Prorated P.L. 566 structural cost per acre benefited: $90.

Carrying out the project: The City of Tompkinsville assumes all local responsibilities for installing, operating and maintaining the structural measures. The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $6,245.

Mr. LANE. The Mill Creek watershed is located in the State of Kentucky, in Monroe County, which is in southern Kentucky, close to the Tennessee line.

Mill Creek is tributary to the Barren River. I am sure that some of the members of the committee will recall Lime Creek watershed project in Tennessee that was also tributary to the Barren River. It is adjacent to this watershed.

Thirty percent of the watershed is in cropland. Most of the cropland is devoted to the production of tobacco, corn, and hay. Tobacco comprises about 50 percent of the farm income of the watershed. And the corn and hay are fed to dairy and beef cattle and hogs, and produces the other one-half of the agriculture income.

Most of the cropland in the watershed is either confined to the alluvial bottom land or to the gently sloping ridgeland, and in between are the areas of grassland and woodland which, together, comprise some 65 percent of the total watershed.

Tompkinsville is located within the watershed. This is a town with a population of some 2,500 people. The Old Mulkey Meeting House, which is now a State shrine, is also located within the watershed, and I am sure that those of you who are students of early American history will recall that this was one of the original churches in Kentucky and was attended by Friar Boone, a brother of Daniel Boone.

Mill Creek floods frequently, usually at least every year on the average. Floods that can be expected every 3 to 5 years will inundate at least 80 percent of the flood plain. This creates havoc with crops growing on the land and the land itself; it also damages roads, bridges, and other farm improvements.

Flood damages amount to $4,460 annually.

The city of Tompkinsville is in dire need of water to meet its present needs. It is hopeful that, by this project, they cannot only meet their present needs for city water but also have enough water to meet the foreseeable needs over the next several years at least. There are no water-based recreation facilities within or nearby the watershed. One of the features of the proposed project here is to develop a recreational area which will be immediately adjacent to the State shrine and will be operated in conjunction therewith and considerably enhance the attraction of the Old Mulkey Meeting House shrine.

The project consists of an interrelated combination of land treatment measures and one multipurpose reservoir which provides for flood prevention, municipal water for the city of Tompkinsville, and a recreational lake.

Other sites were investigated in this watershed to provide additional flood protection and additional benefits. However, because of the unfavorable geologic conditions other sites were not feasible. That is the reason why this project consists of a single reservoir.

The estimated cost of the project is about $876,000 with, roughly, $340,000 coming from Public Law 566 funds, and $536,000 from other funds. This amounts to 61 percent of the total cost.

It is estimated that the project will produce benefits of $34,500 annually, and when the benefits are compared with the costs the

benefit-cost ratio is found to be 1.5 to 1. With redevelopment and seeondary benefits excluded, the benefit-cost ratio is 1.2 to 1.

The estimated cost per acre benefited is $90.

The CHAIRMAN. What is "Karst"?

Mr. LANE. If I had a geologist back of me, I would prefer to refer that question to him, but even though I may not be able to give you the geological explanation of it, I can explain that it is an area which produces very little surface runoff. This is one of the factors involved in trying to justify the structural work above the city of Tompkinsville. When the Karst area is excluded, because it does not provide enough runoff, there is not too much area left to produce damaging floods to the city of Tompkinsville.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions?

Mr. GOODLING. For my edification, I am trying to learn. I have just one question. You talk about Public Law 566 funds, and then "other funds.” What are the other funds?

The CHAIRMAN. The other funds are both Government and private funds channeled through private hands, as I see it. They could be called private funds, but included in these are all of the payments that the Government makes for ordinary agricultural practices, such as soil conservation practices which are included in these private expenses. They are private expenses, to the extent that, at least, the private landowner is deprived of that much money. He has to put up that much money, either to spend it or to forgo the money, or he has to spend that much money. Those are the private expenditures. What I am trying to say that the soil conservation payments are made on that land just the same way as they are made on other lands. That practice may be the planting of cover crops, and for that he will get certain Government assistance, but you give him credit for the total cost of the operation.

Mr. TEAGUE of California. Would it be fair to say that perhaps 25 percent of that is actually by the Government and 75 percent is contributed by the individual, the private individual?

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is about a fair ratio.

Are there any other questions?

We now have Congressman Carter with us.

Do you care to make a statement or to file a statement?

STATEMENT OF HON. TIM LEE CARTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I will just file a statement, sir, with your permission.

This is vital to this area for waterflood protection and for the water supply for the city of Tompkinsville.

The CHAIRMAN. Your statement will be made a part of the record. We are glad to have had you with us.

(The prepared statement of Hon. Tim Lee Carter follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. TIM LEE CARTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Mr. Chairman, member of the subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to appear before your committee this morning to offer testimony in support of the Mill Creek watershed project which is located in my home county of Monroe, Tompkinsville, Kentucky.

The work plan for the project was prepared by the Monroe County Soil Conservation District and the city of Tompkinsville as the local sponsoring organizations. Technical assistance was provided by the Soil Conservation Service, the USDA Forest Service, and the Kentucky Division of Forestry.

The watershed, which is in the South Central part of Kentucky is located in the area designated as the Appalachian region and has a drainage area of 21,179 acres. The city of Tompkinsville, with a population of 2,500, is located in the watershed. All land is privately owned, except for 30 acres in the Old Mulkey Meeting House State Park, a State shrine, which is also located in the watershed. This church, founded in 1798, is an historical attraction, in that it is the oldest one in southern Kentucky.

The economy of the watershed is based largely on farming and related industries. Production of tobacco, corn and hay comprise the major farm enterprises. Tobacco is sold as a cash crop, while corn and hay are utilized for the production of dairy cattle, beef cattle and hogs. The Cudahy cheese plant, employing about 60 people, the Hayes Garment Company, employing about 300 workers, the Key Manufacturing Company, with about 300 employees, and the Hollingsworth-Anderson Lumber Company, with about 60 employees, comprise the related industries. While not in the watershed, although near it, the Hayes Garment Company has another plant in Gamaliel, Kentucky, with about 300 employees.

A major problem in the watershed is floodwater damage to crops and pasture lands, public roads and bridges, and farm improvements. Approximately 460 acres of fertile bottomland are subject to damaging floods. The frequency of flooding during the crop season prohibits continued full use of much of the flood plain land.

The city of Tompkinsville is in dire need of an adequate supply of water. Not only is the supply inadequate for present needs, but future growth and development are greatly hampered by the lack of an adequate supply of quality water. While the need is also great for a water-related recreational development in the area, since the only public recreational development in the country is the Old Mulkey Meeting House State Park which has limited picnicking facilities, I want to emphasize that the primary purposes of the watershed are to provide flood protection and an adequate supply of water for future growth and development.

The proposed project includes land treatment measures for watershed protection and a multiple-purpose reservoir for flood prevention, municipal water supply and public recreation. The land treatment program will consist of essential treatment of about 2,607 acres of cropland, 3,975 acres of grassland, and 600 acres of forest land. The multiple purpose structure includes flood prevention, municipal and recreation water with associated facilities for public use. The plan proposes the installation of the project in about five years at an estimated total cost of $876,290. The Public Law 566 share of this cost is $339,678 and the other cost is $536,612.

A minimum three-year level of protection will be provided to most of the floodplain. Agricultural damages will be reduced about 70%. A dependable and adequate water supply will be provided for the city of Tompkinsville. The 72acre lake will provide facilities for picnicking, boating, fishing and camping. The city of Tompkinsville will secure all land, easements and rights-of-way (estimated cost-$122,500) and will operate and maintain the structural works of improvement (estimated average annual cost of $6,245).

Estimated present land use in the watershed includes 6,244 acres of cropland, 6,433 acres of hayland and pasture, 7,400 acres of woodland and 1,102 acres in other uses.

Markets for farm products consist of Tompkinsville, an incorporated city of 2,500, which is within the watershed; Gamaliel, which is just outside of the watershed; and Glasgow, Scottsville and Edmonton which are in adjoining counties. Access to these markets is provided by Kentucky Highways No. 63, 100 and 163, along with a network of secondary roads.

The population of the watershed is rural, however, the 1960 census indicates that the rural population is declining and the urban population is increasing. The number of farms, including portions of boundary farms, located in the watershed is 265. These range in size from six acres to several hundred acres. The average size farm is about 90 acres with an estimated value of $9,000 for land and improvements.

Per capita annual income is $763 in Monroe County compared to $1,573 for the State and $2,223 for the Nation. These figures illustrate the need to increase

family income in the watershed which would favorably affect the economy of the entire county.

Markets are favorable for the sale of forest products. About 35% of the watershed is in forest cover and is privately owned except for 30 acres in the Old Mulkey Meeting House State Park. Most of the forest land is in small ownerships and is well suited for the production of timber.

In conclusion, let me say that local interest and support of the project are high. As the city's present supply of water depends upon the flow of Town Creek which, during the periods of drought, has practically no flow, and the only storage is a pumping basin with a capacity of less than one acre-foot, I am very hopeful your committee will give prompt and favorable consideration to the Mill Creek watershed project, since it will greatly reduce flooding on most of the flood plain, provide an adequate water supply to the city of Tompkinsville for present and anticipated future needs, and greatly benefit the general public. I consider the project to be highly desirable and one worthy of your consideration.

Thank you for your kind attention and courtesies.

The CHAIRMAN. We have a letter here dated September 20, 1966, from the Department of Parks, State of Kentucky, which will be made a part of the record at this point.

(The letter dated Sept. 20, 1966, follows:)

Mr. RONALD BUSHONG,

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS. Frankfort, Ky., September 20, 1966.

Chairman, Monroe County Soil Conservation District,
Thompkinsville, Ky.

DEAR MR. BUSHONG: This Department operates and maintains, for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Old Mulkey Meeting House State Shrine. This facility includes thirty acres of land located within the Mill Creek Watershed. We have, in cooperation with the Monroe County Soil Conservation District. installed all required land treatment measures necessary to reduce soil erosion and to retard water run-off.

Since we wish to enhance the beauty of the area, you may rest assured that we will continue to maintain the proper vegetation coverage necessary to hold soil and water erosion to a minimum.

We trust that the approving authorities will give favorable consideration to the Mill Creek Watershed Project and that it will become a reality in the very near future.

Very truly yours,

ROBERT D. BELL,
Commissioner.

The CHAIRMAN. With reference to the letter from the Department of Parks of the State of Kentucky, in regard to the project before us this morning, the Mill Creek watershed project, they say that they will maintain it in the State parks and in conformance with the soil conservation practices.

Mr. MURRAY. I think that we should learn whether or not the Kentucky Department of Parks has actually installed the treatment measures as indicated in their letter and that they also agree to continue to do so.

So for the record, have they installed these?

Mr. LANE. Yes; they have installed these measures and have agreed to maintain them.

Mr. MURRAY. Thank you.

UPPER CLINCH VALLEY WATERSHED,

VIRGINIA

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Wampler?

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM C. WAMPLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. WAMPLER. Mr. Chairman, while I am not a member of the subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to speak.

On January 25, 1967, I wrote a letter to the Secretary of Agriculture inquiring as to the status of the Upper Clinch Valley watershed application in Virginia, and on February 8, 1967, I received a reply signed by Mr. John A. Baker, Assistant Secretary, and I ask unanimous consent to file as a part of this record Mr. Baker's reply to my inquiry.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it will be included in the record at this point.

(The letter dated Feb. 8, 1967, follows:)

Hon. WILLIAM C. WAMPLER,
House of Representatives.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington, D.C., February 8, 1967.

DEAR MR. WAMPLER: This is in reply to your letter of January 26, 1967, concerning the status of the Upper Clinch Valley Watershed, Tazewell, Virginia. The work plan for this project was developed under the authority of the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566, 83rd Congress), as amended. Interagency review has been completed and the work plan was received in this office on December 12, 1966. It is currently being held in this office pending clarification of certain provisions of the Act.

The Act authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to assist local organizations in preparing and carrying out plans for works of improvement subject to various stated requirements. Section 2 of the Act provides that no appropriation shall be made for any plan involving an estimated Federal contribution to construction costs in excess of $250,000, or which includes any structure that provides more than twenty-five hundred acre-feet of total capacity unless such plan has been approved by resolutions adopted by the appropriate committees of the Senate and House of Representatives.

This provision is similar to a provision contained in S. 327 (Pacific Northwest Disaster Relief Act of 1965) which the President vetoed. With respect to S. 327, the President said: "The proper separation of powers and division of responsibilities between Congress and the Executive Branch is a matter of continuing concern to me. I must oppose the tendency to use any device to involve congressional committees in the administration of programs and the implementation of laws." The President also objected on constitutional grounds to a similar provision in the Flood Control Act of 1965, and he directed the Secretary of the Army to refrain from exercising the authority which the provision attempted to vest in him.

Since the procedure established by section 2 of the Act had been in effect for a number of years, the President authorized this Department to follow the committee approval procedure during the last session of the Congress, despite his view that the procedure represents an unwarranted encroachment on the authority of the Executive. However, the President considers that he has given clear expression of his views on the need for revision of this procedure and therefore directed that no further work plans be transmitted to the Congress under it.

On August 16, 1966, this office transmitted to the 89th Congress a proposed bill to amend Public Law 83-566, as amended, by (1) eliminating the requirement for approval by substantive committees of the Senate and House of Representatives of certain watershed work plans otherwise authorized by the Act, and (2) by substituting a reporting requirement to the Congress with a waiting