advantage from either an economic standpoint or a cash-outlay standpoint in building these proposed structures to full capacity in the first instance.

The calculations supporting this opinion are set out below. For the purpose of the calculations the following engineering assumptions are taken into account: 1. Length 175' as compared to 130' (your data).

2. Construction to South Dakota standards.

3. Average cost $55,000 as compared to $75,000.

4. Interest on additional required initial investment @3%%.

5. Straight line depreciation at 2% per annum for a lifetime of 50 years.

6. Construction cost index factor increasing at 2% per annum. (Based on So. Dak. costs between 1937-1967.)

7. Full replacement of the smaller structure at the time capacity is increased. 8. A constant factor of $5,000 for demolition of the original structure. Your assumption of 130 feet and 175 ft. bridge lengths is probably based on information furnished to you from Government sources. These are accepted and used in the following tabulation of costs. It would appear that these are minimum figures assuming that the bridge crossings are at points on the canal where there the terrain does not require more than minimum cut. If, however, the crossing should be at a point where the canal might be in deep cut the length of the structure might well be doubled.

You should also be aware that the original structures would be built "in the dry" prior to charging the canal with water. Later construction of bridges while the canal is in service will result in substantially higher unit costs due to wet excavation and the requirement to handle the canal flow during construction. Although you have not requested any study except as structures are involved, it is suggested that the later enlargement of the canal while it is in service will certainly result in a disproportionately higher cost of all canal operations. These comparisons are for the bridge structures only and do not take into account any costs that would be involved in connection with canalside embankments and roadways.

Respectfully,

KENNETH R. SCURR.

ECONOMIC COMPARISON, 10 BRIDGES-CONSTRUCTION FULL SCALE VERSUS STAGE CONSTRUCTION

CASH OUTLAY COMPARISON 10 BRIDGES-CONSTRUCTION FULL SCALE VERSUS STAGE CONSTRUCTION

Mr. JOHNSON. Our next witness is Mr. Robert Broer, a farmer from Beadle County.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT BROER, CHAIRMAN, BEADLE COUNTY WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

Mr. BROER. Chairman Johnson, members of the subcommittee, I wish to thank you for the opportunity of appearing before you here today.

I am Robert Broer, chairman of the Beadle County Water Resources Development Committee, organized in March of 1960.

The purpose of this organization is to determine the beneficial use and conservation of all water available and to fully utilize this resource for the betterment of our economy and well-being.

Much has been accomplished by this group representing all sections of Beadle County in informing the people on the issues involved. Organization of the subdistrict and the contract authority vote are significant for the successful outcome of these issues. Full support of the Oahe irrigation project has been demonstrated through the support given by the voters of this area.

We realize that the initial stage of this project will not include the Beadle Canal and that most of the benefits to our area will be secondary and indirect. However, we feel that the fringe benefits associated with the increased land use in the irrigated area and the expected increase in population are extremely important and beneficial to our

economy.

We are especially concerned that our children, the future farmers, business and professional people be given an opportunity to make a successful life for themselves. The development of this project will help in this achievement. Therefore, we urge the earliest possible congressional approval and start on construction of the Oahe project. I might digress or vary from this prepared statement. There has been brought to your attention earlier from different witnesses who appeared here and testified before you, information in regard to urban development and migration of the farm families into the metropolitan areas. I feel that this project would help to stem that flow.

It would help us, too, as has been brought out before, at our local government level through increased tax valuations.

Thank you.

Mr. JOHNSON. Any questions of Mr. Broer?

We want to thank you for coming here and giving us the benefit of your paper.

Our next witness will be Mr. Stanley P. Munger, president of the South Dakota Reclamation & Water Development Association.

STATEMENT OF STANLEY P. MUNGER, PRESIDENT, SOUTH DAKOTA RECLAMATION & WATER DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

Mr. MUNGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.

I have here a prepared statement, Mr. Chairman, which I would like to have made a part of the record. I will read part of it, with your permission, and digress briefly, for the sake of time.

My name is Stanley Munger. I live at Vermillion, S. Dak., and I am engaged in the livestock farming business there. I am serving this year as president of the South Dakota Reclamation & Water Development Association, and I am privileged to represent that organization here today.

Our organization is celebrating its 30th birthday this month. From a handful of farsighted and dedicated men, the South Dakota Reclamation & Water Development Association has grown to repreent a large and varied cross section of South Dakota's citizens.

And here, Mr. Chairman, I would point out that one of your own committee, Congressman Berry from South Dakota, was one of those farsighted and dedicated men 30 years ago who helped to initiate the formation of our association, together with the late and illustrious Senator Case of South Dakota.

Following this, Mr. Chairman, is a list of our credentials. We represent widely differing vocations and interests from every section of South Dakota, and we are all joined voluntarily together to advocate and support a principle: the multipurpose conservation, storage, and use of water, our most precious natural resource.

And this I point out, Mr. Chairman, for the purpose of indicating that we are joined together not simply by the economics and the geography of the immediate project site. And it is for these reasons, then, that we suggest to your committee that we can accurately reflect for you the public's recognition that approval of the Oahe unit is needed in the public interest and that it will serve that public interest well.

Since approval of the Flood Control Act of 1944, South Dakotans have not been idle. Year by year they have been demonstrating their faith in you, in themselves, and in their future by generously cooperating in providing over one-half million acres of their best Missouri River bottom lands for downstream benefits to navigation, flood control, and power, by passing the laws necessary to constitute their entire State as a conservancy district; by voting overwhelmingly to join 151⁄2 counties into the Oahe Conservancy Subdistrict for the purpose of supporting the Oahe project and by voting, again, to increase their taxes for the purpose of guaranteeing their obligation to operate and maintain the Oahe unit.

Mr. Chairman, it has been 23 long years since 1944 and the irrigation portion of the Flood Control Act has not been initiated, even in part, in South Dakota. But South Dakotans have held to a constant "Faith, Hope, and Action." They have demonstrated their self-preparedness and self-sacrifice. Now, with the demonstration of the economic feasibility and the engineering feasibility of the Oahe project unit, Mr. Chairman, we respectfully ask favorable consideration and approval of the legislation proposed by House Resolution 27 and House Resolution 1163.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. JOHNSON. We want to thank you, Mr. Munger, for your statement here, and I want to say your organization, now observing its 30th birthday, has been in this project for a long, long time. And although it was all authorized in 1944, why, you hope to see progress on the Oahe project, I suppose, in the very near future.

Mr. MUNGER. Yes, sir; we do. We hope so.

Mr. JOHNSON. Are there any questions from the committee? Hearing none, we will excuse you at this time, and you will be with us, I guess, for our stay here in South Dakota.

Mr. MUNGER. Yes, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. And from time to time, our members will probably be asking questions about your organization and the problems that face here in the State of South Dakota.

you

Mr. MUNGER. Thank you very much.

(Mr. Munger's statement in full follows:)

SOUTH DAKOTA RECLAMATION AND WATER DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION,

Vermillion, S. Dak., October 27, 1967.

IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION SUBCOMMITTEE,

COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives,

Congress of the United States.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: My name is Stanley Munger. I live at Vermillion, South Dakota and I am engaged in the livestock farming business there. I am serving as President of the South Dakota Reclamation and Water Development Association and I am privileged to represent that organization here, today.

The SDRWDA is celebrating its thirtieth birthday this month. From a handful of farsighted and dedicated men, SDRWDA has grown to represent a large and varied cross-section of South Dakota's citizens. This membership includes, business men, farmers, educators, professional men, irrigators, conservationists. Institutioanlly, we represent 41 banks and financial institutions, 11 Chambers of Commerce, 23 REA Cooperatives, 3 transportation companies, 5 conservancy sub-districts, 2 soil conservation districts, 3 irrigation districts, 5 investor owned power companies, 2 cooperative electric power distribution associations, and the 5 largest daily newspapers in the State.

Thus, we represent widely differing vocations and interests from every section of South Dakota all joined together voluntarily to advocate and support a Principle. . . . .“The multipurpose conservation, storage, and use of Water, our most precious natural resource". We are not, you see, joined together simply by the economics and geography of an immediate project site.

For these reasons, then, we suggest that we can accurately reflect for you the public's recognition that approval of the Oahe Unit is needed in the Public Interest and that it will serve that Public Interest well.

Since approval of the Flood Control Act of 1944, South Dakotans have not been idle. Year by year they have been demonstrating their faith in you, in themselves, and in their future by generously cooperating in providing over one-half million acres of their best Missouri River bottom lands for downstream benefits to navigation, flood control, and power; by passing the laws necessary to constitute their entire State as a Conservancy District; by voting overwhelmingly to join 151⁄2 counties into the Oahe Conservancy Sub-District for the

purpose of supporting the Oahe Project and by voting, again, to increase their taxes for the purpose of guaranteeing their obligation to operate and maintain the Oahe Unit.

It has been twenty-three long years since 1944 and the irrigation portion of the Flood Control Act has not been initiated, even in part, in South Dakota. But, South Dakotans have held to a constant Faith, Hope, and Action. They have demonstrated their Self-Preparedness and Self-Sacrifice. Now, with the demonstration of the Economic Feasibility and the Engineering Feasibility of the Oahe Project Unit.

Mr. Chairman, we respectfully ask favorable consideration and approval of the legislation proposed by House Resolution 27 and House Resolution 1163. Stanley P. Munger, President. Mr. JOHNSON. Our next witness will be Mr. Richard Ricci, director of public relations, South Dakota Farmers Union.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD L. RICCI, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
RELATIONS, SOUTH DAKOTA FARMERS UNION

Mr. RICCI. Mr. Chairman, members of this committee, Congressman Reifel, in the interest of time, you have my statement, and I would like to file it for the record. I would just like to hit some of the high points of the statement.

Mr. JOHNSON. Without objection, your statement will appear in the record and you may summarize it any way you see fit.

Mr. RICCI. Fine.

Our organization, which is the largest farm organization in the State, is wholeheartedly in support of this project.

As has been said, about 25 years ago a half million acres was taken out of production and off of the tax rolls, and our farmers gave up this farmland for the flood-control reservoirs which benefit the entire Missouri River Basin. And we are hopeful, of course, that with your help we can get this project rolling and carry it through to its completion. We have waited a long time for it and certainly we feel that we are entitled to the benefits that we have waited so long for.

It goes without saying, I think, that not all of our members share directly in the benefits of the Oahe project, but indirect benefits will accrue to farmers outside the irrigable area.

Now, certainly South Dakota's climate is very dry. Some places we get heavy rainfall and other places we get very little, and it changes from year to year. So consequently the dependence on water is of vital importance to all of our farming operations. And I think along with adequate feed supplies to carry on our livestock operations, the certainty of water in the area will insure plentiful amounts of forage and feed being available to ranchers, not only within the irrigable area but to surrounding area farmers and ranchers, so they will also benefit in this way.

Now, we are also hopeful that the Oahe project will provide an answer to our State's steadily diminishing farm population and also give an upward stimulus to a declining farm prosperity.

Now, just to show you how critical the decline in our farms has been in South Dakota, during the 1959 to 1964 period, which was the last census, our State lost more than 6,000 farms, or an average of 1,200 per year.

Now, in a particular period from 1958 to 1963, as documented by the 1963 Census of Business by the U.S. Department of Commerce, our State suffered a net loss of 1,101 retail business establishments.