and there at a few places throughout the area, and so destroy the small coal mines located generally throughout the area. If that happens in the next few years, the whole region will be in a very much worse condition.

Mr. HOLCOMB. One thing I would like to point out in advocating this amendment to this bill is the fact that in Pike County, Ky., in the last 5 years we have created approximately 3,500 new jobs in small mines. Now the concept of unit train transportation has come along. Not only the 3,500 new jobs-there were approximately that many there are in jeopardy because these small mines do not have the facilities to participate in unit train shipments, and they are in danger of obliteration.

One of the things we had hoped to accomplish would be to start through this amendment to this bill on a small mine coal cooperative basis to the establishment of coal cooperatives so that not only the existing people who are employed but more people could be given work.

We feel strongly if we can get these cooperatives into operation that in the next 4 or 5 years the employment in small mines throughout the Appalachian area will be doubled or tripled because coal production in the Nation as a whole is going to go up, and that is the one big reason that we would like to see this amendment added.

Senator COOPER. I will ask you this question.

Can you tell the committee how many of the total miners employed in eastern Kentucky are employed in the type of mine you represent? What percentage of the coal production is produced by these mines?

Mr. HOLCOMB. At the present time approximately 71 percent of the production which is produced in these small mines, and they have about 90 percent of the total labor force.

Senator COOPER. Do you know how many men are employed?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Throughout the small mines are concentrated chiefly in eastern Kentucky, and there are some 23,000 men employed in them at the present time.

Senator COOPER. What is your record for safety?

Mr. HOLCOMB. We set a new safety record in 1962 and another one in 1963, another one in 1964.

Senator COOPER. Does it compare with the record of safety in the large mines?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Our record is better.

Senator COOPER. What is it?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Title 1 and title 2. Our record is much better than the record in title 2 mines.

Senator COOPER. I am sure that will be argued forever.

Mr. HOLCOMB. I imagine it will be.

Senator RANDOLPH. We thank you very much for your testimony, Mr. Holcomb.

Senator Cooper, you have brought out for the committee the socalled small mine operations in Kentucky and other areas of the Appalachian region are very important in the production of this product. It is not a small industry, it is a big industry, but it is made up of small units, just a few men working in the mine; is that correct? Mr. HOLCOMB. Yes.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you very much for your helpful testimony. Your recommendations will be considered in the executive session of the committee, I assure you of that, sir.

The hearings on Senate 3 are now concluded.

We will receive additional statements from our colleagues in the Senate and the House of Representatives. These, and statements from other interested persons, will be received until 4 o'clock tomorrow afternoon.

We also have a letter and statement which will be included in the record from Governor Tawes of Maryland, a telegram from Governor Rhodes of Ohio, a statement from Governor Harrison of Virginia, and two statements from Senator Nelson of Wisconsin.

Senator COOPER. Mr. Chairman, might I ask that there be included in the record this report by the Improvement Association of Jackson County called Natural and Human Resources. I think it is quite representative of the situation in these counties and also reflects the local interest of the counties.

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes, that material will be included, Senator Cooper.

(The statements and material referred to follow :)

ANNAPOLIS, MD.,

January 22, 1965.

DEAR SENATOR RANDOLPH: Inasmuch as I have already testified on the Appalachian Regional Development Act, I will not take up the time of your committee by appearing in person, but am forwarding my views in the enclosed statement. As you know, we in Maryland have waited a long time to see the ideas embodied in this legislation become a reality, and have ever been in the forefront of those who have urged its passage. It will mean new life and new hope for those of our citizens living in the western part of our State.

The State of Maryland is already well advanced with its plans to implement this legislation as soon as it becomes law. For the past several years the Maryland Department of Economic Development has been working with the economic development agencies of our three western counties in perfecting the procedures that will enable us to make the best possible use of this new legislation.

The promise of this much-needed aid has been dangled before our people for over 4 years. Now is the time, not for words, but for action. I urge the passage of this bill with all the forcefulness at my command.

Sincerely yours,

J. MILLARD TAWES, Governor.

STATEMENT BY J. MILLARD TAWES, GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND

Mr. chairman and members of the committee, this is a day I have looked forward to for 4 years 4 years ago yesterday, on May 20, 1960, the first conference of Appalachian Governors was held at my invitation in Annapolis, Md.

In my opening address to that conference, I made this statement: "Nothing significant can be accomplished for our distressed counties of western Maryland except as part of a program whose aim would be to rebuild and revitalize the economy of the entire Appalachian region.”

Today this committee has such a program before it. It is a program which has been evolved during the past 4 years through continuing effort by the Appalachian Governors conference and the Federal Government. It is a program which has been developed from the bottom up, not from the top down. It is a program based on the recognition by the Governors of 10 States that they shared a common problem which could only be solved by common action.

The conditions in the Appalachian area are familiar to all of you, and I will not take your time to detail them here. At that meeting in Annapolis 4 years ago I said: "It is shameful and intolerable that in this year, 1960, there should be children in the United States who are dying of malnutrition, and entire families who are living on a government subsistence handout which is only 30 percent of minimal nutritional needs. It is intolerable that we should have

whole counties where the yearly family income is less than $400, and where children can't go to school because of lack of clothes and shoes."

These feelings have been echoed many times since then, and I know that they underlie President Johnson's deep and burning desire that something finally be done to eliminate the apalling conditions which are plainly visible to any traveler in Appalachia.

To me one of the most significant features of the present bill-in addition to its being based on a cooperative Federal-State-regional approach is the fact that it is aimed specifically at the causes, and not merely the symptoms, of the economic distress of the region.

If you will permit, I would like to quote again from the address which I made before the first conference of Appalachian Governors 4 years ago. "We can never," I said at that time, “arrive at a permanent solution to the problems of the Appalachian region until we stop thinking of the mountains as a 'distressed area' and begin to think of them as an underdeveloped region with vast untapped human and natural resources—a region that can only find its rightful economic level through a plan of overall economic development, programed for a period of 5, 10, or even 20 years. This program must not only deal with the basic problem of correcting the growing imbalance between manpower and job opportunities, but should also concentrate on the building of new highways, flood control projects, and * * * increasing educational and vocational training levels throughout the region."

This approach, I am happy to say, is exactly the one to be found in this bill. In that connection, I am especially pleased to note the emphasis which this bill has placed upon highway construction. Here we see an approach to roadbuilding that was first developed by the ancient Romans-the use of roads not simply to serve traffic already there, but to open up a region for economic development and growth.

Isolation has long been the curse of Appalachia. The high mountains running north and south effectively blocked the region from the primarily east-west flow of American economic development. Highway and rail builders usually found it easier to bypass Appalachia than to traverse it. Only a good, modern road network can end this age-old condition.

And this condition must be ended, not only for the good of Appalachia, but for the welfare of the trading areas that lie east and west of the mountains. Our port of Baltimore, for example, would benefit greatly from increased economic activity in Appalachia-activity which would provide products for export from the port and an interior market for goods and supplies coming into the port.

As a Governor of a State which has three counties in the Appalachian region, I can only add my own voice to the call for urgency which has been sounded so clearly by our President.

The people who live in the Appalachian area are no strangers to promises. They have stood on their street corners and outside their homes for many a year in the past and listened to the brave promises of well-meaning candidates for political office.

All too often these promises have turned to ashes, not because they were insincere, but because, once in office, the former candidate found himself powerless, with the limited means at his disposal, to accomplish anything truly meaningful for the people of Appalachia.

No State has the resources to cope with conditions that are as widespread and as economically deep seated as we find in Appalachia. This is why the present program is so desperately needed. This is also why the people of Appalachia— for the first time-have permitted themselves to believe that at last something effective is really about to be done.

I travel frequently in the three Maryland counties in the Appalachian region, and I can assure you that the usual skepticism of the people has been put aside as far as this program is concerned.

They have faith in President Johnson and in this Congress.

As far as this bill is concerned, they have laid aside their normal protective shield of pride and silence. They have exposed themselves and their plight for all to see. It would indeed be a cruel hoax if we let them down now when their hopes are highest.

Before closing, I would like to quote once more from my address before the first conference of Appalachian Governors in 1960.

Incidentally, I quote from these remarks not because I am fascinated by my own words, but to make the point very clear that this bill represents something

which was originated by the Appalachian region itself, and is a true example of cooperation of government at all levels-Federal, State, and local.

We who have portions of our States in the Appalachian region consider this bill to be our bill, not a Federal Government bill.

We conceived the regional approach, we formed the pilot organization, and we hammered out the details of the bill in meetings in Cumberland and Hagerstown and Pittsburgh and Charleston and Lexington and Atlanta-not in Washington, D.C.

But to get to the quote. These were the closing words in that 1960 address: "I believe that the time is ripe for the launching of some forceful interstate action in regard to the pressing problems of the Appalachian region, and I am most hopeful that this conference today will be the seedbed out of which will grow a new awareness of our obligations to the mountain areas of our States."

Now, 4 years later, that wish has been fulfilled. This bill which you have before you has grown from that seedbed. I cannot urge you too strongly to take the steps needed to make this seedling live and flourish for the lasting benefit of Appalachia.

Hon. JENNINGS RANDOLPH,

U.S. Senate Committee on Public Works,
Washington, D.C.

(Attention, Richard B. Royce):

COLUMBUS, OHIO, January 21, 1965.

With the full realization that certain portions of southeastern Ohio desperately need economic development, Ohio, approximately 1 year ago, embarked on an Ohio Valley region program. This area coincides with the presently termed "Appalachia."

This program was conceived prior to the time that Ohio committed itself to the Federal Appalachia program. Therefore, even though the proposed legislation for the appalachian area was not acted upon, we have continued with our program.

However, the proposed legislation on Appalachia can be of significant import to the area. We are therefore hopeful that with full recognition of the States' responsibility, it will become law in this session.

Four Ohio counties, Carroll, Tuscarawas, Coshocton, and Holmes, contiguous to and economically identical to the existing Appalachia counties, should be included in the program. We ask that these counties be included in the defined Appalachia area.

JAMES A. RHODES, Governor of Ohio.

STATEMENT BY ALBERTIS S. HARRISON, JR., GOVERNOR, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Mr. Chairman, and other distinguished members of the committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to make this statement. I regret that I cannot appear in person.

I have endorsed generally the objectives of the Appalachian Regional Development Act, for I am of opinion that many of the proposals will promote the growth and development of the Virginia Appalachian counties, and the entire Appalachian region. While there are areas in Appalachia whose economy is at a low ebb, I feel it unfortunate that the "depressed" label has been applied to such a large area of our Nation. The Appalachian region is not homogenous; there are areas of very considerable prosperity while others are relatively depressed. The value of this program is that it represents a concerted effort in attempting to alleviate the conditions found in the Appalachian region. By and large, many past efforts, though sincere in purpose, have not been able to solve the region's difficulties simply because they tried to cope with only one aspect of the problem. This bill holds promise since it brings together and accelerates the efforts of many Federal and State programs now in existence. The necessary essentials for improving the development potential of Appalachia are covered by the act. I agree that the Appalachian program should remain separate from the pending "poverty bill."

My executive assistant, Mr. Joseph G. Hamrick, will be the Virginia representative on the Appalachian Regional Commission and I assure you of his continuing interest in this program.

I favor and shall support any sound program that will expedite the construction of modern, safe, and adequate highways in the Appalachia area. Certainly,

there is no area of greater importance to the development of the region than a vigorous and well-balanced highway program. Industrial development and the industry of tourism cannot be promoted without adequate network of roads. The 1964 session of the Virginia General Assembly provided for the beginning of a new network of arterial highways, a system of main, dual-lane roads intended to complement and serve large areas not covered by the Interstate System. A high percentage of this arterial mileage was allotted to the southwest Virginia area. The development highway system as proposed in section 201 of this bill, when coupled with our regular programs, will provide safe and efficient transportation facilities into the heart of our most inaccessible Appalachian areas. The Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 can be of inestimable value to Virginia if the highway funds available to this State under it can be expended to expedite the construction of this arterial system.

With reference to section 202 of title II of the proposed act, we have a wellorganized and well-directed public health program in Virginia, but admittedly we do not have in southwest Virginia sufficient numbers of physicians, nurses, dentists, or other health personnel. For example, there is only 1 M.D. for every 5,000 people, as compared to the national average of 1 for 700. Additional health personnel need encouragement to locate in the area, and those already located there need auxiliary personnel in the care of patients. The development of medical clinics, home nursing care programs, and the provision of additional financial assistance for required hospitalization obviously are steps which can alleviate these conditions.

The basic structure to develop these proposals already exist in Virginia through complete coverage of this area by full-time local health departments.

A preliminary survey of the 106 communities in the 7-county area revealed that only 12 have approved sewage treatment facilities. For example, 8 communities discharge all or a portion of their sewer wastes directly to the Big Sandy River; 24 to Clinch River; 8 to Guest River; and 28 to Powell River. Based on conservative figures, it is estimated that at least 1,500,000 gallons of untreated sewage per day are discharged into secondary streams or directly into these 4 rivers. The provision for grants under section 212 will be of considerable benefit.

Public water supplies are not available in 36.7 percent of the communities. Public water supplies in the remaining 67 communities vary in adequacy and degree of treatment.

Sections 203 and 204 of title II refer to programs for improving the economic level of our farmers. Agriculture and related activities have long been of vital importance to our economy in Virginia. For example, the designated counties in Virginia included in the Appalachian region possess a natural ability to produce bluegrass. This grass is one of the most desirable and easily established forage crops in the area. The bill's provision to improve pasture should be an aid to small landowners desiring to increase, as well as diversify, livestock production. While investment in the highways, waterways, the soil, timber, and recreational resources is of strategic importance in the development of the Appalachian area, it provides only a partial answer to the future of this region. In the final analysis it is the people who make a region, a State, or a nation truly great. We can build a more viorous Appalachian region only as the human resources are developed.

The fundamental key to the development of these resources is education. Section 211 of the bill provides some needed assistance in this direction. Through sound education aspirations are raised, the dignity of the individual is enhanced and his spirit is quickened, knowledges and skills for effective citizenship, including vocational competency, are acquired, the development of a concept of the good life is fostered, and doors to unlimited opportunities are opened.

While progress in education in the Appalachian region is constantly being made, the skills and knowledges of its people have not kept pace with the benefits and vocational opportunities afforded by the rapid growth of industry and technology. The rate of improving education in this area must be accelerated. For the year 1963-64, 20.2 percent of the accredited high schools of the Appalachian region in Virginia offered courses in industrial education; more than 50 percent offered courses in agricultural education; almost 50 percent provided work in business education; more than 25 percent provided courses in distributive education; and more than 90 percent offered home economics. Apprenticeship-related instruction was provided through evening programs in one-sixth of the high schools. Instruction under the manpower development and training program has been provided for more than 240 unemployed adults. Two area vocationaltechnical schools are located in this region.