to currently unforeseen conditions such as more frequent floods. Accordingly, authorization at this time of the project estimated to cost $3,758,700 does not appear to be warranted.

However, they have no objection to transmitting the report to the Congress.

I would like to comment on those four comments of the Bureau of the Budget, if I may, very briefly.

The first comment related to the fact that they were fearful local interests might not make adequate capital investments. The local contribution is in the form of the following items:

First, furnish without cost to the United States all lands, easements, rights-of-way, and suitable spoil-disposal areas necessary for new work and for subsequent maintenance when and as required; second, to hold and save the United States free from damages, which is customary in all of these projects; third, dredge and maintain project depths in the berthing space adjacent to and within 50 feet of the terminal and transfer facilities; and, fourth, to provide adequate public terminal and transfer facilities open to all on equal terms. The costs to the local proponents of the project are $163,800 at present levels. They have taken steps to organize a port and they state they are able to make the money available and will do so when the project is approved.

The second comment of the Bureau of the Budget is to the effect that any gain in this port would result in a loss of fishing traffic from other ports, which are nearby. We believe that it is quite possible there will be some loss initially from nearby ports if this port were constructed. We believe that the amount of fish available will soon cause an adjustment which will permit this port to be developed to its fullest extent and result in a return of traffic to the nearby ports which, as I stated, are 55 miles away by water. We think that the fishing benefit is one of national importance from the increased catch which they will get as a consequence of the greater ease of access to the fishing banks off the shore.

The third comment made by the Bureau of the Budget was that there is some possibility that the port entrance would be closed due to sudden and rapid shoaling of the bar channel. We believe that the jetties, if they are constructed, will insure the maintenance of a channel throughout the year. It is true that you cannot dredge in that channel during the winter months, but that is the reason for our constructing the jetties. We are convinced that the jetties as designed will maintain the channel properly.

The fourth comment of the Bureau of the Budget is that there might be an increase in the estimated annual cost of maintenance due to unforeseen conditions or floods. We have estimated a cost for dredging of $160,000 which we are reasonably sure is adequate for the maintenance of this particular project. Our estimate has been prepared very liberally and we think it is proper.

Mr. ANGELL. Thank you, General.

Are there any additional questions?

Mr. NEAL. General, do you mean it would be about the annual charge that would be necessary to maintain it by dredging?

General ITSCHNER. That is correct. That is our estimate of the

annual maintenance charge for maintaining the channel by dredging, which would be paid for by the Federal Government.

Mr. ANGELL. That does not include amortization?

General ITSCHNER. That is right. It is purely a maintenance charge for dredging.

Mr. ANGELL. Are there any further questions?

(No response.)

Mr. ANGELL. If it is agreeable to the committee, the committee will stand in recess for a moment so that the photographer can take pictures of the proceedings. If there is no objection, that will be done. (Whereupon a short recess was had.)

Mr. ANGELL. The Chair was stating that this project we are considering, the Gold Beach project, was in the district of our colleague, Congressman Harris Ellsworth of southern Oregon. The Congressman is here, and I want to welcome you here, Congressman Ellsworth, and tell you that the committee will be very happy to hear you on this project. We know of the great interest you have in the work you have been doing for Oregon and your district and what you have accomplished.

STATEMENT OF HON. HARRIS ELLSWORTH, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

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

I shall not make a statement in detail regarding the project myself because there is present here today to testify before the committee Mr. Loren Stewart, who represents the Rogue River Harbor Improvement Association. I would like to tell the committee, however, that this project and the survey and report for this project were made some years ago, and that the information and the only information which the Army engineers can supply the committee with is of that date. Since 1949, when the data was accumulated which has already been presented by the Corps of Engineers, there have been many changes in the Gold Beach area which Mr. Stewart will recite to the committee.

I merely want to point out to the committee, which will be amply demonstrated by Mr. Stewart, that this river and proposed harbor are in an area which is totally without adequate transportation. There is no railroad in there. The highway is not of modern standards. It was built many years ago and is very difficult to truck heavy loads over. But in this area there is a vast amount of very valuable timberland-timberland which is going back-that is, it has reached maturity. The timber which is on that land has reached maturity as a crop. Most of it is owned by the United States.

I believe that the committee will agree it is important to the economy of our country that this vast resource which is presently locked up because of the need of transportation, should be made available to our country as a result of this harbor improvement.

Mr. ANGELL. Congressman, may I inquire from you if it is not true, as I believe it is, that the largest stand of commercial timber in any county in the United States, or any congressional district, is. in your district in Oregon?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. That is quite correct. The district I represent accounts for approximately one-sixth of the total timber stand in the United States. This area we are speaking of this morning represents a substantial amount of the standing timber inventory of the district, but it is not, as I said a moment ago, really presently available for cutting because of the lack of transportation.

Mr. ANGELL. As you said, a great proportion of that timber belongs to the Federal Government itself.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. That is correct.

Mr. ANGELL. Before you call your next witness, I would like to make a statement off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Now I would like to present Mr. Loren Stewart, who represents the Rogue River Harbor Improvement Association, which is located at Gold Beach. Mr. Stewart.

Mr. MACK. Before you leave, who owns the timber adjacent to the Rogue River? The Federal Government or the State government? Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mostly the Federal Government. It is mostly in the national forest. I believe Mr. Stewart has some maps which will indicate not only the location of the stand, but the ownership. It is a very high percentage that is owned by the Federal Government. Mr. MACK. By the improvement of this project the Federal Government will benefit to the extent that it will secure or make the timber more accessible and secure lower freight rates in marketing it?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. That is right. I think Mr. Stewart has figures which will show that the increase in the value of timber owned by the United States, which is an increase in the value of the stumpage as it stands, will probably equal several times the cost of the project itself. Mr. ANGELL. Are there any further questions?

Mr. SCUDDER. Will the logs be floated down the river for shipment? Mr. ELLSWORTH. No, sir. The logs will be hauled overland to the mills and milled. I mean in Oregon we do not drive any of the streams any longer. That is the term used when you float logs down a stream. We call it driving the stream. The Rogue will not be a log-driven stream. It has been discovered long since that the practice of driving logs down a stream of that kind is very detrimental to the fish life and to the recreational values.

Mr. SCUDDER. So the logs will be hauled in by truck?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Yes. To the mills.

Mr. BECKER. Then how is the work on the stream going to improve the value?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. It furnishes a means of transporting the finished product to market or, the logs to market.

Mr. BECKER. You mean after the lumber is hauled to the mills nearby?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. That's right.

Mr. BECKER. Then it is put back on the river and shipped as a finished product?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. That is right. The mills, generally speaking, are located within 10 or 15 miles radius of the harbor. They mill the logs into lumber or plywood, and bring it to the port and it can then go to the markets of the country and the world. But at the present time

the only way they can get such finished products out is by a very rugged haul on an old highway.

Mr. BECKER. You see, we in Long Island just see the boards.
Mr. OAKMAN. What is the average rainfall on that coastline?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. I could not give it to you very accurately. I would guess in the neighborhood of 50 to 60 inches.

Mr. OAKMAN. There is a pretty rapid growth there; is there not? Mr. ELLSWORTH. Douglas fir has about the same rate of growth everywhere. Foresters consider the cutting cycle of Douglas fir to be about 100 years. In other words, when the old timber, much of which is now 400 years old, and which is deteriorating and has been deteriorating since it was 200 years old-when that is removed in order to allow new growth, then the forest is actually in production. After it goes into production the growing cycle in Douglas fir is considered to be 100 years. That is the basis on which the allowable cut is made. Mr. OAKMAN. I see. Thank you.

Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Stewart, the committee will be very glad to hear you, sir.

Mr. STEWART. Thank you, sir.

STATEMENT OF LOREN STEWART, REPRESENTING THE ROGUE RIVER HARBOR IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION

Mr. STEWART. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am Loren L. Stewart of Cottage Grove, Oreg., here representing the Rogue River Harbor Improvement Association of Gold Beach, Öreg. I also own an interest in the Hunter Creek Lumber Co., located near Gold Beach.

I would like to show you on the map for a moment the location of the area. This area bounded in red is Curry County. To locate it more clearly in Oregon, this is a map of the State and this is the county. It is the southwestern corner of Oregon.

The benefit area, as outlined by General Itschner, is this black-colored line almost following the county line. All of the timber in that area would be tribuary to Gold Beach, which is here. The mill I spoke of that I have an interest in is located on Hunter Creek.

Mr. ANGELL. What is the significance of the green area shown on the map?

Mr. STEWART. It is owned by the United States Government and is under the jurisdiction of the National Forest Service. All of this green area is national forest owned. This white area intermingled with green here inside and outside the benefit area is what is called O. and C. land that you have no doubt heard of before. It is managed by the Department of the Interior under the Bureau of Land Management here.

The Rogue River traverses this area something like this. The Bureau of Land Management has a good many thousands of acres of ownership in here. Besides that, this is just the public domain along the forest boundary here, which has never been appropriated or patented to any private individual. So it is maintained as public domain land.

There are considerable Indian lands in this area also, which do not show in color and which are administered under the Department of the Interior by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

By the way, 66 percent of all the land area in Curry County within that line is under Federal ownership. That is 66 percent of it. It is practically all timber. Almost 100 percent of it. Curry County, gentlemen, is the only county in Oregon that does not have a railroad within its boundaries, and it is also the only coastal county that does not have an east-west road connection. Its only transportation link with the adjacent area is by Highway No. 101, which runs north and south near the coastline.

You have before you the report of the Army engineers which recommends the Rogue River project. The information contained therein was based on information and conditions prevailing in 1949. We have no complaint with their report, but this is now 1954. The present information shows that a much higher benefit-cost ratio exists. I refer to page 14, paragraph 12, to their table of timber available as compared with the present known facts, which are as follows: In their table you will see a total of timber in the benefit area amounting to 4,727 million. That is in all ownerships. The present known facts on the timber within that area are somewhat different. It has been recruised in the last 2 or 3 years, and the total is now 9,859 million boardfeet. This is an increase of over 5 billion board-feet, which is more than double the amount that the Army engineers based their figures on. I will not take too much of your time, gentlemen, but I would like to read this letter from the Forest Service, Mr. Chairman.

Hon. HARRIS ELLSWORTH,

House of Representatives.

MARCH 3, 1954.

DEAR MR. ELLSWORTH: This is in reply to your letter of March 3 which requests information on the significance of development of harbor and port facilities at Gold Beach, Oreg., to marketing of national forest timber. It is our understanding that the harbor facilities proposed for Gold Beach would provide a channel of 13 feet in depth. Such channel would make it possible to move lumber and other forest products in large barges to California or other parts of the west coast.

The lower portion of the Rogue River drainage where that river cuts through the Coast Range and that portion of the western slope of the Coast Range beyond the economic range of truck logging to Brookings, Oreg., or Crescent City, Calif., to the south, and Bandon or Coos Bay to the north, is an undeveloped island in the great expansion of the lumber industry into southwest Oregon and northwestern California since the close of the war. Depletion of old-growth timber in western Washington and northwest Oregon has resulted in a migration of forest products industries from that area into northwest California. There is a comparable need and opportunities for forest products industry expansion along the Oregon coast in the area centering around Gold Beach.

Development of the potentialities for timber production in the Gold Beach area has not been possible because of lack of transportation facilities to centers of distribution and consumption of forest products. For rail shipments lumber must be trucked south 143 miles to Arcata, Calif., or north 77 miles to Coquille, Oreg. For coastal barge shipment, the closest points to Gold Beach are Bandon, 59 miles to the north, or Crescent City, Calif., 66 miles to the south.

National forest timber available for cutting and tributary to Gold Beach is approximately 7.5 billion board-feet with an allowable sustained yield cutting capacity of 63 million board-feet annually. The average volume of timber cut from this national forest area in the last 10 years has been less than 2 million board-feet annually. This lack of development is in sharp contrast to expanding demands and sharp increases in rate of cut towards allowable cutting capacities in practically all other national forest working circles in Oregon and Washington.

Loss of revenue to the United States because of lack of markets for the annual allowable cut in the Gold Beach vicinity is close to $500,000 annually.