whether the dams are worth that cost from the standpoint of the destruction of the fish. Mr. SCRIVNER. The fish industry to amount to a billion dollars, at the present rate, would mean a hundred years or more. Now I would like to make one other observation, in view of Mr. Mahon's reference to General Robins' statement. This is contained in the statement by General Robins, where he was discussing both Bonneville and McNary Dams. General Robins, on page 576 said: The Bonneville Dam is provided with the best and biggest fish ladders that have ever been built, and in addition fish elevators and bypasses for the fingerlings to get downstream and every conceivable device to get the fish over the dam, and the McNary Dam will be built in the same way. In other words, I think we ought to get the whole statement of General Robins in the record, in which we were assured that McNary Dam was not going to seriously affect the fishing industry. We have got to have the complete statement and not just a little part of it. Mr. DAY. We have been emphasizing McNary, below Grand Coulee. Mr. SCRIVNER. Surely, but you still have that area above Grand Coulee; you have the area from McNary to Grand Coulee where a great deal of funds were expended. Mr. DAY. Yes. Mr. SCRIVNER. And Rock Island Dam. Mr. DAY. No, the fish are going through fishways at Rock Island fairly well. Mr. SCRIVNER. Then you have all of this area shown in red, from McNary up to Grand Coulee which would take you on up into Canada. There are some branches there of the Columbia. Mr. DAY. The Okanogan, Wenatchee, Entiat. Mr. SCRIVNER. Where you have already spent a great deal of money in the propagation of fish and hatcheries. Mr. DAY. That is right. Mr. SCRIVNER. So that if the statements made last year were correct that McNary Dam will not seriously impede the passage of fish over that dam that will be built at the elevations stated, then you will still have to spend a great deal in that region you have just mentioned below Grand Coulee. Mr. DAY. Except in this region of Nez Percé. The next one above there is 145 feet. Mr. SCRIVNER. Is that merely in the talk stage? Mr. DAY. Some of these have not been authorized. Mr. MAHON. I think, so far as I recall, it is fair to say that the Army engineers have not advised us what effect McNary Dam would have on the salmon industry. General Robins was not with the Army engineers when he testified before us last year. He was privately employed by the people out there. Mr. SCRIVNER. General Robins was formerly Chief of the Army engineers. Mr. DAY. I would like to make this statement: That the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Army engineers have worked closely together in attempting to devise fish ladders on the McNary project. I simply want again to emphasize that the McNary and the other main stem dams not yet authorized will in our best judgment have a serious effect on the salmon industry. Mr. CASE. If there are no further questions I think we should proceed with the hearings now. Mr. NORRELL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make this brief statement: As a member of the Interior Department Appropriation Committee, the Fish and Wildlife Service appears before us each year. There is no argument that if we construct the dams and bar the salmon runs that the Government ought to provide some method by which they can get down to the ocean and when they get ready to go back where they spawn, they can do so. Provision has been made at Bonneville to accommodate the salmon: they have concrete steps to go up those mountains, so to speak. But it is absolutely pitiful to stand there and watch the salmon at Grand Coulee exert such desperate effort to climb those concrete steps, and have to go back down the river where they came from. We ought to leave those streams as near like we found them as is possible, and there is not any argument about that, as I see it. The only deplorable situation is that the Interior Department is not charging enough for the power and reclamation benefits to pay for these projects. Mr. SCRIVNER. That is exactly the point I was trying to make. Mr. NORRELL. And I agree with you. This is one of the most worthy projects we can possibly have, saving the salmon industry of the West. There would be no argument about the funds required, Mr. Day, to meet the needs, if the projects can be placed on a selfsustaining basis. That is the deplorable and crying situation that we have in the West. We are favorable, I know I am, so far as the projects are concerned; I want to leave the salmon just like we found them. but I want the projects to pay for themselves, and I am sure you agree with me. Mr. DAY. Yes. Mr. CASE. Mr. Scrivner, after looking at some of the previous testimoney taken by this committee, has pointed out one statement by General Wheeler which I think should be included in the record. General Wheeler said: The Federal Wildlife people believe it will be necessary to provide additional spawning ground below McNary Dam to replenish the loss of salmon which may be incurred due to the operation of McNary Dam. They justified that amount before the Bureau of the Budget, and I understand that they are prepared to come before your committee to justify it also. Mr. Engel, the chairman, subsequently said: I am for wildlife preservation, but I think that is for the Interior Department to handle. General Wheeler then said: The law which was passed just this last year provided that funds for these studies must come from the appropriations that build the structures In other words, it must come from the flood-control appropriation. Mr. ENGEL. We will see what they have to say tomorrow. At least we did have some discussion with the Chief of Engineers that the appropriation must come from the appropriation that builds the structure. Mr. TIBBOTT. May I ask one further question? Mr. Day, I understand that there are some additional dams to be built between McNary Dam and Bonneville. Will they interfere to any great extent with your proposed program as far as new spawning grounds are concerned? Mr. DAY. The Dalles may, but we are quite hopeful that that situation can be handled. We do not know. The Dalles is probably the most worrisome of any. Mr. TIBBOTT. What is the height of The Dalles? ESTIMATES FOR SURVEYS AND INVESTIGATIONS May I say that there are two other items, one for $100,000, and $40,000 of this $1,490,000 is for general surveys and investigations in line with the amended Coordination Act which is included in the War Department program to be transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service for that purpose. That is similar to the appropriations made to the Bureau of Reclamation and transferred for studies under the amended Coordination Act. That is also included in these two items. Mr. CASE. Had you concluded your general statement, Mr. Day? Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. DETAIL OF ESTIMATES FOR PROGRAM IN 1949 Mr. CASE. Specifically how much money are you asking for? Mr. DAY. We are asking for $1,490,000, and in addition $100,000. Of the $1,490,000, $40,000 is to be used for general wildlife studies and surveys on other projects than the lower Columbia. Mr. CASE. All in connection with the Corps of Engineers? Mr. DAY. Yes; all connected with Corps of Engineers projects. Mr. CASE. What, specifically, are you going to do with this $1,490,000? Mr. DAY. $40,000 for general Corps of Engineers projects. The $1,450,000 would be spent as follows: $400,000 for stream improvements; $185,000 for the improvement of the Spring Creek hatchery, in the State of Washington, a Federal hatchery; $185,000 for the improvement of the Carson hatchery, a Federal hatchery in the State of Washington; $120,000 for general plans and surveys. The sum of $340,000 for the Klickitat hatchery to be constructed by the State of Washington; $175,000 for the Sandy River hatchery, a State hatchery in the State of Oregon, and $45,000 for the Herman Creek hatchery in Oregon. That is $1,450,000. Mr. CASE. Do you have copies of that detailed statement for members of the Committee? Mr. DAY. The budget green sheet shows considerable detail. Mr. SCRIVNER. Where are those hatcheries, and where would the propagation be in relation to the proposed Dalles Dam? Will that be below The Dalles, or above The Dalles? Mr. DAY. These hatcheries are located below The Dalles. Mr. SCRIVNER. So that if the Dalles Dam is built you will not be coming in with the same problem you have now, and then starting something below The Dalles. Mr. DAY. No; the hatchery program is below The Dalles, and much of the river rehabilitation is below The Dalles. (The following was submitted later:) One State of Oregon hatchery on the John Day River is planned above The Dalles.) 70546-48 -37 Mr. CASE. We will probably want to take up each one of these activities in detail, but let us have a break-down now, or can you place this table of obligation by objects in the record. Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. (The matter referred to is as follows:) Flood control (general), Department of the Army (transfer to Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service), 1949 Rivers and harbors, Department of the Army (transfer to Interior; Fish and Wildlife |