Benefit-cost ratio: 2.6 to 1.0. With secondary benefits excluded the benefit-cost ratio is 2.4 to 1.0.

Area benefited: 19,170 acres.

Number of beneficiaries: Owners and operators of approximately 285 farms; 389 urban residential properties, and 64 commercial properties. Project costs:

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.

* Consisting of construction costs for drainage, $111,608; land, easements, and rights-of-way, $129,585; administration of contracts, $53,478.

The value of measures already installed ($350,498) increases this to 33 percent.

Benefit-cost ratio: 2.6 to 1.0.

Prorated P.L. 566 structural cost per acre benefited: $71.

Carrying out the project: The Maumee Watershed Conservancy District assumes all local responsibilities for installation, operation and maintenance of the structural measures.

The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $19,906.

LITTLE AUGLAIZE RIVER WATERSHED WORK PLAN

Size and location: 125,440 acres in Mercer, Putnam, Paulding and Van Wert Counties, Ohio.

Tributary to Maumee River, Lake Erie, St. Lawrence River.

Sponsors: Maumee Watershed Conservancy District; Mercer, Paulding, Putnam, and Van Wert Soil and Water Conservation Districts.

Number of farms: 1052.

Size of farms: About 95 acres average.

Purposes: Watershed protection, flood prevention and drainage.

Principal measures: Soil conservation practices on farms; and structural measures consisting of 73.8 miles of stream channel improvement.

Benefit-cost ratio: 2.0 to 1.0. With secondary benefits excluded the benefit-cost ratio is 1.9 to 1.0.

Area benefited: 19,399 acres.

Number of beneficiaries: Owners and operators of approximately 543 farms. Project costs:

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 programs developed each year in consideration of approved State and national programs and the annual authorization by the Congress.

2 Consisting of construction cost for drainage, $199,614; land, easements, and rights-of-way, $344,361; administration of contracts, $82,905.

3 The value of measures already installed ($668,091) increases this to 38 percent.

Prorated P.L. 566 structural cost per acre benefited: $157.

Carrying out the project: The Maumee Watershed Conservancy District assumes all local responsibilities for installation, operation and maintenance of the structural measures.

The estimated annual cost of operation and maintenance is $24,754.

Mr. WELD. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I will testify on the three plans for the Little Auglaize and its tributaries. The description of these three areas, the physical problems, the land use, and all, are quite similar, and if it meets with the approval of the chairman, if I may, I will cover some of the general information that will deal with all of them first and will then go to the details of each. The CHAIRMAN. I think that is the proper way to treat it.

The Chair wants to announce that shortly before 11 I will have to appear before the Rules Committee on behalf of the Agriculture Committee, and Vice Chairman Gathings will take over at that time. I just wanted you to know that my leaving is not because of a lack of interest in the projects, but rather the fact that this committee is interested in an authorization before the Rules Committee.

Mr. WELD. The first plan is the Little Auglaize, and we have the map for that up here on the board.

This watershed is located in the northwest corner of Ohio. The Little Auglaize flows into the Auglaize River which empties into the Maumee River at Defiance: and the Maumee, as you know, flows up through Toledo into Lake Erie.

This area is divided into three projects, the basic one being the Little Auglaize which we have here, and lying immediately above that is the Middle Branch, which joins the Little Auglaize at this point [indicating], and just north of that is the Prairie-Hoaglin Branch which joins at this point [indicating]. So, all three watersheds have one common outlet through the lower reaches of the Little Auglaize.

The CHAIRMAN. At this point, it might be well to tell us why you have made three projects here instead of two. I know why you would have to submit two.

Mr. WELD. Since the 250,000 acres was exceeded we could not submit the three as one project.

The CHAIRMAN. Why did you submit three then?

Mr. WELD. This basic plan on the Little Auglaize the Maumee Watershed Conservancy District had prepared a plan on that watershed through a private consulting firm. They had received court approval to proceed with that project, and it would be expeditious to have one plan so that they could upgrade it based on that and move ahead.

The work will be accomplished with high priority in the lower reaches, since this constitutes a common outlet, and, so, as soon as that is done, the others can move forward.

This area is located in the Maumee River Basin. The topography is relatively flat, with very slight elevation differentials, ranging from about 35 feet in these upper reaches of the watershed.

Incidently, these streams flow in a northeasterly direction.

So, around the perimeter in the upper end the differential in the elevation, between the stream and the divide, is about 35 feet; whereas, in the lower limits it is only 5 to 10 feet.

The stream gradient ranges from 212 to 4 feet per mile.

This is in glaciated till. It is underlain with limestone rock, and the glacial drift ranges from 50 to 100 feet in the upper areas to about 25 to 35 feet in the center of the watershed.

Because of the flat topography, there was no opportunity to develop a plan which would include floodwater retarding structures. Consequently, we had to rely on the stream channel improvement.

The land is practically all open; 92 to 93 percent is in cropland, about 2 percent, on the average, is in grassland, and 2 to 4 percent is woodland.

The main crops grown throughout the three watersheds are principally, soybeans, corn, wheat, canning tomatoes, and sugar beets. Also, livestock production accounts for about 20 percent of the farm income. All of the land is privately owned, and approximately 75 percent of the farms are owner-operated.

The problems which are experienced in this watershed stem from the heavy soils with high clay and silt content with very low permeability, and for that reason moisture movement is slow. The farmers experience considerable difficulty in carrying out their farming operations, particularly following heavy rains they have to delay their planting, cultivating, and harvesting operations if they occur at that time.

The timely removal of the excess surface water is the major problem. The low stream gradients result in overland floodflows causing prolonged inundation all around these stream reaches, and, also, there

87-377-67

are areas of wet land which constitute a joint problem in both drainage and flood damage.

I believe that will cover, generally, the main common points which are peculiar to the entire area.

LITTLE AUGLAIZE RIVER

Mr. WELD. The Little Auglaize which we are studying first here has two main tributaries.

This upper one, Dog Creek [indicating], and then the main branch, the Little Auglaize.

There are a total of 1052 farms in this watershed of which 44 percent are at present cooperators with the watershed soil and water conservation districts.

The watershed comprises an area of 125,440 acres and is located in Mercer, Putnam, Paulding, and Van Wert Counties, Ohio. The main part of the watershed is in Van Wert County.

The plan proposed for this watershed will provide for watershed protection, flood prevention, and drainage needs.

The principal measures planned include the needed soil and water conservation practices on the farms and 73.8 miles of stream channel improvement.

The cost of the measures in the plan total approximately $4,900,000, including the land treatment measures, of which the local sponsors will provide nearly $1,500,000, or 35 percent. If we include the value of the land treatment measures already applied, this would increase the local contribution to 38 percent.

The plan will provide for a 2- to 3-year level of protection, resulting in 75 percent or greater reduction of average annual flood damages. The channel improvement will also provide the needed outlets for the wetland areas that exist in the watershed.

The total benefits accruing to the project are $317,788 of which 91 percent are realized on land and crop damage reductions and agricultural improvements.

The plan provides for a benefit-cost ratio of 2 to 1, and if we exclude the secondary benefits it is 1.9 to 1.

Area benefited, 19,399 acres, representing 15.5 percent of the watershed. This is shown in the designated yellow area, which is benefited by the structural works of improvement.

The project will bring about increased stability of family-type farms by helping the community to reach their optimum agricultural poten

tial.

The prorated Public Law 566 structural costs per acre benefited in this watershed is $157.

The Maumee Watershed Conservancy District-and this is quite significant-through agreement with the Soil Conservation Service, provided the funds and other services which were needed to plan both the Little Auglaize and the other two watersheds. They will be the sponsors responsible for installation, operation, and maintenance of the structural measures, and will assume the cost of annual operation and maintenance, in addition to installation, amounting to nearly $25,000 annually.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you care to go over the other two right now, you think we should handle them separately?

or do

Mr. WELD. Whatever you wish, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me that it would be advisable, since these are all in the same area

Mr. WELD. They are quite similar.

The CHAIRMAN (continuing). That it would be advisable for the Department to explain all three of them and then have testimony on all three.

MIDDLE BRANCH OF THE LITTLE AUGLAIZE WATERSHED

Mr. WELD. The second watershed which lies immediately above the one we have just discussed is the Middle Branch of the Little Auglaize. It comprises an area of 65,920 acres in Paulding and Van Wert Counties.

This plan is somewhat different than the other, in that we do have an urban area. The town of Van Wert is located right in the center of the watershed. Consequently, we do have some urban problems as well as agriculture.

The main tributaries of the Middle Branch are the Maddox Creek and Town Creek which join together to form the Middle Creek at this location [indicating].

The annual crop and pasture damages in this watershed are estimated to amount to nearly $120,000 annually. And floodwater damage in the town of Van Wert has a population of just under 12,000, based on the 1965 census, experiences damages amounting to over $76,000 on an average annual basis.

Other damages in the watershed amount to $7,500 which would be principally to roads, bridges, and agricultural improvements.

The initial formulation of this plan did not include provisions for flood protection for the town of Van Wert. However, as the investigations proceeded it was found that this was a very significant damage area. They had one flood in 1959, in February, which caused $606,000 damage in the city, and this event was estimated to be of about a 100year frequency.

In working with the sponsors several alternative plans were worked out, in trying to reach a level of protection that they would like for the town.

In the absence of any suitable floodwater-retarding sites it was necessary, of course, to resort to channel work.

There is a serious problem in conveying the water through the city due to the fact that there are 15 road crossings and three railroad crossings which severely obstruct the flow. Also, utility lines and other developments which infringe on the channel.

The cost of modifying all of those was prohibitive to the local sponsors at this time, since that is considered a land easement and rightof-way cost. So, in working out this plan, it was decided to develop the channel to its full capacity. And the town of Van Wert is scheduling a program whereby they will make the necessary modifications to these bridge crossings as rapidly as their finances will permit.

When that work is accomplished they will achieve a 100-year level for the urban protection.

The plan which is proposed for this watershed includes, again, the necessary land treatment measures and 57.2 miles of channel improve

ment.