ment, in that the money involved is not entirely supplied by the Federal Government. As you know, considerable moneys were contributed by people interested in the project locally, as out-and-out donations, also the Michigan State Waterways Commission are contributing a large amount they receive from taxation on various kinds of watercraft operated in Michigan. It would be indeed opportune and would help materially to the economy of this locality, should this project be started in the near future, so as to absorb some of the unemployed who are now returning from the industrial communities.

For your information, we think it is very much in order to compliment the office of the Corps of Army Engineers who prepared House Document No. 142, of the 82d Congress, 1st session, because their report covers the project in a most excellent and comprehensive manner.

Our kindest regards, we remain

CHARLES T. LATHERS,
President.
J. J. HARRINGTON,
Vice President.

Mr. ANGELL. We have with us our colleague from Michigan, Mr. Knox, who is very much interested in this project.

Congressman Knox, we will be very happy to hear from you at

this time.

STATEMENT OF HON. VICTOR A. KNOX, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, my name is Victor A. Knox, Representative of the 11th Congressional District of Michigan.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am greatly interested in the project which has been mentioned because of its historic value and because of the great recreational center into which it has been developed. I have had occasion to go through the Cheboygan lock and on up through the entire channel on an inspection tour with the Department of Conservation of Michigan and with the waterways commission, and also members of the Coast Guard. We had Captain Moore from the Cleveland office who was with us on this trip. There was a lot of interest shown by Captain Moore and the conservation department, and also the Michigan Waterways Commission. Since that time there has been considerable thought given to the possibility of improving the waterway. Also by the improvement of the waterway we would have some jurisdiction over it by the United States Coast Guard. I believe this would be very essential to the welfare of the people who use the waterway.

We have had some serious accidents on this particular waterway. As far as the damage to vessels is concerned, it is very true that several people from the metropolitan area of Michigan and of course down in the Ohio have summer homes in the area and have crusiers which they naturally want to bring over into Mullett Lake or Burt Lake, where they have some use of their boats. But they have declined to bring their boats in there in most instances because of the great damage which has been caused to vessels that have come in.

The question that has been raised relative to local contribution is rather disturbing to me. The Board of Supervisors of Emmet County and the Board of Supervisors of Cheboygan County have made cash contributions along with the business interests in the area, and they have deposited that money to the extent of $30,000 with the State of Michigan, showing their good faith and their participation from the local level in the improvement of this waterway.

If I recall properly, I believe that the Michigan Waterway Commission has set aside some $61,000 for this particular project.

There is one thing I do hope that you bear in mind. That is, this particular area is not an area of rich farming districts or one that is timbered, but it is cutover lands. Thereby the Government owns the greatest share of the property in the area. Therefore there is no possible chance to tax that property to get revenue for a greater contribution.

Many projects that are in the offing today are going to add greatly to the use of this particular waterway. I mention the proposed bridge across the Straits of Mackinac that is undoubtedly going to bring a terrific amount of traffic into the area. When the people come there they will be enthusiastic about the possibilities of using it as a resort

area.

All of these things are coming in the future and have now been authorized. The bonds have been sold for the construction of the bridge, which will be the longest suspension bridge in the world, at the Straits of Mackinac, and I can see great possibilities of further development of our waterway. The necessity to do so brings about the fact that we today as far as our highways are concerned are possibly driving 1954 automobiles on about 1940 highways. So we have a certain segment of our traveling public that are looking to some other form of transportation, just the same as back in the early days when we had horse and buggies there was that one segment of our people that went to automobile transportation. That rapidly grew and grew until now everyone is riding our highways on rubber. I believe this segment of people will go to great lengths in order to get away from the great impact that is being imposed upon our highway systems in Michigan.

The question of local participation again is one that I think there is some ceiling on as to how far they can go. Therefore I do feel with its historic value and with the wonderful recreational area that would develop, it certainly would be in the best interests of my Nation that they should make a greater contribution than has been proposed here by the colonel.

The fact that the Corps of Engineers have recognized it as a possibility for their participation leads me to believe that great study must have been made.

I do not know from where 66 percent of the total cost of the project could be forthcoming. It certainly would have to be explored. It was news to me this morning to find the Corps of Engineers were now recommending to this committee that the local level should contribute 66 percent when they have negotiated this proposed waterway with the waterway commission and local interests and have never mentioned it.

I assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I am greatly interested in it and I think it is one of the finest projects that possibly could ever be developed for the area and for the people of the Nation who would use it. I have a prepared statement which I should like to file with the committee for insertion in the record.

Mr. ANGELL. Without objection, that will be granted and it will be inserted at this point.

(The statement of Mr. Knox is as follows:)

39263-54-vol. 1-23

STATEMENT OF HON. VICTOR A. KNOX, A REPRESENTATVIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

Mr. Chairman, I wish to recommend the improvement of Crooked and Indian Rivers, in Michigan, and connecting lakes and channels, to provide a channel 5 feet deep below the surface of the water when Crooked Lake, Burt, and Mullett Lakes are at low-water datum, and generally 30 feet wide with necessary widening at the bends. This would be from Conway at the west end of Crooked Lake to the navigation lock in Cheboygan River with suitable jetties at the head of Indian River, and in Pickerel Channel from Pickerel Lake to Crooked Lake, in accordance with the plan of the district engineer and with such modifications as in the discretion of the Chief of Engineers.

This project is desired by my constituents in this area so that a safe channel will be provided for all the recreational boats, except sailboats, that now cruise in these waters, and for a large number of craft from Lake Huron that may be expected to visit the inland route to take advantage of the scenic beauty of these waters. I know that the improved navigation facilities would enhance the recreational industry and land values in that region. This improved water would be used almost exclusively by privately owned recreational craft.

The estimated cost to the United States Corps of Engineers is $150,850 for construction and $3,000 annually for maintenance. It is understood, of course, that no work of construction for the project shall be done until local interests have given assurances of certain factors satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army. They are:

1. Make a case contribution of 36 percent, and not to exceed $85,000 of the first cost of constructing the channels and jetties.

2. Establish a competent and properly constituted public body empowered to regulate the use, growth, and free development of boating facilities along the project channels, with the understanding that such facilities shall be open to all on equal terms.

3. Provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements, and rightsof-way, including suitable spoil-disposal areas when and if required, for construction and maintenance of the project.

4. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction and subsequent maintenance of the improvement.

5. Provide and maintain without cost to the United States necessary mooring facilities and utilities, including public landings with suitable supply facilities, open to all on equal terms.

6. Make necessary arrangements that the owners of the lock on the Cheboygan River agree to maintain and operate this lock in a manner satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army and agree that any increase in tolls be subject to his approval.

I understand that the district engineer has concluded that this improvement for navigation is economically justified, and that he has recommended that a Federal project be adopted for the Crooked and Indian Rivers and their connecting lakes and channels.

I agree, of course, that this project would be and is justified for my people who live in this area, and request that you members of this committee give favorable consideration to the proposed inland route.

Mr. ANGELL. I want to say to my colleague, as I said a moment ago, that we are very happy to have had you with us and we thank you for your statement.

May I ask you what method is used to raise the $85,000 which was suggested in the original report for the local contribution?

Mr. KNOX. That was all-inclusive with the Michigan Waterways Commission. The local level have already deposited $30,000 with the waterways commission assuring them of their participation in the project.

Mr. ANGELL. That was raised by local taxation?

Mr. KNOX. Not all of it. Some of it has been contributed by businessmen and resort owners in the area, but the Board of Supervisors of Emmet and Cheboygan Counties have made a cash contribution.

Mr. ANGELL. Is there any State contribution?

Mr. KNOX. Yes. The Michigan Waterways Commission, which is a State agency, according to the information I have has agreed to set aside $61,000 for this project. So the total will be $91,000 that has now been set aside by the State of Michigan and local interests for the project.

Mr. ANGELL. On what is the economy of this area based?

Mr. Knox. On the tourist industry, mainly. There is some small industry in the area.

Mr. ANGELL. Is it an agricultural area?

Mr. Knox. Not to any great extent. There is some farming area in the overall northern tip of the lower peninsula of Michigan, but it is not great at all. It was a lumbering area and of course the land, after the timber was taken off, was let go for taxes. The State of Michigan acquired it and the State of Michigan and the Federal Government continually exchange the lands. I am unable to say what acreage it is.

Mr. ANGELL. A great deal of the timber has been cut off and the land was largely left to go back to the State for taxes?

Mr. KNOX. That is right. And the State of Michigan is not selling any of this property which borders on any lake or stream. They are conserving that for the use of the public.

Mr. ANGELL. Do you have any reforestation planting done there? Mr. KNOX. Yes; we have. Not in that particular area as much as we have in other sections of the northern part of Michigan. But there is some. Yes.

Mr. ANGELL. Is the land that has gone back to public ownership owned by the counties or the State?

Mr. KNOX. By the State. The counties do not participate in taxdelinquent lands.

Mr. ANGELL. Would there be any method of raising this additional contribution by State contributions to 66 percent, amounting to $206,000?

Mr. KNOX. I am not in a position to answer that question, Mr. Chairman. I wish I were. If I had known it was going to be brought up here today I certainly would have attempted to get some information on it. But I do not know from where it would be forthcoming. Mr. ANGELL. May I say if you desire to extend your remarks on that point or any other point you have covered, without objection you will have that permission.

Mr. KNOX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I request that my remarks that I have made here become a part of the record, and also the prepared statement that I have left with the clerk.

Mr. ANGELL. That will be permitted. Are there any questions by members of the committee?

Mr. MACHROWICZ. Are you prepared to say to what extent this $91,000 or $93,000 which is now available for local participation, could be increased?

Mr. Knox. No; I am not able to make a statement on that question, because it was my opinion after reading the documents submitted to the waterways commission that the share to which the local level and the State should participate, had been determined.

But

apparently from the testimony here this morning I would say it has not been determined.

Mr. MACHROWICZ. Do you feel because of the fact that this is something new to you that you would like the opportunity of having some one else heard on this matter of local participation?

Mr. KNOX. Yes. I very much should. If it is permissible I would like to have a representative of the Michigan Waterways Commission here, or give me an opportunity to talk to them to find out as to whether or not there could be additional funds brought forward.

I also would like to contact the local level on this question. I feel they were sincere when they went into it and made their cash deposits with the waterways commission which was required at that time as far as local participation was concerned.

Mr. ANGELL. The committee will be glad to have you do that and supply the committee with that information, which will be placed in the record.

Mr. Knox. Mr. Chairman, if it is permissible I should like to ask the colonel representing the Corps of Engineers a question.

Mr. ANGELL. That will be permissible. Colonel Milne, the Congressman desires to ask you a question.

Mr. KNOX. On this point of the revision of the local participation, when was that agreed upon as far as the Corps of Engineers was concerned?

Colonel MILNE. The original?

Mr. KNOX. The original and also the latest revision of the estimated amount of participation.

Colonel MILNE. The report is dated February 1, 1950. I think perhaps it would be well, Mr. Chairman, if I made a few remarks about local contribution.

Mr. ANGELL. The committee would be glad to have you do that. Colonel MILNE. Perhaps I have not been very clear either to Congressman Knox or to the committee. What I have said earlier does not constitute a recommendation that the local contribution be increased to 66 percent in lieu of the amount stated in the document, which said something in the neighborhood of 36 percent. What I was attempting to point out for the benefit of the committee was that since. the time this report was prepared and submitted to the Congress there has been a change in methods of computing the degree of local participation.

Reports that have already been considered by your committee in these present sessions utilized for the most part the new formula. It would be a matter for congressional determination as to whether or not this old report which is now in front of the committee should be changed to make it consistent with the formula that is now being utilized; or whether the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in the report should be followed.

Mr. MACHROWICZ. Colonel, do you recommend that the original recommendations be followed that provide for a cash contribution of approximately 36 percent?

Colonel MILNE. Those recommendations are based on the formula we were using at that time.

Mr. MACHROWICZ. Are you prepared now to recommend that that formula be kept in this project?