up to $0.05 per 

$100 evaluation as watershed tax. Consequently, the 

county commissioners have spent over $200,000 in 

engineering and planning for the watershed. The 

A.L.S.C.P. appropriated over $280,000 for land conserving 

practices to be implemented in the area. One of the 

largest contributions has been the free hundreds of days 

of service the Soil Conservation Service technicians and 

interested people have given to development of the plan.

Likewise, the citizens of Rutherford, McDowell, and 

Cleveland counties, similar to the citizens of Caswell 

county, are willing to sacrifice their time and money 

in order to enjoy the many benefits these two projects 

will ultimately bring to their areas.

Right now, according to reports from the Second 

Broad River Watershed Commission, it is anticipated that 

much of the land rights will be donated for the project 

to procede.
85

As you know, the Second Broad River Watershed 

Project consists of 12 dams which will result in many 

multiple-purpose benefits, similar to the Country Line 

Creek Project. These benefits include a proposed lake 

which will be the largest in the State (over 155 acres).

As everyone on this Subcommittee realizes, recreational 

areas are truly one of the largest assets a region can 

have for the present and the future of a state. With 

the building of the Second Broad River Watershed Project, 

not only will farmers and residents of those three 

counties have little worry of flooding, but the facility 

will provide many recreational benefits.

In conclusion, I hope I have been of some assistance 

to the Subcommittee in pointing out how imperative I 

believe these two projects are to the future of Rutherford, 

McDowell, Cleveland, and Caswell counties. Thank you 

for the time you have given me.
86

ZU N I PU EB LO , N . M EX .

Mr. Mitch ell. Zun i Pueblo Wate rsh ed, New Mexico, consists of 

about 13,000 acres of McK inley County in northwe ste rn New Mexico. 

Th e waters hed is a bou t 25 miles south of Ga llup, New Mexico.

The pro jec t provides fo r conservation lan d tre atm ent pra ctic es and 

one single-purpo se flood wate r retard in g structur e.

The pro ject measures w il l:

One : Provide flood pro tection to the ag ric ultural and urb an lan d 

below the structur e for storms ran ging up to the 100-year event.

Two: Benefit about 543 families by a red uction in flood water and 

sediment dam age to their homes.

The tot al insta lla tio n cost for thi s pro jec t is estimated to be $4.8 

million of which the local sponsors are to fu rnish $1.2 million or 24 

percent. The average annual benefits are estim ated to be $313,600. Th e 

benefit-cost ratio is 1.3 t o 1.

[Questions from Senator Domenici follow :]
87

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

ZUNI PUEBLO, NEW MEXICO

Q u e s ti o n : The Zuni are a is c h a ra c te riz e d by d iv e rs e and abu ndan t a rc h e o lo g ic a l 

and h is t o r ic a l re s o u rc e s . Have surv eys been made to p in p o in t su ch 

re so u rc e s and wha t p re c a u ti o n s w i l l be ta ke n to p re s e rv e su ch 

re so u rc e s w it h in th e p r o je c t are a?

Answ er: The A ri z o n a S ta te Museun conducte d an a rc h e o lo g ic a l su rv e y o f th e

p r o je c t are a in 19 72 . T hat s u rv e y re v e a le d th e pre sence o f 19 

a rc h e o lo g ic a l s ite s . I n s t a lla t io n o f th e p r o je c t w i l l d ir e c t ly 

o r in d ir e c t ly a f f e c t 18 o f th e s it e s .

The p r o je c t p la n p ro v id e s f o r s y s te m a ti c re c o v e ry o f d ata fr om 

th e s e a rc h e o lo g ic a l s ite s th ro u g h te s tin g and in te n s iv e excavat io n . T h is w ork has an e s ti m a te d c o s t o f $205,0 00 and w i l l be 

th e r e s p o n s ib ilit y o f th e N a tio n a l Park S e rv ic e . I t w i l l be 

conducte d b e fo re an y c o n s tru c tio n a c t i v it ie s can commence.

Q u e s tio n : What s p e c if ic re develo pm ent b e n e fits a re expecte d from th e 

p ro je c t?

Ans wer : The re g io n s u rro u n d in g th e Zuni Pueblo W ate rs he d has a v e ry h ig h

r a te o f un em ploy men t and v e ry lo w p e r c a p ita incom es. I n s t a lla ­

tio n o f th e p r o je c t and i t s subsequent o p e ra ti o n an d m ain te nance 

w i l l p ro v id e abo u t 175 m an-y ears o f u n s k ille d em ploy men t f o r 

la b o r w hic h w ould o th e rw is e be s e r io u s ly undere m plo yed. Th es e 

e ffe c ts a re e n t it le d re develo pm ent b e n e fits . The avera ge 

annual v a lu e o f th e se e ffe c ts was e s ti m a te d to be $55,4 70.
88

Question: What changes, 1f any, 1n land use w il l re sult from the pro jec t?

Answer: The area benefited by the projec t Includes 1,440 acr.es of

Irrigate d land. Prote ction provided by the pr oje ct w il l be an

Inc entive to return 834 acres of previously Irrigate d land to

cropland pro duction. The projec t w il l also permit more Intensive

use of 666 acres of Irrigate d land pre sently cropped but subject

to flood hazard. Although be ne fits were not claim ed, the pr oje ct >

should also provide Inc entive to develop the needed Ir ri g a tio n

water fo r fu ll u ti li z a ti o n of an ad ditio na l 900 acres of Id le

e

land.

Question: Please describe the flood problem 1n the watershed. How

fre qu en tly do floods occur and how serious 1s the damage to 

homes, businesses, and ag ric ulture? Please describe the 

sediment problem and explain how the pr ojec t may allevia te 

I t.

Answer: Floo ding, sediment de po sition , and erosion are major resource

problems 1n the watershed. Oak Wash crosses the Zun1 Ir ri g a tio n 

Canal approxim ately one mile north of the Pueblo. The flows 

traverse the agricultura l a llu via l pla in below the canal. The 

slopes of the plain are very fla t which creates sediment deposition 

problems. The flow s fan out 1n th is area, re sultin g 1n flood 

flow spreading over a large po rtion of the urban area of Zun1 

Pueblo and the surrounding Ir rigate d farmland.

Floods from high In te nsity thunderstorms are fre quent. Damages 

occur almost each year. Some of the more damaging floods occurred 

1n 1922, 1924, 1946, 1958, 1963, 1964, 1967, 1969, and 1970.
89

Due to the meandering of the overland fan-flo w of floodwa ter,

1t 1s Impossible to pred ict where flo od ing w il l occdr from 

In dividu al storms.

Flooding causes stru ctur al damage to homes and businesses and 

th e ir contents 1n the Pueblo of Zun1. Water ponding from these 

floods creates health hazards from dis ease-ca rrying fli e s and 

mosquitoes, water stagnation, and sewage pollu tion. Damage to homes 

and commercial establishments 1s estimated to average $142,000 per 

year.

Floods damage Ir ri g a tio n canals and In te rr upt Ir ri g a tio n deliv ery . 

Even a small break causes the Ir ri g a ti o n water to be turned o ff 

fo r about a week. This In te rruptio n begins with a storm of 

about a 10-year frequency, and af fe ct s 666 acres of cropland.

About 1,440 acres of Irrigate d land are d ir e c tl y affected by 

flo odi ng . The average annual damage to crops 1s estimated to be 

$4,000.

Sediment from Oak Wash 1s deposited 1n the Ir ri g a tio n can al, 

causing a maintenance problem. Sediment 1s deposited over the 

cropland, disrup tin g Ir ri g a ti o n grades and Ir ri g a tio n water manage 

ment. Severe damage occurs 1n the urban area where sediment 1s 

deposited 1n homes, businesses, and on equipment. Sediment fin es 

which sett le on yards and roads cause severe dust conditio ns and 

may co nt rib ute to a high rate of re sp irato ry ailments among the
Zun1 In di an s. Sediment from the watershed passes downstream

to the Zun1 River flo od pla in and Tekapo Res er vo ir, damaging

cro pland and di sp la cing sto rag e provided fo r Ir rig a tio n and w ild life .

The damage from sediment 1s estim ate d to average $15,5 00 per year.

To tal flo od wa ter and sediment damages are es tim ate d a t $185,00 0

per ye ar .

The pro je ct w il l prov ide ne ar ly 100 pe rcen t a ll e v ia tio n o f the

above flo od water and sediment prob lems. With sp ecif ic re fe re nce

to the sediment problem , the flo od water re ta rd in g str uctu re w il l

tr ap and st ore about 90 percent o f the sediment y ie ld of the

watershed. The co nc en tration of sediment 1n th e wa ter to be

delive re d to the riv e r 1s estim ated to be 8,60 0 pa rts per m il li o n

which is , fo r a ll pra ctical purpos es, cle ar wat er .
91

Mr. Mitchel l. Senator , I believe th at brief s throug h the seven 

pro jec ts we have here. We will be pleased to answ er any questions 

you might have on them .

Senator Gravel. W e have a n um ber of tech nica l questions. I think, 

due to the experience of the Senator from Tennessee, it migh t be 

be tte r if I sub mitted all those q uestions to you in wr iting and let you 

respond to them. I th in k th at would be a more efficient and more complete way.

I only hav e one question for an academic situatio n. I know th at 

nearl y all Sta tes, save my own State , have Soil Con serv ation Service 

< pro jects. Can you give me a reason why the re has been no initia tio n,

the re is no desire fo r Soil Con serv ation Serv ice pro jects in Alaska?

Mr. Mitchell. Sena tor, I wouldn’t say there was no desire. I t hin k, 

as you w’ell realize, the Soil Conse rvation Serv ice’s pro gra ms in 

*- Alask a are relativ ely young. Th ere are a num ber of area s th at I

believe the State conservationist, M r. Wayne L ong, is looking at righ t 

now th at have a poten tia l for Publi c Law 83-566 projects. I could 

leave it at tha t.

I t hink th ere is a poten tial there, but it j us t has no t developed.

ELK CR EE K, W . VA. ( C O N T .)

Senator Gravel. Very good.

Goi ng back to the West Vi rgini a pro jec t, Senat or Ra ndolp h will 

have some questions.

Senator Randolph. T hank you, M r. Chairma n.

Mr. Mitchell, ra th er tha n discuss the seven projects, because the 

cha irm an will develop as he thi nks helpf ul the overall pro gra m, I 

would like to direct you r attentio n to th e El k Creek Wate rsh ed 

project.

As I un derst and it, Mr. Mitchell, the re are 78,000 acres involved in 

this. Is this also Ups hu r Cou nty?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, a very small pa rt, sir.

Senator R andolph. Th en there are three counties, n ot two counties ?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, sir.

Senator Randolph. The pro ject, then is in central We st Vi rgini a, 

if wTe have a centr al par t of the Sta te.

Am I correct as to the acrea ge, 78,000 acres?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir, you are.

Se nator Randolph. I s th at acreage in spots, or is it all withi n one 

area?

„ Mr. Mitchell. No, sir, it is all in one area, a contiguous area, wh at

we call the watershe d area th at tak es care of the runoff fro m one 

pa rticular contiguous area.

Senator R andolph. One contigu ous are a comprises the total 

acreage ?

Mr. Mitch ell. Y es, sir.

74 -695 0 - 76 - 7
92

Sen ator Randolph. Fine.

I know of the ins tallation , the tre atmen t pro gra ms , and the recrea ­

tion facilities. I would like to come specifically to the 1.3 miles of 

channel work. Ju st wh at does th at encompass?

Mr. Mitchell. T ha t 1.3 miles of channel w’ork, Senat or, as we have 

it in o ur pla n, is to be inst alle d in the lo wer are a of the w atershed are a 

th at would run from somewhere aro und the tow n of Anm oore to Ea st 

View to provide the necessary pro tection th at we feel is req uir ed in 

a hig hly urban are a and pro tec t those people from the risk to loss 

of life.

So th at is an added fea ture, alon g with floodwater retard in g stru c- Ktures th at are being proposed to meet th at protection.

Senator R andolph. Th en I was correct in saying th at the pro jects 

often do pro tec t not only prop ert y and livestock and whatever would 

be protected in connectio n with the use of the soil fo r the rai sin g >

of crops, bu t th at the loss of life is often a fac tor . Is th at correct?

Mr. Mitch ell. V ery definitely.

Senator R andolph. I know th at are a very well to which you are 

add ressing yourself, the A nmoore section.

W ha t is the cost of the p roje ct?

Mr. Mitch ell. The tot al cost, Senator , is estimated to be $20.7 

million.

Senator R andolph. $20.7 million ?

Mr. Mitch ell. Tha t is the total cost.

Senat or R andolph. H ow long will it tak e to complete thi s pro ject?

Mr. Mitchell. W e usu ally have our ins tal lat ion periods run from 

5 to 7 years. In a proje ct of this ma gnitude it may run lon ger than 

the 7 years.

Senator R andolph. Mr. Ch airma n, I would hope th at we would 

be able on nex t Tuesd ay to clear these pro jec ts from the committee.

I am very anx ious to have conside ration of the pro ject for which I 

speak this mornin g.

Senator Gravel. I th in k there is no problem at all, Mr. Chairma n.

I think the y will ju st go automatic ally to the ful l committee.

Senat or Randolph. Fine, if th at could be done and still be within 

the proce dure th at you would like.

Sen ator Gravel. Very well, sir.

Senat or Randolph. Following the committee actio n, wh at do you 

prop ose, Mr. Ch air ma n, in connection with the projects? W ha t is the 

pro ced ure th at will be followed?

Senat or Gravel. In this case what we will do is go to the full 

committee since there are no objections in the subcommittee.

The full com mittee obviously would have to adopt a resolution 

covering these projects.

Senator Randolph. But we take no thing to the Senate floor?

Senator G ravel. R ight.
93

Sena tor Randolph. I wa nt the record t o reflect th at n othin g moves 

to the Sen ate in reference to these projects.

Senat or Gravel. Very much so.

Senator R andolph. I t is an action withi n the committee.

Senator Gravel. Yes, within both the Senate comm ittee and the 

House committee. All th at is req uired is a resolution.

Sen ator R andolph. A resolution?

Senator Gravel. Yes.

Senator R andolph. As I understand it, you would be prepare d?

Senator Gravel. To have th at resolution next Tuesday mornin g.

Senator Randolph. W ha t is the situatio n in reference to House 

action in these seven projects?

Mr. Mitchell. Senator, the House took up the El k Cree k and a 

numb er of these oth er projects last week.

Senator Gravel. An d passed them out of subcommittee. Th ey are 

to be h and led in full comm ittee this mornin g, Mr. Chairm an.

Senator Randolph. Then within the nex t 4 or 5 day s we would 

presum ably have the comm ittee app rov al from both the House and 

Senate?

Senat or Gravel. R ight, by nex t Tuesday .

Senator Randolph. Then what, Mr. Mitchell, are you prepare d to 

do af te r th at congressio nal app rov al has been given?

Mr. Mitch ell. Senator, once the Ad minist rator of the Soil Con ­

servation Service receives the congressional appro val, he will then 

authorize expenditures of our watersh ed con struction fun ds to each 

of the State conserv atio nists who are involved in these pa rti cu lar 

projects.

Th is will the n allow those State conserv ationists to proceed into 

the final design and con stru ctio n activ itie s of the projects, assuming 

th at the local sponso ring org anization s have secured the necessary 

lan d estimates and righ ts-o f-ways.

So the action here does allow fo r expenditures of con stru ctio n 

funds.

Senator Randolph. W ha t fun ds are available?

Mr. Mitch ell. S ir, this year we h ave sufficient funds. We have ap ­

pro xim ately $80 m illion th at we h ad thi s fiscal year. I am not sure of 

our present sta tus , of how much is unobligated. Bu t we h ave not had 

a problem this pa rticul ar year in funding .

Senator Randolph. At least the pro gra m can move forw ard ?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, sir.

Senat or R andolph. In these pro jects, the seven th at are b eing considered tod ay?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, sir , we would hope the y would.

Sen ator Randolph. Increa singly, peop le have been looking upon 

these pro gra ms as we do upon the lakes, the lar ge r bodies of water 

which come un de r the Corps of Engin eer s. Peo ple have been looking 

to these not only for flood control pro tection prop erty and lives, bu t
94

also the recreation al benefits. Rec reation has been included in the 

Corps of En gin eer s’ cost-benefit rati o?

Ca n you tell me, any one of you, when we sta rte d to include the 

rec reational benefit?

Mr. P arker. The Food and Ag ric ult ure Act of 1962 gave us au ­

thority to use recr eational benefits and pla n for recreation .

Se na tor Randolph. W e can place in the record when the Cor ps of 

En gin eers decided to include this element in its analysis.

Senator Gravel. In 1965.

Senator Randolph. I n the 1965 Act. So fo r some 15 years wre have 

been able to do that.

In reference to th is pa rti cu la r project, wh at wou ld you look upon 

as recrea tional benefits?

Mr. Mitchell. We have estimated the rec rea tional benefits th at 

will accrue to appro xim ate ly $238,700 out of a tot al average ann ual $

benefits expected to accrue of $1.4 million. So it is appro xim ate ly 

$240,000 per year th at will be rec reation al benefits.

Senator Randolph. H ow do you come to any figu re or the figure 

th at you have given? How do you arrive at it?

Mr. Mitch ell. W e work very closely wi th the are as of State gov ­

ern me nt, Sen ator, usu ally the Governor’s office who has responsibility for recreation planning in a pa rti cu lar Sta te. We look to them 

to provide us with an idea of the State recreation plan , wh at th eir 

recrea tional needs migh t be in a pa rti cu lar area, and use the i nformatio n th at they would have ava ilab le on recrea tional needs.

Th ey brea k thi s down in many instance s as to type of recreation — 

boating, fishing, swimming—an d work very closely wi th those kin ds 

of exp ertise to develop the recreation al benefits.

Se nator R andolph. W ha t will be the size of the wa ter impounded ?

Mr. Mitch ell. T he size o f the recreation al pool in t he one structur e 

is 190 acres.

Se nator Randolph. 190 acres?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes.

Se nator R andolph. You co uld do boat ing then?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, I believe boa ting is a pur pose in this.

Se na tor R andolph. Not wi th motorb oats bu t presum ably with 

sma ll craf t, canoes and cer tain types of rowboats? Is th at correct?

Mr. P arker. Tha t detail I don ’t believe was in the work plan, 

bu t ma ny of these lake s of th is size do allow more. Sometimes they 

have res tricte d areas fo r their use to keep them ou t of the way of 

the swimmers and wh at have you. Bu t in an addit on to the 190 acre 

lake, the re are 2,400 acres of lan d around the r ese rvo ir for the va rious 

fac ilities a nd recrea tional use fo r land. It is quite a sizable area.

Se na tor Randolph. Ha s there been a pro jec t in West Virginia of 

th is size before?

Mr. Mitch ell. Senator, I don’t have th at inf orma tio n rea dily 

ava ilab le. We can pro vid e it fo r the record.
95

Senator R andolph. I would like it fo r the record. 

[The inf orma tio n requested follow s:]

Que stions From Senator R andolph

ELK CREEK, WEST VIRGINIA

Question. Is there a Public Law 83-566 wate rshed in West Virginia which 

has a recreation development as large as or larg er than site 13 of the proposed Elk Creek Wate rshed?

Answer. Yes. Site Number 10 on Mill Creek Watershed in Jackson and 

Roane Counties has a recreation lake of 200 acres. Usage is expected to exceed 400,000 annual visitor-days.

Senator R andolph. I don ’t recall th at t here has been one.

Mr. P arker. You mean in dollars?

Se nator R andolph. No, in the size o f t he wa ter provided .

Mr. P arker. I am sure there has been one of this size in the number of structur es a nd mag nitude.

Senator R andolph. Y ou mean the 200 acres of water?

Mr. P arker. I can ’t say for sure wh eth er it was 200, bu t t here have 

been recrea tional lakes.

Mr. Mitch ell. L et us provide th at for the record.

Senator R andolph. Yes, i f you would.

[The inf orm ation requested follow s:]

Question. W’hat Public Law 83-556 recreation projects are there in West 

Virginia and what are the expected benefits?

Answer. Yes, there are seven approved Public Law 83-556 projects with 

recreation developments in West Virginia.

Watershed County

Usage annual

Lake size visitor-days

Big Ditch Run................................................................

Blakes Cre ek-Arrow Cre ek........................................

Brush Cre ek...................................................................

Kanawha Two Mi le.......................................................

Mate Cre ek.....................................................................

Mill Creek No. 10.........................................................

Upper Buffalo Cre ek....................................................

Webster...................................................

Kanawha, P u tn a m .. .. ................

Mercer.....................................................

Kanawha................................................

Mingo................. ................. ...................

Jackson, Roane.....................................

Ma rion.....................................................

65 24,600

28 21 ,000

55 35 ,100

50 86 ,000

35 42, 500

200 40 8,00 0

30 15 ,8 00

Senator Randolph. Hav e you had experien ce in We st Vi rgini a 

in the sav ing of lives by such pro jec ts being in place? Or is this just 

hoped for? Or do you have some exam ples?

Mr. Mitch ell. Si r, I don’t have any specific examples. Bu t when 

we get into any waters hed area, of course, we work with the sponsors 

in tryi ng to meet their objectives, w hethe r it be control of floodwaters 

fo r ag ric ult ural benefits or urban protection . And when we get into 

heavily developed areas, we have the cri teria , the admi nis trative 

crite ria , th at we w ant to be assured th at there is no risk to loss of life 

from a 100-year storm. Tha t is wh at we have planned this pa rti cu lar 

waters hed for.
96

But I do not have any specific exam ples of any loss of life t hat we 

have saved throug h the watersh ed pro jects in We st Vir ginia.

Senator Randolph. You do recall th at in my statem ent at the beginn ing of the he ari ng I mentioned th at We st Virgi nia , and I am 

sure oth er States, would clas sify themselves as such areas.

We have the flashflood problem. I have seen the dev astatio n 

wr ought by a flashflood, let's say at Su tto n, We st Virginia .

Are you familiar with the flashflood situatio n as it has occu rred 

in the p ast ?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir. Yo ur entire State is wh at we call hig hgrad ient streams and very subject to flashflooding.

Senator Randolph. Tha t is rig ht. An d those waters move quickly , 

in a matter of min utes, and people have a very sh ort time to att em pt 

to cope with fleeing person ally from the scene or prov idi ng p rotection 

fo r livestock or building s on farms. Is th at corr ect?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir. Tha t is correct.

Senator Randolph. D o you consider th is proje ct in wh at we w ould 

call a semiurb an area, or str ict ly an area th at is ru ra l in natur e bu t 

servin g the people in wh at we call the urban area, such as near 

Clark sburg ?

Mr. Mitchell. I think we consider this a ru ra l are a th at is urban 

in natur e. I think you could use the ter m or phras e here of rurban.

Senator Randolph. The hea dwater proje ct, however, is not fa r 

fro m where the population is more con cen trat ed, isn 't th at correct?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, th at is rig ht.

Senator Randolph. I said at the outset we had the complete coope ration of gro ups and citizens ind ivi duall y who were concerned.

Can you place in the record of the hearing those org ani zation s or 

rep resentativ es of gro ups th at have coopera ted ?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, sir ; I can. We have eig ht such gro ups th at are 

spon sors of this projec t: the city of Clark sburg , the com munity of 

Stonewoo d, the com munity of Anm oore, the com munity of Nutter 

Fo rt, the Cou nty Com missioner of Ha rri so n County, the County 

Com missioner of Ba rbou r Cou nty, the West Fo rk Soil Con servation 

Dist ric t, Ty ga rts Valley Soil Conserv ation Di str ict .

Senator R andolph. T ha t is complete c ooperation of those o rganiza ­

tion s. Because I do recog nize them and know of the work th at has 

been done.

Ha ve all the cos t-shar ing problem s been worked out before you 

came here today?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir. We asked the sponsors to sign a watershed 

wo rk pla n agreem ent th at goes throug h the particu lars, pa rti cu larly 

the cos t-sh arin g features. The y have signed th at watersh ed work 

pl an agre ement, indic ati ng th at they are in agreem ent with the pa rt 

of t he cost th at is t o be borne by oth er th an Fe de ral funds.
97

Sena tor R andolph. H ow much in Federal fun ds, and the n how 

much in the cost-shar ing by the local political subdivisions or gro ups 

th at will con trib ute?

Mr. Mitch ell. Of the $20 million total cost, Public Lawy

 566 or Federal fun ds will be app rox imately $10,600,000 or 51 perc ent. The 

oth er fun ds th at are to be born by the sponsoring local org anization 

they appro xim ate $10,107,000, or 49 per cent of the tota l.

Senator Randolph. I t is tru ly a sharing pro ject, isn ’t it?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir; it certainly is.

Senator Randolph. I t is not a 90-10 or 70-30. It is appro xim ately 

a do lla r for a dollar, isn ’t it?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir.

Senator Randolph. H ow do these local bodies raise the funds necessa ry to comply?

v Mr. Mitchell. One of the cri ter ia th at we ask for in the sponso rship is the ability to raise fun ds throug h tax ation. We do not have 

the specific pla ns here, I am not sure at this stage, as to how the y 

are goi ng to raise their funds, wh eth er it is throug h tax ati on or 

wh eth er it is issuance of bonds. We do request th at the y assure us 

th at they have this abi lity a t t his p oin t before we move on.

Senator Randolph. An d if there were an election of a subsequent 

gro up to the ma kin g of the con tract, is.tlie Federal Government obligated to continue the project?

Mr. Mitch ell. Yes, sir.

Senator Randolph. W ith the fun ds th at wou ld be provided at the 

local level?

Mr. Mitchell. Yes, sir.

Senator Randolph. Do you feel the n th at, once a pro jec t is ap ­

proved by the Sen ate and House comm ittees and you are given the 

mandate to move forw ard, th at you anticipa te no dollar pro ble m; is 

th at corr ect, e ith er at the Federal or local level?

Mr. Mitchell. Tha t is c orre ct at this point.

Senat or Randolph. T ha nk you very much. I am very app reciative 

for the time th at you have permitte d me, Mr. Ch air ma n, to talk with 

Mr. Mitchell. I know the area well. I was born in the area and it is 

very close to w here I live now. So we have been fo r m any, m any y ears 

conscious of w hat wa tershe d pro jects have me ant t o c entral West Vir- 

** gin ia, as well as to th e S tate as a whole.

If you care to, and you feel it would not encu mber the reco rd, 

Mr. Chairm an, I would like to have incl ude d the watersh ed pro jects 

th at have been institut ed in West Vi rgini a, th ei r location, and wh at 

r you feel have been the benefits th at have accrued from those projects

du ring the life of the wor k th at has been carried forward.

Senator Gravel. I will be very ha pp y to include th at in the record.

[The inform ation ref erred to follo ws :]
WEST VIRGINIA

Bla ke s Cr eek - Armour Cre ek P ro je c t (P L- 56 6) Kanawha and Putnam C ounties 

EY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - March 7, 19 66 . E st im ate d co m ple tion - 

Dece mber 1975. Ar ea - 3, 68 0 a c re s ( a l l p r iv a te ly owned ex ce pt fo r ro a d s, 

s t r e e t s , sc h o o ls , and f e d e ra l b u ild in g s ). Spon so rs - C it y of N itro , County 

C ou rt of Kanawha Cou nty, and th e C a p it o l and W es tern S o il C onse rv at io n 

D i s t r i c t s . E st im at ed t o t a l c o s t - $5 98 ,200 ($ 38 6, 80 0 PL-56 6 and $2 11 ,400 

O th er) . P rin c ip a l pr ob le m s - Flo od w at er damage to r e s i d e n t i a l , co mmercial 

p ro p e rt y , and u t i l i t i e s , and la ck of w a te r-o rie n te d r e c r e a tio n a l o p p o rt u n it i e s . Land ow ne rs hi p and use - C ro pl an d, 65 a c re s ; g ra s s la n d , 380 a c re s ; 

woo dlan d, 2,53 5 a c re s ; and urb an and m is c e ll a n e o u s, 700 a c re s (i n clu d es 

ab out 100 ac re s of 3 m il es of I n t e r s t a t e 6 4 ). The C it y of N it ro w it h a 

p o p u la ti o n of 8, 01 9 l i e s in th e w ate rs hed. The re m ai nin g p o p u la ti o n of. 

th e w at er sh ed i s an e sti m a te d 1, 100. Fa rm ing i s ver y m inor and a l l p a rt-tim e . 

Work p la n was su pp le m en te d in 1969 and tw ic e in 19 71.

P ro gre ss in Land T re atm en t. F o rty -e ig h t p e rc e n t of th e land ow ne rs in th e 

w ate rs hed, owning 58 p e rc e n t of th e la n d , a re co o p era to rs w it h th e C a p it o l 

S o il C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t . To d a te , 775 a c re s of la nd tr eatm en t m ea su re s 

ha ve be en ap p li e d com par ed to th e 70 a c re s c a lle d fo r in th e work p la n .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M eas ure s. The m u lt ip le -p u rp o se flo o d p re v en ti o n 

and re c re a tio n dam p lu s th e b a s ic r e c re a tio n f a c i l i t i e s ha ve a l l be en 

I n s ta lle d . The s t r u c t u r a l m ea su re s a re co m ple te d.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . A ll but an e sti m a te d $400 of th e av er ag e an nual 

fl o o d w ate r dam ages of $4 0,70 0 ha ve be en e li m in a te d . T o ta l b e n e f its from 

t h i s co m pl eted p r o je c t a re av era gin g an e sti m ate d $7 2,10 0 y e a rly . T o ta l 

av er ag e an nual c o s t i s e sti m a te d a t $3 5,70 0 fo r a b e n e f it-c o s t r a t i o of 

2 .0 :1 .0 . The r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l i t i e s co m pl et ed sp rin g of 1974 co n ti n u e to 

re c e iv e he av y u se . The C it y of N it ro ha s in s t a l l e d a d d itio n a l pl ay gr ou nd 

eq ui pm en t. Management of th e la k e fo r f is h in g i s bei ng done by th e West 

V ir g in ia Dep ar tm en t of N a tu ra l R eso urc es . A re c e n t ch ec k in d ic a te d th a t 

th e la k e f is h p o p u la ti o n i s in bala nce w it h goo d gr ow th .

The p ro je c t w ill be c lo sed o u t by Dece mber 31 , 19 75.

Se ptem be r 1975
WEST VIRGINIA

Big D it ch Run (PL- 56 6) W eb ster County 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A ut hor iz ed - Se ptem be r 12, 19 63. E st im at ed co m ple tion 

FY 19 77 . Ar ea - 5,7 30 a cre s (84 p e rc e n t p r iv a te ly owned, 16 p e rc e n t 

Mon on ga hela N ati o n al F o re s t). Spo ns or s - E lk S o il C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t ,

Town of Cowen, W eb ster Cou nty C ourt , and th e West V ir g in ia Dep ar tm en t of 

N atu ra l. R eso u rc es. Est im at ed t o t a l c o s t - $9 00 ,4 60 ($ 53 3, 25 0 PL-56 6 and 

$3 67 ,210 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - fl o o d w ate r and se di m en t damage to 

th e Town of Cowen and la ck of w a te r-o rie n te d r e c r e a tio n . Land ow ne rs hi p 

and use - c ro p la n d , 1,32 0 a c re s ; h ay la n d , 745 a c re s ; p a s tu re , 1, 26 5 a c re s ; 

woo dl an d, 1,89 5 a c re s ; id le , 170 a c re s ; and o th e r, 345 a c re s . Count y 

p o p u la ti o n i s 9, 80 9 w it h 9, 32 5 bein g r u r a l non-f ar m . Work p la n was su p p le ­

men ted in 19 65, 19 68 , and 197 4. In 19 74 , an envir onm en ta l as se ss m en t was 

made and a N eg at iv e D ecla ra ti o n p re p are d and p u b li sh ed re g ard in g 1 ,4 0 0 -fo o t 

e x te n sio n o f ch an nel work and i n s t a l l a t i o n of b a s ic r e c r e a tio n f a c i l i t i e s .

P ro g re ss in Land T re at m en t. F if ty -o n e p e rc e n t of th e la ndo w ne rs , own ing 

55 p e rc e n t of th e la nd in th e w ate rs h ed , a re c o o p e ra to rs w it h th e Elk S o il 

C onserv ati on D i s t r i c t . T h ir ty -o n e p e rc e n t ha ve de ve lo pe d and a re p u tt in g 

in to e f f e c t co n se rv a ti o n pla ns fo r t h e i r la n d . About 55 p e rc e n t o r 505 

a c re s of th e 925 a c re s of la nd tr e a tm e n t c a lle d fo r in th e su pp le m en te d 

wo rk p la n has bee n a p p li e d .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. The m u lt ip le -p u rp o se fl o o d p re v e n ti o n 

and r e c r e a tio n dam and 19 ,800 f e e t of st re am ch an nel work th ro ugh th e 

Town of Cowen has be en in s ta lle d . The re c r e a tio n b a s ic f a c i l i t i e s a t th e 

dam a re pla nned f o r c o n s tr u c ti o n d uri ng f i s c a l year 197 6. A c o n tr a c t fo r 

1,4 00 f e e t e x te n sio n of th e ch an nel was aw arded Ja nuar y 1975 and th e 

wo rk i s expec te d to be co m pleted in O ct obe r 19 75 . The West V ir g in ia 

Dep ar tm en t of N a tu ra l Res ou rc es a re sp o n so ri n g th e r e c r e a tio n a l dev el opm en ts . A ll la n d rig h ts ha ve be en se cu re d a t an e sti m ate d c o s t o f $1 72 ,000 

w it h $4 6,70 0 b ein g PL-56 6.

W ater sh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . Flo odw at er re d u c ti o n b e n e f its a re avera g in g 

an e sti m a te d $3 2,70 0 an n u all y . R e cre a ti o n b e n e f its w ill avera ge an 

esti m a te d $5 5, 40 0 y e a rly . T o ta l annual e sti m ate d b e n e f its w ill be $1 12 ,1 00 . 

E st im ate d an nual c o s ts w ill be $7 0,90 0 fo r a b e n e f it- c o s t r a t i o of 1 .6 :1 .0 .

Se ptem be r 1975
100

WEST VIRGINIA

Bond’s Creek (PL 566 P ro je ct) , Ri tchie County

The Pr ojec t in B ri ef. Authorized - Ap ril 25, i96 0. Completed - June 30, 1966. 

I t is an agri cult ura l watersh ed without urba ni za tio n — only small communities 

of Pik e, Highland, and Beech Grove are si tu at ed th ere in . The pri nci pal problems 

were floo dwater and sediment damages to ag ri cu lt u ra l lan ds and improvements. 

Sponsoring lo ca l or ga niza tio ns are the L it tl e Kanawha Soil Conservation D is tr ic t 

and the City of Pennsboro. Estima ted to ta l co st - $368,100 ($257,250 Fe deral 

and $110,850 lo cal) . Ben efiting landowners along Bond's Creek are maintain ing 

the channel improvement and the City of Pennsboro is op erating and ma intai ning the mu ltiple -pu rpo se st ru ctu re .

Pro gre ss in Land Tre atm ent. Pr ac tice s estim ate d to co st $106,200 are plan ned . 

Over 60 p erc ent of the watersh ed is covered under coop era tiv e agreement with 

the L it tl e Kanawha Soi l Conservation D is tr ic t. About 20 perce nt of the pl an ­

ned land tre atm ent measures have been es ta bl is hed . Woodland ha rvest cu ttin g 

has been done on 105 ac res out of 200 acres pla nne d, 327 ac res of pa stu re 

have been tr eate d out of 1000 ac res planned fo r tre atm en t. Tree pl an ting was 

done on 84 acres - only 80 ac re s were plan ned .

Progress in Str uc tu ra l Measures. The 5.8 miles of channel improvement and a 

multipurpo se dam have been completed. These two job s comprise a ll the 

st ru ctu ra l measures inc lud ed in the work plan . To tal co ns tru ction co st was 

$178,970, abou t 8 perce nt und er work plan es tim at es . The twelve acr e lake is 

being managed fo r fi sh and w ildli fe pro du cti on , in ad di tion to being op era ted 

as a floodw ater re ta rd in g st ru ct ure . Rates of co st-s ha ring fo r the dam were 

87.3 perce nt Federal and 12.7 perce nt lo cal, of the to ta l in sta ll a ti o n cost 

of about $92,000. The City of Pennsboro furn ish ed the lo cal funds fo r the 

multipurpose stru ct ur e and w il l opera te and maintain the dam.

Progress in Obtaining Easements and Righ ts-of-Way. Local spon soring or ga niza tio ns obtained a ll requ ire d lan d ri ghts invo lving some 40 pr op er tie s valued 

a t $3,900. The Bond's Creek Watershed Improvement D is tr ic t secured easements 

fo r the channel job and the City of Pennsboro alr ea dy owned the sit e of the 

multipurpos e re se rv oir .

Ef fectiven es s of P ro je ct. A very severe storm with a ra in fa ll to ta li n g 3-4 

inches occ urred on March 4, 1963. Reside nts st at ed th at run off was the gre atest they could ever remember. The channel improvement, designe d to handle 

a storm of 3 to 5 year freq uen cy, could not accommodate the fu ll flow.

Damages to crops and farm improvements was not ex tens ive; however, and was 

much le ss tha n i f the job had not been in sta ll ed . Con siderable maintenance 

was req uired along the channel banks where new ve ge tatio n had not been fu ll y 

es ta bl ishe d.

August, 1966
101

WEST VIRGINIA

Br us h Cr eek P ro je c t (PL-566) M erce r County 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t In B r ie f . A ut hor iz ed - Ju ne 21 , 19 60 . E st im at ed co m ple tion - 

FY 1977. Ar ea - 22 ,293 a cre s (e xce pt fo r s e v e ra l ver y sm all t r a c t s , a l l 

la nd i s p r iv a te ly ow ne d). Sp on so rs - South er n S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t , 

County Cou rt of M erce r Co un ty, Br ush Cr ee k Im pro veme nt D i s t r i c t , Gr een 

V al le y - Glenwood P u b li c S erv ic e D i s t r i c t , C it y of B lu e fie ld , C it y of 

P ri n c e to n , and West V ir g in ia Dep artm en t of Highw ays. E st im at ed t o t a l c o s t - 

$5 ,9 46,8 50 ($ 1,4 51,3 00 PL-566 and $4,4 95,5 50 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - 

in u n d ati o n of 500 a c re s of r e s id e n tia l an d b u sin e ss a re a s ; w ate r and se di m en t 

damage to ho u se s, g ard en s, s t r e e t s , ro a d s, and many o th e r im prov em en ts; 

p o ll u tio n of w ate r s u p p lie s , gard ens, and o th e r so u rc es of fo od ; e ro sio n 

of la n d ; fl o o d in g of 600 a cre s of v a lu a b le a g r ic u ltu r a l la nd w it h damage 

to c ro p s, s o i l s , and fix e d im prov em en ts; and in ad eq u ate p u b li c and i n d u s tr ia l 

w at er s u p p li e s . Land ow ne rshi p and use - c ro p la n d , 443 a c re s ; g ra s s la n d , 

6, 70 0 a c re s ; woo dl an d, 10 ,000 a c re s ; and urb an and m is c e ll a n e o u s, 5,15 0 

a c re s . P re se n t p o p u la ti o n of th e w at er sh ed i s e sti m a te d a t 19 ,000 w it h 

ab out 8, 00 0 in th e C it y of P ri n c e to n . The work p la n has be en su pp le m en te d 

s ix tim es - 19 63, 19 65 , 19 67 , 19 68, 19 69 , and 19 73 . Due to ch an ge s and 

de vel opm en ts , th e work p la n is bei ng su pp le m en te d in o rd er to adeq u ate ly 

me et th e o b je c ti v e s of th e p r o je c t. A f u l l en vir onm enta l im pa ct sta te m e n t 

i s bein g p re p a re d . An A rc h eo lo g ic al Su rvey ha s bee n co m pl et ed .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. Th ere a re 165 la nd ow ne rs and o p e ra to rs 

co o p era ti n g w it h th e South er n S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t . Of th e s e , 164 

ha ve de vel oped and a re im pl em en ting c o n se rv a ti o n p la n s fo r 9, 32 6 a c re s . 

S ix ty -o n e p e rc e n t of th e pl an ne d 3, 58 0 a c re s of la n d tr eatm en t ha s be en 

a p p li e d .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. C o n str u c ti o n of l a s t dam i s under way and 

i s 26 p erc en t co m ple te d. The Brush Creek chan nel work i s th e re m ai ni ng 

s t r u c tu r a l m ea su re to be in s ta lle d . C o n str u c ti o n c o s t fo r a l l s t r u c t u r a l 

m ea su re s i s esti m ate d a t $2 ,3 98,8 00.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits .

Fl oo d Damage R educt io n - The 10 dams ca n p ro v id e fl o o d s to ra g e of 

4, 84 3 a c r e - fe e t fo r av er ag e an nu al b e n e f its of $7 0, 34 0. Two a c re s 

of fl o o d p la in la nd in th e C it y of P ri n c e to n re c e n tly was so ld 

fo r $80 ,0 00 .

R e cre a ti o n - Dam No. 14 pro vid es a 5 5 -a cre la k e fo r w a te r-o ri e n te d 

re c r e a tio n . An nual v is ito r-d a y s in c ale n d ar y ear 1974 to ta le d 43 ,3 13. 

T his i s 24 p e rc e n t ov er th a t e sti m ate d in th e w at er sh ed p la n .

M un ic ip al W ater Su pp ly - Three of th e te n w at er sh ed dams a re p ro v id in g 

a d d itio n a l s to ra g e of ov er 90 0,0 00, 000 g a ll o n s fo r p u b li c w ate r su p p ly . 

T his has be en a b ig fa c to r in th e re c e n t gr ow th of th e P ri n c e to n - 

B lu e fie ld a re a .

Se ptem be r 1975
102

WEST VIRGINIA

Dave's Fo rk- Ch ristian’a Fork Watershed (P.L. 566)> Mercer County

The Proje ct in Brief . This watershed 6f U,15U acres is loc ated JuBt outside 

of Prince ton, West Virginia . Seventy percent of the area is pastu re and cropland . The pr ojec t was authorized July 7, 1957 and was completed at the end of 

fi sc al year 1962. Total cost of the pr ojec t is estimated at $278,030 ($221,472 

Federal and $56,558 non-Fed eral). I t is sponsored "by the Southern Soil.Cons ervation D is tr ic t with assis tanc e from th e Mercer County Court and the Dave’s 

Fork-Christian’s Fork Watershed Assoc iation. The major problem is the reductio n of floodwater and sediment damage to a rapidly growing urban area. The 

work plan was amended t o provide fo r an extensio n to channel improvement on 

Ch ris tia n’b Fork. The improvement st ar te d at Brush Creek and extended 1.2 

miles upstream.

Progress in land Treatment. More land trea tme nt was app lied than was planned. 

For example, 257 acr es of permanent hay were es tablish ed —100 acr es were 

planned; 350 a cre s of pastu re improvement planned—352 acres trea te d; 6 farm 

ponds planned—^0 ponds constru cted; 60 acr es of tr ee plan tin g planned—151 

acres pla nte d. About 60$ of the 115 farmers in the watershed became cooperato rs with the Southern So il Conservation D is tr ic t. ThiB covered about 70# of 

the watershed are a. Ov era ll, the watershed Is in an excelle nt Condition from 

a cons ervation standp oint.

Progress in St ru ctur al Measures. All three of the planned floodwater re ta rd ­

ing str uc tures have been con stru cted at a contract cos t of $87,000, some 2# 

under work plan estim ate s. In st al la tion of 1.2 miles of channel work was 

couple ted th is pa st year. The channel is bein g Improved through a suburban 

area of Prince ton and the coope ration of the City, u tilitie s , and the Sta te 

Road Commission has been outstan ding. Three bri dges were replaced to accommodate the new channel. U ti li ti e s have made reloca tio ns at th eir expense.

Local protec tio n works (Corps of Engineers) are also completed and the two 

Jobs Join at the Chr is tian 's Fork-Brush Creek confluence, The st ru ct ura l program i s now complete. ,

Progress in Obtaining Easements and Rights-of-w ay. The Dave’s Fo rk-C hristlan's 

Fork Watershed Assoc iation secured a ll easements req uir ed fo r the three flo odwater retard ing dams and the channel improvement. I t was necessa ry to Becure 

one floo ding ri gh t by condemnation. Dr. Daniel Hale, Pre sident of the Association, was most activ e in securing the land ri ghts . About 160 sep ara te tr acts 

of land were involved in the channel Job.

Effec tiveness of Pr oject Proved. There has not been ony r ain fa ll of su ff ic ie nt 

in te ns ity to te s t the retard in g str uc tures since completion. The program, when 

complete, is estima ted to reduce damages by 81$. There have been no flooding 

damages of any sig nific ance cince the pr oj ec t was In st al le d.

Ju ly, 1962

REVISED Decem ber, 1964
WEST VIRGINIA

Du nlo up Cr ee k P ro je c t (PL- 56 6) F a y e tt e and R ale ig h C ou nt ie s 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t In B rie f. A uth ori ze d - Ju ly 22 , 19 69 . E st im at ed co m ple tion - 

FY 19 77 . Ar ea - 31 ,5 10 a c re s (90 p e rc e n t p r iv a te ly ow ne d). Spo ns or s - 

Co unty Cou rt of F a y e tt e Co un ty and th e S outh er n S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t .

F.gr-tmat t o t a l c o s t — $2 ,7 01, 50 0 ($ 2,1 68,3 00 PL—566 and $5 33 ,200 O th er) . 

P rin c ip a l pr ob le m s — fl o o d w ate r and se di m en t dam age s to homes, g a rd e n s, 

ro a d s, b rid g e s , and hom es te ad s; e ro sio n of c r i t i c a l a re a s in clu d in g 

ro ad ban ks, s t r i p mi ne s p o il, and st re am ban ks; o v erg ra zin g of p a s tu re s ; 

and i n s u f f ic ie n t ch an nel dep th and c a p a c it y du e to se dim en t d e p o s it io n .

Land ow ne rshi p and use - 40 a cre s of cro p la n d , 736 a c re s of g ra ss la n d , 2, 30 2 

a c re s of m is cell an eo u s la n d , and 28 ,432 a c re s of f o r e s t . The tr en d is 

toward fe wer farm s and fe wer a c re s per fa rm . F o re s t sta n d s occup y 90 

p e rc e n t of th e w at er sh ed a re a , a l l of which i s p r iv a te ly owne d. Work pla n 

was su pp le m en te d in 19 73. A f u l l envir onm en ta l im pa ct st a te m e n t i s bei ng 

p re p are d . An A rc h eo lo g ic al Survey ha s be en co m pl et ed .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. Th ere a re 53 la nd ow ne rs and o p e ra to rs co o p era ti n g 

w it h th e Sout her n S o il C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t . Of t h is numb er, 40 ha ve 

de vel oped and a re im pl em en ting c o n serv a ti o n p la n s . Ab out 55 p e rc e n t of 

2, 39 6 a c re s of pla nned la nd tr eatm en t ha s be en a p p li e d .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M eas ure s. The S ta te O ffi c e of th e F e d e ra l- S ta te 

R e la ti o n s ha s fu rn is h e d $1 00 ,000 to th e F a y e tt e Co unty Cou rt fo r la n d - 

r ig h ts . The F a y e tt e Count y Commission ha s ag re ed to p ro v id e an a d d itio n a l 

$1 50 ,0 00 . Two a tt o rn e y s ha ve be en emplo yed and a re se c u ri n g n ecessa ry la n d - 

r ig h ts fo r th e Glen Je an ch annel. Cou rt s u i t s to condemn ne ed ed la n d rig h ts 

a re bei ng p re pare d fo r 40 p r o p e rtie s . Aw ard ing of c o n tra c t fo r th e Gl en 

Je an ch an nel i s ex pec te d in Ju ly 1976.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . Av era ge an nual flo o d damage of $2 14 ,000 w ill 

be re duce d by 76 p e rc e n t w it h in s t a l l a t i o n of th e pla nned p r o je c t. The 

b e n e f it-c o s t r a t i o i s 1 .6 :1 .

Se ptem be r 1975
104

WEST VIRGINIA

Elk Two mile Cr eek P ro je c t (PL- 56 6) Kanawha County 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t In B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - A p ri l 1, 1969. Ar ea - 8, 45 0 a c re s 

( e s s e n tia lly a l l p r iv a te ly owned). Spo ns or s - C a p it o l S o il C onse rv ati on 

D is tr ic t and Kanawha Co un ty C ou rt . E st im at ed t o t a l c o s t $3 ,0 45 ,7 00 

($ 1,7 88,1 00 PL-56 6 and $1 ,2 57, 600 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - fl o o d w ate r 

damage to r e s id e n tia l and commercial e s ta b li s h m e n ts , and ro ads and b rid g e s . 

Land ow ne rship and use - C ro pla nd, 29 a c re s ; p e re n n ia l hay , 90 a c re s ; 

p a s tu re , 315 a c re s ; f o r e s t la n d , 7,51 9 a c r e s ; i d l e , 60 a c re s ; and urb an,

437 a c re s . Abo ut 2, 10 0 a c re s of th e w at er sh ed a re in th e c ity lim its of 

C h a rl esto n . The work p la n was su pp le men ted May 1972 to updat e c o s ts , 

d e le te th e C it y of C h a rl esto n as a sp o n so r, and in c lu d e th e p ro v is io n s of 

th e Un ifo rm R e lo c ati o n A ssis ta n c e and R ea l P ro p e rt y P o lic ie s Ac t of 1970 

(PL 91-6 46). A f u l l en vir onm en ta l as se ss m ent i s bein g made of th e p r o je c t 

to det er m in e deg re e of im pac t on th e en vir onm en t. An A rc h eo lo g ic al Su rvey 

ha s be en made.

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. About 71 p e rc e n t of 368 a c re s of th e 515 a c re s 

of la nd tr eatm en t m ea su re s c a ll e d fo r in th e work p la n ha ve be en a p p li e d .

Thi s work was ac co m plish ed by 24 of th e 60 r u r a l la nd ow ne rs in th e w ate rs hed. 

The 24 la nd ow ne rs a re co o p era to rs w it h th e C a p it o l S o il C onse rv at io n 

D i s t r i c t and 17 ha ve and a re im pl em en tin g c o n se rv a ti o n p la n s .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. S ite 12 , th e f i r s t of s ix pla nned fl o o d w ate r 

re ta rd in g dam s, i s sc hed ule d fo r co m ple tion O ct ob er 19 75. C o n str u c ti o n of 

S ite 13 i s ab out 34 p e rc e n t co m pl et ed . R e lo c ati o n of th e p u b li c se co ndar y 

ro ad arou nd th e dam was in clu d ed in th e c o n tr a c t. T his ha s re s u lte d in 

le s s c o s t fo r th e dam and ro ad re lo c a tio n . A ll c o s t fo r ro ad re lo c a tio n is 

pro vid ed by West V ir g in ia Dep artm en t of High wa ys.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . The p ro je c t when in s t a l l e d w ill re duce 

esti m ate d av era ge an nual fl o o d damages of $9 2,46 9 by $8 3,78 3 or 91 p e rc e n t.

The p ro je c t w ill p r o te c t p ro p e rt y e sti m ate d in 1967 to be val ued a t $15 

m illio n . Bec au se of ru ra l- u rb a n ty pe of w ate rs h e d , sp onso rs a re pa yi ng 

fo r I n s t a l l a t i o n of a 6 -in c h pip e th ro ug h ea ch dam w it h a hydra nt below th e 

dam to pro vid e a so u rc e of w at er fo r f i r e p r o te c tio n .

Se ptem be r 1975
105

WEST VIRGINIA

Hannon Cr ee k P ro je c t (PL- 56 6) Hanco ck and Brook e C ounties 

(W ashing ton Cou nt y, P en nsy lv ania )

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - March 25, 19 65 . Area - 24 ,3 50 a cre s 

(1 3, 350 in W as hing ton Co un ty, P en n sy lv an ia ; 11 ,0 00 in Brook e and Han cock 

C o u n ti es, Wes t V ir g in ia ). Sp on so rs - N ort her n Pan ha nd le S o il C onse rv at io n 

D i s t r i c t , C it y of W ei rt on, Was hing ton County Com m is sion er s, P en nsy lv ania 

F is h Co mm iss ion , Sm ith Tow nship S u p e rv is o rs, W as hing ton County S o il 

C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t . E stim at ed t o t a l co st - $2 ,7 20 ,9 00 ($ 1,8 62,0 00 PL-56 6 

and $8 58 ,900 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - fl oo d w ate r damage to th e re s id e n ­

t i a l , co m m er ci al , and in d u s tr ia l e s ta b li s h m e n ts lo c a te d in th e down stream 

p o rti o n of th e flo o d p la in . Also damaged a re num ero us ro ad s and b ri d g es 

th a t a re fre q u e n tl y in u n d ate d . Land ow ne rs hi p and us e - f o r e s t, 18 ,0 20 

a c re s ; s t r i p s p o il a re a , 2,43 5 a c re s ; ur ban de ve lo pm en t, 2, 19 0 a c re s ; 

a g r ic u ltu r a l u se , 1,70 5 a c re s . More th an 50 p e rc e n t of th e 11 ,000 a c re s of 

th e w at er sh ed in West V ir g in ia is w it h in th e c o rp o ra te lim its of th e C it y 

of W ei rt on. The wo rk p la n was su pp le m en te d November 1971 to in clu d e 

p ro v is io n s of th e Uniform R e lo c ati o n A ct , PL 91 -6 46 .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. In West V irg in ia , 76 of th e 100 la nd ow ne rs and 

o p e ra to rs a re co o p era ti n g w it h th e N ort her n Pan dh an dl e S o il C onse rv at io n 

D i s t r i c t . Of th e s e , 61 ha ve de ve lo pe d and a re im pl em en tin g co n se rv a ti o n 

p la n s fo r 3,7 40 a c re s . About 2, 03 2 a c re s of la n d tr eatm en t m ea su re s ha ve 

be en a p p li e d . T his ex ce ed s th e t o t a l pl an ne d fo r West V ir g in ia .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. A ll s ix of th e pl an ne d fl oodw ate r re ta rd in g 

dams in West V ir g in ia we re co m pl et ed in 19 74. They ha ve fl o o d sto ra g e 

c a p a c it y of 1, 13 4 a c r e - f e e t.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . When co m ple te ly i n s t a l l e d , av er ag e an nual fl o o d 

dam ages of $1 06 ,9 60 w ill be re duc ed by ab out 91 p e rc e n t. S ite PA-481 

lo c a te d in P ennsy lv an ia w ill p ro vid e 97.8 m illio n g a ll o n s of w ate r fo r 

m unic ip al use and a f i f t y - a c r e la k e fo r f is h in g . A ll dams op era te d 

s a t i s f a c t o r i l y d u ri n g th e fla s h fl o o d ove r th e La bo r Day wee kend in th e 

N ort her n Pan ha nd le of th e S ta te .

Se ptem ber 1975
WEST VIRGINIA

Kanawha Twomile Cr eek P ro je c t (P L- 56 6) Kanawha County 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t In B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - A p ri l 1, 19 69 . E st im ate d co m ple tion - 

Unknown. Ar ea - 15 ,3 72 a c re s ( a l l p r iv a te ly owned excep t fo r ro a d s, s t r e e t s 

sc h o o ls , and f e d e ra l b u ild in g s ) . Sp on so rs - C a p it o l S o il C onse rv ati on 

D i s t r i c t , Kanawha Co un ty C o u rt , and R eg io nal De ve lopm en t A u th o ri ty of 

C h a rl e sto n . E st im at ed t o t a l c o s t - $1 ,8 96, 50 0 ($ 1,1 29,3 00 PL-566 and 

$7 67 ,200 O th e r). P rin c ip a l prob lems - Flo odw at er damage to r e s id e n tia l and 

commercial e s ta b li s h m e n ts , ro a d s, and b rid g e s in th e flo o d p la in , and th e 

la ck of r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l i t i e s . Land ow ne rs hi p and u se - A pp ro xi m at el y 

77 p erc en t i s in f o r e s t co v er. About 3, 00 0 a c re s a re in th e c ity lim its of 

C h a rl esto n . The work p la n was su pp lemen ted in Au gu st 1970 to in clu d e th e 

R eg io nal De velopm ent A u th o ri ty of C h arl esto n as one of th e lo c a l sp onsori ng 

o rg a n iz a ti o n s. At th e re q u e st of lo c a l S ponso rs , th e p ro je c t was pla ced in 

in a c tiv e s ta tu s . As of F eb ru ar y 15, 1975 a l l te c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e un de r 

PL-566 was te rm in a te d .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. At th e tim e a s s is ta n c e was te rm in a te d , of th e 

110 o p e ra ti n g u n its of la nd in th e w ate rs h ed , 60 were c o o p e ra to rs w it h th e 

C a p it o l S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t , and 41 had de vel ope d and were im plem en tin g c o n serv a ti o n p la n s fo r th e ir la n d . Of th e 3, 17 0 a c re s of la nd tr e a tm e n t 

m ea su re s p la nned, ab out 72 p e rc e n t ha ve be en a p p li e d .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. No s t r u c t u r a l m ea su re s wer e in s t a l l e d .

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . Land tr eatm en t m ea su re s a p p li e d a re p ro v id in g 

an esti m ate d $700 an n u all y in fl o o d p re v en ti o n b e n e f its . T hi s i s in 

a d d it io n to re d u c ti o n of e ro sio n and se d im e n ta ti o n .

Se ptem be r 1975
WEST VIRGINIA

Mate Cr ee k P ro je c t (PL- 56 6) Mingo Cou nty 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - March 16 , 19 72 . E st im at ed co m ple tion - 

FY 19 79. Ar ea - 10 ,4 80 a c re s . Spo ns or s - Guyan S o il C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t , 

Mingo County C o u rt , and C it y of Matewan. E st im ate d t o t a l c o st - $6 ,1 61 ,0 00 

($ 4,5 99,3 00 PL-56 6 and $1,5 61, 700 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lems - fl oodw ate r 

and se dim en t damage to r e s id e n tia l and co mmer cial e s ta b li s h m e n ts , ro a d s, 

and b rid g e s . A no th er pr ob lem is th e la ck of w ate r- b ase d re c re a tio n . The 

100-y ea r fr eq uency fl o o d would damage 258 home s, 42 b u s in e s s e s , 8 sc h o o ls , 

and 4 ch u rc h es. Land ow ne rs hi p and us e - f o r e s t , 9,0 61 a c re s ; p a s tu re , 77 

a c re s ; and m is c e ll a n e o u s, 1,34 2 a c re s . The m is ce ll an e o u s ac re age in clu d es 

th e urb an a re a s , ro a d s, an d s t r i p mine a re a s . The only fa rm in g in th e 

w at er sh ed i s on a p a rt-tim e b a s is . Matewan i s th e only in c o rp o ra te d town 

in th e w ate rs hed. The w at er sh ed is one of th e m aj or coal- p ro d u cin g a re a s 

o f th e U nited S ta te s . O v e ra ll p o p u la ti o n of th e w at er sh ed i s ap pro xim at el y 

4,6 00 p ers o n s. The work p la n was su pp le m en te d November 1972 to in clu d e 

p ro v is io n s of th e Un ifo rm R elo cati o n A ct , PL 91 -6 46 . The sp onso rs ha ve 

re q u e ste d th a t a p u b li c w ate r su pp ly be ad ded to one of th e s tr u c tu r e s .

A f u l l envir onm en ta l as se ss m en t and im pa ct sta te m e n t w i l l be made. An 

A rc h eo lo g ic al Su rvey ha s bee n co m pl et ed .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. Land tr eatm en t m ea su re s a re pl an ne d fo r 276 

ac re s of w at er sh ed la n d . F ifte e n land ow ne rs in th e w at er sh ed a re co o p era ti n g 

w it h th e Guyan S o il C onse rv at io n D i s tr ic t w it h 12 ha vin g de ve lo pe d and a re 

im pl em en ting co n se rv a ti o n p la n s.

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M eas ure s. The s t r u c t u r a l m ea su re s c o n s is t of th re e 

fl oodw ate r r e ta rd in g s tr u c tu r e s , one m u lt ip le -p u rp o se fl oodw ate r re ta rd in g 

and re c re a tio n s tr u c tu r e , and ap pro xim at el y 22 ,0 00 lin e a r f e e t of st re am 

ch an nel work. The m u lt ip le -p u rp o se s tr u c tu r e i s pl an ned to pro vid e a 

3 5 -a cre la k e and b a s ic r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l i t i e s . G eo lo gic in v e s ti g a tio n 

was co m pl eted fo r S ite 3. An aba ndoned co al mine was en co unte re d a t S ite 3 

which n e c e s s ita te d moving i t do wn str eam. G eo lo gi c in v e s tig a tio n i s under way 

fo r S ite s 1, 2 , and 4.

W ater sh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . The p ro je c t w i l l re duce av era ge an nual fl ood 

damage of $2 87 ,900 by ove r 76 p e rc e n t. M u lt ip le -p u rp o se S ite 1 w ill pro v id e 

33 ,0 00 an nual v is ito r -d a y s fo r r e c re a tio n p u rp ose s.

Se ptem be r 1975
108

WEST VIRGINIA

M il l Cr eek P ro je c t (PL-566 ) Ja ckso n and Roa ne C ounties 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - Ju ne 29 , 19 71 . E st im at ed co m ple tion - 

FY 197 9. Ar ea - 12 3, 25 0 a c re s ( a l l p r iv a te ly o r i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y owned 

ex ce pt fo r th e 376 a c re Ce da r Lakes S ta te Camp and C onf er en ce C e n te r) .

Sp on so rs - W es tern and L i t t l e Kanawha S o il C onserv ati o n D i s t r i c t s , Ja ck so n 

Cou nty C ourt , C it y of R ip le y , and West V ir g in ia Dep ar tm en t of N atu ra l 

R es ourc es . E st im at ed t o t a l c o st - $7,5 96 ,0 00 ($ 5,2 54,1 00 PL-566 and 

$2 ,3 41 ,9 00 O th e r). P rin c ip a l prob lems - fre q u e n t fl o o d in g and se di m en t

damage to 376 p ro p e rtie s in c lu d in g a g r ic u ltu r a l la nds and im pr ov em en ts, »

re sid e n c e s, b u s in e s s e s , ro ads (8 m ile s ), g ard en s, b rid g e s , and u t i l i t i e s

p ri m a ri ly in th e R ip le y a re a ; la ck of w ate r- b ase d r e c r e a tio n ; in ad eq u ate

w at er su pply fo r R ip le y ; and d e c li n in g f i s h e r i e s . Land ow ne rs hi p and use -

f o r e s t, 58 p e rc e n t; c ro p la n d , 2 p e rc e n t; g ra s s la n d , 32 p e rc e n t; i d le ,

6 p e rc e n t; and m is c e ll a n e o u s, 2 p e rc e n t. P re se n t p o p u la ti o n of th e w at ers hed 

i s 7,0 00, w it h ab out 3, 50 0 in th e C it y of R ip le y . The m ajor a g r ic u ltu r a l 

e n te rp ris e in Ja ck so n Co un ty is p ro d u cti o n of liv e s to c k and liv e s to c k 

p ro d u c ts . The work p la n was su pp lemen ted Ju ne 1972 to in c lu d e p ro v is io n s 

of th e Un ifo rm R e lo c a ti o n A ct, PL 91 -6 46 , and update c o s ts . An A rc h eo lo g ic al 

Su rve y has be en co m ple te d.

P ro gre ss in Land T re atm en t. Th ere a re 414 la nd ow ne rs and o p e ra to rs co o p era ti n g 

w it h th e L i t t l e Kanawha and W es tern S o il C onserv ati o n D i s t r i c t s . Of th e s e ,

279 ha ve dev el op ed and a re im plem en tin g co n se rv a ti o n p la n s on 40 ,2 85 a c re s .

Abo ut 82 p erc en t of th e pla nned 10 ,115 a c re s of la nd tr e a tm e n t ha s be en 

a p p li e d .

P ro gre ss in S tru c tu r a l M eas ure s. C o n str u c ti o n of th e f i r s t darn a t S ite 4 

is ab ou t 26 p e rc e n t co m ple te d. A c o n tra c t fo r S ite 5 i s ex pec te d to be 

awarded e a rly in 19 76. P la nnin g and d esig n in g fo r th e la rg e m u lt ip le - 

pu rp ose dam a t S ite 13 i s co n ti n u in g w it h th e West V ir g in ia Dep ar tm en t of 

N atu ra l R eso urc es . G eo lo gic in v e s ti g a tio n of m u lt ip le -p u rp o se S ite 10 was 

co m pl et ed .

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . The p ro je c t w ill re duce th e av er ag e an nual 

fl o o d damages of $1 75 ,700 by ab ou t 97 p e rc e n t. Over 60 0, 00 0,0 00 g a ll o n s 

of w ate r w ill be ad ded to S ite 13 to pro v id e a d d itio n a l fu tu re w ate r su pply 

fo r th e C it y of R ip le y and a d jo in in g a re a s . The two m u lt ip le -p u rp o se fl o o d 

p re v en ti o n and r e c r e a tio n dams w ill pro v id e r e c r e a tio n o p p o rt u n it y to 

40 8,50 0 v i s i t o r s a n n u a ll y .

Se ptem be r 1975
109

WEST VIRGINIA

Polk Creek (PL 566 Pr oj ec t), Lewis County

The Pro ject in Brief . Authorized - July 31, 1961. Completion d ate - Juno 

30, 1968. Watershed are a is 7p

280 ac res, es se nt ia lly a ll pr ivately owned. 

Sponsors inclu de the West Fork So il Conservation D is tr ic t and the County 

Court of Lewis County. Estimated to ta l cost - $1,066,2*00 ($858,000 PL 566 

and $208,!*00 ot he r). Princ ipa l problems - floodwater and sediment damages 

to ag ricu ltu ra l lands and to parts of the City of Wsston and suburban are as. 

Present land use - 2*3% pastu re, 2,0% woodland, 5% cropland, and 12% miscellan eous .

Progress in land Treatment. Land trea tme nt prac tic es cos ting $67,200 were 

planned. Typical of the se practices are pas ture treatm ent, 2*00 acres 

planned and 2*80 acres accomplished; tr s s plan tin g, 300 acres planned ar.d 

2*12* acre s planted; 2 miles of fencing for protec tio n of woodland with 3.7 

miles con structed . Overall, 198 percent of the pr ac tic es planned have been 

in sta ll ’d. Thia project is one of the most outs tand ing in the State in 

estab lis hin g the planned land treatment we ll ahead of schedule. There were 

375 acres of disturbed area in str ip mining for co al. Exc ellent progress 

in stab iliz in g th is at ri p mined ars a has been made. The watershed area 

includes stme 89 farmers - 70 percent ore cooperators with the West Fork 

Soil Conservation D is tr ic t.

Progress in St ru ctur al Measures. Eight floodwater retar ding str uc tu res were 

in st al le d at a contract cos t of about $593,600. The State Road Commission has 

made extensive road reloca tio ns at four stru ctur e si te s to permit dam in st alla tion s. Road changes were made at si te s 7, 8, 9 and 13. The Lewis County 

Court is maintaining the str uc tu res.

Progress in Obtaining Eascn.^rts ar.d Rlghts-of-Way. The to ta l land ri ght s 

req uired tue estimated to have cost about $122,800. All of the ri ghts have 

non been secured. U ti li ti e s, str ip mine op erato rs, and highway off ic ia ls 

have cooperated in making arrangements for stru ctur e in st al la tions. The 

West Fork So il Conservation D is tric t was instrumental in obtaining the 

necessary lan ds. The D is tr ic t purchased sn en tire farm for ons sit e . The 

Sta te So il Conservation Committee as sis ted the D is tr ic t by furnis hin g about 

$20,000 to acquire Si te 13.

Effectiveness of Pr ojec t. When the pr oject has bean in st al le d, average 

annual damages w ill be reduced by 83 percent. Flooding dsmage to the City 

of Weston, caused by Polk Creek, w ill be su bs ta nt ia lly reduced (Polk Creek 

affe ct s almost one-fourth of the Ci ty). However, the lower end of Polk 

Creek affect ed by backwater from the West Fork River w ill not be sign ific an tly 

improved.

September, 1968

i
110

WEST VIRGINIA

Pond Run P ro je c t (PL- 56 6) Wood County 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t In B r ie f . A ut hor iz ed - May 28 , 19 70. E st im at ed co m ple ti on - 

FY 19 78 . Area - 4,4 30 ( a l l un de r p r iv a te or m u n ic ip al ow ner sh ip ).

Spo ns or s - C it y of V ie nn a, C it y of P a rk e rs b u rg , Co un ty Cou rt of Wood 

Co un ty, and L i t t l e Kanawha S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t . E st im at ed t o t a l 

c o st - $1,1 84,8 00 ($ 95 4, 90 0 PL-566 and $2 29 ,900 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s 

Flo od w at er and se dim en t damage to home s, g ard en s, ro a d s, b rid g e s , p u b li c 

u t i l i t i e s , and hom es te ad s; ero sio n of c r i t i c a l a re a s in c lu d in g stre am ba nk s 

and ur ba n de ve lopm en t a re a s ; o v erg ra zin g of p a s tu re s ; in s u f f ic ie n t ch an nel 

de pth and c a p a c it y du e to se di m en t d e p o s iti o n . Lan d ow ne rshi p and use — 

urb an, 43 p e rc e n t; woo dlan d, 38 p e rc e n t; and g ra s s la n d , 19 p e rc e n t.

Fa nn ing i s v ery m inor an d m os tly on a p a rt-tim e b a s is . The re a re on ly 

ab ou t 12 farm s c o n s is tin g of ab ou t 1, 00 0 a c re s in th e w at er sh ed w it h only 

two bei ng f u ll- tim e o p e ra ti o n s . F o rt y -s e v en la nd ow ne rs a re co o p era to rs 

w it h th e L i t t l e Kanawha S o il C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t and 38 ha ve de ve lo pe d 

and a re im pl em en ting co n se rv a ti o n p la n s on 1, 27 5 a c re s . The work p la n was 

su pp le men ted in 1972 to add p ro v is io n s of th e Un ifo rm R e lo c ati o n A ssis ta n c e 

and Rea l P ro p e rt y A c q u is it io n P o lic ie s Act of 1970 (PL 91-6 46). A f u l l 

en vir onm en ta l ass ess m ent and im pa ct sta te m e n t is bein g p re p are d .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. P ro g re ss co n ti n u es to be sl ow . To d a te , 58 

a c re s of la nd tr eatm en t m ea su re s ha ve be en a p p li e d . F o rt y -s e v en of th e 

60 land ow ne rs in th e w at er sh ed a re co o p era to rs w it h th e s o i l c o n se rv a ti o n 

d i s t r i c t in v o lv in g 2, 79 4 a c re s , or 63 p e rc e n t, of th e w ate rs hed.

P ro gre ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. The C it y of Vienn a s u i t a g a in s t th e 

p r in c ip a l land ow ne r to p erm it c o n s tr u c ti o n of th e one pla nned fl oo d w ate r 

re ta rd in g dam i s co n ti n u in g w it h f i n a l re s o lu tio n ex pec te d by la t e 19 75.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . The in s ta lle d pla nned p ro je c t w ill re duce 

p re se n t e sti m a te d avera g e an nua l fl o o d damage of $2 19 ,000 by $2 08 ,000 o r 

ab out 95 p e rc e n t. The b e n e f it-c o s t r a t i o i s e sti m ate d to be 5 .1 to 1.

Se ptem be r 1975
WEST VIRGINIA

P ric k e tt Creek P ro je c t (PL-566) M arion and T ay lo r C ounties 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - November 5, 19 73. E st im at ed co m ple tion - 

FY 19 78 . Ar ea - 15 ,5 80 a c re s . Spo ns or s - M arion Co unty Cou rt and th e 

Mo nong ah ela and T y g art s V all ey S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t s . E st im at ed 

t o t a l c o s t - $1,5 61, 400 ($ 1,2 07,7 00 PL-566 and $3 53 ,7 00 O th e r). P rin c ip a l 

pr ob le m s - fre q u e n t flo o d in g and se dim en t damage to re s id e n c e s , b u sin e sse s, 

ro a d s, b rid g e s , la w ns, g ard en s, and u t i l i t i e s i s th e pri m ar y pr ob lem .

Some fl o o d in g and se di m en t damage occ urs to a g r i c u l t u r a l la nd and th e re 

i s a la c k of f is h in g o p p o rtu n it ie s . Se dimen t r e s u ltin g from ero sio n 

t o t a l s 13 ,8 40 to n s an n u all y fro m th e w ate rs h ed . The 100 -y ea r fr eq ue nc y 

flo o d wo uld In undate 134 a c re s of la nd and im prov em en ts val ued a t $4,9 39,8 00. 

Land ow ne rs hi p and use - A ll la nd is in p r iv a te ow ner sh ip . C ro pla nd , 315 

a c re s ; g ra s s la n d , 7, 16 0 a c re s ; wo od land , 7, 47 5 a c re s ; and m is ce ll an e o u s,

630 a c re s . The re a re 73 fa rm s in th e w ate rs h e d . Ab out 40 p erc en t of th e 

w at er sh ed is un de r co o p e ra ti v e ag reem en t w it h th e two s o i l co n serv a ti o n 

d i s t r i c t s .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. Land tr eatm en t i s pl an ned fo r 5, 65 8 a c re s of 

w at er sh ed la n d . E st im at ed c o s t is $1 47 ,100 ($ 35 ,6 00 PL-566 and $1 11 ,500 

o th e r ). F iv e hu nd re d e ig h ty a cre s or ab out 10 p e rc e n t of th e pl an ned la nd 

tr e a tm e n t m ea su re s ha ve be en a p p li e d .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. C o n sis ts of one fl o o d w ate r re ta rd in g 

s tr u c tu r e , ab out 5,0 70 f e e t of le v e e , 600 f e e t of c o n c re te flo o d w a ll , and 

ab out 1, 36 0 f e e t o f ch an nel wo rk. C o n str u c ti o n c o s t i s an esti m ate d 

$8 71 ,0 00 . G eo lo gic in v e s ti g a tio n of th e dam s i t e is sc hed ule d fo r e a rly 

19 76 .

W ater sh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . E st im at ed av era ge an nual fl o o d damages of 

$1 23 ,900 w ill be re duc ed by ab ou t 67 p e rc e n t. Se di m en t le av in g th e 

w at er sh ed w ill be re du ce d by ab ou t 35 p e rc e n t or 5, 05 0 to ns an n u all y .

A 3 0 -a cre se di m en t la k e w ill pro vid e o p p o rtu n it ie s fo r a wa rm -w ater f is h e ry 

fo r ab out 3,8 00 annual v is ito r -d a y s .

Se ptem be r 1975
WEST VIRGINIA

Upper B uff alo Creek P ro je c t (PL- 56 6) Marion County 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B rie f. A uth ori ze d - Au gu st 19 , 1966. E st im at ed co m pl et io n 

FY 1979. Ar ea - 45 ,9 14 a c re s (a lm os t a l l i s p r iv a te ly ow ned). Spo ns or s - 

C it y of *M an ning ton, Marion County C ourt , West V ir g in ia Dep artm en t of 

N atu ra l R eso urc es , and th e Mo non gah ela S o il C onserv ati on D i s t r i c t . E s tima ted t o t a l c o st - $5,6 34 ,3 29 ($ 3, 711 ,5 75 PL-56 6 and $1 ,9 22 ,7 54 O th er) . 

P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - aver ag e an nu al fl o o d damage to r e s i d e n t i a l , co m m er ci al , 

ro ad s, b rid g e s , u t i l i t i e s , and a g r ic u ltu r a l la nd to ta lin g $2 54 ,1 40 ; la nd 

tr eatm en t and s t a b il i z a t i o n of w at er sh ed la n d ; and la c k of w ate r- base d 

re c re a tio n o p p o rtu n it ie s . Land ow ne rship and use — T he re a re 450 u n its of 

la nd in th e w ate rs h ed . Two hu nd red th ir ty - e ig h t a re co o p era to rs w it h th e 

Mo non gah ela S o il C onse rv ati on D i s tr ic t. Of th is nu mber, 177 ha ve de vel op ed 

and a re im pl em en ting c o n serv a ti o n pla n s on 15 ,533 a c re s . Land us e i s ab out 

2,98 0 a cre s cro p la n d ; 7, 56 0 a cre s g ra ss la n d ; 34 ,454 a c re s wo od land ; and 

920 a c re s m is c e ll a n e o u s. The work pla n was su pp le m en te d in March 1974 to 

In cl ude p ro v is io n s of th e Un ifo rm R elo cati o n A ssis ta n c e and Rea l P ro p e rt y 

A c q u is it io n Ac t of 1970 (PL 91 -6 46) . A co m pl et e en vir onm en ta l as se ss m en t 

and im pa ct st a te m e n t a re bein g p re pare d.

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm ent. A t o ta l of 4, 88 3 a c re s of la nd tr eatm en t 

m ea su res ha ve be en a p p li e d to cro pla nd, g ra ss la n d , woo dlan d, and m is ce ll an e o u s 

la nd use com pared to 6, 33 0 acre s c a ll e d fo r in th e work pla n fo r ab ou t 77 

p e rc e n t co m ple ti on.

P ro gre ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. C o n str u c ti o n of th re e of th e 12 dams has 

be en co m ple te d. In co o p era ti o n w ith th e West V ir g in ia Dep artm en t of N atu ra l 

R eso urc es , a c o n tr a c t fo r S ite 4 m u lt ip le -p u rp o se fl o o d p re v en ti o n and 

re c re a tio n dam i s sc hedule d du ri ng FY 19 76. T o ta l c o s t fo r s tr u c tu r a l 

m ea su res is an e sti m ate d $5 ,3 02 ,3 00 w it h sp onso rs p ro v id in g $1,6 78,8 00.

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . The p r o je c t, when i n s t a l l e d , w ill re duce th e 

pni-im ated av er ag e an nual fl o o d damage of $2 54 ,140 by ab ou t 95 p e rc e n t.

More th an 600 la nd ow ne rs w ill be d ir e c tly b e n e fite d . W ate r- o ri en te d 

r e c re a tio n o p p o rtu n it ie s w ill be pro vid ed fo r 15 ,8 00 an nual v i s i t o r s .

Se ptem be r 1975
113

WEST VIRGINIA

Upp er Dec ke rs Cr ee k P ro je c t (PL-566 ) P re sto n and M on on ga lia C ounties 

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - Ju ly 17 , 19 63 . E st im at ed co m pl et io n - 

FY 19 76. Area - 19 ,9 40 a c re s ( a l l but 400 a c re s a re p riv a te ly ow ned). 

Spo ns or s - Mo nongahela S o il C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t and th e West V ir g in ia 

D ep ar tm en t of N a tu ra l R eso urc es. E st im at ed t o t a l c o s t - $9 87 ,00 0 

($ 76 9, 70 0 PL-566 and $2 17 ,300 O th er) . P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - fl ood damage 

to 1,12 9 a c re s of flo o d p la in wh ich in c lu d e s 890 a c re s of good a g r ic u ltu r a l 

la n d , 35 re s id e n c e s , 5 .5 m il e s of ra ilro a d w it h 10 b rid g e s , and 4.5 m il es 

of p u b li c ro ad w it h 12 b rid g e s . Est im at ed t o t a l v alu e of p ro p ert y su b je c t 

to flo o d in g is $1,1 00,0 00. Land ow ne rship and u se - Land us e i s cro p la n d , 

1, 60 5 a c re s ; h ay la n d , 1, 79 0 a c re s ; p a s tu re , 4, 21 0 a c re s ; wo od land , 9,83 6 

a c re s ; and m is c e ll a n e o u s, 2, 49 9 a c re s . The re a re ab out 192 u n its of la nd 

In th e w ate rs hed. E ig hty -t w o a re co o p era to rs w it h th e Mo nonga hela S o il 

C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t and ha ve de ve lo pe d and a re im pl em en ting co n serv a ti o n 

p la n s fo r 6, 23 0 a c re s . The pl an ned p ro je c t i s com ple te ly in s ta lle d and 

w i l l be clo sed out in Dece mber 197 5.

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. The amount of la nd tr e a tm e n t ha s ex ce ed ed th a t 

c a lle d fo r in th e wo rk p la n . T hi s in clu d es ove r 6, 000 a c re s of g ra ss la n d , 

3, 00 0 a c re s of cro p la n d , and 1,00 0 ac re s of wo odlan d hav in g re ceiv ed la nd 

tr e a tm e n t.

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M eas ure s. The pl an ned s t r u c t u r a l pro gram in clu ded 

fiv e fl oodw ate r r e ta rd in g dams , two f is h and w ild lif e s tr u c tu r e s (m it ig a ti o n 

m easu re s) , and 7. 2 m il e s of ch an nel m o d if ic a ti o n . C o n str u c ti o n of a l l 

s tr u c tu r a l m ea su re s i s now co m pl et ed . The se ve n s tr u c tu r e s plu s ch an ne l 

m o d if ic a ti o n c o s t over $7 50 ,0 00 .

W atersh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . T hi s co mpleted p r o je c t i s p ro v id in g av er ag e 

an nual fl o o d damage re d u c ti o n b e n e fits of $34,8 78. T his re p re s e n ts a 97 

p e rc e n t re d u c ti o n in t o t a l avera ge an nu al fl o o d dam age . An a d d it io n a l 

b e n e f it from th e p r o je c t which was not in th e o r ig in a l p la n co nc er ns th e 

de ve lopm en t of a p u b li c w ate r su ppl y from one of th e s in g le -p u rp o se r e ta rd ­

in g dams fo r th re e r u r a l co m m un itie s. Q u a li ty of th e w ate r is e x c e ll e n t 

and su pply is s u f f ic ie n t to mee t a l l fo re s e e a b le need s. The m it ig a ti o n 

and re ta rd in g dams p ro v id e in c id e n ta l r e c r e a tio n b e n e f its of $4 ,647 

a n n u a ll y .

Se ptem be r 1975
WEST VIRGINIA

Upper Grave Creek (PL 566 Pro je ct ), Marshall County

The Pr oj ec t in B ri ef. Authorized - January 29, 1957- Pr oj ec t was completed on 

Deceiuter 31 , 1964. Watershed are a - 4,920 ac res (4,600 ac res in West Virgi ni a 

and 320 acr es in Pen nsy lvania ). Su bs ta nt ia lly a l l the land is p ri vat el y owned. 

Estimated to ta l cost - $716,300 ($501,300 Federal and $215,000 non -Fe der al). 

Pr in ci pa l problem was flco lw at er damage to urban are as in the City of Cameron 

and vic in it y ; als o, inadequate wat er supp ly. Land use - cropland and pasture 

cover about 80 per cent of the watershed. Pr oj ec t was sponsored by the Northern 

Panhandle Soil Conservation D is tr ic t, with as sist an ce from the City of Cameron, 

and the Cameron Plann ing Commission. Maintenance is being ca rr ied out by the 

City of Cameron.

Progress in Land Treatment. Land treatment measures estimated to co6t $111,300 

were planned. There are 51 farms in the water shed—m ajo rit y are covered by 

D is tr ic t cooperativ e agreement. Rate of esta blishment was low; 11 per cen t of 

the planned pr ac tice s were in st all ed . The land treatment planned include d the 

to ta l remaining land in need o f treatm ent and not the amount th at could r e a li s ­

t ic a lly be expected to be accomplished during the pr oj ec t perio d. Farming 

opera tions have de cli ne d— most of the landowners are part-tim e farmers or ju st 

ru ra l re side nt s. However, land is in good cove r of gra ss or tr ee s.

Progress in St ru ct ur al Measures. A ll six of the floodwater retard ing st ru ctu re s have been In st al le d. Also the City re se rv oir — combination municipal 

water supply and flo od pr ot ec tio n stru ctur e— has been completed. The re se rv oi r 

is now in operation and is supp lying water to the City of Cameron. Excavation 

work on 3.6 miles of stream channel improvement al so was coat..-•ted. A ll of 

the planned st ru ct ura l measures were in st alled and are func tio ning prop erly.

Pro gress in Obtaining Easements and Rlghts-of-Way. Most of the easements and 

rig ht6-cf- wa y ver e secured by the Cameron Plann ing Commission fo r the Northern 

Panhandle S o il Conservation D is tr ic t. Tney ra ised about $26,000 by pu bli c 

sub scr ipt ion to help de fra y pa rt of the co st s. The Sta te S o il Conservation 

Committee furnished part of the funds needed fo r the la st st ru ct ur e. The Ci ty 

of Cameron purchased the sit e fo r the municipal re se rv oi r— pa rt of a revenue 

typ e bond iss ue ($300,000) to cover gen eral improvements to the water system. 

The Ci ty furnish ed 57 per cent of the const ruc tion co st of the multipurpose 

dam. I t was nec essary fo r the Northern Panhandle S o il Conserva tion D is tr ic t 

to employ condemnation to secure f u ll easement coverage on two of the seven 

stru ctur e sit e s.

Effec tive nes s of Pr oj ec t Proved. A severe storm occu rred on July 24, 1965 

u it h 4.8 inches of ra in fa ll reported in seme pa rts of the watershed. Upper 

Grave Creek remained within it s channel through the City of Cameron prop er.

Some damage occurred to busin ess property from clog ged storm sewers. A ll 

' the dams performed as planned. L it tle or no damage to the str ucture was 

rep orted . A fter the storm, people were heard to remark, "We would have 

been washed away with out the watershed dams."

August, 1965
WEST VIRGINIA

Whe eling Cre ek P ro je c t (PL -56 6) M ars h all and Ohio C ounties 

(W as hing ton and Greene C o u n ti es, P en nsy lv ania )

FY 1975

The P ro je c t in B r ie f . A uth ori ze d - O ct ob er 18 , 19 66. E st im at ed co m ple tion - 

FY 19 76 . Ar ea - 19 1,18 0 a c re s (8 6, 18 0 a c re s in West V ir g in ia and 10 5,00 0 

in P en n sy lv an ia . A ll p riv a te ly owned except fo r 4, 28 9 a cre s owned by th e 

S ta te of P e n n s y lv a n ia .) . Sp on so rs - in West V irg in ia , th e C it y of W he elin g, 

County C ourt s of M ars h all and Ohio C ounties and th e N ort her n Pan ha nd le S o il 

C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t a re sp onsors ; in P en n sy lv a n ia , sp onso rs a re th e Greene 

and W as hing ton Co unty Bo ards of Co mmiss ione rs and th e Gr eene and W as hing ton 

County S o il and W ate r C onse rv at io n D i s t r i c t s . E st im at ed t o ta l c o s t - 

$1 0,9 75 ,4 00 ($ 7,6 31,2 00 PL-566 and $3 ,3 44, 200 O th e r). P rin c ip a l pr ob lem s - 

fl o o d w ate r damage to r e s id e n tia l and in d u s tr ia l e s ta b li s h m e n ts , a g r ic u ltu r a l 

la n d , and ro ad s and b rid g e s . Th ere is a ls o e ro sio n and se di m en t damage to 

cro pla nd and p a s tu re la n d . Th ere is a need fo r w ate r- b ase d re c re a tio n a l 

o p p o rtu n it ie s open to th e p u b li c . Land ow ne rs hi p and us e - Abo ut 6, 50 0 

ac re s a re u rb a n iz e d , in c lu d in g th e C it y of W he eling and s e v e ra l sm a ll er 

c i t i e s , tow ns and co m m un itie s. Th ere i s an esti m a te d 7,10 0 a c re s of cr opla nd 

27 ,0 00 a c re s pe rm an en t hay ; 60 ,500 a c re s of p a s tu re ; 76 ,900 a c re s of woodla nd; and 19 ,6 80 a c re s of id le la nd. The re a re ab out 1,10 0 fa rm s in th e 

w ate rs h ed . In West V irg in ia , 498 a re c o o p e ra to rs w it h th e N or th er n Pa nh an dl e 

S o il C onse rv ati on D i s t r i c t and 389 a re im pl em en ting co n serv a ti o n p la n s on 

46 ,3 59 a c re s of th e 86 ,1 80 a c re s . The p la n was su pp le men ted in 1971 to 

ch an ge th e lo c a tio n and s to ra g e of two s i t e s in P en n sy lv an ia , updat e c o s ts , 

and to in c lu d e p ro v is io n s of th e Un iform R e lo c a ti o n A ssis ta n c e and Rea l 

P ro p e rt y A c q u is it io n P o lic ie s Act of 1970 (PL 9 1-6 46). A f u l l en vir onm en ta l 

im pa ct sta te m e n t i s bei ng pre par ed fo r th e re m ai nin g th re e s i t e s in 

P e n n sy lv a n ia .

P ro g re ss in Land T re atm en t. Du rin g f i s c a l y ear 19 75, 4, 34 1 a c re s of la nd 

tr eatm en t m ea su re s we re a p p li e d . To d a te , a t o t a l of 25 ,831 a c re s ha ve 

be en a p p li e d . T his fa r ex ce ed s th e 10 ,7 10 a c re s c a lle d fo r in th e pla n 

fo r Wes t V ir g in ia .

P ro g re ss in S tru c tu r a l M ea su re s. Of th e fo u r dams in West V ir g in ia , one 

has be en c o n s tr u c te d and th e o th er th re e a re un de r c o n s tr u c ti o n . One is 

ex pec te d to be co m pl et ed l a t e in 1975. T o ta l b id c o s t fo r th e fo ur dams 

was $2 ,3 15,1 52 as comp ared to $2 ,3 67 ,9 00 shown in th e su pp lemen ted p la n .

W ater sh ed P ro je c t B e n e fits . The p r o je c t, when I n s t a l l e d , w ill pro vid e 

fl o o d p ro te c tio n to 1, 24 5 a cre s of fl ood p la in la n d . P ro p ert y su b je c t to 

100-y ea r fr eq uency fl ood ha d an esti m ate d v alu e in 1966 of $3 2,4 06, 000 .

The p ro je c t w ill re duce esti m ate d av er ag e an nual flo o d damage of $2 76 ,541 

by $2 74 ,1 26 , or ab out 99 p e rc e n t. The m u lt ip le -p u rp o se fl ood p re v en ti o n 

and r e c r e a tio n dam w ill pro v id e 74 ,000 annual v is ito r - d a y s . Du rin g th e 

fla s h fl o o d over La bo r Day we eken d, 19 75, th e co m pl et ed dam a t S ite 7 on 

M iddle Wheeli ng Cr ee k k ep t 16 3, 00 0, 00 0 g a ll o n s of flo o d ru n o ff from ad di ng 

to th e down str eam fl o o d in g .

Se ptem ber 1975
ST AT US OF PU BL IC LAW 566 PROGRAM AS OF JAN. 1, 1976

Area Date Date Project purposes

Watershed name (ac res ) Counties approved completed WP FP DR |R RW RE FW Ml WQ EI S

Big Ditch Run .................................... Bla kes Cree k-Armo ur Cree k...........

Bond s Creek ......................................

Brush Creek ......................................

Dave 's Fork- Ch rist ian 's Fork........ .

Dunloup Creek .................................. Elk Two mile Cre ek..........................

Harmon Cree k............. .....................

Kanawha Twom ile Creek (in activ e). Marlin Run .........................................

Mate C ree k........................................

Mill Cre ek..........................................

Pecks Run ..........................................

Pocatalic o River Ba sin ___________ Polk Cre ek.........................................

Pond Run ...........................................

Pric kett Cree k...................................

Sa ltlick Cre ek....................................

Shooks Run........................................

Upper Buffalo Cree k........................ Upper Deckers Creek .......................

Upper Grave Creek ...........................

Wheeling Creek ............. . ............... ..

5,73 0 Webster...............................................Sept. 12,1963 . . . . . . . . 3,6 80 Kanawha, Putnam............................ Mar. 7,1966 Dec. 31,1975 9 435 Ritchie ....................................Apr. 25,1960 June 30,1966 22,2 93 Mercer................................................. June 21,1960 . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 154 do ...........Ju ly 22,1957 June 30,1962 3 l’ 51O 'Fayette, R a le ig h " - " .................... July 24,1969 ............................. 8,4 50 Kanawha............................................ Apr. J - } * ? ? ............................. 24,3 50 Brooke, Hancock; Washington * . . . Mar. 26,1965 ........................... 15,372 Ka nawh a........................................... Apr. 1.1969 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1,035 Pocahontas............................................Ju ly 14,1958 June 17,1963 10, 480 Mingo................................................. Mar. 16,1972 ........................... 123,250 Jacks on, Roane.....................................June 29, 971 8,21 0 Barbour, Ups hu r........................... July 17,1963 June 30,1968 231,2 00 Roane, Kanawa, Putnam, Ja ck so n. Jan. 16,1975 . . . . . . . - - - -

7 280 Lew is July 31,1961 June 30,1968

4,430 Wood.................................................. May 28,1970 ........................... 15,580 Marion, Ta ylo r....................................Nov. 5,1973 .

31 683 Braxton Sept. 28,1962 June 30,1968 1,924 B a r b o u r - " - ................................... Nov. 19,1964 June 30,1968 45’ 914 Marion ................................ Aug. 22,1966 ............................. 19'940 Monongalia, Prest on.......................... July 19,1963 Dec. 31,1975 4 920 Marshall ......................................June 21,1956 Dec. 31,1964 191,180 Ohio, Marshall; Greene,' Wash- Oct 20,1966 ...........................

t—* 

1—* 

0 5

Total completed.......... Total not co mple ted.. . 

Total approved.

9? ?fil 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 1 1 1 0

. 729,739 . 13 0 13 13 0 0 0 8 1 4 0

822,000 23 23 23

' Pennsylvania.
117

Senator Randolph. I than k you again , Mr. Mitc hell and your 

associates.

Mr. Mitch ell. Th an k you, Senator.

Senator Gravel. Th an k you, Mr. Chairm an.

Th an k you, gentlem en. If you will just supply for the reco rd responses to our wr itten questions.

Sen ator Dom enici will also have some questions th at he will want 

responded to fo r the reco rd. I appre cia te it very much.

Mr. Mitchell. T ha nk you, Sen ator .

Sen ator Gravel. O ur next witnesses are Mr. Br en t B lackwelder and 

Steven Shamburek, En vironme nta l Policy Center.

STATEMENT OF BRENT BLACKWELDER, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

CENTER, WASHINGTON, D.C., ACCOMPANIED BY STEVE SHAMBUREK

Mr. Blackwelder. Th an k you, Mr. Gravel.

W ith me is Steven Shamburek, who is wo rking with me th is year. 

We both have gone throug h the waters hed work plans and have 

pre pared some fairl y deta iled comments on a number of wat ersh eds 

you are con siderin g here today.

I will not enter into deta iled exp lan ations bu t hope th at the committee could review our comments.

Senat or Gravel. W e will take them in total in the record. (See p. 

119.)

Mr. Blackwelder. Yes, I want to men tion to you, Mr. Chairma n, 

some of the action now occ urring in the House Public Wo rks Committee rega rding SCS pla nning procedures.

Th e first of the reform s concerns a req uirem ent t ha t features in the 

work plan be inc rem entally justified because present procedure lum ps 

the benefits and costs tog ether, ma kin g it impossible to determine 

wheth er one piece of the pro ject is justified incrementally.

Second, it is im po rta nt, we feel, th at pro jec ts which exceed $10 

million in cost get ex tra scrutin y. One rou te to go is a phase 1 and 

phase 2 autho rization sim ilar to th at which you adopted in the 1974 

W ater Resources Dev elop ment Act. We feel th at pro jects which 

exceed thi s amount should require legisla tive appro val by the entire 

Cong ress, not merely appro val by committee resolution. Wate r pr ojects of oth er agencies which exceed $10 million , fo r exam ple, do get 

full congressional app rov al.

Th ird , we are concerned about the use of questionable recrea tional 

benefits. In a numb er of the projects, the Soil Con serv ation Service 

is pro posing reservoirs with ex tra ordina ry recrea tion benefits in area s 

th at are alre ady sup ers atu rat ed with flat wa ter recreation. Th e SCS 

should conduct a rec rea tional dem and analysi s with and witho ut the 

project.

Fo urth, we th in k th at some of the pro jec ts are rea lly neglecting 

some of the cri tical erosion needs. In fac t, if you look at the do lla r 

amo unts of money spe nt, you will see th at lan d treatm ent measures 

are severely slighted , whereas huge amoun ts of money are spent on 

ma nip ula tions of the ru ra l landscap e with lar ge num bers of dams.
118

I might mentio n thi s morning th at we feel th at a num ber of these 

pro jects are possibly illegal in failing to com ply with the existing 

policies and laws concerning water pro jec t just ificatio n. Fa ilu re to 

look at the least-cost altern atives for su pp lyi ng water, for exam ple, 

is one apparen t failure. In some o f these watershed s, the re is a stated 

need for sewage tre atmen t plant subseque nt to the con stru ctio n of 

recreational fac ilities although the costs are not included in the 

work pla n. If these are no t included as real proje cts cost, then the 

committee does no t have an accurate acc oun ting of the actual cost.

Finally , in conn ectio n with the comments mad e about moving 

forw ard with the proje cts to help preven t the loss of life , we feel, 

needless to say, th at this is an adm irable goal and one sha red by all. 

One of th e reasons we are he re is th at we think th at a dis proportio nate 

exp enditure of fund s is made on str uc tural measures which can not 

pro vide complete protection . Th is arr angeme nt engenders a false sense 

of security. At the same time, im porta nt flood wa rning systems are 

neglected although the y could best pre vent the loss of life.

Fo r exam ple, on page 69 of the El k Creek wor k pla n a flood wa rning system is discussed alth ough this alt erna tiv e is rejec ted. Yet, 

such altern atives aro und the cou ntry are some o f the most im po rta nt 

th at could be ins titute d if we a re rea lly serious about pre venti ng the 

loss of lives du ring flood storms.

In the interest of time, I will stop there. If y ou have a ny questions, 

Mr. Sham burek and I will be glad to respond to them.

Sen ator Gravel. I do n’t. We may develop some for the record. 

W ha t we will do is communicate them to you and you can resp ond 

to the record.

Mr. Blackwelder. Th an k you.

Senator Gravel. Th an k you very much.

[Mr. Black welde r’s prepare d statement follow s:]
Environmental Policy C enter

3?4 C Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003

(202) S47-65OO

T es tim ony Of 

B re n t B la ckw eld er 

Ste ven Sham burek

S en ate Co mmi tte e On P u b li c Works & T ra n s p o rta ti o n 

Su bc om mittee on W ater R eso urc es 

S o il C o n serv ati o n S e rv ic e W at er sh ed P r o je c ts

Ju ne 3 , 1976
120

Environmental Policy C enter

324 C Street, S.E., Washington, D.C . 20003

(2 02) 54 7- 65 00

The E n v ir o n m e n ta l P o li c y C e n te r wo ul d l i k e to b r in g t o th e 

C om m itt ee s a t t e n t i o n a num ber o f r e s e r v a t i o n s we ha ve w hi ch 

c o n c e rn th e SCS p r o j e c t s to be c o n s id e r e d to d a y . We a p p r e c ia t e 

th e o p p o r tu n it y to a p p e a r .

E lk C re ek W at er sh ed 

W est V ir g in ia

The p ri m a ry o b j e c t io n to t h i s p r o j e c t i s th e la c k o f an y

a g r i c u l t u r a l b e n e f i t s . The p ar am ount c o n c e rn o f PL 5 6 6 i s th e *

p r o v is io n o f a g r i c u l t u r a l b e n e f i t s , y e t th e s t a t u t e i s b e in g

u se d t o p ro v id e u rb a n flo o d p r o t e c t i o n , (p . 1 4 1 , Work P la n ) >.-•

The SCS i s p u rs u in g a p r o j e c t w hi ch i s w h o ll y d i s p r o p o r t io n a t e 

to th e o b j e c t iv e o f a g r i c u l t u r a l im p ro v em en ts .

The p r o j e c t d o e s n o t f u l f i l l th e f lo o d p r o t e c ti o n n e ed s o u t l i n e d 

by th e s p o n s o r s . Un der th e e x i s t i n g c o n d it i o n s , 1 ,2 4 1 a c r e s wo ul d 

be flo o d e d d u rin g th e 10 0 y e a r f l o o d . I f th e p r o j e c t i s

ap p ro v ed an d c o n s t r u c t e d , 94 5 a c r e s wo ul d s t i l l be fl o o d e d d u rin g 

th e 1 0 0 y e a r f l o o d . Thu s t h i s p r o j e c t w i l l prov ide ! f o r th e 

p r o t e c ti o n o f o n ly 24 p e r c e n t o f th e la n d s u b je c t t o th e 10 0 

y e a r f l o o d . (2 9 6 a c r e s / 1 ,2 4 1 a c r e s ) I t i s o b v io u s t h a t t h i s 

a rr a n g e m e n t le a v e s 76 p e r c e n t o f th e c u r r e n t l y flo o d p ro n e la n d 

s u b j e c t t o th e 10 0 y e a r f lo o d . A lt h o u g h th e s t a t i s t i c s f o r th e 

1 0 0 y e a r flo o d t r a d i t i o n a l l y s e rv e a s th e i n d i c a t o r o f a p r o j e c t s 

p o t e n t i a l , s i m i l a r l y low p r o t e c t i o n i s p ro v id e d f o r th e 5 y e a r 

a r e a an d th e k ey st orm a r e a . The e f f i c i e n c y r a t i o s a r e 22 p e r c e n t 

(2 0 2 a c r e s / 9 0 2 a c r e s ) an d 20 p e r c e n t (2 1 6 a c r e s / 1 0 4 7 a c r e s ) , 

r e s p e c t i v e l y . (A ll f i g u r e s a r e c a l c u l a t e d fro m p . 1 0 6 , Work P la n ,

A re as F lo o d e d Un de r P r e s e n t C o n d it io n s And W ith The P r o j e c t In

O p e ra ti o n )

M or eo ver , th e Work P la n c la im s t h a t " th e v a lu e o f p r o p e r ty s u b j e c t 

t o flo o d in g by th e 10 0 y e a r fr e q u e n c y e v e n t i s e s ti m a te d to be 

mo re th a n 20 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s . " (p . 4 2 , Work P la n ) In l i g h t o f 

th e p r e v io u s ly p r e s e n te d s t a t i s t i c s , t h e r e i s some q u e s ti o n as 

to th e t o t a l v a lu e o f th e p r o p e r ty to be p r o t e c te d .

The SCS c o n ce d es t h a t dams 17 an d 18 a r e in a d e q u a te an d t h e r e f o r e

in c r e m e n ta ll y u n j u s t i f i e d . " I t wa s d e te rm in e d fro m th e w a te r -

s u r f a c e p r o f i l e s an d fro m th e am ou nt o f re m a in in g dam age t h a t

flo o d w a t e r - r e t a r d in g dams n o s . 17 an d 18 sh o u ld be su p p le m e n te d 4

w it h c h a n n e l wo rk on Anne Moor e R u n ." (p . 1 4 5 , Work P la n ) Ev en

w it h th e two da m s, $ 1 1 0 ,5 0 0 da mag es w ou ld c o n ti n u e t o o c c u r

a n n u a ll y t o t h i s re g io n o f th e w a te rs h e d . W ith th e dams
an d c h a n n e li z a t i o n , o n ly $ 1 0 ,0 0 0 a n n u a l da ma ge s wo ul d c o n ti n u e 

to o c c u r . T hu s, $ 1 0 0 ,5 0 0 b e n e f i t s a r e a t t r i b u t a b l e to th e Anne T

Moor e c h a n n e l w o rk . Ho we ve r, t h i s a s p e c t erf th e p r o j e c t i s 

in c r e m e n ta ll y u n j u s t i f i e d a s th e c o s t o f th e c h a n n e li z a tio n i s 

$ 2 0 9 ,2 0 0 f o r a b e n e f i t / c o s t r a t i o o f . 4 8 . A lt h o u g h th e c o s t 

s t a t i s t i c s a r e u n a v a i l a b l e , s u s p ic io n i s c a s t on th e ec on om ic 

j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r th e dams an d th e c h a n n e l wo rk a s a p a c k a g e .

"The sp o n s o rs ha ve d e c id e d t h a t p u b lic a c c e s s w i l l n o t be p ro v id e d 

f o r th e (1 2 ] s in g le - p u r p o s e s t r u c t u r e s i n t h i s w a te r s h e d ." ( p . 9 ,

EI S) T h e re fo re , c o n s t r u c t i o n o f th e 12 dams w i l l p ro v id e 12 p r i v a t e 

la k e s a t f e d e r a l e x p e n s e . We c o n c u r w it h th e W est V ir g in ia «.

D ep ar tm en t o f N a tu ra l R e so u rc es ( p . 1 3 6 , com ment 1 2 , EIS ) th a t 

th e s e dams sh o u ld be op en ed to p u b li c a c c e s s t o m ee t th e l o c a l r: f i s h e r i e s de ma nd . I t i s o u r b e l i e f t h a t f e d e r a l fu n d s sh o u ld n o t 

be a l l o t e d to th e c o n s tr u c tio n o f p r i v a t e l a k e s .

The W est V ir g in ia DNR n o te s t h a t " th e c o s t f i g u r e s f o r many o f - _

th e it e m s l i s t e d i n t h i s [R e c r e a ti o n a l F a c i l i t i e s ] t a b l e a r e mu ch. 

to o lo w ." (p . 1 3 8 , com me nt 2 1 , EI S) In a d d i t i o n , th e r e c r e a t i o n a l 

f a c i l i t i e s w i l l r e q u ir e th e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a se wa ge tr e a tm e n t 

p l a n t , ( p . 9 0 , Work P la n ) oi T hi s c o s t , how ev er < .i s tn ot in c lu d e d wave 

in th e p r o j e c t i n s t a l l a t i o n c o s t s , ( p . 1 3 0 , Work P la n ) "To m ee t 

th e he av y u se -d a y de ma nd , a p p ro x im a te ly 6 6 ,8 0 0 g a ll o n s o f w a te r 

w i l l be r e q u ir e d by th e r e c r e a t i o n a l d e v e lo p m e n t. " (p . 1 2 , EI S)

A g a in , th e c o s t o f t h i s w a te r i s n o t in c lu d e d i n th e c o s t t a b l e s . .

(p . 1 3 0 , Work P la n ) A mo re c a r e f u l c a l c u l a t i o n o f th e c o s t s an d 

b e n e f i t s c o u ld d r iv e th e b e n e f i t / c o s t r a t i o b e n e a th u n i t y .

Th er e i s some q u e s ti o n a s to th e b e n e f i t s w hi ch wo ul d a c c ru e to 

th e f a c i l i t i e s p r e s e n t l y on th e flo o d p l a i n . I t se em s t h a t th e 

SCS i s c la im in g b e n e f i t s f o r f u tu r e gro w th on th e flo o d p l a i n .

H a rr is o n Cou nt y i s a ll o w in g l o c a l r e s i d e n t s t o p u rc h a s e f e d e r a l l y 

s u b s id iz e d flo o d i n s u r a n c e , (p . 5 4 , Work P la n ) Ho we ve r, th e y a r e 

c o u p li n g t h i s e n d ea v o r w it h un so un d f lo o d p l a i n m an ag em en t.

"F u tu re la n d u se p r o j e c t i o n s show t h a t th e f lo o d p l a i n a r e a a lo n g 

lo w er re a c h e s o f th e w a te rs h e d w i l l be d e v e lo p e d f o r r e s i d e n t i a l 

an d i n d u s t r i a l p u r p o s e s , w it h o r w it h o u t th e p r o j e c t . " (p . 1 0 7 ,

EI S) T h is a rr a n g e m e n t may in d e e d be i n v i o l a t i o n o f th e Fl oo d 

D is a s te r P r o t e c t i o n A ct o f 1 9 7 3 .

M cN air y— C y p re ss 

T en nes se e

Of a l l th e p r o j e c t s b e in g c o n s id e re d to d a y , we f i n d t h i s on e th e 

m os t o b j e c t io n a b le . Ev en when e v a lu a te d by SCS s ta n d a r d s , t h i s 

p r o j e c t i s i n e f f e c t u a l b e ca u se i t d o es n o t a c h ie v e an a d e q u a te 

l e v e l o f 1 0 0 y e a r flo o d p r o t e c t i o n . The SCS, m o re o v e r, d id n o t 

ev en e v a lu a te th e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f th e p r o j e c t f o r th e 1 0 0 je a r 

f lo o d . The SCS d o e s s t a t e t h a t t h i s p r o j e c t w i l l re d u c e th e 

fl o o d in g d e p th s o f th e 1 0 0 y e a r f lo o d . N o n e th e le s s , f lo o d in g
122

up to 3 .5 f e e t w i l l s t i l l o c c u r in th e c i t y o f S e lm e r, T en n es se e 

( p . 6 8 , Work P la n ) C om ple ti on o f th e p r o j e c t w ou ld o n ly re d u c e • by 25 p e r c e n t th e am ou nt o f la n d in u n d a te d by th e 25 y e a r f lo o d . 

C o n se q u e n tl y , th e us e o f t h i s p re su m ab ly mo re f a v o r a b le i n d i c a t o r 

r e v e a ls t h a t t h i s p r o j e c t i s 75 p e r c e n t i n e f f e c t i v e . In d e e d , ev en 

w it h th e s t r u c t u r e s , $ 2 2 1 ,5 0 0 a v e ra g e a n n u a l da m ag es w i l l c o n ti n u e 

to o c c u r , (p . 1 0 1 , Work P la n ) Th us 41 p e r c e n t o f th e c u r r e n t 

f lo o d dam age w i l l c o n ti n u e u n a b a te d . ( $ 2 2 1 ,5 0 0 / $ 5 4 1 ,1 0 0 [ t o t a l ] = -

41 p e r c e n t)

"C ha nn el im pr ov em en t wa s in c lu d e d a f t e r i t ha d b e e n d e te rm in e d 

t h a t th e la n d tr e a tm e n t an d flo o d p l a i n r e t a r d i n g s t r u c t u r e s w ou ld •' 

n o t p ro v id e an a d e q u a te l e v e l o f flo o d p r o t e c t i o n ." (p . I l l , Work - 

P la n ) A g a in , th e f lo o d W at er r e t a r d i n g ' s t r u c t u r e s do n o t a p p e a r s 

t o be in c r e m e n ta ll y j u s t i f i e d w hi ch n e c e s s i t a t e s th e u se o f

c h a n n e li z a t i o n .

T he re i s no j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r th e c la im t h a t th e p r e s e n t an d f u t u r e 

w a te r s u p p ly i s in a d e q u a te . • T her e a r e p r e s e n t l y 3 w e lls w hi ch -u et -e n 

su p p ly 1 8 0 0 g a l . o f w a te r/ m in u te o r 2 , 5 9 2 , 0 0 0 g a l . o f w a te r / d a y . , n • 

(p . 3 8 , Work P la n ) The E lk C re ek r e p o r t ( p . 4 7 , Work P la n ) n o te s t h a t 1 2 0 g a l . o f w a te r pet r u s e r/ d a y i s rt e c e S s a ry ' ( 4 , 8 8 6 , 0 0 0 g a l . / 'e s s 

da y m ee ts th e n e e d s o f 4 0 ,0 0 0 u s e r s w hi ch e q u a ls 1 2 0 g a l . p e r u s e r / 

da y) T hus, th e c i t y c u r r e n t l y h a s th e p o t e n t i a l t o su p p ly 2 1 ,0 0 0 

p e r s o n s . ( 2 , 5 9 2 , 0 0 0 a v a i l a b l e g a l. / d a y d iv id e d by 1 2 0 g a l . p e r u s e r/ d a y e q u a ls 2 1 ,0 0 0 p e r s o n s .) At t h i s p o i n t , th e c u r r e n t m u n p o p u la ti o n s t a t i s t i c s a r e c r i t i c a l . The p r e s e n t p o p u la ti o n de ma nd s 

4 7 5 ,0 0 0 g a l ./ d a y . (3 9 0 0 [ c u r r e n t p o p u la tio n — S e l m e r - 3 ,4 0 0 , E a s t 

V ie w -5 00 ] m u lt i p li e d by 12 0 [ d a i ly demand p e r p e r s o n ]) 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 

g a ll o n s p e r da y a r e s t i l l a v a i l a b l e f o r i n d u s t r y . T h er e i s no 

re a s o n to b e li e v e t h a t in d u s tr y u t i l i z e s ev en h a l f t h i s am ou nt . ............

Ho we ve r, w ha t a b o u t f u t u r e dem and ? E xa m in in g th e p o p u la ti o n t r e n d s

(p . 1 7 , Work P l a n ) , th e g ra p h i n d i c a t e s t h a t p o p u la tio n h a s bee n d e c r e a s in g f o r " y e a r s a lt h o u g h th e SCS p r e d i c t s t h a t th e p o p u la ti o n 

w i l l ap p ro ac h 7 0 0 0 by th e y e a r 2 0 0 0 . T h u s, w a te r dem and may in c r e a s e to 8 5 5 ,0 0 0 g a l ./ d a y . (7 0 0 0 [ p r o j e c t e d p o p u la ti o n ] m u l t i p l i e d 

by 1 2 0 [ d a i ly demand p e r p e r s o n ] ) T h is h e ig h te n e d w a te r dem and 

w i l l n o t d e c re a s e th e su p p ly a v a i l a b l e to i n d u s t r y .

Assum e t h a t th e s e f i g u r e s u n d e r e s ti m a te f u t u r e w a te r de man d. The 

SCS c o n c lu d e s t h a t " th e d if f e r e n c e i n c o s t o f c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a 

s in g le - p u r p o s e w a te r su p p ly dam a t th e same l o c a t i o n was th e b a s i s 

f o r d e te rm in in g th e b e n e f i t s f o r th e i n d u s t r i a l w a te r su p p ly 

in c re m e n t in s t r u c t u r e No. 1 3 . T h is wa s c o n s id e r e d a s th e l e a s t a l t e r n a t i v e c o s t o f a w a te r su p p ly t h a t wo ul d a t t r a c t i n d u s t r y ."

(p . 1 1 0 , Work P la n ) The SCS c la im t h a t s t r u c t u r e n o . 13 i s th e 

l e a s t c o s t a l t e r n a t i v e i s e rr o n e o u s i n l i g h t o f th e f a c t t h a t th e 

t h i r d w e ll was su nk i n 1 9 6 3 a t a c o s t o f b e tw ee n 20 o r 30 th o u sa n d 

d o l l a r s . S t r u c tu r e n o . 13 w i l l c o s t $ 1 9 2 ,0 0 0 ( p . 6 4 , Work P la n )

In th e u n l ik e l y e v e n t t h a t g r e a t e r w a te r s u p p ly i s d e s i r e d , a 

f o u r th w e ll c o u ld be su nk a t a f r a c t i o n o f th e c o s t o f s t r u c t u r e 

n o . 1 3 .
123

I f t h i s m or e c o s t ly a lt e r n a t iv e i s a d o p te d , w h a t ty p e o f d i s t r ib u t i o n

syste m w i l l be em plo yed? Why i s i t n o t n o te d i n th e Work P la n ......

o r r e f le c t e d i n th e c o s t e s tim a te ? Who w i l l p ro v id e th e syste m ............

an d who w i l l re c e iv e th e w a te r?

The r e c r e a t io n a l b e n e fits o f t h i s p r o je c t a ls o a p pear to be j

e x a g g e ra te d . The b e n e fits f o r th e M cN a ir y C yp re ss a re c a lc u la te d 

a t $2 p e r v i s i t o r d a y . ($2 m u lt ip lie d b y 6 0 ,0 00 [ v i s i t o r s ) e q u a ls 

$1 2 0 ,0 0 0 , p . 75, Work P la n ) w here as a v a lu e o f $ 1 .5 0 p e r v i s i t o r 

da y seems more a p p r o p r ia te . Th e r e c r e a t io n a l f a c i l i t i e s w o u ld 

n e c e s s it a te th e c o n s tr u c tio n o f a sewa ge tre a tm e n t f a c i l i t y . -j 

a lt h o u g h t h i s i s n o t m e n ti o n e d i n th e Work P la n n o r i s i t r e f le c t e d 

in th e c o s t ta b le s . j

F in a lly , c o n s tr u c tio n o f 18 p r iv a t e la k e s a t th e ta x p a y e r’ s expense 

i s f i s c a l l y unsound.

C o u n tr y L in e C re ek

N o rth C a ro li n a . j

The r e c r e a t io n a l b e n e fits c la im e d by t h i s p r o je c t. a re s u s p e c t as 

th e re does n o t a p pear to be any e v id e n c e to in d ic a te a g ro w th in 

r e c r e a t io n a l de mand. The Work P la n s h o u ld ha ve p ro v id e d a 

r e c r e a t io n a l dem and a n a ly s is to in d ic a t e f u t u r e tr e n d s . A lt h o u g h 

no q u a n t it a t iv e d a ta i s a v a ila b le , i t seem s a p p a re n t t h a t th e 

p re s e n t f a c i l i t i e s a re n o t b e in g used t o t h e i r ma xim um p o t e n t ia l'.

"T he w ork p la n su g g e s ts t h a t m o st f is h in g i s do ne a t ro a d c ro s s in g s 

an d any f is h in g do ne e ls e w h e re r e q u ir e s c ro s s in g p r iv a t e la n d .

There i s a fo u r - a c r e po nd op en to p u b lic f is h in g n e a r Red Ho use 

and, i n a d d it io n , th e C om m ission ha s tw o s h a ll ponds open t o fr e e 

f is h in g on th e C a s w e ll game la n d . The l a t t e r ponds a re l i t t l e 

us ed in s p ite o f ea sy acce ss an d e x c e lle n t bass an d b l u e g i l l 

f is h in g m a in ta in e d th ro u g h in te n s iv e m anagem ent." (p . 55 , co mmen t 

11, E IS ) I f th e s e po nd s a re u n d e r v is ite d , why use ta x mo ne y to , 

c o n s tr u c t mor e o f them ? M o re o v e r, th e re i s an ab undance o f n e a rb y 

f la t w a t e r r e c r e a t io n i n th e w a te rs h e d . K e rr La ke c o v e rs 4 8 ,9 0 0 • 

a c re s an d i s o n ly 32 m il e s aw ay. (p . 20, Work P la n ) Hyco Lake 

c o v e rs 3750 a c re s an d i s o n ly te n m il e s fr o m th e p ro p o se d r e s e r v o ir s . 

(P« f - 2 3 , E IS ) N e it h e r o f th e s e tw o la k e s a re anyw here re a r f u l l 

u t i l i z a t i o n . T h e re fo re , p r o v id in g f o r th e c o n s tr u c tio n < f a 640 

a c re pond i s u n n e c e s s a ry .

The b e n e fits c la im e d by r e c r e a t io n a re d e v io u s ly p re s e n te d i n th e 

Work P la n . Two r e c r e a t io n a l r e s e r v o ir s s im ila r i n s tr u c tu r e an d 

fu n c tio n a re c la im e d to p ro v id e d i f f e r e n t b e n e f it s . One o f th e 

dams i s j u s t i f i e d on th e g ro u n d s t h a t i t p ro v id e s r e c r e a t io n .

The second dam, on th e o th e r ha nd, i s c la im e d to p r o v id e o n ly 

" in c id e n t a l r e c r e a t io n " a v o id in g th e n o rm a l c o s t s h a rin g t h a t 

c h a r a c te r iz e s th e s e p r o je c t s . The b e n e f it s o f th e dam a re in c lu d e d 

i n th e c o m p u ta ti o n o f th e b e n e f it / c o s t r a t i o a lt h o u g h th e c o s ts 

a re n o t. A d d in g th e a d m it te d r e c r e a t io n a l b e n e fits an d th e 

" in c id e n t a l r e c r e a t io n a l" b e n e f it s , 45 p e rc e n t o f th e t o t a l p r o je c t

k

74-695 0 - 76 - 9
124

b e n e f i t s a r e a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s . T h is 

p e r c e n t a g e i s q u i t e h ig h -w h e n c o m p ar ed t o o t h e r p r o j e c t s .

Th e f lo o d w a te r r e t a r d i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e tw o da ms i s s u s p e c t . 

U nd er t h e e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s , 1 9 2 0 a c r e s a r e p r o n e t o f l o o d in g 

fr om t h e r u n o f f o f a 1 0 0 y e a r s to r m . Up on c o m p le tio n o f t h e 

p r o j e c t , 1 6 1 3 a c r e s w i l l re m a in s u b j e c t t o f l o o d i n g fr om t h e r u n o f f , 

( p . 3 9 , Work P l a n ) T h u s , o n ly 1 6 p e r c e n t o f t h e .l a n d w i l l b e .. . _ 

p r o t e c t e d fr om i n u n d a t i o n . Th e p r o j e c t , n e e d l e s s t o s a y , i s 84 

p e r c e n t i n e f f e c t i v e .

Th e SCS c la im t h a t 1 b i l l i o n g a l l o n s o f w a t e r w i l l b e n e e d e d b y *•* 

t h e y e a r 2 0 0 0 lo o k s s u s p i c i o u s . Th e w a te r s u p p ly i s t o be 

p r o v id e d t o Y a n c e y v il l e w h ic h h a s a c u r r e n t p o p u l a t i o n o f 1 , 2 7 4 

an d t h e p o p u l a t i o n t r e n d i s do w nw ar d. U t i l i z i n g t h e s t a t i s t i c s 

p r o v id e d i n t h e E lk C re e k .W o rk P l a n , t h i s 1 b i l l i o n g a l l o n s c o u ld 

m e e t t h e de m an ds o f a p o p u l a t i o n g r e a t e r t h a n 2 2 ,U 0 0 . ( 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 ,

0 0 0 b i l l i o n g a l l o n s p e r y e a r / 4 3 8 0 0 ; 4 3 8 0 0 = 1 2 0 g a l . p e r d ay p e r 

p e r s o n m u l t i p l i e d by 3 6 5 (d a y s ) In f a c t / , t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f t h e , u w 

e n t i r e w a te r s h e d i s o n l y * 6 ,1 0 0 . Th e N o r th C a r o l i n a D e p a rtm e n t - ' •' 

o f N a t u r a l a n d E co no m ic R e s o u r c e s c o n c l u d e s t h a t " t h e p r o j e c t c a l l s 

f o r 1 0 MGD M&I w a t e r , b e t t e r t h a n tw ic e w h a t o u r * s t a f f r e g a r d s w rr at 

a s a r e a s o n a b l e a m o u n t. Th e o v e r a l l e c o n o m ic d e v e lo p m e n t p o t e n t i a l 

o f t h e a r e a i s p o o r , b e c a u s e o f a l a c k o f s u p p o r t f a c i l i t i e s f o r 

i n d u s t r i a l d e v e lo p m e n t o t h e r th a n w a t e r . I n s h o r t , 1 0 MGD a r e 

n o t j u s t i f i e d . "

W at er s u p p ly b e n e f i t s a r e n o r m a ll y c a l c u l a t e d b y d e t e r m i n in g t h e 

c o s t o f th e . l e a s t c o s t l y a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t w o u ld p r o v i d e f o r a 

co m m en su ra te q u a n t i t y a n d q u a l i t y o f w a t e r . Th e b e n e f i t s i n tt ri s 

p r o j e c t a r e n o t b a s e d on t h i s t r a d i t i o n a l a p p r o a c h b u t r a t h e r — . 

a r e c a l c u l a t e d by t h e f o l lo w in g fo rm u la :

1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 g a l . m u l t i p l i e d by 1 0 c e n t s p e r 1 0 0 0 g a llo n s = 

$ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0

( p . 7 0 , Work P la n ) T h is q u e s t i o n a b l e c a l c u l a t i o n p r o c e d u r e i s 

o f g r e a t im p o r t b e c a u s e 2 5 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l b e n e f i t s a r e 

a t t r i b u t a b l e t o m u n i c i p a l an d i n d u s t r i a l w a te r s u p p l y .

C o tt o n w o o d -W a ln u t C re e k 

New M ex ic o

T h e re a r e a nu m be r o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w h ic h t h a t t h i s p r o j e c t s h o u ld 

b e r e j e c t e d . Th e p r o j e c t e d r e c r e a t i o n a l b e n e f i t s t o be p r o v id e d 

by t h e 1 2 0 a c r e l a k e a r e e x a g g e r a t e d . O ne , t h e l a k e c a n n o t b e 

m a in ta in e d b e c a u s e o f t h e c h r o n ic e x a p o r a t i o n p ro b le m a n d no o t h e r 

w a te r r i g h t s a r e a v a i l a b l e . H ow ev er , i f t h e r e i s a n a t t e m p t t o 

s u s t a i n t h e l e v e l o f t h e l a k e , w a te r m u st b e d ra w n a t t h e e x p e n s e 

o f i r r i g a t i o n w a t e r r i g h t s . F u r th e r m o r e , t h i s p ro b le m i s 

e x a c e r b a t e d by t h e d e c l i n i n g w a te r t a b l e . U nd er t h e g u i s e o f 

a g r i c u l t u r a l b e n e f i t s , t h i s p r o j e c t w i l l ha rm i r r i g a t i o n f a r m e r s .
125

P ro je c te d h u n tin g b e n e fits a re c a lc u la te d as a b e n e f it . H ow eve r, 

h u n tin g w h ic h c u r r e n t ly ta k e s p la c e w i l l be a d v e rs e ly e ff e c te d 

b u t i s n o t c o n s id e re d as a c o s t o r even c o n s id e re d i n th e e n v ir o n ­

m e n ta l im p a c t s ta te m e n t. The S ta te o f New M exic o p r e d ic ts t h a t 1

th e re w i l l be a d e c li n e in th e demand f o r h u n tin g i n th e fu t u r e 

(p . 13, Work P la n ) w h ic h seems to v i t i a t e th e p r o je c te d h u n tin g 

b e n e f it s .

We o b je c t to th e in c lu s io n o f f u t u r e d e ve lo p m e n t on th e flo o d 

p la in as a b e n e f it o f th e p r o je c t . "F lo o d damage re d u c tio n 

b e n e fits w ere d e te rm in e d as th e d iffe r e h c e betw een fu t u r e damagei 

w ith o u t and w ith p r o je c t . P h y s ic a l dam age was c o n v e rte d to 

m o neta ry v a lu e s and t h e i r r e d u c tio n c r e d ite d as p r o je c t b e n e fits . 

A vera ge a n n u a l flo o d damage f o r fu t u r e c o n d itio n s an d th e a ve ra ge 

a n n u a l flo o d damage re d u c tio n b e n e fits a re shown i n T a b le 5 ."

(p . 8 3 ,W ork P la n ) T h is i s s i g n i f i c a n t because 60 p e rc e n t o f th e 

b e n e fits a re a t t r ib u t a b le to flo o d damage r e d u c tio n . (§ 4 6 3 ,4 0 0 / 

$ 7 6 7 ,9 0 0 , p . 69, Work P la n ) ,, . . . .

F in a lly , th e c h a n n e li z a tio n w i l l d e s tro y a " h ig h v a lu e w i l d l i f e 

h a b it a t " (SCS q u o te , p . 50, Work P la n ) a n d 'w ill damage a nu m be r an<; 

o f a r c h e o lo g ic a l s it e s i n th e w a te rs h e d .

Elm C re ek 

Texa s

The c o n s tr u c tio n o f 45 s m a ll fa rm ponds w a rra n ts c lo s e s c r u t in y . 

Se ve n o f th e s m a ll dams (n o s. 11, 20, 28 , 29, 31 , 33, & 35 ) p r o te c t 

o n ly 1 /2 squ are m il e o r le s s . S ix o th e r s m a ll dams (n o s. 2 , 8,

9, 10, 16, & 18) p r o te c t o n ly 1 sq u a re m ile o r le s s . Eac h o f 

th e s e t i n y f a c i l i t i e s , how ever, c o s ts upw ard s o f $ 2 5 0 ,0 0 0 . In 

a w a te rs h e d w ith more th a n 200,0 00 a c re s , th e e f f e c t o f th e se 

dams on d im in is h in g th e flo o d p ro b le m i s m in im a l.

The a n n u a l damages to th e a re a a re $580,5 00 on 22,9 00 a c re s f o r 

an ave ra ge o f $25 p e r a c re . The c o s t o f p r o te c tin g t h i s same are a 

i s $ 6 ,6 7 1 ,3 3 0 f o r 21 ,4 81 a c re s . Thus, th e s tr u c tu r e s c o s t $311 

p e r a c re b u t p ro v id e b e n e fits o f o n ly $25 p e r a c re . T h is g r e a t ■ 

expense in c lin e s us to pro pose t h a t th e C om m itte e r e je c t t h i s 

p r o je c t an d d ir e c t th e SCS to in v e s t ig a te some n o n s tr u c tu r a l 

a lt e r n a t iv e s w h ic h a re mo re e c o n o m ic a ll y sound.
126

Ou r n ext witness is Mr. Rylan d S. Fa rm er, chairman of the Caswell 

County Pl an ning Board, Yanceyville, N.C.

STATEMENTS OF RYLAND S. FARMER, CHAIRMAN, CASWELL 

COUNTY PLANNING BOARD, YANCEYVILLE, N.C., AND LYNN B. 

SATTERFIELD, CHAIRMAN, CASWELL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Mr. Satterfield. I am Ly nn B. Satterfield , chair ma n of the

Caswell County Comm issioners. We are here to present to you our 

project of the watersh ed. Mr. Ry lan d Fa rm er has been wo rki ng on 

it and is servin g as cha irm an of th at committee.

I present to you Mr. Rylan d Fa rm er to p resent th e pro gra m to you. 

Mr. F armer. Th an k you. We do have with us Mrs. Russell Long, 

who is from C aswell County, N.C. It is a p leasure to have he r with us.

Senator Gravel. I t is a pleasure. I recognized her when she came 

in. I looked at the schedule to see if t here was anybody from Lo uis iana. I do recall she has a lineage th at goes beyond Lou isiana and into 

No rth Carolina . We are ha pp y to have her here. She certainl y is 

an added featu re to your cause.

Today the Senate W ate r Resources Subc omm ittee is bein g asked to 

make a decision th at will affect the fu ture gro wth and economy 

of Caswell Co unty, N.C.

As chairma n of the Caswell County Pl an ning Board and on behalf 

of our citizens, I urge you to su pp ort the app rov al of the Co untry 

Line Creek Wate rsh ed work pla n. Th is pro jec t will be fun ded pa rtly 

by Public Law’ 566 and the rem ain der by county and State f und s.

Casw’ell County has one of the lowest pe r capita incomes and one 

of the h igh est prop erty tax rat es in the State of No rth Carolina . The 

tax received from ind ustries is only 10 perce nt of the tot al pr op erty 

taxe s collected. Th e pop ula tion of ou r cou nty has declined based on 

the 1970 census. Our county is a predom ina ntly ag ric ult ural are a of 

which the pr im ary crop is tobacco.

The total pou ndage grown by each farm is regu late d by t he D ep ar tment of Ag ric ulture on an allotme nt basis. It is my un de rst an din g 

th at North Ca rolin a is the only State th at ca nnot lease tobacco acreag e 

across cou nty lines.

If the voters app rov e leasing across cou nty lines, we are sure th at 

most of our tobacco acreage will be leased to the eas tern counties of 

No rth Ca rol ina where tobacco can be raised more easily due to the 

level ter rain.

The loss of tobacco would mea n disaste r to the economy of our 

county unless we pla n now’ fo r more facilities to secure more in ­

dustries.

Th e Co untry Lin e Creek Wate rsh ed work pla n was sta rte d in 

1968, an d ou r cou nty has worked constan tly with State and local soil 

conservation pers onnel in d eveloping the work plan .

We have been faced with many problem s in the past 7 years; 

howe ver, wi th the fine coopera tion of the State and Fe deral Govern me nt personnel, we have resolved all problem s sat isfactor ily .

Th is pro jec t consists of two water imp oundments and will store 

water for flood con trol, mu nicipal and indu str ial wa ter supply, and 

recreation.
127

The landowners below these structu res will be able to use the ir lan d 

to the utm ost poten tial witho ut the worries of crop and soil loss as 

the y have experienced in previous years. Cro ps can be moved from 

th e ero din g hillsides and planted on the fer tile bottomlands. The 

erod ed hillsid es can the n be pla nte d in gra ss and tree s to pro tec t 

the soil.

At present the town of Yanceyv ille has a reservoir of ap prox imately 3 acres in size. Du rin g the past 10 years it has been necessary 

to pump w ate r from a n earby stream to the r ese rvo ir to provide water 

fo r t he to wn of Yanceyville. W ith this m ultipu rpo se structure we will 

be in an excellent position to attrac t industries . Ou r county has developed an indu str ial pa rk site and wa ter line system.

How ever, we are lim ited to the typ e of ind ustries th at we can 

attrac t because of the lim itations on the am ount of wa ter they can 

use.

If th is pro ject is c ompleted, we will have sufficient water to p rovide 

fo r future indu str ial and pop ula tion growth . Local fun ds will be 

used first to finance the municipal wa ter s upply in thi s first s tructu re. 

Our county must pur cha se all the la nd used for this str uc tur e to comply with the requ irem ents of Public Law 566.

Th e total pro jec t cost estimate is a pprox im ate ly $ 4 ^ m illion and of 

this the cou nty's sha re is appro xim ately 60 percent. As you can see, 

the county will have to ca rry its pa rt. M oney is pres ently bein g raise d 

fo r the first structure.

Th e benefit-cost rat io is 1.16 to 1.0, based on the pres ent inventory 

of our coun ty. How ever, when the proje ct is complete d, we feel the 

benefits will increase wi th new indu str y and population growth .

Struc tur al measures alon g with lan d tre atm en t will reduce flooding and flood dam ages on 1920 acres of bottomland below the dam. 

We feel th at this lan d will increase in benefits over the yea rs due 

to increased value of lan d and the soil th at is saved.

There is a severe lack of organized recrea tion and recreation fa ­

cilities in the coun ty. There for e, we feel th at the recr eational benefits will be justified . Th e two structures will pro vide water-based 

recreation.

In addition , the second structure will include a park and outdoo r 

cam pin g area with adequate sewage and water facilities.

As Presi dent of the Caswell Cou nty Dev elopme nt Co rpo ration , I 

have have worked du rin g the pas t 5 y ears wi th at least 25 indust ries 

th at were inte rested in loc ating in our cou nty because of the a vailable 

lab or force. Wh en they realized our water supply was lim ited , they 

lost all interest.

Th is year our State app roved, by po pu lar vote, the ado ption of 

ind ustrial bond s, which is the last St ate to do th at in the Un ited 

St ates ; and with the addit ion al water sup ply ou r county shou ld be 

in an excellent position to attra ct indu strie s.

In conclusion, I again ask your su pp ort of the Country Line Cree k 

Wa tershe d pro ject, as it is our feeling th at this pro ject is necessary 

fo r our county to make a complete tu rn upwa rd in population , employment opportunities , personal income, recrea tion, and good land 

use.
128

I noticed this morning there were several questions on recreation. 1 

would like to point out some figures th at we got from the State Soil 

Conservation in Raleigh. North Carolina is twelfth in the Nation 

in population. We are the fiftieth in the Nation in recreation facilities, 

and we are fiftieth in the Nation in total acres set aside for recreation.

So we urge your support. Thank you.

Senator Gravel. Thank you very much.

Senator Morgan couldn’t be here. He will have a statement to 

include in the record.

[A table appended to Mr. Farm er’s statement and a letter from 

Mr. Satterfield follow:]

GROSS ADJUSTED INCO ME AND GROSS RE TA IL SALES IN REGION G.— 197 3-74

County

Nu mber

of

re turn s

Ne t adjuste d 

gross income

Per ta xp ay er 

per ca pita

Gross retail 

sales

Per taxp ay er 

per capita

Pe rcent 

inc om e sp en t 

in co un ty

Alamance .................... . . . . 53,836 $374, 598, 282 $6,949 $3 22,301,000 $5,98 7 86

Ca sw ell........................ 6,79 2 39, 898, 398 5,87 4 17,334,000 2, 552 43

Da vid son...................... . . . . 51,88 7 334, 456, 312 6,445 25 2,69 7,00 0 4,87 0 76

D a v ie .. ....................... 9,994 65 ,711 ,276 6,57 5 39,97 3, 000 4,00 0 61

Fo rsyth......................... . . . . 114,798 929 ,158, 492 8,09 4 92 2,34 2,00 0 8,0 34 99

Guilfo rd ........................ . . . . 154,726 1, 210, 473, 684 7,82 3 1,489 ,7 80 ,000 9, 628 123

Ra ndolp h.......... .......... . . . . 41,624 263, 485, 791 6,330 174, 435, 000 4,19 0 66

Ro ckingham ................ . . . . 39,346 253, 560, 266 6,44 4 187,071,0 00 4, 754 74

Sto kes.......................... . . . . 11,796 74,415,74 7 6, 308 32,65 0, 000 2,7 68 44

S urr y............................ . . . . 27,182 161,542,8 84 5,94 3 168,960,000 6,21 5 105

Yad kin.......................... . . . . 12,282 74, 005,6 30 6,02 5 59,634, 000 4, 855 81

Reg iona l......... . . . . 524,262 3,78 1,359 ,216 7,213 3, 667,177, 000 6,9 95 97

Note.— In 1970, No rth Ca rolina had a net loss of 5,000 wor ke rs to the State of Virg in ia. Of th is numbe r, 1,412 (28 .25 

percen t) liv ed in Ca swell, Ro ckingham, and Stokes Counties. Davie County had a net loss of 512 wor ke rs to Rowan Co unty 

(1970). These 4 counties account fo r th e major outside region G com muting wor ke rs.

Caswell County,

Board of Commissioners, 

Yanceyville, N.C., June 2, 1976.

Re country line creek wate rshed project.

Hon. Mike Gravel,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Wate r Resources,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Gravel : The Country Line Watershed Proj ect is of the ut ­

most importance to Caswell County for many reasons. I und erst and th at 

this project is now before the Senate Wa ter Resources Subcommittee. I speak 

for the enti re Board of County Commissioners in my following remarks.

1. Background.—Caswell County is a county of 435 square miles and a populatio n of over 20,000. We have an assessed value (recently appr aised of 

$205,000,000 or 1/3 or less of the value of counties aroun d us of similar size 

in population. Approximately 4,000 workers leave the County to work each 

day.

2. Benefits of Wate rshed Projec t:

A. Flood Control—as referenc ed in the Soil Conservation Plan.

B. In du str ial Development—The County needs to be able to provide wa ter 

in order to at trac t prop er types of industry.

C. Recre ation —The projec t would provide much needed recr eatio nal are as 

and really help at trac t indu stry to our community.

D. Employm ent—The project will provide short-term and long-term jobs for 

the County and help increa se the economic base.

E. Tax Relief—The ind ustrial development will enable the County to reduce its prope rty tax levy which is now the second highest in the State. The 

ind ustrial tax base in the County is now only 10% of the tota l value. The
129

farmers and households of the County are carryin g the load of the taxes in 

order to provide funds for programs required by the State and Federal Government.

Caswell County has been working on this project since 1968. The County 

Commissioners have levied a tax to help build the project every year beginning in 1969. The County now has $320,000 it has derived from tax money to 

help build the watershed project.

I can assure you and the Congress of our United States that this project is 

our County’s top priority. If I or our Board can help in any way to get this project funded, please let me know.

Sincerely yours,

Lynn B. Satterfield, Chai rma n.

Senator Gravel. Thank you.

Mr. Farmer. Thank you very much.

Sentor Gravel. Our next witness is Mr. Hamlin for the Second 

Broad River project, Rutherford County Watershed Commission.

STATEMENT OF J. J. HAM LIN, JR ., CHA IRMAN, RUT HER FOR D

COUNTY WA TERSHED COMMISSION, RUTHERFORDTON, N.C.

Mr. Hamlin. Thank you, Senator Gravel.

I would like to comment that less than a month ago, I was in the 

beautiful State of Alaska. I brought back one brown bear, many 

pleasant memories, and left several thousand dollars.

Senator Gravel. The last contribution is the most significant.

Mr. Hamlin. I also have a son in platinum who I think is going to 

take up residence and might be a constituent.

Senator Gravel. The weather might be a little different than in 

North Carolina, but certainly the country would welcome him.

Mr. Hamlin. They spent the last winter alone. The nearest 

neighbors were 11 miles away, Eskimos, so they know what the 

winter is.

Senator Gravel. I am sure they do.

Mr. Hamlin. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee on Water Resources, I am J. J. Hamlin, Jr., Chairman of the Rutherford County, 

North Carolina, Watershed Commission.

My residence is in Rutherford County, North Carolina, and I appear before you today for the purpose of making a statement in 

support of the proposed Second Broad River Watershed project, 

which is in Rutherford, McDowell and Cleveland Counties of North 

Carolina.

For the following reasons, I believe th at I can make a knowledgeable and yet unbiased statement concerning the conditions prevailing 

in this watershed which justify the funding and ultimate completion 

of the project.

My first association with the area was in 1938 when I went to 

Rutherford County as an assistant agricultural farm agent. In 1944, 

I bought the land lying on both sides of Second Broad River and 

started my farming career in my own right. Over the years, my wife 

and I put together 1100 acres in a contiguous tract, made our living 

there, raised our family and sold the farm in 1975 after 31 years of 

farming which involved work every single day of these 31 years—for 

w’e operated a dairy farm.
130

In th e l ight of these facts, and notin g t hat I no lo nge r own p rope rty 

in the area, I feel th at I can speak wi th both knowledge and objectivity.

My statements to you will be more general th an specific. The detai ls of the proje ct are provide d in forma l work pla n, some copies of 

which I have with me and more can be prepared if needed.

The need for flood con trol in the Second Broad River watersh ed 

area has long been recognized by far me rs the re. Floodin g one or 

more time s annually is almo st a certa int y. I t is not so much a 

question of wheth er it will h app en, or not, as i t is when w ill i t happen 

and how bad will it be.

I recall some ye ars ago b alin g h ay in the bottom lan d along the rive r 

one fall. The re was no storm fore cast and the sky was so clea r and 

blue t hat I stoppe d baling, leaving the hay alr eady baled in the field 

and sta rte d mow ing more hay so it could be curing.

During the n ight, a storm moved in, the riv er went out o f its bank s 

and my hay ended up , as fa r as I know, in the At lantic Ocean 300 

miles away. At any rate, the las t tim e I saw it, it was headed th at 

way.

Only men and women who farm un de r these conditio ns can trul y 

understand the fru str ation, hearta che and losses caused by the elements you seek to live harmoniously wi th and grow crops in coopera ­

tion with.

No longer than it has been since I hav e left the far m, I find my ­

self exp eriencing so m uch less awareness of the effects of these floods 

th at I can un derst and how a person who has never lived with it just 

can ’t un derst and it at all.

Nowt, coin cidentally , as I was wr iting th at last sentence, I heard 

on the radio, which happene d to be on in the oth er room, a pro gra m 

int err uptio n and the announcer said , “Flash floo d watch tod ay in the 

mountains of western No rth Carolina .”

I t is with a sense of relief th at I react to such an announcem ent— 

bu t also sort of a gu ilt feeling too, because I know my friends who 

are still the re in the vall ey may litera lly be wdped out—while I am 

no longer affected, as I was for 31 years.

Th e Second Broad River Wate rsh ed oro jec t had its beg inn ing in 

the ear ly sixties by far mers on Can e Creek, which is a pa rt of the 

watersh ed and a trib ut ar y of Second Broad Riv er. Th eir efforts and 

work interested others and the pro ject ultim ate ly exp and ed to its 

presen t size, which includes a total of 144,300 acres.

As you gentlem en know full well, many changes have taken place 

since those days. When the initial pla ns were begun, we all thou gh t 

the pro ject would be complete, long before now. Man y who worked 

on it in the begin nin g have passed away. Others are still working 

to see its fru ition , even tho ugh it can’t come in time to help them . 

I t is som ething the y would like to see done so that their children, 

and gen era tions yet unborn, can pro fit by it.

Ju st las t yea r, in 1975, the worst storm in recorded his tor y occurred. In less t ha n 2 months tim e we h ad a 1 00-year storm and a 180- 

yea r storm. Dam age was over $1,050,000 in the area and the Federal 

Governme nt woun d up spe nding $130,632 in disast er aid to the 

victims.
131

Needless to say, this did not repa ir all the dam age , nor will it ever 

be total ly rep aired. Ha d the wate rshed pro jec t been completed, much 

of the dam age c ould have been preven ted.

In 1965, a referendum was held in Ru therfo rd Cou nty autho riz ing 

the county comm issioners to levy up to 5 cents pe r $100 ev alu ation as 

a watersh ed tax. Since t hat time, an estimated $200,000 has been spe nt 

in eng ineerin g and planning. $287,000 special ALS CP approp ria tio ns 

have been app lied in the area for lan d con serving practices and the re 

has been man y hu ndred s of days of work done by Soil Conserv ation 

Serv ice technician s and inte rested pers ons who have con trib ute d th eir 

time. We anticipa te th at most of the lan d rig hts will be don ated.

Gentlem en, I am confident th at the necessary data on this proje ct 

is available to you and I have brou gh t with me seven copies of the 

wor k plan, all th at was available to me when I left. I f you find th at 

any add itio nal inf orma tio n is needed, I will certainly do all in my 

pow er to pro vid e it.

It has been my pur pose to briefly convey to you the intere st of the 

people at home and to dem ons trat e this by taki ng the tim e and ma king the effort to be here today.

Cons isten t with the curre nt tre nd of thou gh t, the project, which 

consists of 12 dams, has been designed fo r multip le-purpo se benefits. 

Th e larges t lake, which will have an area of 155 surface acres, and 

an ap prop ria te are a around it will be fully developed for recreation. 

Consideratio n has adequately been given to improving fish and wildlif e hab itat.

The eng ineerin g stud ies reveal a benefit ratio of 1.4 to 1.0 and the 

env ironmental im pact statem ent has been caref ull y review ed and ap ­

proved. All systems are sittin g on “go” back home, gentlemen, and 

we are exceedin gly hop eful th at the proje ct will be funded and 

sta rte d this year.

We respec tfully urg e your endorsement of t he Second Bro ad River 

Wate rsh ed proje ct in Ru therford, McDowell and Cleveland Cou nties 

of western No rth Ca rolina , and we are indeed grateful to you for 

the op portu nit y to be heard by you.

Th ank you very much .

I would like to poi nt out, in conside ratio n of Mr. Ra ndolp h’s point, 

th at jus t a few’ weeks ago, less than 50 miles away a fam ily was wiped 

out by a flashflood. Peo ple do lose their lives.

Senator Gravel. T ha nk you very much, sir.

Senator Montoya will be subm itti ng a statem ent for the reco rd 

wi th respect to New’ Mexico projects.

[Senato r M ontoy a’s sta tem ent follows :]

Statement of Senator J oseph M. Montoya on the Cottonwood-Walntjt Creek

and Zuni Pueblo Watershed Projects

I wish to thank Senator Gravel and the entire subcommittee for allowing me 

to submit this statement concerning the watershed work plans for the Cottonwood-Walnut Creek and Zuni Pueblo Wate rshed projects. Both of these projects 

are vitally important to the citizens of western and southwestern New Mexico, 

and I am pleased to have the opportunity to sha re their intere st and concern in 

this matter with the members of the Wa ter Resources Subcommittee.

The Central Valley, Penasco, and Hagerman-Dexter Natural Resource Conservation Districts, along with the Sureste RC&D and the Cotton wood-WalnutWatershed Board have l>een cosponsors of these projects since the early 19G0’s. 

These watersheds are essential to the local farme rs and rur al residents who live 

in the surrounding areas, as they would prevent the type of destruction that 

occurred in the tragic flooding of 1854 and 1967.
132

Another added benefit of these projects is the recreat ional development of 

Site 19 by the New Mexico Game and Fish Dep artm ent and the New Mexico 

Pa rks Commission. Th is addition al improvement on these area s will subsequently 

benefit all of New Mexico’s citizens by providing them with new are as in which 

to enjoy a wide v ariet y of outdo or recreati onal activi ties.

I have received many lett ers from soil conservation dist rict s, watershed boards, 

and local municipalitie s all across New Mexico who have expressed the ir full 

supp ort for the construction of these two projects. The fac t th at both the local 

people involved w ith these p ropos als a s well a s the possible future users of these 

are as are concerned about their approval in my mind speaks highly of the need 

and desir ability for cons truct ing both of thes e proposed wate rshed plans.

Again, I would like to thank this subcommittee fo r giving me the oppor tunity 

to express my personal int ere st in these two proje cts, and to express the f eelings 

of many citizens in my home state. I hope th at your deliberatio ns will find th ese 

two proposals as beneficial an d u seful as I have.

Senator Gravel. T he h earin g is here by adjou rne d.

[W hereup on, a t 11 :15 a.m., the subcomm ittee recessed, to reconvene 

at 10 a.m., F riday , Ju ne 18,1976.]
PENDING WATERSHED WORK PLANS 

Elk Creek, W. Va.

FR ID AY, JU N E 18, 197 6

U. S. Senate,

Commit tee on P ublic W orks, 

Subcomm itte e on W ater Resources,

Wa shington , D.G.

The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room 4200, Dir kse n Senat e 

Office Bu ild ing , Hon . Jenning s Ra nd olph (chairma n of the full 

comm ittee) presiding .

Pr es en t: Senat ors R and olp h, Gra vel, and Burdick.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JENNINGS RANDOLPH, H.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

Senator R andolph . Good mornin g.

In a sense, we can say thi s is a nothe r West Virgini a day because all 

who are in the audienc e this mo rning are W est Vir ginian s.

I am serving in the capacity th is mo rning th at I do not possess. 

We are havin g this mee ting in the Sen ate Public Wo rks Committe e 

room. I do have the responsibility of ch air ing the Senate Publi c 

W orks Committee. We have subcommittees on several jur isd ica tions 

of this committee’s responsib ility. One is the Subc omm ittee on W ater 

Resources.

I chair no subcommittee, as you can understand, bu t I serve as an 

ex-officio mem ber of all subcomm ittees and the ran king member 

of this committee also serves as an ex-officio member of all subcommittees.

We have rece ntly mad e a change, or th e chan ge was made necessary 

in connection with the min ority. Ho wa rd Ba ker of Tennessee because of a new committee assignment found it necessary to leave the 

ran kin g minority position on the c ommittee. He remains a mem ber of 

the committee, but the position is now tak en by Senator Buckley of 

New York.

How many mem bers of the subcommittee will be pre sen t this 

morning, I do not know. I will tell you th at the Sen ate of the U nited 

State s is in session. We were in session, a lon g schedule yesterda y, beginning at 8 o’clock in the mo rning and continuing un til after 

9 o’clock las t nig ht.

Someone might ask, when do you do your oth er work? You do 

it at oth er times. I am only say ing to you th at the schedule is rather 

(133)
134

heavy and at times it is difficult to do i t all. Yesterda y was a d ay th at 

I can recall vividly. I ha d nine gro ups of West Vi rgini ans in W ashing ton on various projects.

So to hold those meetings, it was somewhat difficult. There was a 

gro up of some 11 or 12 from Weston who have a prob lem with securin g the necessary na tural gas to operate a new glass f actory which 

is b eing developed there.

The glass fac tory at the present tim e has abo ut 11 workers. I f the 

na tural gas can be secured for the expansion of the plan t, ap prox imately 125 wor kers will be employed. So we were working wi th the 

Federal Pow er Comm ission yesterday and thro ug h oth er means, 

hopin g th at the necessary natur al gas can be secured.

I only men tion th is so as to express our appre cia tion of yo ur coming 

and to say th at y ou have been joined by man y othe r West Virginia ns 

du rin g the pa st 36 hours.

The bells will rin g and t hat is two bells. Tha t means we a re havin g 

a quor um call in the S enate. Tha t is f or Members like me to be over in 

the Senate instead of here , bu t I will be here. I will, of necessity, 

have to go when the re is just one bell because th at means th at there 

will be a rollcall in progress.

W ith those expla nations and with my genuine welcome to you all,

I am once aga in privileged to counsel with We st Virginia ns. On this 

occasion, I will talk with people, and more importantl y, liste n to 

peop le who are from th at section of West Virg inia in which I had 

my beginnin gs.

As most of you, I am sure know, I was born at Salem in Harris on 

County. I worked in Clark sburg and was educate d in th at area. I 

know the lan d well and have a great affection for th at lan d and for 

West Virginians gen erally who lived the re in the past and who live 

the re now.

For these and man y oth er reasons, I think th at this is a very sig ­

nificant hearing. I have long felt th at, even pe rhaps more in the Bicentenn ial year than in any oth er year, we should remember th at our 

Fo un ding Fa th er s in adoptin g our Co nstitu tion, did no t say the 

emperor, the kin g, the rul er.

You will remember the words, “We the people.” Those were the 

words, “We the people, in ord er to for m a more perfect union .” So, 

in a sense, t his is a he ari ng concerned wi th the view points of people, 

the opinion s of people and the convictions of people.

Ou r subject as we all know is the work plan for the Elk Creek 

Wa tershe d proposed fo r Harrison , Ba rbou r, and Up sh ur Coun ties. 

Th is proposal is estimated to cost $20 million.

I am not at this po int att em pting to say a pro ject is good or a 

pro ject is bad, bu t a proje ct in the Un ite d State s of Ame rica tod ay 

th at is not sta rte d now, bu t sta rte d 1 yea r late r or 2 yea rs late r or 

3 years lat er, is going to cost more and more money. Tha t is th e experience with bu ild ing the hig hw ay system in West Virgi nia .

If I could ind ica te to you wh at it cost to build a mile of hig hw ay 

in West Vi rgini a 20 yea rs ago as ag ains t 10 years ago and 5 years 

ago and now in We st Virginia , I th in k pe rhap s you might be astounded at the figure.
135

The pro ject now, whether it is correc t or incorrect—and I am not 

to say—is estimated to cost $20 million and would involve much 

constructio n and other type s of develop men t in the area.

On Ju ne 3, th e subcommittee members cond ucted a heari ng on this 

pro ject and on six oth er watershed pro jects or w ork pla ns th roug ho ut 

the cou ntry . At th at hearing—I was only presen t for a few minutes— 

the re were rep res entative s of the Soil Conservation Service an d other 

inte rested gro ups who were tes tifyin g.

It was, I would say, almost imm ediatel y af te r the hea ring th at our 

office, which is you r office, received a numb er of inquiries by telephon e, mostly, from citizens expre ssing their opp osition to the pr oposed project. Several of these pers ons lat er came to Washin gto n and 

we had an infor ma tiv e and helpf ul meeting.

Feeling th at such an importa nt pro jec t needed the most tho rou gh 

conside ration—includ ing the pre sen tation of all valid viewpoints— 

I asked the chairma n, Sen ator Gra vel of Ala ska, to schedule thi s 

add itio nal heari ng in the subcommittee.

So the oth er pro jec ts th at we had un de r conside ration are rea dy 

for rep ortin g to the full comm ittee, bu t this pro ject is stil l under 

consideration. Pr ojects such as the one in which you are inte rested 

have sub stantial impact one way or anoth er on the com mun ity. There 

are benefits and appa rentl y the re are a^ o benefits th at occur to such 

projects in ma ny States.

Du rin g the period th at I have been a mem ber of thi s committee, 

which is 18 yea rs, we have had literall y scores and scores of such 

projects th at have been app roved. I do n't recall one on which the re 

was the great difference of opin ion as is expressed on this pro ject.

So the re are the adv antage s and dis adv ant age s, all of these have to 

be placed in perspectiv e and considered. Tha t is the reason I asked 

for the heari ng to day and asked for the privilege , if my schedule pe rmitted , to chair the hea ring .

We have those pe rsons p rese nt who are prop onents o f th e Elk Creek 

plan and we h ave those who are opposed to the plan. It is my hope — 

and I am sure th at it will follow—tha t we will have det ailed discussion and inf orm ation th at will help us eva luate the project.

I think th at our form of gov ernme nt prop erl y fun ctio ns best, as 

I earlie r s aid, w hen the people who are concerned a re here an d ins ofa r 

as possible heeded. I must say to you, however, th at the heeding 

process process is m ore difficult th an the he ari ng process.

I had a con stituen t—I do not know this lad y who called last n ight 

about 10 :30 from Wh eeling—who had been tryi ng fo r 2 day s to 

reac h me. It was no t th at I cou ldn’t arr ange the schedule to ta lk 

with her, bu t I could n’t ret urn the call. She would not ta lk wi th 

anyone else. I was busy —I don’t have to tel l you th at —wi th a heavy 

schedule, sometimes 18 roll calls a day.

So I took the call las t nigh t and she tal ked fo r 28 minutes. At th at 

time of nigh t, I don’t know wh eth er I even heard as well as I migh t 

and perha ps she turned me off just a lit tle because of the attitud e 

th at she had. Bu t th at is a ll in the process of hearing a nd heeding.

So today, we are try ing, as you are tryi ng —and I am appre ciative 

of you r efforts—to know from your sta ndpoint s more abo ut this
136

proj ec t, w ha t it wi ll do or w ha t it will no t do ac co rd in g to yo ur th in k ­

ing . Yo u are th e peop le di re ct ly invo lve d who m us t live w ith or w it hou t th e pr ojec t.

W e ha ve th e pr op on en ts of th e pr oj ec t. The re ar e m an y of tho se 

who are here, bu t th er e are th re e, as I un de rs ta nd it , wh o ar e to 

tes tif y. T hat wo uld be Mr. Fet ty , Mr. Unt er ko efler, an d Mr. Sh affer.

Mr . F et ty , bo ar d of su pe rviso rs of So il Co ns erva tio n D is tr ic t, 

Mr. Un ter ko efl er, co un ty pl an ne r, H ar ri so n Cou nt y Co mm ission ; an d 

Mr . Sh aff er, th e m ay or of Cla rk sb ur g. I f I ha ve give n th e co rre ct 

nam es of tho se wh o wi ll te st ify fo r th e pr oj ec t, wo uld yo u come fo rw ar d to th e t ab le so we can be gin th e te st im on y ?

STATEMENT OF I. N. FETTY, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,

WEST FORK SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT, CLARKSBURG,

W. VA., ACCOMPANIED BY GEROLD UNTERKOEFLER, COUNTY

PLANNER, HARRISON COUNTY COMMISSION; HON. S. JAMES

SHAFFER , MAYOR, CLARKSBURG; DANIEL L. McCARTHY, PRE SIDENT, HARRISON COUNTY COMMISSION, CLARKSBURG W. VA.;

PORTER NESTER, SUPERVISOR, TYGARTS VALLEY CONSERVATION DISTRICT, PH IL IP PI , W. VA.; DAVID BRANTNER, PRESIDENT, WEST VIR GIN IA WIL DLIF E FEDERATION; HON. D. F.

OLIVERIO, MAYOR, STONEWOOD, W. VA .; JAMES TOOTHMAN, ELK

CREEK W ATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE, CLARKSBURG,

W. VA.; VICTOR GONZALES, REPR ESEN TING THE TOWN OF

ANMOORE, W. VA.; HON. JOHN CARDER, MAYOR, TOWN OF

NUTTER FORT, W. VA.; AND JAMES MICHAEL, AREA CONSERVATIONIST, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, PH IL IP PI , W. VA.

Se na to r R an dolph. Sha ll we ha ve th e te stim on y giv en in th e or de r 

of th e name s or is th er e a lead-o ff perso n ot he r th an th e name s I 

ha ve re ad ?

M ay or Sha ff er. I th in k th e way yo u ha ve re ad th e nam es is co rre ct.

Se na to r R an dolph. Y ou will id en ti fy yo ur se lf as you begin yo ur 

testi mo ny . E ve ry wo rd you say will lie he ld fo r or ag ai ns t you . Th ey 

us ua lly say it m ig ht be he ld ag ains t yo u, bu t it could be he ld fo r you .

W e ha ve th e tr an sc ri pt of th is he ar in g wh ich I wan t to say is 

a pu blic tr an sc ri pt. An yo ne will ha ve th e op por tu nity to st ud y it, 

to know ex ac tly wyh at wa s said he re to da y.

I f yo u wi ll, ple ase pro cee d an d id en tify yo ur se lf.

Mr. F ett y. Se na to r, do we rema in se ated ?

Sen at or R andol ph. Ye s, you ma y.

Mr . F ett y. H on or ab le Se na to r R an do lp h, ch ai rm an of th e Pub lic 

W or ks Co mmi tte e, I am “I k e” I. N. F et ty , ch ai rm an of th e W es t 

F o rk So il Con se rv at io n di st ri ct , ch ai rm an , Boa rd of Su pe rv isor s. I 

ha ve w ri tten th is stat em en t an d will re ad it fo r br ev ity .

G en tlem en : So il Co ns erv ati on D is tr ic t pr og ra m s inc lud e ass istanc e 

fo r ap pl yi ng co ns er va tio n tec hn olo gy to pr ob lem s in ru ra l an d ur ba n 

are as—w he reve r la nd is use d w ith in th eir bo un da rie s.

U nd er W es t V ir gin ia law s enacted in 1939 , di st rict s are ch ar ge d 

with th e du tie s an d re sp on sib ili ty of pr ov id in g sou nd co ns erva tio n
137

planning for lan d uses in ord er to pro vide this, and future generations, with a fit place to live, work and play .

The Fe deral law, Publi c Law 83-566, provides for dis tricts to 

assist the local people in small waters hed pro jects in cosp onsorship 

with tax lev yin g bodies.

Flo od pre vention pro jects on waters hed s are im porta nt measures 

th at conserve, deve lop, utilize, and dispose of water in an orderly 

manner. They help to prevent top-soil losses and sediment pollution, 

and help conserve and pro perly utilize land.

In the case of Elk Creek, the 13 dams will store water to release it 

gradua lly the reb y affording pro tection from flood waters on at leas t 

51 percen t of the lan d in the pro jec t boundaries.

In the Elk Creek watershed, at leas t twic e a yea r, a pa rk and lan d 

th at could support a school are flooded; businesses, homes, and ro ad ­

ways need cleanup efforts, and money—ta x dollars—pay for cleanup 

and damages. More im porta nt, uncontrolled water carries ton s of 

topsoil with it and far ml and becomes poorer and less pro ductive each 

year. Preventiv e tax dollars go fu rth er than cleanup tax dollars.

Fu rth ermo re, watershed pro ject assistance is only provide d upo n 

written request by local people.

In e arly 1967, the Elk Creek W ate rsh ed Association was organized. 

The board of directors was made up of 25 local citize ns and spon sorrepresent atives who favored the pro ject. They held reg ula r meetin gs 

and publicize d th eir meetings and activities. To date, the y have ha d 

140 news arti cles and 15 pictures pub lish ed in local new spapers . They 

have had local TV coverage.

Upon w’ritte n request by local people, in March 1969, a wr itten 

request for assistance und er the Wa tershe d Prote ction and Flo od 

Pre vention Ac t—Pub lic Law 83-566— was made fo r the 77,860-acre 

Elk Creek waters hed.

Th e app lication was signed and autho riz ed by the g overn ing bodies 

of the Ba rbour and Ha rrison County Comm issions, the West Fo rk 

and Tyg ar t’s Valle y Soil Cons ervation Di str ict s, the cities of Cl arks ­

bu rg and Ston ewood, and the towns of Anm oore and Nut ter Fo rt.

Critical problem s and needs were listed in the request for help .

The app lication was reviewed and appro ved as valid by the State 

soil conserv ation comm ittee, the des ignated appro vin g agency for the 

Sta te. Th is committee established a plan ning priorit y and forw ard ed 

the app lication to the Soil Con servation Service.

Detaile d plan ning go und erw ay in September 1969. T here follo wed 

7 years of exh austive inventories, onsite surveys, and studies of m any 

combina tions of str uc tur al and nonstru ctu ral measures. Sev eral alternativ e pla ns were developed to meet and satisfy the needs and objectiv es set by the sponsors, and the y meet the constrain ts and cri ter ia 

under Public Law 83-566. Selection of the final pla n was made by all 

sponsors.

We are confiden t th at the pla n selected and now before the U.S . 

Congress is the best possible feasible and economic pla n un de r presen t 

conditio ns fo r the biggest ma jority of the peop le liv ing in the 

watersh ed. We are also certain if this pla n is app roved by the U.S . 

Congress for ins tallation , and if the Soil Con servation Service’s past 

experience with 30 oth er watershed pro jects in the Sta te and two in 

opera tion withi n ou r own West Fo rk Distri ct is any ind ication, th at
138

during the installation period changing conditions will necessitate 

and dictate that the plan be modified and changed. The SCS will 

provide planning assistance in making such changes which are acceptable to all sponsors, which meet the constraints and criteria of 

the law, and which will give the districts the opportunity to perform duties given to them by law.

The West Fork Soil Conservation District therefore recommends 

approval by Congress of the Elk Creek watershed project plan, 

requests that our written presentation be made a part of the hearing 

records, and thanks you for the opportunity to appear before this 

committee.

Senator Randolph. Thank you very much, Mr. Fetty. I will ask 

Mr. Harris, 1

 when you speak of the approval of the Congress, to 

give for the record so that that information can be available, the 

procedure by which such a project is approved or not approved in 

the workings of the Congress.

I want to say to you that we do not vote upon an individual 

project in the Senate or in the House of Representatives.

Mr. H arris?

Mr. Harris. The Soil Conservation Service projects of this type 

are submitted to the Congress by the Office of Management and 

Budget. They come to the Public Works Committees of the House 

and Senate who review the projects in the Subcommittees on Water 

Resources.

The projects are then referred to the full committee for consideration and discussion. They do not go to the floor for a vote. 

They are approved by resolution of the two committees. Once these 

two resolutions are adopted, then the project is approved and the 

Soil Conservation Service and the local sponsoring group can go 

forward with the project.

Funding would also be required subject to appropriation acts at 

a later date after the project is approved by the authorizing committees.

Senator Randolph. Mr. Unterkoefler.

STATEMENT OF GEROLD UNTERKOEFLE R, HAR RISON COUNTY 

COMMISSION

Mr. Unterkoefler. Mr. Randolph, members of the Water Resources Subcommittee: My name is Gerold Unterkoefler, chief administrative officer for Harrison County and I represent the Harrison County Commissioners, a prime sponsoring organization of the 

Elk Creek watershed work plan.

The Harrison County Commissioners’ statement reads as follows:

Since the original request for assistance in flood prevention to the Soil 

Conservation Service in March, 1969, co-signed by the Harrison and Barbour 

County Commissioners, the West Fork and Tygarts Valley Soil Conservation 

Districts and the cities of Anmoore, Stonewood, Nutter Fort, and Clarksburg, 

Harrison County has supported the need for flood prevention throughou t the 

Elk Creek Watershed.

1

 Richard M. Harris, ass istant counsel, Senate Public Works Committee.
139

It has been, and still is, the inte nt of the County Commissioners to provide 

the maximum amount of flood control with the minimum amoun t of damage 

to cropla nds consis tent with the desire s of local landowners and minimum 

relocation of persons curr entl y living in the affected areas.

As with all projects of thi s magnitude, some persons suffer more tha n 

other s and still othe r persons stand to gain much by the completion of this 

project.

The final completion of this projec t with in the normal ten years allowed 

by Federal sta tut e for such insta llatio n, will be dependent upon the cooperation of affected citizens, the availability of Fede ral funding and the ability of 

the local sponsors to develop sources for the required local share.

The fact that a majo r shar e of the local contribut ion for the proposed work 

plan will have to be rais ed by a General Obligation Bond which requires the 

vote of the citize ns of Harr ison County, must be viewed realisticall y.

This observation is especially valid when reviewed within the county. It 

should be pointed out th at this does not automati cally doom the project. In 

fact, the most imp orta nt par t, that of the construction of small impoundment 

areas for flood control, could be constructed with local contribu tions from 

persons receiving direct benefit.

As with any maj or unde rtaking which takes years to form ulate and plan, 

and then takes a long period of review before appro val and then years to 

construct, the changing pat tern of life in the community and other projects, 

not necessarily rela ted to flood prevention, may change the needs of the cit izens living in Harrison County and more particu larl y, in the Elk Creek Wa tershed.

There is one prime area that has come to light in developing the County's 

1976 Comprehensive Plan. That is the imme diate availabi lity of recre ation 

facilities rivaling those proposed in the work plan now unde r consideration. 

These faci lities were not available as litt le as 18 months ago when the work 

plan was completed.

It is still not assured that these faci litie s will be completed, but if these 

facilities can be completed in the near future , at a lesser cost tha n proposed 

in the plan, and since one of these faci lities is with in one and one-half miles 

of the work plan proposed recreation site, consi deration would have to be 

given to scaling down th at recreation site.

The only reason to scale the site down would be to provide the citizens of 

Harr ison County bet ter and more complete recreat ional facilities and a reduc ­

tion in the cost of those facilities.

It is fully consis tent with the rapidly changing needs and growth in Har ­

rison County, to expect th at durin g the course of construction of this project, 

that one or more amendments will be required.

The prime objective of the Elk Creek Watershed Work Plan is to provide 

flood prevention and protection to majo r population area s of the county. Not 

only will the p’an you now consider provide this all important element, but 

the plan will also help provide for fut ure developable lands in the County.

This will be achieved because the small flood prevention impoundm ent sites 

will grea tly change the are as deline ated as flood prone on the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engin eers’ maps used for the federally conducted flood insur ance 

program.

This “reclaim ed” land will be avail able for future development, an asset 

to both the landow ner and because of its close proximity to the urb an core 

of Clarksbu rg, an asset to future development of the County.

The Harr ison County Commission, due to a lack of engineering expertis e, 

must rely totally on the professional abili ty of the Soil Conservation Service 

to determ ine real need and to prepare a work plan which will meet th at need.

Based upon the historic al need for flood preven tion in the Elk Creek basin 

and upon the Soil Conservation Services’ dete rmin ation of need and solution 

to this long-term problem, with acute awareness of the possible need for 

amendments during the course of this proje ct the County Commissioners of 

Harr ison County respectfully request th is committe e approve the Elk Creek 

Watershed Work Plan for immediate constructio n. The need is great.

Th an k you.

Senator R andolph. Th an k you ver y, very much. Is th at a Swiss 

name or German name?
140

Mr. Unterkoefler. It is German, sir.

Senator Randolph. My wife is Swiss, but her name is shorter. I 

was making sure. Where were you born ?

Mr. Unterkoefler. Originally in California.

Senator Randolph. Have you lived in Harrison County for many 

years?

Mr. Unterkoefler. For 2 years now.

Senator Randolph. I know Mr. Fetty has been around for awhile.

Mr. Fetty. Yes; quite awhile—too long, maybe, Senator.

Senator Randolph. We will now hear from the mayor of the city 

of Clarksburg, James Shaffer.

STATEMENT OF S. JAMES SHAFFER, MAYOR, CLARKSBURG, W. VA.

Mr. Shaffer. Senator Randolph, members of this subcommittee:

My name is Jim Shaffer, mayor of the city of Clarksburg. As 

mayor of the city of Clarksburg, I have the unanimous support of 

the Clarksburg City Council to submit affirmative approval of the 

Elk Creek watershed plan as preventive to the flooding the city 

limits of our city.

In the past our community has been handicapped during the high 

rainy months with the extremely high water levels from the Elk 

Creek. Many people have to be on the alert when the Elk Creek 

water levels begin to rise.

In March 1967, all of the thoroughfares leading into our city 

were impassable due to high water spillage of the Elk Creek.

Just yesterday the city of Clarksburg began demolishing substandard housing, 150 feet from the bank of the Elk Creek in the 

heart of our community. These houses were only substandard because of the yearly flooding or fear of flooding. In this same area 

years ago, people actually abandoned their homes and let th eir prop ­

erty be sold for taxes.

The city council of Clarksburg in a meeting just last night, unanimously agreed tha t I, as mayor of our community, appear here 

today and give 100 percent support of this flood control plan.

I would be less than honest if I did not add that our community 

at the present time does not have any funds earmarked for flood 

control. Unless the citizens of our county pass a general obligation 

bond, I personally don’t know if our city of Clarksburg could come 

up with our fair share.

It is indeed a pleasure to be here and I thank you.

Senator Randolph. Thank you very much, Mayor Shaffer.

Before we ask questions—I am not sure how many questions I will 

ask—I would like for those citizens who are here with the three 

witnesses who appear for the proponents to stand, if you will. Give 

your name and your position and any other information that you 

desire.

It is not necessary for all to stand at one time. But I want the 

record to show the citizens as I have indicated who are here. Mr. 

Keene, president of the Barbor County Commission, I presume we 

might start with you.

Senator Randolph. Thank you very much, Mayor.
141

Mr. Keene. I am Jim Keene, president of the Barbour County 

Commission. I am here as one of the sponsors of the Elk Creek watershed, to glean from this meeting whatever I can to take back to 

our commission.

Thank you very much for allowing me to sit in.

Senator Randolph. Thank you.

Then if you will just go forward with the others, I just wanted one 

person to start. So someone will just come second.

Mr. Michael. Senator Randolph, I am James Michael, area conservationist of the Soil Conservation Service, Philippi. I am the 

area supervisor and this project falls in my area. I am here strictly 

as a technical resource today in behalf of the Soil Conservation 

Service.

Senator Randolph. You are not here for or against the project?

Mr. Michael. That is correct.

Senator Randolph. We want to clearly identify and thank you 

very much.

STAT EMENT OF D. F. OLIVERIO, MAYOR, STONEWOOD, W. VA.

Mr. Oliverio. Honorable Senator Randolph, I am D. F. Oliverio, 

mayor of the city of Stonewood, Harrison County, directly in the 

path of Elk Creek.

I am here today in support of the proposed multiple dams for the 

control of the watershed and thereby prevent flooding. We have a 

section in Stonewood tha t often floods and people have to leave. It 

happens once or twice every year.

Mr. Leroy. I am Joe Leroy, councilman, city of Stonewood. I, 

too, am with the mayor, for this project. Thank you.

Senator Randolph. Thank you very much.

[A letter from Mayor Oliverio follows:]

City of Stonewood, 

Stonewood, W. Va., June 17, 1976.

Re chairman of the Senate Subcomittee on Elk Creek Water Shed Program. 

Hon. Jennings Randolph,

U.8. Senator from West Virginia,

105 Old Senate Building,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Randolph : Just a few words to let you know my feelings on 

the Elk Creek Wa ter Shed Project. I live down stream on Elk Creek and 

during a heavy rainy season, it often nearly floods. While I am not in any 

personal danger, I do know there are sections of Stonewood that are. Water 

Street has been inundated several times since I have been Mayor. I don’t 

think this should be allowed to continue. This Elk Creek Water Shed Project 

has been discussed for some time, and there are many advan tages to its 

fru itfu l conclusion.

In addition to the flood control aspect, some of these dams as proposed bv 

the Elk Creek Water Shed Association would offer high points of recre ational 

possibilities for development. Then, too, in drou ght conditions, this water 

could be released and keep Elk Creek clean since there are points in the upper 

head wate rs of it that raw sewage water is going into it. Also, I think the 

instance of this being corrected is excellent and will soon be non-existent.

I beseech your efforts towards the accomplishment and authorization of this 

project.

Sincerely yours,

D. F. Oliverio, P.E., Mayor.
142

STATEMENT OF VICTOR GONZALEZ, RE PRESEN TIN G THE TOWN OF 

ANMOORE, W. VA.

Mr. Gonzalez. I am Victor Gonzalez, Senator; pleased to be here 

with you. I represent the town of Anmoore and also am immediate 

past president of the Elk Creek Watershed Association, and presently am a member of the board of directors. We, too, support the 

plan as submitted, and have a brief written testimony that we would 

prefer to be entered into the record.

Thank you.

Senator Randolph. Is that to be entered into the record by you?

Mr. Gonzalez. Yes, sir.

Senator Randolph. Then we will have tha t entered into the record through you or someone else. Thank you.

[Mr. Gonzalez’ statement follows:]

Mr. chairm an, Sena tor Randolph, and members of thi s sub-committee of the 

Senat e Public Works Comittee, I want, in beha lf of a maj ority of the residents of the Town of Anmoore, Harr ison County, West Virginia, to express 

our appreciatio n for this opportunity to appe ar here today and strongly urge 

th at you suppo rt the wate rshed project as subm itted for your approv al by the 

Elk Creek Watershed Association, Inc., and the ir sponsors.

As the immedia te past president, I hold to the opinion that a majority of 

the members of the Board of Directors suppo rt the pro ject as submitted for 

your approval.

Information avail able to you and to me clearl y indic ates th at the benefits 

to be obtained from th e completion of this project by fa r exceeds the cost.

Speakers who preceded me have clearly demonstrated the need for flood 

protection for the are a and the increased demand for recr eatio nal facilitie s to 

meet the needs of the low income and middle income groups.

As Americans we pride ourselves in our adopted policy that the will of 

the majority shall prevail. The members of the Har riso n County Commission 

have consented to supply the local share of the funding , five million dollars, 

through the issuance of General Obligation Bonds. This will require approv al 

by the voters of Harr ison County. To delay approva l, or at worse, to table 

action on this project indefinitely would deny the residents of Harr ison County 

an opportunity to proceed with a project th at will provide unlimite d benefits 

to a majo rity of the resid ents of Harrison County, West Virginia. Therefore, 

prompt positive action by the members of this committ ee and the congress 

will be appreciated. Than k You.

Respectfully submitted.

Victor Gonzalez.

STATEMENT OF POR TER NESTER, SUPERV ISOR, TYGARTS VALL EY 

CONSERVATION DISTRICT

Mr. Nestor. Mr. Chairman, I am a Barbou r County landowner 

and supervisor of the Tygarts Valley Soil Conservation Distri ct for 

23 years.

The Tyga rts Valley Soil Conservation District has always worked 

to advance the farm soil and water conservation program. The distric t has been actively involved in surface mine reclamation, critical 

erosion control plantings, livestock watering facilities, pasture and 

hayland improvement and proper woodland and wildlife management.

The supervisors of the district recommend the Elk Creek watershed project to help accelerate the total soil and water conservation 

program.
143

The district has previously sponsored and assisted in the completion of two Public Law 566 watershed projects. The supervisors are 

aware of the effect a project has on local landowners and farmers 

with some being adversely affected. In all projects the total benefit 

and the total adverse effects must be weighed.

It is the belief of the district tha t the overall project benefits 

strongly exceed the adverse effects.

The Tygarts Valley Soil Conservation District recommends adoption of the Elk Creek watershed project as planned.

Senator Randolph. Thank you very, very much. That statement, 

of course, will be included in the printed public record.

Are there others who are here as proponents?

STATEMENT OF DAVID BRANTNER, PRESIDENT, WEST VIRGINIA 

WIL DLIFE FEDERATION

Mr. Brantner. Mr. Chairman, my name is David Brantner. I am 

president of the West Virginia Wildlife Federation. We are concerned and interested in the project as we have over 8,000 members 

living in the watershed basin. They have asked me to come here 

today to express their concern and interest tha t this project, they 

feel, the result is feasible and they would like to see it entered as 

proposed.

We also have in the past, I might add, Senator, have been using 

Harrison County as a pilot project for cleanup of the State of West 

Virginia.

We have initiated the clean streams program in Harrison County, 

which has cleaned up many, many miles of streams in that county. 

We feel th at this will just be sort of an icing on the cake to the total 

cleanup project, should we be able to have control over the water 

of the West Fork.

So that, therefore, the West Virginia Wildlife Federation goes 

on record as recommending that this project be put into action.

Thank you.

Senator Randolph. Thank you very much.

What I shall now read is not exactly pertinent to the proposal 

under consideration, but only because you have spoken of the cleaning of streams. I wish to have placed in the record an article appearing in the Elkins, W. Va., Intermountain, our afternoon newspaper, 

of Tuesday, June 15. The headline reads, “Polluted Streams to be 

Cleaned.”

[The article referred to follows:]

[From the Elkins, W. Va., Intermounta in, Jun e 15, 1976]

GEN . TRIGG HEA DS PROG RAM

P olluted Streams T o Be Cleaned

Last year 13 junk cars, 370 old tires, 228 household appliances and 4,000 

plastic bags of trash were removed from 12 miles of highway and 8 miles 

of waterways in Randolph County.

County youngsters from low income families under the Governor’s Summer 

Youth Program were responsible for the clean-up.

This year, the seventh annu al Scenic Rivers Program is underway with 50 

youngsters from throughout Randolph County under the supervision of five 

adults.
144

Appointed by the county court to head this task is Brig. Gen. (re t.) Thomas 

K. Trigg who said it will be their job to “improve the scenic value, water 

quality and the environment as well as picking up trash by getting rid of 

pollution or reporting sources of pollution.”

The eight-week program will begin along the Tygar t River after the youth 

participate first in a first aid instruction class which will be given by the 

Randolph County Emergency Squad, said Trigg.

“We’ll start at the southern extremitie s of the county with one crew working toward Mill Creek (following the river) and ano ther crew at Mill Creek 

working toward Elkins.”

Trigg said, “People should recognize th at as they see these kids, they are 

not trespassing and will not destroy property. They should be allowed access 

to the river through priv ate lands, if necessary.”

“As much cooperation as possible is requested,” urged Trigg, adding that if 

any property damage does occur he should be contacted.

Pleased with the clean strea ms program, Trigg believes “it will do the kids 

and the county a lot of good.”

The program, noted Trigg, has a “double value.”

“It not only teaches the kids about the damage that can be done with indiscriminate dumping of tra sh but gets the county clean through education.”

Trigg, in a countywide appeal, urged any person knowing of areas or streams 

to be cleaned to call him at 636-5140.

Senator Randolph. I called attention to this article because of 

the work of your organization and other organizations. I was 

privileged a few nights ago to speak in Lewisburg, W. Va., to 

the Isaak Walton League members of the chapters in the State of 

West Virginia. There was an emphasis placed there, as you placed 

it here this morning, on the necessity for clean streams.

That, of course, is a part of all of this thinking tha t we have in 

reference to not only the use of the watersheds for the purpose of 

the impoundment of water to bring about a lessening of floods, but 

also for certain recreational uses.

But above all, whatever we do with our streams, our ponds, our 

lakes in West Virginia, the chairman, if he might, he would do 

more than suggest—it is not necessary to even suggest to you as 

citizens—but I admonish people that this good earth must, as far 

as possible, be kept good earth. For tha t reason, I have taken the 

time to interject this material.

I want to add tha t we are very fortunate in Elkins to have as 

editor of our newspaper Eldora Nuzum. I think that a newspaper 

has a real opportunity to provide the news, but also to stimulate 

good programs and constantly in this newspaper, there will be story 

after story which I think contributes to an alert citizenship and an 

understanding of the problems in West Virginia and particularly 

problems of concern to the people.

In connection with the issue of so-called ciearcutting with which 

I have been identified in reference to the national forest within our 

State, although the newspaper editor is in favor of the purpose of 

the legislation tha t I have introduced, I know of one day when 

she carried a full page of comment giving equal space to those in 

favor of the legislation and those against the legislation.

That is in the tradition, as I understand it, of the dialog of citizenship in this country. So I might even send all of this to Eldora, 

sometime so she will hear what I said about her. She used to be 

the editor of the Sentinel at Grafton.

Is there other testimony, other comment from the proponents?
145

[A sta tem en t from the Ha rri so n Co unt y and Elk Cree k Po llu tio n 

Con trol Com mitt ee, Inc . foll ows:]

T o: Hon. Jennings Randolph, chairman, and members of the Senat e Public 

Works Committee, Washington, D.C.

Fr om : The Har riso n County and Elk Creek Wa ter Pollution Control Committee, Inc., repre sented by Jam es Toothman, member 

Gentlem en: The Harrison County and Elk Creek Wat er Pollution Control

Committee, Inc. completely supports the Elk Creek Waters hed Proj ect plan 

because it will complete and enhance the aims and efforts of the citizen’s 

group which was organized in 1969 to bring a “dea d” stream “back to life.”

More than 10,000 reside nts of Harriso n, Upshur, and Barb our counties 

signed the group’s petitions in supp ort of cleani ng Elk Creek of debris, acid 

» mine drain age pollution and sediment. We received contributions from ordi ­

nary people, businesses, doctors, and othe rs—including a contribution from 

Hawa ii from a trav ele r through West Virginia .

In Jun e 1971 a federa l educational gra nt enabled us to inform people of the 

need and value of havin g clean strea ms and a good place to live. Anothe r peti-

• tion resulted in the Stat e's division of reclamation spending $100,000 to revegetate abandoned str ip mined land in 1971.

In 1972 the Environm ental Protection Agency approved $448,700 for a threeyear research proje ct to abate or help eliminate acid mine wat er pollution in 

the Creek and its watershed. The Sta te matche d these funds. The research 

is in progress.

A “dead” stream was resurrected. For the first time in 25 years local 

churche s are again baptising people in Elk Creek. Again it is suppo rting 

aquatic life and has been stocked with fish, frogs, and other species of aqua tic 

life for a good food chain. All the people in the are a are benefiting from our 

efforts.

To complete our goals we urge the U.S. Congress to approve the Elk Creek 

Wate rshed Pro ject plan for insta llation under Public Law 83-566 . We submit 

our comments in writ ing and ask th at they be made a pa rt of the hearing 

record, and we t hank you for this opportunity to appear before this committee.

Se nator R andolph. We th an k you, ver y much.

Now we will cha nge to the opp one nts. Ike , I believ e th at you 

were to tes tif y. You said earlier th at pe rhap s you were the only 

person, bu t if there are oth ers fo r some reas on th at you wa nt to 

hav e sit wi th you at the tabl e, of course, th at is in orde r.

Ike , you are from Lo st Creek , is th at ri ght?

Mr. Maxwell. Tha t is correct, sir.

STATEMENT OF IKE MAXWELL, LOST CREEK, W. VA., ACCOMPANIED BY JOSEPH WAGNER, BRIDGEPORT, W. VA.; RALPH

McDonald pr es id en t, elk creek wa te rs he d associa tion,

BRIDGEPORT, W. VA.; PEARLE MALCOLM, PHILIP PI, W. VA.;

RICHARD SEIBERT, PHI LIPP I, W. VA.; PETER POTH, JR., MT.

• CLARE, W. VA.; NORMA DAVIS LOST CREEK W. VA.; EDWARD

LANHAM, BRIDGEPORT, W. VA.; AND ARNOLD SMITH, LOST

CREEK, W. VA.

Se na tor R andolph. Yes, sir, Lo st Creek.

Wi ll you iden tif y those who sit wi th you or do you wa nt to have 

them do th at ?

Mr. Maxwell. To my rig ht is Ra lp h Mc Donald, Presi de nt of the 

Elk Cree k W ate rsh ed Associat ion; to my le ft is Joe W ag ner, landown er on the Ru shing Fo rk, which is affected by the El k Creek 

Wa ters hed .
146

Senator Randolph. I t was my privile ge and it was he lpf ul to me 

to talk with you and oth ers including the man who sits on you r left. 

He is quite a talker. I do n’t mean at the witness table, bu t I do re ­

member him in th at conference. How do you spell your name?

Mr. Wagner. W-a-g-n-e -r.

Senator Randolph. I wa nt to make sure because I have seen it 

both ways.

Mr. Wagner. L ots of peop le spell it W-a -g-g -o-n -e-r.

Senator Randolph. Tha t is rig ht.

Ike, you give your testimo ny in any way you care to.

Mr. Maxwell. Senator Rando lph, other mem bers of the sub ­

committee, it is my plea sure to be here tod ay and I want to than k 

you in advance for giv ing me and oth er landowners the op po rtu nity 

to submit to you fo r con side ratio n some views of the landow ners 

th at are directly affected by the wate rshed pro ject.

I would like firs t to go on record as person ally fav oring flood 

pro tection and con trol fo r Ha rrison Co unty, as well as any other 

cou nty in our State , or any oth er State in the Un ite d Sta tes of 

America; and I believe th at oth er landow ners h ave the same views.

Th e concern th at we hav e is how are we going to accomplish this 

obje ctive and still keep the land in pro duc tion. It is our opinion 

th at the impoun dments on Elk Creek are too larg e. The y are taking 

some of our best land out of pro duc tion and pla cin g it un de r water.

La nd is one th in g th at we have no t been able to replace—we can 

only try to enhance it. Th e land th at is tak en by the Elk Creek 

Wa tershe d proje ct is some of the best lan d in our area.

I t has been sta ted ea rlier th at this falls un de r Publi c Law 566. 

Th e prim ary obje ctive of this public law is for the prov ision of ag ­

ric ultur al benefits. Yet, in this plan it is being used to provide urba n 

flood pro tection ra th er th an ag ric ult ura l benefits. This, in ou r 

opinion , is not in concurrence with the objec tives of Public Law 

83-566.

We also feel th at the Soil Cons ervation Service has not fully in ­

formed the landow ners of the development of the watershed pro jec t 

itse lf. Le t me go so fa r as to say th at I person ally believe th at very 

few land owners have been contacted by the Soil Conserv ation or the 

local sponsors and inf orm ed where the dam is to be located and wh at 

part of their prop erty is to be taken.

W ha t we have learned h as come out t hr ou gh he arsay of landow ners 

them selves beco ming involved. In fac t, I would say th at the landowners hav e not been contacte d con cerning this by the Soil Co nservation Service.

My next request might be difficult to fulfill, bu t I would like to 

ask th at you, the subcommittee, dra ft a letter, a questio nnaire, to 

each of the landow ners ask ing them the simplest question, “H ave 

you been contacted by the Soil Conservation and have they discussed 

with you the placem ent of the dam str uc ture as well as what lan d 

will be u nd erwater?” I wou ld imagine th at th e overwhelming response 

wou ld be th at they have no t been contacted.

Th e Elk C reek Wate rsh ed Association was the association th at wTas 

first form ed to get this proje ct started. In spite of its interest in the 

proje ct, the Wate rsh ed Association has no t been inform ed by the
147

Soil Con servation Service as to the pro gress of this proposal and 

the position of the Federal Government.

As recently as Apr il, the Soil Conservation asked the various 

sponsors to write a let ter of endorsement, bu t the El k Creek W ater ­

shed Asso ciation was not info rme d or asked to write a letter. There 

was a pub lic meetin g held in September 1974. It was sponsored by 

the El k Cree k Wate rsh ed Association. We were tol d at th at mee ting 

by the Soil Conservation Service th at our views would be expre ssed 

to you, the Sen ators, and to the Congressmen—yourse lf, Senat or 

Ra nd olph , and Congres sman Molloha n—as well as our own local 

Senator s and Congressm en and th at the public meeting would go on 

record and would be par t of the materials sub mitted for review.

Three oth er landow ners and I recentl y visited our Senat or and our 

Congressman. They were completely unaware of the ma gnitude of 

the opposition to this project.

Senator Randolph. These were sep ara te meetings. I ju st wanted 

the reco rd to indicate that.

Mr. Maxwell. I think th at I can go on reco rd as saying th at you 

were unaware of the pub lic meeting, statem ent s where the land - 

owners opposed were pres ented. I am appalled at these actions o f the 

Soil Conserv ation Service.

The purp ose of the public meeting, as I saw it, was for both the 

opp one nts as well as the proponents of the proje ct to have their 

say. The failure of the Soil Conservation Serv ice to pass on our concern s to Congress, in effect, denied our rig ht to be heard. A Federal 

agen cy owes it to the pub lic to express both sides—not one side.

A t th at pub lic mee ting, an ind ividual asked th at all those in fav or 

of the pro ject stan d. They stood. The n he asked for those not wor king for the Federal Gov ernmen t or a Federal agency to please sit 

down. Very few sat down. I could count t he pro ponents of the pro jec t 

who were not Feder al employees. W ha t I see here is the Soil Con ­

servat ion Service really pres sing for this project.

I think I could count those on one hand who sat down. W ha t I am 

say ing, in effect, is only the gov ernm enta l agencies were present and 

favorable at th at time.

Senator Randolph. Is th at the Mo rgantown meeting?

Mr. Maxwell. N o, sir. Tha t was the one in Sep tem ber 1974 at the 

Nutter Fort gra de school.

Senator R andolph. Let me go back. Would the re be any reason why 

a hearing was held at Morgan town ?

Mr. Maxwell. I can not answ er that. Mr. Michael is here.

Mr. Harris. Did you say the d ate of the h earin g was Septem ber 19, 

1974?

Mr. Maxwell. Yes.

Senator R andolph. I t shows from Mo rgantown here.

Mr. Maxwell. I t was held at Nutter Fort grade school.

Senator R andolph. We, as the Public Wo rks Committee, have received the tra ns cript of th at hearing . Mr. Joseph Ha ug h of the 

Wash ing ton Office of the U.S. De partm ent of Ag ric ult ure , the Soil 

Con serv ation Service, mad e that available. So we have the t rans cript 

of the pub lic meetin g and it did not ind icate where the mee ting was 

held. You have clarified th at for us.

7 4 -6 95 0 - 76 - 10
148

Th is let ter is from Jam es S. Ben nett, th e State conserva tionist.

Th is is Ba rry Meyer, the chief counsel of the Public Wo rks Com ­

mittee, and Ann Garrabran t. I will ask both of you, here is a heari ng 

on a project. When we have the hea ring on this and oth er projects, is 

it customary th at we receive in this committee such a hea ring backgro und th at we may inf orm ourselves as mem bers of a subcommittee 

of a situat ion in referenc e to a pro ject? An n, would you have commen t?

Ms. Garrabrant. No, sir, it is not among the papers sent u p by the 

Soil Con serv ation Service. We receive the work plan itself and the 

env ironmental impact sta tem ent and in the work plan, the re is a description of meetings which have been held with a brief pa ragr ap h 

describ ing each of them . Bu t tra ns cripts tra ns cripts of the meetings 

are not tran sm itted. Pe rh ap s we should ask fo r them af te r this.

Senator R andolph. Th an k you, very much, Ann .

I t is my feeling, Barry, I am not sure about the encumbering of a 

record, bu t I wa nt a record th at is complete. I th in k we, as a matter 

of policy in the futur e, if the re is a meetin g or meetings on a proje ct 

and large num bers of citizens are the re and are heard, shou ld be in ­

forme d as a committee of the fac t t hat this was done.

Th en we will have the op po rtu nity of reques ting this inf orma tio n 

befo re we ho ld this hearing. Th is inf orm ation—fo r the m oment I am 

not tal king for or again st the project—sho uld be in the subcommittee 

and the committee files.

Am I rig ht, Mr. Meyer?

Mr. Meyer. Senator, when the Cor ps of En gin eer s schedules a 

pub lic hea ring, we rou tin ely receive notices on all pub lic hearings on 

all projects by the corps. We don ’t receive transcri pts . We receive 

notification th at a he aring has been schedule d and its location.

W ith th e Soil Conse rvation Service, w hat we do receive, as Ann h as 

pointed out, is in the pro jec t document, the notat ion of the pub lic 

heari ng s th at were held. I t takes a citizen com mun ication to us to 

rai se the issue of the inadequacy of the hearing.

Otherwise, the number of hea ring s whi ch are held throug ho ut the 

country would give us an almost impossible review task to perform. 

But I do believe th at the Soil Conserv ation Service should follow 

the same practic es as the corps and th at is inform the committee.

Senator R andolph. T he Corps of En gin eer s he is speaking of.

Mr. Meyer. We really do have to rely in large par t upo n the people 

of the area to let us know whether or not the y believe the y have 

received a fa ir hearing. Of course, in most cases with most projects, 

th at is not an issue. W ith all controv ersial pro jects, it seems to be 

an issue.

Senator R andolph. Th an k you very much, Ba rry .

I am not sure of the modus ope ran di th at should be taken in all 

cases. I am no t pas sing judgment. An n, I wa nt us within a sub ­

committee to be as fully info rme d as possible.

Senator Gravel, the chairma n of our W ater Resources Subc ommittee is here. I appre ciate the o pp ortunity to have cha ired the meeting with fellow West Virgini ans tod ay, Senator Grav el.
149

Th is migh t be a ma tte r where the subcomm ittee and the comm ittee 

should be bette r informed. We s hould have the adv ant age o f knowing 

what has tak en place in a hea ring.

So I will ask you, Senator Gra vel, as cha irm an of th at subcomm ittee and oth ers on you r subcommittee to give some attent ion , perha ps 

in the future, to one of the point s which I am rai sin g here toda y; 

th at is, the completeness of the record.

Senator Quentin Burdick has come into the hea ring. He is fro m a 

State a little west of West Virginia. Tha t is No rth Dakota. As you 

know, we talk ed earlie r in our heari ng tod ay of Se nator Mike Grav el 

who comes from Alaska, who chairs our subcommittee.

Mr. Max well, I inter rup ted your stateme nt. I am sure you un de rstand the reason. I am just att em pting t o work o ur way in the process 

of kno win g as much as possible about wh at has been done, wh at is 

un de r con sideration , wha t might be done in the future .

Mr. Maxwell. If I under stand you rig ht , Sen ator, you presently 

have for conside ration th at docume nt of concerns expressed by those 

presen t at the pub lic meeting?

Senator R andolph. Yes. I t was req uested by—was the request made, 

Ann, by the Pu blic Wo rks Com mittee? Did we make the requ est for 

the inf orma tion?

Ms. G arrabrant. F or th at? Yes, sir.

Se nator R andolph. Yes. We made it from the Pu blic Wo rks 

Comm ittee.

Mr. Maxwell. I might add why I raised t ha t question here a nd m y 

concerns, is because at the public mee ting, we were told in adva nce 

th at thi s would be our mechanism to be hea rd and our views would 

be presented. If th at is going to be the ope ning statem ent , then it 

should be fulfilled with and complied wi th or we should be told th at 

it will not be presented to the House o r th e Sen ate subcommittees f or 

consideratio n.

Senat or R andolph. Y ou will proceed.

Mr. Maxwell. Fine.

It is my opinion, and the opinion of most of the landow ners , th at 

the Soil Conservation Service should have done the study and le ft it 

up to the local constitu ency at th at time to take it from there.

On Th ursd ay , Ju ne 10, I met with the two Ha rrison County Com ­

missioners, the rep resentativ es of the Soil Con serv ation, and the 

rep res entative of the Ha rrison County Pl an ning Commission. At t hat 

time we agreed to come to a meetin g th at was to be held on Ju ne 14, 

1976, and see if we could not reach a c ompromise to be subm itted here 

today.

At the meetin g of Ju ne 10, I had the impression th at the Soil 

Conserv ation officials could see some valu e to the small imp oun dments 

rather than the lar ge impoundm ents of water. I hoped th at a compromise could be fashioned aro und these sma ller impoundments . 

However, at the meetin g of Ju ne 14, a repres entativ e of the Soil 

Con servati on stated th at the re was no op po rtu nity to comprom ise 

at th at stag e of the game.
150

The landowners feel th at we should always be open f or compromise, 

no matter where we are in the process. I would like to make one o the r 

point at this time. We have heard a rum or th at , with or witho ut 

local sup port, this pro jec t will go in. It is our un de rst an din g th at the 

money has to be matched, and I would like to know where these 

match ing fun ds are to come from.

Anoth er area th at we are very concerned abo ut is the cost estim ate. 

We do not feel th at you have, a t t his time, an accurate estim ate of the 

cost of thi s pro ject. Th e projected cost is $20,707,200. I just can not 

realize how the y can buy all the land and do all th at they are going to 

do with th at amoun t of money.

Granted , the figures were made earlier and th at they did plug in 

some inflati onary costs. In the ma terial th at was presented on Dam 

Site No. 13, the amount of $383,000 has been allocated for roa d relocation. Pe rh ap s if you place a “1” in fro nt of th at and mak e it 

$1,383,000 th at would be more realistic .

I am bas ing th at on my estimation of local costs. Recently the 

Sycamore Road, Ha rri so n Cou nty was covered at a cost of over 

$500,000; ju st fo r toping and dra ins . In roa d relocation, you have 

to go from star t to finish. One expert has mentioned to me th at the 

minimum th at we can build a mile for is $500,000, and th at is with a 

minimal amo unt of work.

We, the land owners, would like fo r you, the Sen ate subcommittee, 

to hav e the acc urate figures so th at you can be tte r evaluate the financial bur den th at you will be placing on the tax payers, both throug h 

Federal taxes as well as the ma tch ing fun ds local people would have 

to come up with .

This would also give us and you a b ett er cost ratio to determ ine the 

benefit of the project.

As to d am site No. 13, which is the m ultiple-p urp ose dam for recre ation and flood con trol, I do not feel th at Ha rrison Cou nty can afford 

an ope ration such as this, since the ann ual opera tin g expense is above 

$111,000 a year. At the pres ent time, t he Bel Meadows recrea tion area 

is f or sale and the Ha rri so n County Par ks and Rec reation is tr yi ng to 

obtain Federal money to purchase that.

The lake at dam site No. 13 would be only 200 acres in size and 

water. Th is would accommodate small row boa ts or batte ry- pro pelle d 

motors. It will not accommodate mo tor boating which is the prime 

attrac tio n today. It will tak e care of fishing.

Senat or R andolph. M ay I interrup t, which I reg ret to do?

If y ou will notice the clock th at is on the wall behind you, I spoke 

about the bells and so fo rth and said to you th at when there is one 

button on the left, th at is a roll call ; the roll call is in progres s. The 

time for a roll call is 15 minutes. So I am, of necessity, going to have 

to go to th e floor.

I hope to be back in appro xim ately 10 to 12 min utes o r w hatever th e 

amoun t of time to g et over and back. I might, o f necessity, have to be 

stopped for a minute or two. Bu t we will proceed with the he ari ng 

on my return.

[B rie f recess.]
151

Senator R andolph. Mr. C hai rman, I app rec iate you r u nders tan din g 

of the need to have the hea ring this mo rning somewhat longer than 

perha ps we had anticipa ted and were interru pted by the roll call. The 

subco mmittee on W ater Resources has o the r work to do t his m orning, 

other testimo ny is to be given.

So, Ike, if you would move as expedit iously as you can.

Mr. Maxwell. Goi ng on with the cost figures, the West Vi rgini a 

De partm ent of Na tural Resources notes th at the cost figures of the 

recr eational pla n table are m uch too low ; in addit ion , the recreational 

facilities will require the constru ctio n of a sewage treatm ent pla nt. 

Th is cost, however, is not included in the pro jec t ins tallation costs 

to meet the heavy-use demand.

Ap pro xim ate ly 66,800 gallons of wa ter will be required by the 

recr eational development. Again, the cost of this wa ter is no t included in the cost tables. A more car efu l calculation of the cost and 

benefits could dri ve the benefit-cost rat io beneath the desired figure.

W ith in an ho ur and a ha lf’s drive fro m Cla rksburg, there are 

the following lak es: Sutto n, Burnsville, Tyg ar t, Sum mersville, Buf ­

falo, Stonecoal, Teter, Tw in Lakes ; as well as the following State 

pa rks: Au dra State Par k, Valley Fa lls State Pa rk , No rth Bend State 

Pa rk , Cedar Creek St ate Pa rk, W att ers Sm ith State Pa rk.

Many of these, in fac t, are considerably closer than a ha lf ho ur ’s 

driv e from Clark sbu rg. W e feel th at, at this time, th e lan d in question 

would be more valuab le for agriculture than fo r recr eation due to the 

abundance of recrea tional areas in the vic inity of Cla rksburg.

In addition , you have on the books the p roposed Stonew all Jac kso n 

Dam, which aga in will place more land underw ate r. Th is proje ct 

-would also be for recreation as well as flood control.

Senator Randolph. N ot dam, lake.

Mr. Maxwell. Excuse me, which will, again , place more wa ter and 

more land under water.

Senat or Randolph. Y ou will un derst and -why I corrected you, and 

it is only for the pur pose of rememb ering yea rs ago w’hen the Cor ps 

of Engin eer s called all projects “reserv oirs and dam s,” or “dams and 

reservoirs.” I attem pte d to have the corps change to the word “la ke.” 

When we see a reservoir and dam , we think of imp oundment of the 

w’ater; sometimes a for bid din g fence aro und it which could keep 

people out. The pro jec ts are not, however, only for flood control and 

oth er uses, but also for recreation al uses.

If a perso n is coming, let us say, from some far aw ay Sta te, who 

had no know ledge of West Virgini a as a place for recreation for he, 

his wife and fam ily and he saw’, let us say, Sum mersville Dam and 

Reservoir. I do not think he would tak e any intere st in checkin g out 

what sort of a body of w’ater is there.

Bu t if he read th at t here was a Sum mersville Lak e or Su tto n Lak e 

or Bluestone Lak e, I think th at he might write for inf orma tio n and 

he might take an intere st in coming to We st Virgi nia , for a vac atio n 

w’ith his fam ily, in a cam per o r by whatever m etho d he trav eled .

I could not get the corps to change its position and on all of their 

maps they listed these pro jects as “ rese rvoirs” and “ dam s.”
152

So, for the State of We st Vi rgini a, I offered leg isla tion which 

changed the name officially, by act of Congress, to “lakes.” T hen abo ut 

a year and a ha lf lat er the corps, of its own volition, changed from 

“reservoir s” and “da ms,” to use of the word “lakes.”

I am gla d the y took th at actio n because these bodies of wa ter —no 

ma tte r what the size might be in a pa rti cu la r State or locality, it is 

used for purposes oth er tha n to have a flow of wa ter w ithhel d or that 

flow to move at certain times du rin g the yea r. It is a place for wa ter 

skiin g, for boating, fo r fishing, fo r swimm ing and so forth .

I felt th at l ite rally tens of thousa nds of people would come to W est 

Virginia , to enjoy ou r scenic State and to pa rticip ate in the use of 

these bodies of water.

I t was righ t to mak e the change which was made by law and then 

later , as I hav e indicated, a ccepted by the C orps o f Engineers. I th in k 

we do have to mak e available not only in West Vi rgini a, bu t in every 

Sta te, in every pa rt o f the c ountry, ins ofar as possible tod ay wi th our 

network of roads, the op po rtu nity for citizens, for fam ilies to use the 

recreation al pro jects th at are fo r multiple-us e.

I have ind icated th at even in conn ectio n with the proje ct of this 

typ e, the re are mu ltip le uses.

Th an k you, Ike, fo r allowing me to mak e this discussion of something I think can be a pa rt of the record.

Mr. Maxwell. Yes sir. Th is pro jec t, also under the existing con ­

ditions , 1,241 acres would be flooded du rin g a 100-year flood. If the 

pro ject is proved and constructed , 945 acres would still be flooded 

du rin g the 100-year flood. Thus, this pro jec t will provide for pr otection of only 24 percent of the lan d subject to the 100-year flood.

It is obvious th at this arr angeme nt leaves 76 percen t of the cu rren tly flooded land subject to the 100-year floo d; although the sta tis ­

tics for the 100-year flood, traditio na lly , serves as the ind ica tor o f the 

projects. Po ten tial sim ilarly low pro jec tions is provided fo r in the 

5-year area and the key storm area; deficiency ratios are 22 percen t 

and 20 percent, respectiv ely.

All figures are calculated from pag e 106 of the work pla n area s 

flooded un de r pre sen t conditio ns and with the pro ject in ope ration.

In conclusion, I would like to state th at I believe in the dem ocratic 

process. If it is employed correctly, this process usually crea tes the 

gre ate st good for the greatest numb er of people. Ru t in this case, 

the case of the Elk Creek Watersh ed pro jec t, the process has been 

short circ uite d. Loc al Federal officials hav e not passed on our concerns to yo u; the y have not given you acc urate cost estimates; and 

they have shown an inflexible attitud e th at has prec luded any meaningfu l compromise.

There for e I, and the landow ners present here tod ay, respectfully 

request th at you not app rove the pro jec t in its p resent form and th at 

you send it back to the local level. We fu rthe r ask you to dir ect the 

local sponsors to work with the local landow ners to deve lop and 

submit for your app rov al a pla n which will bette r meet the needs 

of all of us who will be affected by the pro ject. We would also like to
153

request th at if the pro jec t is defeate d and if and when it is conside red again , the land owners be info rme d.

Th ank you, Sen ator .

Senator Randolph. T ha nk you, Mr. Maxwell.

Mr. McDonald.

Mr. McDonald. Senator, than k you.

Senator Randolph. Y ou will identify yourself fo r the record.

STATEMEN T OF RA LPH McDONALD, PRESIDEN T, ELK CREEK 

WATER SHE D ASSOCIATION

Mr. McDonald. Ralp h McDon ald; I am a lan dow ner and president 

of th e Elk Creek W atersh ed Association. I would like to make a sho rt 

statem ent on each.

As a landow ner in Ha rrison Cou nty, W . Va., I wish to lodge a pr otes t again st the prop osed El k Creek Wate rsh ed plan . I am not opposed to flood control. I am, however, opposed to the present plan. 

I believe a pro ject such as was installed at Salem, W. Va., with a 

series of small dams, would furni sh flood pro tection with much less 

des tructio n of valuable pro perty . I believe the pr op erty th at is to be 

flooded, under the pre sen t plan, is some of the best lan d in no rth 

cen tral West Virginia.

I, as a landow ner, was not kept inform ed of th is project. I feel th at 

the Soil Conservation Serv ice was very underha nded and sho ddy in 

the manne r in which the y tre ate d the citiz ens in thi s project. If this 

proje ct is completed according to pla n, I will lose my best fa rm la nd; 

plu s, I will lose my home. I ask th at th is proje ct be recon sidered.

Sen ator Randolph. T ha nk you very much.

Mr. McDonald. I hav e a statem ent I would like to read, also, 

Se nator ; as pre sid ent of the Elk Cree k Wate rsh ed Association.

Senator Randolph. Yes. Will you read th at , sir?

Mr. McDonald. At a board meeting of the Elk Creek Watershed 

Associatio n on June 9, 1976, a motion was passed by the boa rd mem ­

bers pres ent, with one abstention and the rem ain der of the board 

members in fav or of the m otion, to ask the p res ent p lan o f large dams 

be changed to a series of small dams.

We believe we can wor k with the SC S towa rd a pla n th at would 

be effective, bu t would be more acceptable to landow ners involved. 

We ask th at this p rojec t be reconsidered.

Senat or Randolph. Th an k you very much , Mr. McDonald.

As we look at the map w hich I hold here, who is rep res enting the 

Soil Conservation Service?

Mr. Michael. Ji m M ichael.

Senator Randolph. Yes, Jim . I did no t know whether the re were 

oth ers who were here.

Jim , jus t for the fac tua l situ atio n, no t to en ter into an argum ent , 

bu t I notice th at as we look here we see t ha t the pro ject is proposed 

to take these lands, 2,400 acres here to the lef t as I am holding this. 

Is th at correct?
154

Mr. Michael. Yes, sir. I am a little bit—I do n’t quite understand 

the defin ition of the 2,400 acres. Is th at the one prop osed site, the re?

Mr. Harris. Tha t is for the Routi ng Creek site.

Mr. Michael. Yes. That is the rec reational site, Dam Site No. 13, 

which was prop osed as a Ha rrison Cou nty park.

Mr. Harris. Was the whole area to be used as a park?

Mr. Michael. T ha t is wh at is in the p lan , yes. You heard testimony 

here today about the recreation al complex and abo ut the pos sibility 

of consideration of mo difyin g th at complex.

Senator Randolph. Th an k you very much. I wa nt to cla rify th at. 

It would not be absolutely necessary, for the purposes of flood 

control ?

Mr. Michael. Tha t is correct.

Senator Randolph. Fine. Th ank you very much.

Yes, Ike ?

Mr. Maxwell. Senator , if I could, we have he ard at various meetings by the Soil Con serv ation th at one of the reasons th at t his comes 

out in a favora ble opinion is because of the recreation al area. This 

is the only way it will meet the cost-ratio sta ndard s set up by the 

Soil Co nserv ati on; th at is the reason they keep th at reservoir or lake 

in its pre sen t condition of 2,400 acres.

Senator Randolph. I will not discuss it fu rthe r except to say th at 

the proje cts for lakes, u nd er the U.S . Corps of E nginee rs, an d pro jects 

fo r watersheds as proposed here and oth er pro jects, one of the f actors 

th at certainly should be considered are the recr eational features.

I realize th at you have mentioned here t he o the r areas in the w atershed th at you think are adequate for th at; I am not att em pting to 

argue the point. But there was a tim e when the corps, for exam ple, 

considered any pro jec t only on the flood control basis for the costbenefit ra tio.

There was a feeling throu ghout the Congress and the cou ntry th at 

many pro jects could have the recreation al fea tures built into them 

to make them possible to be brou gh t into bein g so tha t, fra nk ly, m any 

people migh t tak e advanta ge of the so-called flood control lakes as 

places for recreation in the uses th at I mentioned, here, today.

I t was in 1965 th at the recreatio n fac tor beg an to be bu ilt into 

projects. I t is a factor th at is necessary to be inclu ded. W ith ou t re ference to this proje ct ; I am only say ing th at as we con struct and 

spend hug e sums of money, very fra nk ly, for the construc tion of lakes, 

prim arily o f flood control protection o f pr op erty and lives, t ha t recreatio nal needs of the people of the c ountry who wa nt to come from the 

cities and the centers of population ou t into the country side should 

be met.

I would ask th at those who are opposed, if you, one-by-one, will 

stand, give your name so th at the record may indicate th at, in this 

hea ring, I gave the op po rtu nity to each person to do exactly th at; 

the witnesses do not need to stand.
155

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH WAGNER, BRIDGEPORT, W. VA.

Mr. Wagner. Mr. Randolp h, all oth ers he re: I absolutely oppose 

the waters hed -reservoir plan involving some 77,000 acres.

Senator Randoph. 77,000 acres ?

Mr. Wagner. Altog eth er, the whole pro ject. A great deal of this 

is used for agriculture, f arm ing , tha t will not be good for farm ing any 

more, a gre at deal of this land will be destroy ed. I am advised th at 

it is necessary for the Conserv ation distr ict to obtain agre ement from 

th e owners of no less t han 50 percen t of the land in the d rainag e area, 

th at are willin g to carry out reco mmendations of the Soil Conservation measures.

I can advise you now of a t least 80 percent of owners of the acreage 

invo lved are opposed to this plan . If you will continue you r del ibe ratio n for the period of 20 days, I will furnish the comm ittee petitio ns 

executed by said owners, sta tin g their position to the plan, sta ting 

th at they will not sign an agre eme nt to carry out t his measure.

Th an k you very muc h fo r your time.

Senat or Randolph. T ha nk you very much, Joe, for tes tifying h ere 

today.

I ask now, if yo u will ju st run throug h the list of opponents, stand 

an d give your name s ra th er quick ly, if you would, for the record. 

Th en I have done wh at I wanted to do and th at was to recognize 

every person here. Th en we will be clos ing the hea ring.

STATEMENT OF PEARLE MALCOLM, PH IL IPPI, W. VA.

Ms. Malcolm. I am Pe ar l Ma lcolm; landowner in Ba rbo ur Cou nty, 

and I will be affected by the dam. Here is a lette r th at the people who 

will be h arm ed by Dam No. 4; they hav e sign ed it, 168; not only did 

the y sign it, but the y also he lped me compose the letter. M ay I read it?

Senat or Randolph. Fo rgive me for jus t a mom ent in saying wh at 

I am up aga inst. We have people here on other pro jects in Kansas 

and Ala ska, and so forth . I have run , tod ay, lon ger than perha ps we 

should in connection with our heari ng and the chairma n of the subcommittee is here; Senat or Stevens, of Ala ska, is here; the Senator 

fro m Kansas, Mr. Dole, has been here.

How long will it tak e to read it? It will be a pa rt of the record. 

You see, I would place it in the record. But if you feel it mu st be 

rea d, I will try to accommodate you. I can not do th at fo r everyone 

because I was only given the names of those who would tes tify, you 

see.

Ms. Malcolm. Th ank you.

Honorable ladies and gentlemen of the Senat e Public Work s 

Com mittee, my purpose in bein g here thi s mo rni ng is too make a plea 

on beh alf of myself and the persons whose names appe ar on this 

petition which I have on my person. Th is petiti on contains the sig ­

na tures of those persons who are oppo sed to the proposed pro ject,
156

designa ted as Dam No. 4 in Ba rbou r County of the State of West 

Virginia.

Such prop osed con struction, havin g been published in new spapers 

of the local area, has been a pro ject of the Un ited Sta tes De partm ent 

of Ag riculture , the Soil Conserv ation Service. According to the information th at has been received by us tod ay, by way of press and 

word of mouth, the only ma jor reason for such con stru ctio n is th at 

for the purpose of a recreation al area, mainly for the pers ons of the 

adjoin ing coun ties and State s; a minor mentio n has been proved 

th at a purpose may also be flood control.

I shall attem pt to cite for you some of the reasons as to why we are 

opposed to the afo rem entioned proje ct; these th at will be mentio ned 

are not, by any means, all the reasons for opposition bu t will give 

some ins igh t as to why we feel th at we have become the victims of 

un jus t discrim ination .

Fi rs t in importance as to the reason for ou r opposition is th at the 

proposed con stru ctio n will take many of our homes and most of our 

livelihoods; the majo rity of the home- and landow ners will become 

victims of the inju stice.

Connected with the proposed con stru ctio n are ret ire d person s who 

will find it difficult to give up their homes and properties , man y 

havin g been h and ed dow n t hrou gh th e fam ilies by w ay of inheritanc e.

It will also be next to impossible for many of us to ad just to a 

new way of life in a different setting, and in a loca tion foreign to 

our accustomed life style. Many of our homes have been rece ntly 

remodeled and equipped for mod ern convenience; the luxury which 

man y people petitioners have only been recently able to enjoy.

Many of the con stituen ts involved have jus t obta ined th eir pos ition where the y are ready to enjoy the last few years of the frui ts o f 

many long yea rs of working and pla nning .

Second, the proposed pro ject will tak e out of pro duction many 

tho usands of acres of choice pro ductiv e far ml and. It will cover and 

ren der useless ma ny acres of beautifu l for est lan d, not only of value 

due to its quali ty of tim ber, bu t equ ally of imp ortanc e because of its 

quiet, beautiful atmosphere prov idi ng a home haven for ma ny species 

of wildlife.

We feel by giv ing up this type of te rrain is too great a price to 

pav in order to control a small amoun t of flooding.

Th ird , the pro posed dam will flood many of the prese nt roads. 

In order for the persons who live above the dam to have access to 

the main hig hw ay, new roads will have to be bu ilt; thereb y cu tting 

out many of the her etofore un dis tur bed far ms in to man y sections.

Fo ur th, most of the retirees who live on pro per ties in and on the 

prop osed con stru ctio n area are retired pers ons on fixed income who 

have not the mo net ary sources no r the he art to experience displa cement and the heartach e of ha vin g to sta rt all over again. They beg 

only to let them live their rem ain ing few yea rs in the peaceful qui et 

valley of almost heaven.
157

Fifth , there are a few couples who have jus t rece ntly bu ilt homes 

and are beg inning to rear families in the prop osed construction area. 

They began th eir fam ily lives with new homes, involving the expense of installing water systems, septic tank s and all of those things 

th at go into the bu ild ing of a new home. They have high hopes of 

liv ing and rea rin g their respective fam ilie s in the quiet, peacefu l, 

undistur bed valley.

We beg of you, do not, for them , interrup t th is bea utiful dream .

Sixth , las t bu t by no means the leas t of ou r concern, is the danger 

and the hazard imposed in the con stru ctio n which thi s typ e of dam 

proposes. We have, to a degree, been told th at ther e will be no breakage due to some unseen qu irk of dan ger. How ever, we, as well as all 

of you here before us today, a re fully aware of such d isasters that occurred in such places as Buffalo Cree k, We st Vi rgini a, and jus t a 

few days ago in Idaho.

Assuran ce means little when we see such disasters can and do 

hap pen. We feel there is absolutely no need for the watershed itself, 

as a flood control measure. In oth er word s, th is arg um ent for the 

prop osal just does not hold water.

We know that with some planning and a small exp enditure of our 

tax pa ye rs’ money, the creek could be dred ged to take care of any 

futur e flooding of any reasonable nature. The arg um ent for expansion of recreation al fac ilities to accommodate persons in the su rroundin g counties and Sta tes, at our expense and our displacemen t, 

is also insane when we know th at in an ad joi nin g county, the one 

fac t th at would be the most accomm odating is t he recreational facilities and under the proposed pro ject a lad y passed away and left 200 

acre s of far ml and to th at cou nty to be used for recreation al purpose s 

in 1974.

To this date, not one stone has been turned on th at prop erty development for the pur pose for which it was given.

There for e, the proposed construction fo r the pur pose of pro vid ing 

add itio nal needed recr eational facilities is a weak one to say the least.

We cannot emphasize too stro ngly nor can we say it too loudly 

th at we are str ong aga inst proposed con stru ctio n of the El k Creek 

Wa tershe d. We know th at it is writte n, “The Lo rd giveth, and the 

Lo rd taketh away.”

We are a Go d-fea rin g people who will abide by the Almighty. 

How ever, we wish to rem ind you th at you are men and women ju st 

like ourselves, and we trus t th at you will not take-away the peace 

of ours on this earth which our Cre ator has loaned to us for a sho rttime on which to live and love and spend our last few rem ain ing days 

in peace and tra nq uillity which is assured to each and every citize n 

of this country , in the preamb le of the gr ea t Constitution.

Th an k you and may yo ur decision get our best inte rest and favor.

Senator R andolph. T ha nk you very much, Mrs. Malcolm, for your 

testim ony th at you have given which, of course, will be made a pa rt 

of the print ed record.

[Ms. Malcolm’s state me nt and a pe tition fo llo w:]
158

Ju ne 16, 1976

TO: Sen at e P u b li c Works Co mm ittee,

Subcom mi ttee on Wate r Res ou rces

FROM: Co ncern ed C it iz e n s a ffe c te d by th e

Elk Cr eek W atersh ed P ro je c t

TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TO THE •

ELK CREEK WATERSHED PROJECT

Mr. Cha irman and d is ti n g u is h e d co ll eag u es:

We wi sh to th an k th e Sen at e P u b li c Works Co mmitt ee , Subcom mi tte e 

on Wate r R eso urc es , f o r g iv in g us th e o p p o rt u n it y to be hea rd on th e Elk 

Creek W atersh ed P ro je c t; and we on ly re q u e st th a t you g iv e c a re fu l co n sid ­

e ra ti o n to our te st im ony in o p p o sit io n to th e El k Creek W ate rsh ed P ro je c t.

As co nc er ne d land ow ne rs who a re d ir e c tly a ffe c te d by th e Elk Creek 

W atersh ed P ro je c t, we r a is e th e fo llow in g o b je c ti o n s :

1. As th e p ro je c t is s u b s ta n tia lly one to c o n tr o l flo o d in g , among 

o th e r b e n e f its , su ch ca n be e f fe c tiv e ly don e by a num ber o f sm all fl o o d 

re ta rd a ti o n dams al ong th e he ad -w at er s o f El k Creek an d i t s v ari o u s t r ib u ­

t a r i e s , w it hout g e ttin g in to th e s u b s ta n tia l d is tu rb a n c e o f farm la n d , w it h 

th e co nse nt and appro val o f farm owners whose la n d is in volv ed.

2. The co m ple tion o f th e p r o je c t, as pro pose d, d e str o y s some o f th e 

c h o ic e st and mo st p ro d u cti v e farm la nd in th e a re a , an d do es not pro vid e 

any e q u iv a le n t o r s u b s ta n tia l imp rovement bel ow th e dams pr op os ed . Gre at 

sums o f money have be en in v e s te d in homes an d la n d a ffe c te d by th is p r o je c t. 

Each y ear th e farm ac re age in t h is co untr y d im in is h e s, and th is is acre ag e 

wh ich i s d earl y nee ded .

3. Co st fa c to rs us ed by th e develo pers o f th e p la n are u n r e a lis tic a t 

th is ti m e, and wo uld be f a r bel ow th e a c tu a l c o s t o f c o n s tr u c ti o n . Cos t fa c ­

to r s are in ad equate no t only as to th e la nd a c q u is iti o n and co n str u c ti o n 

c o s ts , bu t a ls o as to m in era l a c q u is iti o n c o s ts and th e re -a li g n m en t o f

pip e l in e s .

*♦. The ove rh ea d y e a rly c o s ts w ill be co n sid era b ly in ex ce ss o f th e

amount shown by th e 1974 im pa ct st ate m ent o f $133,5 00.0 0, in th a t in th e 

im pa ct st ate m ent th e re is re fe re n c e on pa ge 18 to one (1 ) fu ll- tim e c a re ­

ta k e r and a d d it io n a l se aso n al h e lp . Whe reas , in th e b r i e f in fo rm ati on 

s h e e t, th e re i s re fe re n c e to o p era ti o n and m ai nt en an ce re q u ir in g e ig h t (8 ) 

fu ll- tim e jo b s. The county , w ith o th e r p re ss in g demands, can i l l a ffo rd 

to be sa ddle d w it h s u b s ta n tia l m aint en an ce c o s ts .
159

5 . That w a te r r e c r e a tio n is unnecessary in th e a re a s in c e th e T y g a rt 

Lake w it h some 1750 a cre s o f w a te r s u rfa c e is o n ly a bo u t 25 m il e s e a s t; th e 

Che at La ke R e s e rv o ir , w it h 1730 a cre s o f w a te r a re a , is some 40 m il e s aw ay ; 

th e S to n e w a ll - Ja ck so n L a k e , now under th e d e s ig n s ta g e , w i l l ha ve some 

2500 a cre s o f w a te r a re a and w i l l be lo c a te d 25 m il e s s o u th . A l l o f th e se 

m a jo r la k e s are e a s ily re ached by in t e r s t a t e hig hw ays o r m a jo r s ta te h ig h ­

w ays . O th e r re c r e a tio n f a c i l i t i e s , su ch as f o r p ic n ic in g , h ik in g , ca m pin g, 

e t c . , a re in g re a t ab un da nc e w it h in h a lf an h o u r’ s d r iv e o f th e E lk Creek 

W ate rs hed a re a . Th ese in c lu d e th e Aud ra S ta te P a rk , w it h swim m in g, p ic n ic 

a re a s , e t c . ; th e V a ll e y F a lls S ta te Park be tw een F a ir m o n t an d G ra ft o n ; th e 

M a tt e r S m ith S ta te P a rk , p ro v id in g p ic n ic a re a s , sw im m in g, e t c . , n e a r L o s t 

C re ek; an d th e N o rth Bend S ta te P a rk , perh aps an h o u r’ s d riv e aw ay, n ea r 

H a r r i s v i ll e , w it h p ic n ic f a c i l i t i e s , sw im m in g, e tc . In a d d itio n , one o f th e 

m a jo r r e c r e a tio n a l are as in th e E ast is in o p e ra ti o n s o u th o f E lk in s , West 

V ir g in ia , and is known as "S now -S hoe," h a v in g y e a r aro und r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l ­

i t i e s . When th e s e f a c i l i t i e s are added to th e r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l i t i e s o p e ra te d by th e C it y o f C la rk s b u rg and by s e v e ra l o f th e s u rro u n d in g to w n s , i t 

sh o u ld be q u ite o b v io u s th a t f o r th e p o p u la tio n th a t e x is t s in t h is a re a , o r 

is a p t to e x is t h ere in th e fo re s e e a b le f u t u r e , th e re a re more th a n ade quate 

acc om m odations.

6 . In a ti m e o f s tr o n g in f la t io n a r y p re s s u re s , an d when i t is re c o g ­

n iz e d t h a t g ove rn m e nta l sp en d in g mus t be k e p t a t a minim um t o a v o id in c re a s ­

in g th o se p re s s u re s , th e a d d itio n o f tw e n ty to t h i r t y m illio n d o lla r s in 

sp en d in g on t h is p r o je c t i s u n c a ll e d f o r . The f i g h t a g a in s t i n f la t i o n is 

one w hic h we cannot s im p ly e xp e ct th e o th e r fe llo w t o make. I t is necessary 

to s t a r t in o u r own co m m un ity w it h o u r own p ro g ra m s , an d make su ch pro gra m s 

s e n s ib le an d re a so n a b le in l ig h t o f o u r p re s e n t c o n d itio n s . The re is c e rt a in ly no p u b lic n e c e s s it y f o r t h is p a r t ic u la r ty p e o f pro gra m a t t h is ti m e .

7 . Much o f th e s o i l c o n s e rv a ti o n wor k in v o lv in g s t a b iliz a t io n o f 

s tr ip - m in e are as and o th e r im pro ve m ent pro gra m s ca n be u nd e rt a ke n w it h 

e x is t in g fe d e r a l an d s ta te re s o u rc e s w it h o u t g e t tin g in t o th e pro ble m s 

o f condem nations an d s u b s t a n t ia l s t r u c t u r a l ch an ge s in th e w ate rs hed.

8. The peo p le who a re op po se d to t h is w ate rs h e d p r o je c t a re as in ­

te re s te d in p r o te c tin g th e envir o n m en t and a re as in te r e s te d in fo llo w in g 

go od c o n s e rv a ti o n p r a c tic e s as th o se who may be in fa v o r o f th e p r o je c t , 

b u t i t is q u it e c le a r th a t a p r o je c t o f t h is k in d condemn s th e p ro p e rty o f 

c e r ta in in d iv id u a ls w it h o u t ju s t if ic a t i o n and r a is e s th e ta x e s o f a l l p a rt ie s who may l iv e an d re s id e in th e g e n e ra l a re a . R egard le ss o f whe re o u to f- s t a t e p eo p le come fr o m , th e y w i l l be co m ing by f a r mo re a t t r a c t iv e and 

com ple te r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l i t i e s , b o th p u b lic an d p r iv a t e , b e fo re g e t tin g 

t o th e E lk Creek W ate rs hed a re a , and i t is w is h fu l th in k in g to assume th a t 

th e re w ould be an y s u b s ta n tia l in f lu x o f o u t - o f - s t a t e p e o p le in t o an a re a

l ik e t h i s . Based upon th e p o p u la tio n in H a rris o n , B a rb o u r and Ups hu r C o u n ti e s , 

i t s h ou ld be c le a r th e r e c r e a tio n a l f a c i l i t y is o u t o f k e e p in g w it h an y re a ­

s o na b le as se ss m ent f o r c o s ts o f o p e ra ti o n , w hic h w ould be re q u ir e d o f th e 

r e s id e n ts o f th ose c o u n tie s .
160

I t i s su bm it te d th a t t h i s e n tir e m att er sh ould be re -e xa m in ed 

from th e st an d p o in t o f making sm all fl ood r e ta rd a tio n dams w it h r ig h ts 

acq u ir ed on a volu n ta ry b a s is fro m la nd ow ne rs , and w it h c o n serv a ti o n 

p ra c tic e s en co ur ag ed and i n i t i a t e d to re du ce th e se dim en t ru n -o ff from 

th e a re a , s im il a r in n a tu re to th e su c c e ssfu l sm all w at er sh ed p ro je c t 

i n i t i a t e d in th e Salem a re a over tw en ty (2d y ears ag o.

R e sp ectf u ll y su b m it te d ,

z z <3 t . X

W * -

. >Ll<
161

R o u te 1

PH IL IP P I, W es t V i r g i n i a 26416

Ju n e 10, 1976

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

We, th e u n d e r s ig n e d , a r e a g a in s t th e Dam Number 4 o f t h e E lk C re e k W at er 

S hed .

F i r s t , I t w ould ta k e m ost o f o ur ho mes an d m o st o f o u r l i v e l i h o o d s . A lm ost a l l o c c u p a n ts o f th e s i t e a r e r e t i r e d p e o p le wh o h av e re m odele d 

t h e i r ho mes an d a r e re a d y to s e t t l e dow n to l i v e an d to fa rm .

A ls o , on p r o p e r t i e s bel ow th e dam p e o p le w ould l i v e In c o n s ta n t f e a r o f 

a r e p e t i t i o n o f th e tr a g e d ie s o f B u ffa lo C re ek an d Id a h o .

Th e E lk C re ek W ate r Sh ed w ou ld ta k e th o u sa n d s o f a c r e s o f th e m ost 

p r o d u c ti v e fa rm an d f o r e s t la n d In W es t V i r g i n i a ,

Th e dam w ould p u t th e p r e s e n t ro a d s u n d e r w a te r . In o r d e r f o r th e p e o p le 

who l i v e ab ove th e dam to g e t to th e p u b lic hig h w ay s new a c c e s s ro a d s 

w ould b e b u i l t . Son e o f o u r fa rm s a lo n g Dam No . 4 w ould be c u t In h a l f 

by th e s e ro a d s .

T h ere I s a b s o lu te ly no nee d f o r th e W a te rs h e d I t s e l f . W it h a sm all 

am ou nt o f money f o r d re d g in g an d c le a n in g o f th e E lk C re e k f u tu r e flo o d in g 

c o u ld be p re v e n te d .

A g a in , we r e p e a t : "We a r e a g a in s t th e p ro p o se d E lk C re e k W at er S h e d ."
162

r - ^ i r £ ~ i J

 ■ f c d “

'

>7Vv < - <^Q^ Z- ^ o j . WVuUjLl,

<-, . .-J '~yi/j • - , - / n f , 0 iZa.-6i(ic.n

l& jL ^

P-U«L& 

I'T K '

'jZZ''"-'-

'ft

y?A<JZ-z (i^Atf yp-<

M A C ZL ZZ ^

~/f] d'-v^O/u^ V'-'^*" 

ft

Y) t* c^y,^ -

Zv< A-io S^.cJtzvrGEa> 

7/^.2.^ 7 / £ ' &£■/<-<>-d-j

^ 7 7 a Z a ^^

^ ojuvm vlpft ^UeJ(WLA

* " Z Z Z A

"hi2 s Zy'^/.i/- £ > ^e ^z A ^~ '

y?zu^vzj 4>uj* y y ^ y ^ y y

(-'4/VL4& (f , “T c -J

p \ - A / 1 '

-<Aj

0
163

, J ^ ,

( y ’aJ ub

j l ^

(y^-C-Y^D ^y7C^^tC(^~'

O iy

o^W w ^pulE >v»x^y 

&b->i ft ^ C - y -f ^ ^ - ^ f

l ^ ' j

M f - M ' '

(? a ' C /a * * ^ t f

^ ? * < L

y j L'lf 'y f J i 'f /

Z y x Z - t ^ x f w ^ - - 

/ ) . 't x x l 7 P; t x x

p / j / i ' ~ £ ('/i'y^U '9o J

--yt'MxL-iJ <S^. £ ^> Ji u .t C 4 C iA 3

y y y*c4^ <^~—

Yd 6S^*£Y~^__

74-695 0 - 76 - 11
164

LlL - t / i l x Z: ^ ju lJ ^ LLhslu^A-J^t^

.. .. z r -*« «■/&■' J - / / J b ^ s s -

/f a d ' J'- floc*^

t&ulj,,

~7?7a

‘'T7/&

QJ\z£3£Z.£. *

A m J ^ £)

a

^

1 > uix^y-

.Jw /?7£A

/ ^ x

• W

4 / / -

/£< &' So. .3 (zic^'Ct:

'"blazq $. Cjail ir^

^uY/C ty J

Y '

*
165

Senator R andolph. I f those persons will stand who are here as op ­

pon ents and give you r names quickly, would do it, please, if you desire to? You do not necessarily have to ; I am jus t giv ing you the 

op po rtu nity to.

Ms. Smith. I am Pa tricia S m ith; I live in Lost Creek. My comp lete 

farm will be tak en by the watershed project.

Mr. Albert. I am Bill Alber t. My lan d is affected by the water.

Senat or R andolph. T hank you.

Ms. Davis. My name is Norma Da vis ; I am a l and owner and secretary of the El k Creek Watershed Association.

Se nator Randolph. Th an k you.

Mr. Seibert. Senator Ra ndolp h, I am Richard Seiber t, Ba rbo ur 

County, and I am opposed to it because I will lose my house and 

propert y.

Mr. Williams. My name is Je rr y W illiams ; I am also a mem ber 

of the Elk Creek Watershed Associatio n and it will tak e 85 percent 

of my lan d, plu s my home.

Senator Randolph. Th an k you.

Mr. Lanham . Senator Ra ndolp h, I am Ed ward La nham , Route 1, 

Box 554, Br idgepo rt, W. Va. I am opposed to this pro ject inasmuc h 

as there is no way for a person to build thi s pro ject by giv ing an 

easement. I f you give an easement, there can be no pay ment. The 

spon sors state they c annot go alo ng w ith t he idea th at i f I would give 

an easement and if I was ever d amage d, the y would pay for the crops 

th at would be dam aged, pay for the dam age caused by the flooding.

I never have no choice but to oppose this proje ct with every mean s 

th at I can possibly do so.

Senator R andolph. W ith every prop er means. Righ t?

Mr. L anh am. Yes, sir.

Senator R andolph. N ot violence.

Mr. P oth. Senator Ra ndolp h, I am Pe te r Po th, businessman from 

the Elk Creek distric t. I have about a mile and a ha lf of lan d along 

Elk Creek. I am a dairy farmer. In the las t 3 years I have pu t over 

50 million quart s of milk on the steps of Clark sbu rg, and su rro un ding counties; over 1 million hamb urg ers in the last 3 years. I have 

a crop of rye on Rou te 20; 6 foot, 7 inche s tall at the jun ction of 57 

and 20. I wish all my gro und didn ’t flood so I could raise crops 

like that.

Dam 14 is prop osed to tak e my meadows. Th is will tak e my business. Th is is a dr y dam. It is not fo r recreation or no pur pose oth er 

than flood control. My un derst andin g is it will be 75 foot hi gh ; th at 

the dam will fill up in rainstorm s and em pty o ut gradually.

I am opposed to dams. I hav e been a member of the Elk Cree k 

Watershed since the first nigh t it sta rte d. I am vice pre sid ent of it 

as of now. Th ey had said the y was going to have small dam s, pr oposed 40 small dams. Afte r about four meetings this mushroo med into 

larere lakes which I d on’t think were needed. I am s till fo r small dams.

Th an k you.

Senator R andolph. Th ank you very much.

We must hu rry if there are any others. The roll call is on. I must 

accommodate the Senators who are here on the pen din g project.

As we close this—yes.
166

Mr. F uller. I am Floy d Fuller. I came as an observer to listen 

to both sides. I am a can didate for th e House of Delegates. I thou gh t 

it would be a good oppo rtu nity to listen to both sides.

Senator Randolph. Th an k you very much. We are gla d to have 

you in attendance.

Mrs. Seibert. Senator Randolp h, I am Sue Seibert from Ph ilipp i. 

Six years ago we sold our new home in Harris on County, to move 

out of town. We wanted to raise our c hildre n on the farm . I can ’t see 

the Soil Con serv ation and these dam s going throug h to tak e our 

home and o ur ba rn and our yard. I don’t want a concrete ya rd for m y 

children to be raised in.

[A letter from Richard Seibert foll ows:]

Route i, Box 204, P hil ippi, W. Va.

Public Works Commission,

Washington, D.C.

Gentlemen : My name is Richard Seibert. I live on Stewarts Run in Barbour 

County of West Virginia. My house is to be taken by “DAM 26” of the proposed Elk Creek Watershed program. For this reason alone I am opposed to 

the program as it now stands.

In our area the only land that is near level, is along our streams, and this 

is the most productive land we have. If one looks at a map of our area, you 

can see th at we have very litt le tillable land. I think it would be most unreasonable to convert our best ground into swamp and backwaters for a 

dry dam.

On the subject of houses and families th at have to be moved or affected 

by floods, I urge you to conduct a survey to find the exact number. Since the 

program started five years ago, I am sure that most of the facts and figures 

contained in it have changed.

Many of our neighbors have expressed a fear, of living in the valley below 

these dams; since they sometimes give way, as the Idaho incident. I see' no 

difference in being caught in a flood in Anmoore or Clarksburg, by the raising 

waters of the Elk Creek, tha n being flooded by water from a dam. Thank God 

this type of tragedy doesn’t happen every day, but when it does the loss of 

lives, homes, and property is very great.

Do not misunderstand my position in this matter. I am for flood control, 

but I think that it can be accomplished by channeling our streams and building small ponds.

I believe th at the project has been mishandled by the Soil Conservation 

Service; they seem to be forcing the issue at every opportunity. The project 

is not well known or understood, in the Watershed area. I resent the fact 

th at they seem to be gathering people who are in favor of this project, while 

ignoring people who are interested because it affects them. Because of their 

att itu de a selected few individuals have trie d to purchase property in proposed dam areas, so to be in a position to receive a nice fat profit, when it is 

later taken as a dam site.

As a land owner and a concerned citizen I am ashamed of the fact that the 

Barbour County Court, a sponsoring body, did indeed say that, they had heard 

nothing but complete approval for this project. Attached you will find a list of 

signatures of people who are opposed.

In closing I ask th at you as members of thi s commission, vote against ap ­

prop riation of the money for the Elk Creek Watershed Project.

Richard Seibert.

Senator Randolph. Th an k you very much. Ha s everyone had 

th e opp ortunity to speak ?

As cha irm an of the Publi c Wo rks Com mittee and acting as ch airman ex officio this mo rni ng in the W ater Reso urces Subcomm ittee, I 

express genuine appre cia tio n for you r testimony and for your presence at thi s hea ring.
167

You will, of cours e, be fu rth er inform ed of wh at we are thi nk ing, 

wh at we are doing in connection wi th th is project.

You will know th at we will not foreclose inf orm ation which is coming to us by letter. We have a volum e of opposition by the letter s 

th at are here. I sim ply call attentio n to them .

We have had more tha n 384 roll calls du rin g this 94th Congress. I 

have had to vote on all of them , as you understand. I have a 98-percent rollcall record. I had to vote “yes ’ or “no. I will be faced with 

a decision, here, as you can understand. Bu t it may be a situ ation 

where the re might be—I will not discuss it, here, tod ay a difference 

of cer tain typ es th at might b rin g you toge ther. I cannot go into those 

situations.

Bu t I do say th at in the best sense the people speak. Tha t is w hat I 

have done. I than k you very m uch.

[W her eup on, at 11 :15 a.m., the Subc omm ittee on W ater Resources 

adjou rne d, to reconvene subject to the call of the chair.]

A P P E N D I X

COMMUNICATIONS IN OPPOSIT ION TO TH E

ELK CREEK, W. VA. PROJE CT

171

J u n e 3 , 1976

The H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r

U. S . S e n a te

’.' a s h in p'..o n , D. C. 20510

My R e a r S e n a t o r :

S m a lle r da ms in th e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s v o u ld 

consu m e l e t s la n d o f any one i n d i v i d r .a l a n d s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f lo o d c o n t r o l ; t h e r e f o r e , 1 

w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u ray o p p o s i t i o n to t h e E lk C re ek 

W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S i n c e r e l y ,

& . X

Ju ne 8 , 1976

The Hon or ab le Jennin gs Randolp h

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e

W as hing ton, D. C. 20510

Dear Mr. Ra ndolph:

I wa nt to expre ss ray o p p osit io n to th e Elk Cr eek 

W atersh ed P r o je c t, as p re s e n tl y pla nned .

With raore st udy and p la n n in g , I fe e l we coul d 

ac co m pl is h th e same fl ood c o n tr o l w ith le ss burd en to th e 

fa rm er, and le ss ex pe ns e to th e ta x p a y ers .

S in c e re lv ,
172

June 8, 1976

The Honorable Jen nin gs Randolph 

United State s Sen ato r 

United State s Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Mr. Randolph:

I want to exp res s my op po sition to the Elk Creek 

Watershed P ro je ct , as pr es en tly planne d.

With more study and plan nin g, I fe el we could 

accomplish the same flo od co ntrol with le ss burden to the 

farm er, and le ss Expense to the tax pa ye rs.

Sin ce re ly ,

J u n e C, 197 6

Tn e H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a te 

W a s h in g to n , D. C . 20510 

liy D e a r S e n a t o r :

I w an t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u r y o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

L a r g e r dam s i n t h e p a s t tw o o r t h r e e y e a r s h a v e 

p r o v e n d a n g e r o u s f o r t h e c o m m u n iti e s d o w n - s tr e a m . F o r 

e x a m p le , S n a k e R i v e r , T e to n Dam .

I do n o t f e e l t h a t t h e s m a l l e r c o m m u n iti e s dow ns tr e a m fro m t h e p r o p o s e d E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t 

s h o u ld b e s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s p o t e n t i a l d a n g e r .
173

J u n e 3 , 1976

H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a to r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 5 1 0

D e a r S i r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e E lk 

C re e k W a te r s h e d p r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

I f e e l we c o u ld h a v e t h e sa m e f l o o d c o n t r o l w ith

l e s s e x p e n s e t o t h e t a x p a y e r .

S i n c e r e l y ,

J u n e 8 , 1976

The H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 5 1 0 

i'y D e ar S e n a t o r :

S m a ll e r da ms in t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w o u ld 

consu m e l e s s l a n d o f any o ne i n d i v i d u a l ar.d s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e c f f l o o d c o n t r o l ; t h e r e f o r e , I 

w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e E lk C re e k 

W a te rs h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .
174

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Ra ndo lph

U ni te d S ta te s S en ato r

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20S10

Dea r ‘-’r. Ran do lph:

I am op po se d to th e p re s e n tl y pl an ned E lk Creek 

W atersh ed p r o je c t.

I fe e l th e Co un ty co uld hav e fl o o d c o n tr o l in a much

le ss ex pen si ve man ne r.

S in c e re ly ,

. . .

(L /^ y

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ra ndolp h

U ni te d S ta te s S en ato r

U ni te d S ta te s Senate

W as hi ng to n, P. C. 20S10

P ea r S ir:

T his is to in fo rm vou th a t T am op po sed to th e Elk 

Cr eek W atersh ed P ro je c t as i t is now pro pose d.

We co uld ha ve th e same fl ood c o n tr o l w it h sm a ll er

dam s, and le s s ex pe ns e to th e ta x p ay er.

Ve ry t r u ly y o u rs ,
Ju ne 8 , 197^

Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Ra ndolp h 

U nit ed S ta te s S en ato r 

U. S. Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20510

De ar Mr. S e n a to r:

Fl oo d c o n tr o l i s a ver y commen dable p ro je c t fo r th e 

comm unity. To so lv e t h i s pr ob le m , El k Cre ek W at er sh ed P r o je c t, 

we th en in co nvenie nce o th e rs . Sm all er dams wo uld se rv e th e 

u lt im a te purp ose o f flo o d co n tr o l w it h o u t ta k in g a l l o f th e 

la n d .

Very tr x il y y o u rs,

s ' y

J u n e 8 , 1976

Th e H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 20510

My D e a r S e n a t o r :

I w an t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

L a r g e r da ms i n t h e p a s t tw o o r t h r e e y e a r s h a v e 

p r o v e n d a n g e r o u s f o r t h e c o m m u n iti e s d o w n - s tr e a m . F o r 

e x a m p le , S n a k e R i v e r , T e to n Dam .

I do n o t f e e l t h a t t h e s m a l l e r c o m m u n iti e s dow n 

s tr e a m fr o m t h e p r o p o s e d E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t 

s h o u ld b e s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s p o t e n t i a l d a n g e r .

S i n c e r e l y ,
176

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ra ndolp h 

U nited S ta te s Senato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hing ton, 9. C. 20510

?ea r Sir :

I am op po se d to th e Elk Cr eek W ater sh ed P ro je c t, as now

pla nned .

T hi s sa ne fl o o d c o n tr o l co ul d be desi gned w it h sm a ll er 

c a r s , and le s s co st to th e ta x p ay ers .

Vc rv T ru ly ,

____

1/1/c / fe f / e /,e/ S'/",

Ju ne 8 , 1976

H on or ab le Je n n in g s Ra nd olp h 

U nited S ta te s S enato r 

V. S. Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, 0 . C. 20510

hear Vr . S en ato r:

Fl oo d c o n tr o l i s a ver y commen dable p r o je c t fo r th e 

c o rr.- n it y . Tc so lv e th is pr ob le m , E lk Creek W at er sh ed P ro je c t, 

vo th en in convenie nce o th e rs . S m al le r de ns wo uld se rv e th e 

u lt im a te purp os e o f f ood c o n tr o l w it hout ta k in g a l l o f th e 

le n d .

very tr u ly yours ,

/ j
177

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ra ndo lph

U nited S ta te s Senato r

U nited S ta te s Sen at e

W as hing ton, D. C, 20510

P ea r S ir:

1 am op po sed to th e Ell: Cr ee k W ater sh ed P ro je c t, as now

pla nned .

T hi s sa ne fl o o d co n tr o l co uld he des ig ned w ith s n a ile r 

dan s, and le s s c o st to th e ta x p ay ers .

Ve ry T ru ly ,

Ju ne 8 , 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Rando lph

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e

W as hing ton, D. C, 20510

Pea r Mr. Ra nd olp h:

I wa nt to expre ss r.y o p p o sit io n to th e F.lk Creek 

W atersh ed P ro je c t, as p re s e n tl y pla nned .

With nore stu d y and p la n n in g , I fe e l we co ul d 

ac co m pl ish th e sa ne fl o o d co n tr o l w it h le s s bu rd en to th e 

fa rm er , and le s s ex pe ns e to th e ta x p a y e rs .

S in c e re ly ,
178

/ < / / * / 7 6

/ / / )

- - JC*J«— C Z ~ V £z . 1 Z

Z V

/

f t - ' * ' ’L

" ' ^ f t - 6 7 - f t

C —z

t e

[ f t f t y _. 6 f t * .

^ 7 ^ 7 ^

^ 7 z.< 7 Lt. /Z~ 7eL'6 ^t- '± s i, 6- '•-

C c

7 —' ■ * ' , . f t/d ^ i> ft'r

-'C

6 - 4 ^ 7'<-c'^ ^c'i~^c >~-^k’7 ~~-c ^ 7

( f t v - c T f t c f t f t ^ f t f t f t f t ^

f t f t y T J z , 7 7 / ^ f t 7
: -t£ / .—-^ z< ^

<< /r ^ - « .'.

X ^ s£7t±-

- -

(£ -t<^

\y, >-^CxC,z

 / J u y % ^ 4

2 Jy ^ Z ^ C z /- ^ /UL' i

-* L'

7

. v

S

-y

----y y -------------------

^ < f 7^1 #~-rd^->

tfLA JL' ( L ^ A ' - c i y ^

C ^h .^ c< ~£s s<2 &

/ 6

a?'-/j

( t v 7a C (£

K X ^
180
181
182

J u n e 8 , 19 76

The H o n o ra b le J e n n in g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a to r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 20510 

My D e a r S e n a to r :

S m a ll e r dams in t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w ould 

con su m e l e s s l e n d o f any o n e i n d i v i d u a l an d s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f l o o d c o n t r o l ; t h e r e f o r e , 1 

w an t t o e x p r e s s to y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e E lk C re ek 

W a te rsh e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S i n c e r e l y ,

LotXA— <0 U A + t t

# 7 H i .

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Ho no ra ble Je nnin gs Randolph 

Uni te d S ta te s S enato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Senate 

W as hi ng to n, n, C. 20510

n ear S ir:

Th is is to inf orm vou th a t I am opposed to th e Elk 

Creek W ate rsh ed P ro je c t as i t is now pro pose d.

We co uld have th e same fl ood c o n tr o l w it h sm all er 

dams, and le ss ex pe ns e to the ta x n av er.

Very truly yours,
183

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Rando lph 

U nited S ta te s S enato r 

U nited S ta te s S en at e 

W as hing ton, D. C. 20510

Dear S ir:

T his is to in fo rm vou th a t I am oppo sed to th e Elk

Cr eek W atersh ed P ro je c t as i t is now pr opose d.

We co uld ha ve th e same fl ood co n tr o l w ith sm a ll er

dam s, and le s s ex pe ns e to th e ta x p ay er.

Very tr u ly y o u rs ,

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Rando lph 

U ni te d S ta te s S en ato r 

U ni te d S ta te s S en at e 

W as hing ton, P. C. 20510 

Dear Mr. Ra nd olph :

I am op po se d to th e p re se n tl y pla nned El k Creek 

W ate rsh ed p r o je c t.

I fe e l th e Co un ty co ul d ha ve fl o o d c o n tr o l in a much 

le ss ex pen si ve man ne r.

S in c e re ly ,

?> o Z
184

Ju ne 8, 1976

The H on or ab le Je n n in g s Ra ndo lph

U nited S ta te s S enato r

U nited S ta te s Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, P. C. 20510

De ar Mr. Ra nd olph :

I an op po se d to th e p re s e n tl y pl an ne d n il Cr eek 

W atersh ed p r o je c t.

I fe e l th e Count y co ul d ha ve fl ood c o n tr o l in a much

le s s expensi ve man ne r.

S in c e re ly ,

The H on or ab le Je n n in g s Rando lph

U nited S ta te s S en ato r

U nited S ta te s Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, 0 . C, 20510

P ea r S ir:

I am op po se d to th e El k Creek W at er sh ed P ro je c t, as now

pla nned.

T his same fl o o d co n tr o l co uld he d esi gned w ith sm a ll er 

dam s, and le s s c o st to th e ta x p ay ers .

Ve ry T ru ly ,
J u n e 8 , 197b

H o n o ra b le J e n n in g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 5 1 0

E e a r M r. S e n a t o r :

1 w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o yo u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S m a lle r da ms i n t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w ould

consu m e l e s s la n d o f any one i n d i v i d u a l an d s e r v e t h e

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f l o o d c o n t r o l .

V ery t r u l y y o u r s ,

J u n e 8 , 1976

H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , P . C. 2 0 5 1 0

D e ar Mr. S e n a t o r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o you my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S m a lle r da ms i n t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w o u ld

co nsu m e l e s s la n d o f a n y one i n d i v i d u a l and s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f lo o d c o n t r o l .

V ery t r u l y y o u r s
18G

Ju ne 6, 197p

Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ra ndolp h 

U nit ed S ta te s S en ato r 

U. S. Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20510

De ar Mr. S en ato r:

Flood c o n tr o l i s a ver y co’mnendable p r o je c t fo r th e 

comm unity. To so lv e t h i s pro ble m , El k Cr eek W ater sh ed P ro je c t 

we th en in co nvenie nce o th e rs . S m all er dons wo uld se rv e th e 

u lt im a te purp ose o f fl ood c o n tr o l w it hout ta k in g a l l o f th e 

la n d .

ery t r u ly y c u rs,

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Ra ndolp h 

U nited S ta te s S en ato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hing to n, P. C. 205 10 

Pea r Mr. Ra nd olph :

I a r op po sed to th e p re se n tl y pla nned Elk Creek

W atersh ed p r o je c t.

I fe e l th e Co unty co ul d have fl o o d c o n tr o l in a much

le ss expen si ve man ne r.

S in c e re ly ,
187

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Ran dolph

U ni te d S ta te s S en ato r

U ni te d S ta te s S en at e

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20510

Hear Hr. "a ndolp h:

I wa nt to expre ss my o p p o sit io n to th e El k Creek 

W atersh ed P ro je c t, as p re se n tl y pla nned.

K it h more st udy and p la n n in g , I f e e l we co ul d 

ac co m pl is h th e same fl oo d co n tr o l w ith le s s bu rd en to th e 

fa rm er, and le s s ex pe ns e to th e ta x p ay ers .

S in c e re ly ,

J

3-7% 77777^^

77 ^77

J u n e 8 , 197 6

The H o n o r a b le J e n n in g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a to r

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 20510

My D e a r S e n a t o r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u r y o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te rs h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

L a r g e r da ms i n t h e p a s t t v e o r t h r e e y e a r s h a v e 

p r o v e n d a n g e r o u s f o r th e c o m m u n itie s 'e • • .- s t r e a m . F o r 

e x a m p le , S n a k e R iv e r , T e to n P a r,.

I do n o t f e e l t h a t t h e s m a l l e r c o m m u n itie s do w ns tr e a m f r o - th e p r o p o s e d I l k C re e k W a te rs h e d P r o j e c t 

s h o u ld h e s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s p o t e n t i a l d a n g e r .

i r . c e r e l y ,
188

J u n e 8 , 1976

H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r

U . S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C . 20510

D e a r M r. S e n a t o r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o yo u ray o p p o s i t i o n t o th e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p la n n e d .

S m a l l e r da m s i n th e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w ould 

co nsu m e l e s s l a n d o f an y one i n d i v i d u a l and s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f lo o d c o n t r o l .

V ery t r u l y y o u r s

J u n e 8 , 19 76

H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 5 1 0

D e a r S i r : .

I w a n t to e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o th e E lk 

C re e k W a te r s h e d p r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p la n n e d .

I f e e l we c o u ld h a v e t h e sa m e f l o o d c o n t r o l w ith

l e s s e x p e n s e to t h e t a x p a y e r .

S i n c e r e l y
1 8 9

J u n e 0, 1 9 7 6

T he H o n o r a b l e J e n n i n g s R a n d ol p h 

U n it e d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S. S e n a t e

W a s h i n g t o n, D. C. 2 0 5 1 0 

My D e a r S e n a t o r:

S m a ll e r da re s i n t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w o ul d

c o n s u m e l e s s l a n d o f a n y o n e i n d i v i d u a l a n d s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u lti m a t e p u r p o s e o f fl o o d c o n t r o l ; t h e r e f o r e , I 

w a nt t o e x p r e s s t o y o u m y o p p o s iti o n t o t h e E l k C re e k 

W at e r s h e d P r o j e c t, a s i t i s n o w p l a n n e d .

J u n e 8, 1 9 7 6

H o n o r a b l e J e n n i n g s R a n d ol p h 

U n it e d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S. S e n a t e

W a s h i n g t o n, D. C. 2 C 5 1 0 

D e ar S i r :

1 w a nt t o e x p r e s s t o y o u m y o p p o s iti o n t o t h e E l k 

C r e e k W at e r s h e d p r o j e c t, a s i t i s n o w p l a n n e d .

1 f e e l we c o u l d h a v e t h e sa m e fl o o d c o n t r o l, w it h 

l e s s e x p e n s e t o t h e t a x p a y e r.

Si n c e r e l y ,

C o. U a. %(, y o
190

Ju ne 8, 1976

The H on or ab le Je nnin gs Ra ndolph 

U nited S ta te s S en ato r 

U nited S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20S10

De ar S ir: ,4

I am op po se d to th e Elk Cr eek W ater sh ed P ro je c t, as now

pla nned .

*

T his sa ne fl ood c o n tr o l co ul d he des ig ned w it h sm all er 

dans, and le s s c o st to th e ta x p ay ers .

Ve ry T ru ly ,

J u n e 6 , iy ? 6

H o n o r a b le J c n n ln y .- l- .- .n ao ir b 

U n ite d S t a t e s 6 e- r. a t < r 

U. S . S e n a t e

We ah l e c t o r , P . C. PC51.0

D e a r S i r :

1 v a n

C re e k W a te r:

t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e FI R

<

lie d p r o j e c t , vs i t i s no w p l a n r e d .

I f e c i we

l e s s e x p e j:s a t o

c o u ld h a v e th e

t h e t a x p a y e r .

s ain c f l o o d c o n t r o l w ith

s i n c e r e ! y ,
191

J u n e 8 , 19 76

H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e .- S e n a t o r

U . S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2C 51 0

P e a r S i r :

T w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o yo u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e E lk 

C re e k W a te r s h e d p r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

- f e e l we c o u ld h a v e th e sa m e f lo o d c o n t r o l w ith 

l e s s e x p e n s e t c t h e t a x p a y e r .

S i n c e r e l y ,

J u n e 8 , 1976

H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r

U . S . " c r a t e

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 5 1 0

P e a r S i r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e E lk 

'■-re ek W a te rsh e d p r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e e .

- - ' c o u ld h a v e .t h e sa n. e f l o o d c o n t r o l w ith 

l e s s e x p e n s e t o t h e t e x p a y e r .

S i n c e r e l y
192

J u n e 8 , 19 76

H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 5 1 0

D e a r M r. S e n a t o r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o yo u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te rs h e d P r o j e c t , as i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S m a lle r da m s i n t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w o u ld 

consu m e l e s s l a n d o f a n jr

 o ne i n d i v i d u a l and s e r v e t h e 

sa me u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f lo o d c o n t r o l .

V er y t r u l y y o u r s ,

J u n e 8 , 1 976

The H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 20 51 U

i'y D e a r S e n a t o r :

I w an t t o e x p r e s s t o yo u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

L a r g e r da m s i n t h e p a s t tw o c r t h r e e y e a r s h a v e

p ro v e n d a n g e r o u s f o r t h e c o m m u n it ie s c o v n - 3 t r e a m . F o r 

e x a m p le , S n a k e R i v e r , T e to n Dam.

I do n o t f e e l t h a t t h e s m a l l e r c o m m u n itie s do wns tr e a m fre m. t h e p r o p o s e d E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t 

s h o u ld b e s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s p o t e n t i a l d a n g e r .
193

Ju ne 8, 1976

Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ra ndolp h 

U nited S ta te s S en ato r 

U. S. Sen at e

W as hing to n, D. C. 20510

Dear Mr. S en ato r:

Fl oo d c o n tr o l i s a ver y comm endable p r o je c t fo r th e 

com munity. To so lv e t h i s pr ob le m , El k Cr eek W ater sh ed P ro je c t 

we th en in co nvenie nce o th e rs . Sm all er dams wo uld se rv e th e 

u lt im a te purp ose o f fl o o d c o n tr o l w it h o u t ta k in g a l l o f th e 

la n d .

Very t r u ly y o u rs,

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Randolp h

" n ite d S ta te s S en ato r

U nited S ta te s Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20S10

Dea r S ir:

T his is to in fo rm vou th a t I am op posed to th e Elk 

Cr ee k W atersh ed P ro je c t as i t is now pro pose d.

We co uld ha ve th e same fl o o d c o n tr o l w it h sm all er

da- '?, ar.d le ss ex pe ns e to th e ta x n av er.

Ve ry t r u ly you rs
194

J u n e 8 , 1976

Th e H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 20510

I';,- D e ar S e n a t o r :

t v;a*it t o e x p r e s s t o y o u nty 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t

o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

i s now p l a n n e d .

L a r g e r d a n s in 

p ro v e :, d a n g e r o u s f o r 

e x amp 1 e , S u ak e R i v e r ,

t h e o a s t tw o o r t h r e e y e a r s 

he c o m m u n iti e s d o w n - s tr e a m . 

T e to n Dam.

h a v e

F o r

I do n o t f e e l t h a t t h e s e a l 

s tr e a m fr o m t h e p r o p o s e d F lk C re e k 

s h o u ld b e s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s p o t e n t

e r c o m m u n iti e s dow n— 

W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t 

.3.1 d a n g e r .

I

S i n c e r e l y ,

3 / 3 p

June 8, 1976

The Honorable Jennings Randolph 

United States Senator 

United States Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Sir:

I am opposed to the Elk Creek Watershed Project, as now

planned.

This same flood control could be designed with smaller 

dams, and less cost to the taxpayers.

Very Truly
195

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ran dolph 

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hi ng to n, 9. C, 20510

De ar Mr. Ra nd olph :

1 wan t to ex pre ss my o p p o sit io n to th e El k Creek 

W atersh ed P r o je c t, as p re s e n tl y pla nned.

K ith ro r e st udy and p la n n in g , 1 fe e l we co ul d 

ac co m pl is h th e same fl ood c o n tr o l w ith le ss burd en to th e 

fa rm er, and le ss ex pe ns e to th e ta x p a y ers .

S in c e re ly

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ran dolph 

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Se na te 

W as hing ton, D. C. 20S10 

Dear Mr. Ra ndolph:

I am opposed to th e p re s e n tl y pla nne d Elk Creek 

W atersh ed p ro je c t.

I fe e l th e County co ul d have fl ood c o n tr o l in a much 

le ss ex pen si ve ma nner.

S in c e re ly

74 -695 0 - 76 - 13
196

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon or ab le Je n n in g s Ra ndolp h 

U nited S ta te s S en ato r 

U nited S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hi ng to n, D. C, 20519

De ar Mr. Ra nd olph :

I wa nt to ex p re ss r.v o p p o sit io n to th e F.lk Cr eek 

W atersh ed P ro je c t, as p re s e n tly pla nned.

With ro re st u d y and p la n n in g , I fe e l we co uld 

ac co m pl is h th e same fl o o d c o n tr o l w it h le s s bur de n to th e 

fa rm er, and le s s ex pe ns e to th e ta x p a y ers .

S in c e re lv ,

T he H o n o r a b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a to r 

U. C. S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 ti l0 

I'.y D e a r S e n a t o r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p la n n e d .

L a r g e r dam s i n t h e p a s t tw o o r t h r e e y e a r s h a v e 

o ro v e r. d a n g e r o u s f o r t h e c o m m u n itie s d o w n - s tr e a m . F o r 

e x a m p le , S n a k e R i v e r , T e to n Darn.

I do n o t f e e l t h a t t h e s m a l l e r c o m m u n iti e s dow ns t r e a m fro m th e p r o p o s e d E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t 

s h o u ld b e s u b j e c t e d t o t h i s p o t e n t i a l d a n g e r .

S i n c e r e l y
197

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Hon orab le Je nnin gs Ran dolph

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hing ton, D. C. 20510

He ar S ir :

Th is is to in fo rm vou th a t I am op posed to th e Elk 

Creek Wate rshe d P ro je c t as i t is now pro po se d.

We co uld b.ave th e same fl ood c o n tr o l w it h sm all er 

dam s, and le ss ex pe ns e to th e ta x p av er.

Very tr u ly y ours ,

Ju ne 8, 1976

honora ble Jen nin gs Ran dolph 

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r 

V. S. Sen at e

W as hi ng to n, D. C. 20510 

D t'i r Vr. S en ato r:

Flood c o n tr o l i s a very commendable n ro le c J

 + s, 

purP U J, o f n o M c o n t M v l t t o n t " ■ ■= t h .

Very tr u ly y o u rs ,

A 2 *
198

TALBOTT. SAMUEL ELLIOTT. ISAAC BOOTH.

FIRS T TER M OF COURT H ELD AR RIL >. 1B4S

PRESENT DAVID MOLDIN, JACOB KELLER. JACOB

JOHN H WOODFORD JOSEPH MCCOY. WILLIAM

C L E R K 'S O F F IC E

Madely n N Thomas

GUunig (G-curi of Qnxbix ut (G-uuitig

CO UNTY CO MM ISSIO NE RS

CLCNNA C. N»O r» T. CLERK

C uyanit a Ben ne tt

SECRETARY

P H IL IP P I. W E S T V IR G IN IA

Jam es F. Stemp le

IOS BEECH AVENUE

Ju ne 17 , 197 6

I , James P. S te m p le , member o f th e B arb our Co unty 

C o u rt , su p p o rt sm a ll ty pe dam an d str eam im prov em en t 

f o r E lk Cre ek W at er Sh ed .

J u n e 8 , 19 76

The H o n o ra b le J e n n in g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a to r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 20510 

My D e ar S e n a t o r :

S m a lle r da ms in t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w o u ld 

consu m e l e s s l a n d o f any one i n d i v i d u a l a n d s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u rp o s e o f f l o o d c o n t r o l ; t h e r e f o r e , I 

w an t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e E lk C re ek 

W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , as i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S i n c e r e l y
199

J u n e 8 , 19 76

H o n o ra b le J e n n in g s R a n lc ip h 

U n ite d S t a t e r S e n a to r 

U. S . S e n a te

W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2051 0

D ear vr . S e n a to r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t c y ou a y o p p o s i t i o n t o th e 

I l k C re e k W ate r- sh ed P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S m a lle r d a n s in t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w ould

consu m e l e s s la n d o f an y one i n d i v i d u a l and s e r v e t h e 

e a s e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f lo o d c o n t r o l .

. V er y t r u l y y o u r s ,

77

J u n e 8 , 19 76

h o n o r a b le J e n n in g s R an d o lp h 

• t - . o d S t a t e . S e n a to r

u . £ . S e n a te

i n g to n , D. C. ..’051 0

e a r " r . S e n a t o r :

I w an t t o e x p re s s t o you my o p p o s i t i o n t o th e

:

 C re e k W a te r s h e d ? r o * « c t « e •< - < .

r °v

'

C T * a s 1 W i s now p l a n n e d .

C G x h e e o s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w ould 

c e n s u s ., l e s s la n d c f an y one i n d i v i d u a l and s e r v e th e 

« s - e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f lo o d c o n t r o l .

V er y t r u l y y o u r s ,

3 * 2 ^ 2.C33O
200

Ju ne 8, 1976

The Ho no rable 

U ni te d S ta te s 

U ni te d S ta te s 

W as hi ng to n, D

Jen nin gs Randolp h

S enato r

Sen at e

C. 20510

Pe ar S ir :

Thi s is to in fo rm vou th a t I am opposed to th e F.lk 

Cr eek W atershed P ro je c t as i t is now pro pose d.

We could ha ve th e same fl ood c o n tr o l w ith sm all er 

dam s, and le ss ex pe ns e to th e ta x p ay er.

Ve ry tr u l y y ours ,

Ju ne 8 , 1976

The Hon or ab le Je nnin gs Ran dolph 

U ni te d S ta te s S enato r 

U ni te d S ta te s Sen at e 

W as hi ng to n, P, C. 20310 

Dear S ir :

1 am op po sed to th e Elk Cr eek W atersh ed P r o je c t, as now

pla nned.

Thi s sa ne fl ood co n tr o l co uld be desi gned w ith sm all er 

dams , and le s s c o st to th e ta x p a y ers .
201

T ^ L ^ - aT ^ ^ ^ 7 2 7 ^ 4 ° ^ ■

'J " " , “ 7^77'- 7^-- i .

O t- ^ ~ / ^ z a s is T - 7 7 2 2Z sh ~- 7C7s £. / / s t ^ e ^ L ^ / ( Z ^ L 't s ^ & A 'C

7 ^ 7 7 ^ 2 TATcisl^-^ s^ T & h 'i '^ ts s /ty t?2 u-d -

'C s - 7 7 6 7 s & L t^ < ^ 7 - & 27<s_^L. j7 / a s ^ s is 2 s ^ ( - c ^

jT7s ,^ s>2s s 2s 7 .C-,^ Z » T * ^ i - ^ Z i ^ x ^ Z - * ^ -Tt) ‘y^c-d ~ij- -^ a7t.

'^ ''S O s iA ^ iT ^ '' C S L ' y Z Z T h 'H sri ^i- q ( ^ 7 ^ - Tsi-izj-'TL ^ ro - ^ L ^ a ^ e - A ^ , ■

' ,T77as77s

—~ —- u s — y ' — ----------yt ■>— —■— ‘^2 L <^-

X v. 6

M ^ s i^ a '' . y 2 y ( d ' s ' '' 2 '< . . £4J'-tt-as 7^/'^2'is)-i»~C s7 . '7 ^ - i s

tz ^ T s l^ -2 7 T ^ 'i 'd /ti'S - A S ' J^^Tas^L. ,lf^Zf—ts7. 7^~ K^i'^22 ~^isZ ^A —t'~~'

T ^ 'r ’Tsrrtss&C 't-S ^tsHs 7 7 6 7 7 7 s ^2 s 2 ~ ^-A .

7 ^ - s ^ / , . . ^ . 7 .

/ M . 7 .

s i'* - . 7 9 6 7 i^ s- a7

2-<2s2'Sa.

^ l/'- c s 'd z s i^ A U '. J i. ttT .

*

y

'^-'l<-'S t7 '7 ls 7 7 (-'/ 7 ~ /s ^T T c- sT sf—CsT. £ - » -----

-Q 'b s t'lr -c s iJ L ' ^ c 7 TT s ’^ - s ^ ^ /' L -'l/ / 7 6 7.

rt'iLCs s 7 - 7 io j7 /2 s s >UL. y i2 ^ L-^ is yT.'s S\ <^^>»7-»->-«- —

.s /) & s2 . s t b - ls '- s i * s i> ^ 2 ^ ts S s 7 i- o ^ ' s 77 2’7 ^s*7 TL/i^s s 2 7 .7

iTT l/ iT eTToJ . ^ A n u . s &Lzj- ''- 2 7 ^ 7 7 -4 s2 ^y <>~2s*s ^- ^- . .<7-<2,

/ £ b - . T T fa ^ s s S s s s !'. T Z -^ ^ s r'i s ^ T o s y —'^ T -/

* j b h - y 3 & s » - £ - ik 's 2 * . T T l'A sC j^ sls b 't-^ T ^M S 'T -'.- s}

? x o )

TlTrOs ^ ^ T Z u O T L sss ‘ 7 ^ / , ^

T lb u j- , ^Js s ^ a6cca7 66C7jla> T ^ ts y i. s ^ z s 's / j ^7a , £ a 6 1

' ’ / e ^ ^ )
202

^ A aso^ ,

4 / 6 . % 60 ) sdz''^'-' ^ ^ > - < < ^ ,0 ^ - ^ ^ ^ U X j

( 4 ^ 0 4 ) t7t ~i zA J e4 s

y . &>7lZ 6 -.C I^ )- C ^G ^ 0 ^ yL #-t /- ^^'C -* £ '- s

j744>-aJ y ^ T iJ ^TL^-X'-Z-ts

0^027>GZ-74c^4z^

t'T-' 4 • s7fl-''4L-Z>

J >

df -n rC ^ a ^ i> /£ A.aa>Ga s y2~*-&4 -^a-Az-e^ T'I jL'Ia-ccs

ft~/^ 4 ^ 4 , £ > ^ ^ 6 ^6 6 ~ tA L C e ^ <42^-d'-1

f

^ 2 & -& ^ 2 h ^ -0 ^ —d a - I Z J ^

0/4. 0„ rf. / „ 4 / /£> — d~ a- G -& ^ ^ c g C-^ -

’' S-Si a- 4

^c -^ -y z/-c < -^ T^ ( 7 ^ y^^CL-Z/^ty

^ t y c b L - J t* ^ oay y i z h

£s £^<£ <L«?-&< 0 2 ^ ^ y ^ 2 e ~ 6 ^ a ^ y/ ~6-^ -4 -4 .

.^Zl s&< rrri<_.
203

■

. ~ T ^£> ' < U J ^ r \ ' ^ >a:z' w a jz z t y

(&UL, y '^ Z t ' ^ 2 ^ 7 ^ .
204

J u n e 8 , 1976

H o n o ra b le J e n n i n g s R a n d o lp h 

U n ite d S t a t e s S e n a t o r 

U. S . S e n a t e

W a s h in g to n , D. C . 20510

D ear ” r . S e n a to r :

I w a n t t o e x p r e s s t o y o u my o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e 

E lk C re e k W a te r s h e d P r o j e c t , a s i t i s now p l a n n e d .

S m a l l e r da rn s in t h e l e s s p o p u l a t e d a r e a s w o u ld 

co nsu m e l e s s l a n d o f any o n e i n d i v i d u a l an d s e r v e t h e 

sa m e u l t i m a t e p u r p o s e o f f l o o d c o n t r o l .

V ery t r u l y y o u r s
wes tern union

205

Telegram

NKB019N WAG 0 3 7 ( 0 7 4 0 /(Z -0 0 6 5 7 8 E 16 8 )rD 0 6 /1 6 /7 6 0740

"T cs IPMMTZZ CSP

3044573591 TDMT P H IL IP P I WV 18 0 6 -1 6 07 40A EST

PMS SENATE PUBLIC COMMITTEE

42 04 DIRKSON OFF IC E CENTER BLDG

WASHINGTON DC 2 05 10

PLEASE DONT VOTE FOR ELK CREEK WATER SHED NO 4 OUR LIV ES AT STAKE ON

IN DIA N FORK ROADO

MR AND MRS WILLIAM DIGMAN

NNNN

f p f r d i r * l~lH H f? .

J JU N 1 u 197G

I k t o i s r i T E

WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20510

BF-1201 (RS-SB)

wes tern union Telegram

_BFAS25 VAASSSCO TAt) (2 -S 0 6 6

IC S IPMMTZZ CSP

M 4 4 S 7 J M I TIN T P H IL IP P I WV 18 O C -IC S74IA EST

PMS SENATE PU BLIC COMMITTEE

42A4 BIRKSON OFF IC E CENTER BLM

WASH INS TON SC 2A 5IN

E£2 EIM q n )

JU N 1 6 19 /o

ILILdLSU u llQB

WASHINGTON. 0. C. 29510

HELP US SAVE OUR HONES VOTE BO ELK CREEK WATER SNEB SU ME R 4 PLEA SE

M S IVA BISH AS

74-695 283

SMR
206

we sferrt union

Telegram

NFA 024 W A B 0 3 5 C 0 7 3 5 ) ( 2 - 0 0 6 4 2 6 2 1 6 8 )P B 0 6 / 1 6 / 7 6 C 735

ics ipmmtzz csp

3 1 4 4 5 7 5 9 2 8 POM TBMT P H IL IP P I WV 13 0 6 - 1 6 O73 5A 1S T

J*KS SENA TE P U B L IC WORK COMMIS SIO N

4 2 0 2 O IN K SEN SE NA TE O F F IC E B U IL B IN G

WA SH INGT ON »C 2 0 5 1 0

I AH AGAIN ST PROPOSER EL K CREEK WATER SHEB I T W IL L TA KE ALL MY HOME

PLACE

SENTELL MALCOLM RT I BO X II2 B P H IL IP P I WW 2 6 4 1 6

wsehque

< JUN 1 6 197c

Dm W

WI9EK IK, 1 .1. 2C519

wes te rn union Telegram

L L E 0 3 1 S P 0B 029 W A C 0 7 0 (0 9 2 6 > ( 2 - 0 1 1 3 6 6 E 1 6 8 1 P D 0 6 /1

IC S IP MMTZZ CSP

3 0 4 4 5 7 1 5 0 0 TDMT P H IL IP P I WV 19 0 6 - 1 6 1015A EOT

P” iz-- 08

PU S SE NA TE P U B LIC WORKS COMMIS SIO N

4 2 0 2 D IR KSEN SENA TE O F F IC E BLDG

WAS HING TO N DC

I AM AGAIN ST T HE ELK CREEK WATERSHED WE WOULD L IV E IN DANGER BELOW

THE DAM

SHERWOOD YOCUM RT 1 P H IL IP P I WV

SS! SS Telegram

2-0 278R JE 168 0 6 /1 6 /7 6

IC S IPMMTZZ CSP

50P2653210 ML TDMT GRAFTON WV 100 0 6 -1 6 01 25 P EOT

PMS SENATE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

«20 2 DlRKSfcN SENATE OF FICE BLDG

CAPITOL ONE DC 20510

AS A LAND OWNER ANO MEMBER OF L CREEK WATERSHED ASSOCIA TION IN

HARRISON COUNTY »EST V IR G IN IA I WANT !T KNOWN TO YOU THAT I STRICKLY

OPPOSE The PROPOSED FLOOD CONTROL DAMS ON ELK CREEK RESPECTFULLY

JAMES J -AGNER ROUTE 1 BOX 60 BRIDGEPORT WEST VIR G IN IA

121 52 EST

JPMPOMT h Sa
207

R o u te 1

PH IL IP PI, WEST VIRGINIA 26 41 6

Ju n e 10, 197 6

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

We th e u n d e rs ig n e d e r e a g a i n s t th e d a r y s w ^ e c - 4 o f th e E lk C re ek Wate r Shed . 

F i r s t , I t w ou ld ta k e m o st o f o u r ho mes an d m ost o f o u r l i v e l i h o o d s . M os t 

o f th e d w e ll e r s o f t h i s dam a r e r e t i r e d p e o p le who have re m o d e le d t h e i r 

home s an d a r e re a d y to s e t t l e down to l i v e an d to fa rm

A ls o , th e r e w ould be a c o n s t a n t f e a r to e v e ry o n e who l i v e s bel ow th e dam 

t h a t th e tr a g e d ie s o f B u ffa lo C re e k an d Id ah o w ould o c c u r a g a in .

Th e E lk C re ek W ate r Sh ed w ould ta k e th o u sa n d s o f a c r e s o f m ost 

fa rm an d f o r e s t la n d In W es t V i r g i n i a . p ro d u c tiv e

F u r th e r som e o f o u r fa rm s alo ngAd am S i e ., * w ould be s p l i t in tw o f o r ro a d s 

so t h a t th e p e o p le who l i v e above th e dam s c o u ld g e t i n an d o u t to th e 

p u b lic hig hw ay s f o r th e p r e s e n t ro a d s a r e in th e a r e a o f th e dam.

Th e W ate rs hed i t s e l f I s u n c a l le d - f o r . 

mo ney to be s p e n t to d re d g e an d c le a n 

f lo o d in g .

A ll we nee d I s a s m a ll am ou nt o f 

th e E lk C re ek to p r e v e n t f u t u r e

A g a in , we r e p e a t : "We

7'aZZS-

'O 't d c / n jL .

a r e a g a i n s t th e p ro p o se d E lk C re ek W ate r S h e d ."

R e sp e c tf u ll y y o u r s ,

/ \ c

r y ( ^

G&t-LoJ ‘o J’Tuuu- ' x

‘-1 / V S

c vxdZ-M
208

c i * /

U/TLCCJui

J^L ^ / r J ~ d x ^ >

-Sz zz^a^L

p - C e h ^ s

l 0 vvC hy o-C cO-^7
209

Route I

P H IL IP PI, VEST VIR GIN IA 26«1 (

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

We th e u n d e r s ig n e d a r c a g a i n s t th e d 

F i r s t , i t w ould ta k e c o s t o f o u r h a n e s a n ^ ^ t 

o f th e d w e lle r s o f t.-.’.s dan a r e r e t i r e d p c o u le •. 

home s an d a r e re a d y to s e t t l e io u a to l i v e an d •

c f th<

C- ou ,

"ho bn '

Ju n e IC , 1976

E?k !.* nt er Shed ,

l i v e l i h o o d s . r o s e

t rc r.o d e le d t h e i r

A ls o , th e r e w ould b e a c o n s ta n t f e a r tc 

t h a t th e t r a g e d ie s o f B u ffa lo C ra sh an d ev e ry o n e who l i v e s b elo w th e den 

Id a h o w ould o c c u r a g a in .

The E lk C re ek V a te r Sh ed w ould t i k e th o u sa n d s 

fa rm an d f o r e s t la n d in W es t V i r g i n i a . o f a c r e s o f m o st p r o d u c tiv e

F u r th e r some o f o u r fa rm s a lo n g dam n< 

so t h a t th e p e o p le who l i v e ab o v e th e 

p u b lic hig h w ay s f o r th e p r e s e n t ro a d s

Th e W a te rs h e d i t s e l f i s u n c a lle d f o r . 

money to ' be s p e n t t o d re d g e an d c le a n 

f lo o d in g .

>. A w ould b e s p l i t in tw o f o r ro a d s 

dam s c o u ld g e t in and c u t to th e 

a r e in th e a r e a o f th e d e n .

A ll we n eed i s a sm a ll am ou nt o f 

th e E lk C re ek t o p r e v e n t f u t u r e

A g a in , we r e p e a t : "We a re a g a in s t th e p ro p o se d E lk C re e k • ,'t t e r S h e d ."

R esp e c tf u ll y y c u r s ,

(K.&- s it v k X ttx _A ^,v>w<%_v v _p

C o ^ 4 —

__

«-»Sa -

7 / ^ / / 7 / 7 ^ ^

J

7

 tfTj (7, 77^.^^/