NORTH PIGEON WATERSHED, IOWA

NORTH PIGEON WATERSHED WORK PLAN

Size and location: 4,510 acres in Pottawattamie County, Iowa.

Tributary to Pigeon Creek, Missouri.

Sponsors: West Pottawattamie County Soil Conservation District and Pottawattamie County Board of Supervisors.

Purposes: Watershed protection and flood prevention.

Principal measures: Soil conservation practices on farms and structural measures consisting of 18 grade stabilization structures.

Benefit-cost ratio: 1.2 to 1.0. With secondary benefits excluded the benefit-cost ratio is 1.1 to 1.0.

Area benefitted: 3,684 acres.

Number of beneficiaries: Owners and operators of 32 farms are benefited by structural measure.

1 This is primarily the cost of applying land treatment measures by landowners. Cost sharing from Federal funds appropriated for the agricultural conservation program may be available if included in the county program developed each year in consideration of approved State and National programs and the annual authorization by the Congress. 2 Consisting of land, easements, and rights-of-way, $10,010; administration of contracts, $3,730.

3 The value of measures already applied ($113,510) increased this to 35 percent.

Prorated P.L. 566 structural cost per acre benefited: $107

Carrying out the project: The West Pottawattamie County Soil Conservation District assumes responsibility for installation of all structural measures except structure M-2 which will be handled by the Pottawattamie County Board of Supervisors. The responsibility for operation and maintenance of all structural measures will be assumed by the District and the county.

The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $1,510.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not believe there is anybody to appear on that. Mr. WELD. Mr. Chairman, the North Pigeon watershed is located in Pottawattamie County in western Iowa. It is also in the loessial hills, adjacent to the Missouri floodplain.

The CHAIRMAN. It is also an area where we approved a great many of these projects?

Mr. WELD. Yes, sir.

This is quite typical of the projects that you have considered before. This watershed comprises 4,510 acres. It drains into the Pigeon River. That flows into the Missouri River a few miles north of Council Bluffs, Iowa.

The sponsors of this project are the West Pottawattamie County Soil Conservation District and the Pottawattamie County Board of Supervisors.

As in the last plan we have testified on, all of the land in this watershed is privately owned: There are a total of 44 farms averaging about 147 acres. The land use is about two-thirds cropland, 13.7 percent grassland, and 17.5 percent woodland and the balance of about 6 percent miscellaneous land.

The major farm enterprise is production of cattle and hogs, which represents 63 percent of the farm income. Others are engaged in dairying and cash grain farming. The main crops are corn, soybeans, and

oats.

The main problem in this watershed is land voiding and depreciation. of the productive capacity of the land adjacent to the gully areas. The gullies range in width from 120 to 250 feet and 30 to 75 feet deep. Progressive development of the main gullies and their laterals dissect the fields to the extent that they can no longer be farmed profitably in corn and grain crops. As a result, these areas are converted into pasture or revert to idle land. It is estimated that during the next 50 years, if the project is not installed, that an additional 1462 acres will be damaged. Much valuable farmland will be destroyed. Farm income will be drastically reduced. The general economy of the local community will deteriorate and the tax base for the entire county will suffer.

The average annual damage from gully erosion is estimated at $25,850. The watershed is a heavy contributor of sediment to the main stem of Pigeon Creek, which is its outlet at the lower end.

In recent years about $10,700 has been spent on the average annually to clean out the main creek below the project boundary in order to maintain channel capacity required to prevent flooding of extensive areas of bottom land adjacent to the Missouri River. The objectives of the sponsor in developing this plan are threefold:

First, to maintain the soil productivity by prevention of excessive sheet erosion.

Second, reduction or elimination of the growth of gullies and accompanying damages to land and improvements.

Third, reduction of sediment damage to downstream outlet channels.

The measures planned for the project are conservative cropping systems, including rotation of close-growing and intertilled crops and contour farming; water disposal systems on the farms which include either level, parallel, or basin-type terraces and divisions, with the needed grassed waterways; minor gully stabilization which is within. the capability of the individual farms to carry out; pasture renovation and improvement; and improved woodland management.

These represent the principal land treatment measures. The structural measures planned include 18 grade stabilization structures. These are designated by the red symbols, each of which serves a group of

landowners. Of these, 16 are the conventional drop inlet type structure, one is an inlet on the existing road culvert, and one is a chute type outlet which differs from these others in that instead of having a conduit through the structure, there is a concrete paved spillway over it. There is a picture in the plan illustrating that type of structure. It is located near the lower end of the watershed. You will see it controls quite a large area.

The cost of the project totals $718,000, of which $171,000 is land treatment and $547,000 structural measures for flood prevention. The local share of $175,000 represents 24 percent of the total. The measures already installed when credited would increase the local contribution to 35 percent.

It is proposed that the project will be installed over a 5-year period. Benefits will accrue to 32 farms involving 3,684 acres. Average annual benefits are estimated at $27,560.

It is proposed that sediment pools of 16 of the structures will produce incidental recreation. However, this was not evaluated monetarily.

The benefit-cost ratio for the project is 1.2 to 1. If we disregard the secondary, it is reduced to 1.1 to 1. The sponsors have agreed to carry on the necessary operation and maintenance at an estimated cost of $1,510 annually. The prorated PL-566 structural cost is $107.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions?

Mr. GATHINGS. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that there are many beneficiaries. With a large portion of the watershed 3,684 acres benefited out of a total of 4,510 acres, it seems that you would turn up with a little better cost-benefit ration than 1.2 to 1.

Mr. WELD. On this land voiding and land damage, it is very difficult to arrive at true figures probably in the damages and the resulting benefits that accrue. We must base this on our present land values. These are based at present to a value of $300 per acre for cropland. When the land reverts to pasture its value drops to $75, and if it falls into the idle category, which is badly gullied, it drops to $25. Mr. GATHINGS. The average is about $107?

Mr. WELD. The average value of the farm per acre? The $107 is not the value of the land but the cost of the structure measures per benefited acre. This cropland we are trying to protect is valued at the present time at $300 per acre. With increasing land values and everything, you can see in the future that these benefits could go up considerably. It is very difficult to predict what that might be.

We also have this situation down here of a tremendous amount of sediment which is coming from this valuable land. We are losing irreplaceable natural resources and the sediment is being dropped on the flood plain downstream.

Here in the past they have been able to clean it out so that they can properly utilize that flood plain land, but how long that would continue is questionable, too.

Mr. GATHINGS. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further questions, we thank you very much.

Without objection, Mr. Scherle's statement will be made a part of the record.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM J. SCHERLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

Mr. Chairman and members of the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation and Credit, as a newly elected member of the House, this is my first opportunity to present my views to you. Since I represent a rural district, where soil conservation is of critical importance, this opportunity is most meaningful to me.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak to you on behalf of North Pigeon Watershed in Pottawattamie County, in southwestern Iowa. Consisting of 4,510 acres, this is in the area along the east bank of the Missouri River which is badly in need of gully control.

The erosion in this area is not only destroying valuable farm land but the sediment from it goes down stream into Pigeon Creek and into the Missouri River to create additional problems. Unless the erosion can be controlled many of the farms will be permanently damaged and the tax base of Pottawattamie County will suffer.

The treatment to be provided by the project will include combinations of land treatment measures to bring sheet erosion within acceptable limits. This will include necessary land use conversion to bring the land use within the capability of the soils, and measures to control gullies and waterways as much as possible on individual farms. The control of floodwater runoff and erosion by these measures will contribute to solving the problems farther downstream.

Eighteen grade stabilization structures will supplement the land treatment practices for structural controls of the major watercourses in the watershed. These structures will each benefit groups of farms and are beyond the capabilities of the individual farmers to install.

Three-fourths of the farms in the watershed will benefit from reduction of gully erosion damages. The reduced sediment load in the channels downstream from the project will provide important benefits to the public. Water areas which will be created in sixteen of the stabilization structures will range from two acres to twenty acres. These will be beneficial to fish and wildlife in addition to their primary purpose of flood prevention, although the additional benefits have not been measured.

Excellent progress has already been made in land treatment on the farms of the watershed. Over half of the farms already have conservation plans, and measures valued at $113,510 have already been installed without P. L. 566 help. There is every reason to expect accelerated progress if the project is approved. The local people are ready and able to do their share to install the improvements and see that they are properly operated and maintained

In conclusion, I am very pleased that such a distinguished group of men as you are giving consideration to the conservation needs of our land. The people of my District and I thank you.

PAPILLION CREEK WATERSHED, NEBRASKA

PAPILLION CREEK WATERSHED WORKPLAN

Size and location: 245,800 acres in Douglas, Sarpy and Washington Counties, Nebraska.

Tributary to Missouri River.

Sponsors: Douglas, Papio and Sarpy Soil and Water Conservation Districts and Douglas, Sarpy and Washington Counties.

Purposes: Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention.

Principal measures: Soil conservation practices on farms; and structural measures consisting of 52 grade stabilization structures.

Benefit-cost ratio: 1.7 to 1.0. With secondary benefits excluded, the benefitcost ratio is 1.6 to 1.0.

Area benefited: 6,340 acres.

Number of beneficiaries: Owners and operators of approximately 1,600 farm and urban properties will benefit by the project. Project costs:

! This is primarily the cost of applying land treatment measures by landowners. Cost-sharing from Federal funds appropriated for the Agricultural Conservation program may be available if included in the county program developed each year in consideration of approved State and National programs and the annual authorization by the Congress. * Consisting of Land, easements and rights-of-way.. Administration of contracts..

*The value of measures already installed ($3,544,100) increases this to 80 percent.

$198,300 10,600

Prorated P.L. 566 structural cost per acre benefited: $90. Carrying out the project: The counties of Douglas; Sarpy and Washington will aquire the necessary land, easements and rights-of-way for the works of improvement and be responsible for operation and mainitenance after construction. The Papio Watershed Board will assume full responsibility for contracting and construction of structural measures.

The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $2,700.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you reckon that we can hear the Papillion Creek watershed very promptly?

Mr. LANE. Mr. Chairman, this is another one of those watersheds that has a name difficult to pronounce. Locally it is called the Papio watershed. Perhaps that would be easier for all of us to refer to it that way instead of Papillion watershed.

This 246,000-acre watershed is located in eastern Nebraska. Much of the metropolitan area of Omaha is included in the southeast portion of the watershed. Papillion Creek flows in a southeasterly direction into the Missorui River a few miles south of Omaha.

The CHAIRMAN. This is just northeast of the one we saw a while ago, is it not?

Mr. LANE. Yes, that would be correct.

Topography varies from nearly flat bottomlands to moderately sloping uplands. The total relief is less than 400 feet. There are three principal tributaries. From west to east they are West Papillion, Big Papillion, and Little Papillion. Almost three-fourths of the watershed is cultivated. Omaha and suburbs occupy over 15 percent. The remainder is divided between pasture and other minor uses including woodland which is limited principally to streambanks.