The Greenville times. [volume] (Greenville, Miss.) 1868-1917, 1907-02-23

their declared purpose and IN VIOLA
ton Of their expressed opinion as TO
the proper treatment of the river.
Our engineers went before them,
however, and pitted our condition
against their theory, and being wise
men, the Commission subjected their
theory to the force of this ponderous
fact and made the allotment, and the
levee was saved.
Mr.. Shackleford. What did it cost
the Government to put in this rcvet
ment work you speak of to save the
Longwood levee?
Mr. Humphreys of Mississippi. 1t
cost a little more. than $4,000.
Mr.. Shackfeford Has there ever
! been any estimatee by the engineers
/ Of the cost OF revetting the banks on
+ large scale, 50 as to preserve the
regimen Of the river and also to pro-
/ feet your levee lines3
! MIR. Humphreys Of Mississippi
/ There have been numerous estimates.
! Mr.. Nolty, who is an engineer Of con
siderable learning and experience, has
| estimated that the cost of revetment.
including cost OF plant, administra
ton, and engineering charges-in
| fact everything be $4,000
/ mile He says. also, that there are
500 miles of caving bank between
Cairo and the mouth OF the Red
River. In other words, that it would
! cost 500 Ooo, 900 to revet all the cav
ing banks along that reach Of the
river. which is about the only part OF
the river where there is any consid-
cradle caving. 1t is the opinion of
our engineers, however, that it would
not be necessary to revet more than
one-half of the caving banks; III 9th
er word, not more than $50 miles.
And it IS also their opinion, and i'll
this Mr. Nolty concurs, that if the
work were done on large scale
that is, if the Government should go
at it in a businesslike way-the cost
per mile could be cut almost, if not
quite, in half, so that the revetment
instead of costing $780, 900, would
probably cost not more than SIS
600. 600.
OF course, the protection of levees
IS not the only-in fact, is not the
principal object in view in doing this
revetmert work 1t is very necessary
IN the first place, to prevent the
bends from being cut off. | think
all the engineers are agreed on this,
because you can readily see what dis
atsrous consequences would follow
81
bend, let us suppose, is Is miles
around ard only one mile across
The fall in the river is about inches
to the mile, and when the cutoff
Is made we would therefore have a
fall OF IL feet in l mile This would
upset existing conditions for 40 or
so milesabove and below the cutoff,
and. IN addition, experience has DEM
onstrated that this shortening of the
river would be only temporary 1t
would at once begin TO eat into the
opposite shore, an5i IN a very few
years it would restore the length lost
tby the cutoff. The amount OF silt
dumped into the river by reason OF
these caving banks is astounding. In
an article written by Chief Engineer
West, of the Mississippi Levee Board
he says that in his district alone,
embracing only one side of the river
for distance of $50 miles, "67 square
miles of land, most of which was
highly improved. have beens aban-
doned by the retirement of the levee
line from caving banks since 1882,
and but for the limited revetment
that has been done this would have
been considerably more" Assuming
that an equal amount of caving oc-
ours on both sides along this
reach of the river, enough land is
caved in in this $50 miles annually to
fill the river to the level of its banks
for a distance of II miles. While on
this point | will read another pas
sage from Mr.. Molly. He says:
IT the revetment work is syste-
npatIcally prosecuted, there will even
tually be such a small amount of sed-
lment carried out that the necessity
OF dredging in the pass and seward
extension of the jetties will be re-
moved.
But let me return, Mr. Chairman.
TO the Longwood levee. Since this
allotment was made by the Commits
| sion. they have made others for SIM
liar purposes. 1t is intended. to relax
still further the old rule, and this
additional 100000 which this para
graph carries will be expended in that
way
In the annual report of c. H. West,
chief engineer of this levee district,
he makes this startling statement:
Since 1882 there have been Iz2
miles of levee abandoned. or OF per
cent. of the total length of the con-
trolling line
During the three years since the
high water of 1908 there have been
SI-45 miles of 1evee abandoned, or
nearly n per cent. of the total length
of he controlling line
As the levee grows in volume the
loss per mile from cavng, banks be-
comes more and more serious, and
1t the same rate continues the time
will soon come when the annual rev
enaes will not be sufficient to build
the new levees required to replace