developers are lending a hand by developing a year-round vacation area on Adams Mountain. In other words, we in New Hampshire are trying hard to help ourselves, and this project would be a great boost to us all the way around.

Mr. Chairman, I could go into considerably more detail on this project, but I shall not do so because I know this committee has already heard excellent testimony from the Soil Conservation Service, and is well-informed of the bene fits to be realized by all if this project is approved. I add my voice in support, and sincerely hope that this project will receive your favorable consideration. DICK'S CREEK-LITTLE MUDDY CREEK WATERSHED, OHIO

(Supplemental Watershed Work Plan)

The CHAIRMAN. The next project is the Dick's Creek-Little Muddy Creek watershed, which will be presented by Mr. Lane for the Depart

ment.

DICK'S CREEK-LITTLE MUDDY CREEK WATERSHEDS, SUPPLEMENTAL WATERSHED WORK PLAN

Location of Watershed.-Butler and Warren Counties.

Sponsors. Dick's Creek-Little Muddy Creek Subdistrict of the Miami Conservancy District, Butler Soil and Water Conservation District, Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District, Butler County Commissioners and Warren County Commissioners.

Purpose of Supplement.-To make the plan responsive to the present needs of the watershed by providing for urban rather than agricultural levels of protection in the Dick's Creek flood plain. Reformulates structural measures to meet changed conditions due to the eastward expansion of the City of Middletown.

Changes in Principal Measures.-Channel improvement on lower Dick's Creek and on the North Branch is eliminated from the project due to improvements carried out by local interests without Federal assistance. The Dick's Creek channel and the Millers Creek channel are extended upstream about 0.5 miles and 0.7 miles, respectively, but the total length of planned channel improvement is reduced from 17.7 miles to 14.1 miles. All channel improvement in the Dick's Creek portion of the watershed is increased in capacity to provide 100-year or greater protection. Floodwater retarding Structures II-B and III-A are eliminated. Annual Benefits.

Additional Information.-The sponsors do not anticipate using the P.L. 566

loan authority.

87-377-67-2

The CHAIRMAN. I understand that Congressman Lukens will appear and present a statement on this project; however, as is our practice, we let the Department make the statement explaining the legislation before members present their statement, in order that the committee may better understand the project.

Mr. Lane?

Mr. LANE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this is a supplemental watershed work plan for the Dicks Creek-Little Muddy Creek watershed in southwestern Ohio.

This watershed is located about midway between Cincinnati and Dayton, Ohio.

The city of Middletown is located at the western extremity of the watershed.

Actually, the watershed drains in two directions: generally speaking, the watershed runs in a northwesterly-southeasterly direction so that the water on this side drains into the Miami River, and the Muddy Creek portion of the watershed drains to the southeast and outlets into Turtle Creek which is a tributary to the Little Miami River.

The reason for this supplement is that since the orginal work plan was approved, there has been tremendous industrial and municipal expansion in the Dicks Creek portion of the watershed, particularly in the area surrounding the city of Middletown. We were, therefore, faced with a dilemma of either not doing anything, in accordance with the approved work plan for the Dicks Creek area because it provided only a level of flood protection adequate for agriculture, or we would have to revise the plan, in order to provide an adequate level of protection for the land use that is now going on there and will continue to expand as time goes on.

We checked this with the committee in accordance with the committee's wishes, before giving our people the "Go ahead" to prepare the supplement. The committee agreed that in this case the condition had changed to the point where it would be desirable to take another look at what we might find there and what was needed there, and on this basis, the committee advised us to proceed with modifying the plan and bringing the plan before it.

As I have indicated, the measures that are included on the Muddy Creek side of the watershed, which include the channel improvements here at the lower end of the watershed, plus three floodwater retarding structures, remain, essentially, unchanged from the approved work plan. The big change that has been made is on the Dicks Creek side.

It is believed by local authorities that agriculture will still be predominant in the Muddy Creek side. So, we feel that the plan for that side of the watershed is adequate.

The changes in the measures which this supplement provides for includes enlargement of the channels of the Dicks Creek watershed, the elimination of one of the floodwater retarding structures which was located up in the north end of watershed, and the channel below it, and the elimination of another small floodwater retarding structure here at the lower end.

Much of the work that has been deleted, has now been by local interests at no cost to the Federal Government. That explains why, for

example, the channel improvement in the watershed project termimates at this point here [indicating]. Before, in the old plan, it went farther on down the stream.

Now, the local interests have completed work up to this point so that the project will extend that channel improvement upstream.

The estimated cost of the plan as modified is about $3.6 million of which Public Law 566 funds amount to about $2.2 million, and other funds about $1.4 million, or 39 percent of the total.

The benefits from the project which were formerly largely agriculture are now largely nonagriculture, and out of the total benefits of about $515,000, over $400,000 are now expected to accrue to municipal, industrial, and other nonagricultural properties. There are an estimated 1,475 beneficiaries from the project.

The estimated benefit-cost ratio is 4.5 to 1. The estimated value of the work that the local people have done since the original plan was approved is estimated at about $1.5 million. This would further enhance or increase the contribution that the local interests are making in carrying out adequate flood protection for this entire area.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, I can conclude that the expenditures that have already been made, if included, you would calculate that the local people were putting in more than one-half of the cost?

Mr. LANE. That is correct, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not understand the map. I have the same map here before me that you have, of course. You told us that most of it was on the Dick's Creek side; that is, the western side.

Mr. LANE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I did not understand that to be the Dicks Creek out where that town is, to the extreme west.

Mr. LANE. That is the Miami River which flows along there this is Middletown right here [indicating].

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I thought that was farther down.

Mr. LANE. Dick's Creek flows from this point here [indicating], and it follows on in a course like this [indicating] to the Miami River. So, you see it either goes through Middletown or skirts the edge of Middletown.

The CHAIRMAN. That is where I understood that the great bulk of the benefits would accrue.

Mr. LANE. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. I see from the map that the area is all over on the southeast, the benefited area?

Mr. LANE. To answer your question, I was incorrect in agreeing before that the benefits of the project largely accrue in this area [indicating]. The improvements that the local people have already installed will benefit this area. The benefits of the watershed projects do lie back in this area here, and this is rapidly becoming a great industrial complex, all through this area [indicating]; in fact, factories costing millions of dollars are being installed throughout this area.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, the real benefits in changing the program will be largely along the Little Muddy watershed?

Mr. LANE. The change in the program will benefit the upper portion of the Dick's Creek side. In the yellow area, the upper portion of the Dick's Creek watershed is roughly at the point where the Texas Gas line crosses that yellow area that you see.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, I see that.

Mr. LANE. From there on down, this is where the industrial complex is developing, and that is where the principal benefits will accrue from the change in the plan.

Over on the other side, the principal benefits will continue to be agriculture.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask you about the original project.

It was never approved by this committee, because it is one of those $250,000 projects.

Mr. LANE. It was approved by your committee, yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It was?

Mr. LANE. Yes, the original project.

If you will look toward the bottom of your tabulation, on the second page, you will see an item of "Approved Work Plan."

Then, another item "Total Project."

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. LANE. This shows the cost of the plan, as originally presented, and compares it with the new project which is immediately above that. The CHAIRMAN. I see it now.

Mr. LANE. That is right.

One thing that the figures do not show exactly, that the increase in other costs is slightly greater than the increase in Federal costs, even without considering what work has already been done without Federal assistance.

The CHAIRMAN. It does show that in the original cost it was 26 percent local and 39 percent contribution. Is that correct?

Mr. LANE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions?

(No response.)

The CHAIRMAN. If there are no questions, we will note that Congressman Lukens is here now, and we will be glad to hear from you.

STATEMENT OF HON. DONALD E. LUKENS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. LUKENS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to speak at this time.

I simply would like to lend my support to the testimony that has been adequately given this morning. Of course, I ask permission to file a statement for the record later on.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, that permission is granted, and it will be included in the record at this point. (The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. DONALD E. LUKENS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on behalf of the Dick's Creek-Little Muddy Creek Supplemental Watershed Work Plan. As has been mentioned before in previous testimony, this includes channel improvements at the lower end of the watershed, plus three floodwater retarding structures.

The principal reason I am here, besides my natural interest in a project of this nature in the district which I represent, is that much work has already gone into this project and much investment has already been made by local interests. Because of the investment of the local community and their very real concern

with the long range benefit to everyone federal funds were not needed up to this point. Now, however, more money is needed than can be obtained from local sources of revenue. In addition to which, as previous testimony points out, nonagricultural interests will now benefit even more than agricultural interests.

In a brief overview of the long range benefits inherent in this project, and others like it in this area, is the fact that Middletown and Franklin and other communities are expanding so rapidly in population that not to act at this time would most certainly result in even higher costs in the future from flood damage. By approving this project at this time not only can we avoid future flood damage loss, but the communities concerned can benefit in terms of increased revenue and savings.

I appreciate the privilege of appearing before this committee and ask for every consideration for this worthwhile project.

EBENEZER CREEK WATERSHED, GEORGIA

The CHAIRMAN. We will now take up the Ebenezer Creek watershed. I understand that Mr. Clyde W. Graham, who is now the Director of the Watershed Planning Division, the Soil Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture will present the next project for the Department.

Mr. Graham who is new within the Washington office making this presentation before us today graduated from Texas A. & M. University with a bachelor of science degree in agricultural engineering; he served in the U.S. Air Force in World War II; and following World War II, in 1946, he entered on duty with the Soil Conservation Service in Texas; and from 1946 to 1955, he worked as an agricultural engineer on irrigation, drainage, flood prevention, planning and construction, and from 1955 to 1957, he worked as a budget analyst with the Soil Conservation Service in Washington, D.C.; and from 1957 to 1958, he was on leave from the Government, being at Harvard University on water resources study, and received a master's degree in public administration in 1958; and from 1958 to 1966, he was assistant State conservationist and deputy State conservationist in Texas; and from 1966 to the present time, he has been Director of the Watershed Planning Division, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.

EBENEZER CREEK WATERSHED WORK PLAN

Size and location: 153.545 acres in Screven and Effingham Counties
Tributary to: Savannah River-Atlantic Ocean

Sponsors: Ogeechee River Soil and Water Conservation District, Screven County, Effingham County.

Total watershed land use:

Purposes: Watershed Protection, Flood Prevention and Drainage

Principal measures: Soil conservation practices on farms, and structural

measures consisting of 561,725 feet of channel improvement.