a fecal equivalent of approximately 3 million people live within the watershed. And all of the material is proceeding very rapidly into the lake.

The Kissimmee River receives the sewage effluent from the Orlando urban complex and the urban boom resulting from construction of Disneyworld. Prior to channelization, large quantities of these watershed nutrients were absorbed by floodplain marsh vegetation as the water moved overland as sheet flow through approximately 90 miler of the former meandering river channel. This nutrient-laden watee now moves rapidly through a 52-mile ditch to Lake Okeechobee. The channelization of the Kissimmee River not only destroyed a uniqus south Florida ecosystem, it is now killing Lake Okeechobee.

The commercial frogging industry, which once flourished in the flood plain, is gone. Ten years ago, the flood plain supported 500,000 to 1 million waterfowl-days per year; in 1969-70, approximately 20,000 waterfowl-days were recorded, a reduction of approximately 98 percent. The once numerous ibis rookeries are suffering from severe environmental stress, and some rookeries have been eliminated.

Preliminary fish population surveys within the Kissimmee River once noted nationwide for its largemouth bass fishing, indicate after channelization there has been a reduction in the sports fishery in the order of 50 to 80 percent. The marsh vegetation is changing from wetland grasses to other less desirable plants. Approximately 54 percent of the original mile-wide floodplain is dry or covered with spoil from the channel excavation. Five proposed reservoirs in the canal totaling approximately 10,000 acres which were offered as project mitigation are almost dry because of errors in assessing land contours. The watershed nutrients conveyed rapidly by the channel to Lake Okeechobee are already expressing themselves. Blue-green algal blooms were documented in Lake Okeechobee in April 1970, July 1970, January 1971, and in May 1971; four of the five canal reservoir areas in the Kissimmee River have blue-green algal blooms. The eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee is accelerating which puts the agricultural and domestic water supply for south Florida in jeopardy. Mr. Chairman I would like to comment. I think this is probably the one point that we might have to make and a question that you might want to pursue, this business of how these floodplains serve as nutrient removals.

We have observed numerous effects on the environmental resources of Florida caused by channelization. The hardwood and marsh borders of our streams are the final retreat for big game species in much of south Florida. When the width of a canal and its bankside spoil are combined, a swath approximately 200 feet wide of swamp and marsh is destroyed with each project. The remaining wet lands outside the marsh are drained and rapidly developed. Alligators are forced to the canal where the water is available and are much more vulnerable to poaching.

There are many other effects on the alligator that I won't go into because of the time, but what it boils down to is that he is an integral part of our ecosystem down there and he has problems when we have channelization.

Stream channelization also results in substantial elimination of scenic resources and the environmental quality values of marsh and woodlands.

Channelization of streams degrade the water quality within the stream and its receiving waters. The swamps and marshes of the flood plains of rivers and streams comprise nature's tax free "biological waste treatment complex," which reduce turbidity of the water and utilize watershed nutrients in much the same manner as a high-rate trickling filter of a sewage treatment plant.

Channelization causes a significant reduction in nesting waterfowl habitat for the resident wood duck and Florida duck as well as feeding areas for migratory species. Navigation by wilderness canoists and passage of fishes are both blocked in most of the channelized streams by water control structures which lack navigation facilities because of cost of installing.

Our agency feels that it is possible to protect our environment while providing needed flood protection. The first item of business, however, is to define a flood. It is our opinion that we do not have a flood until the water rises beyond the flood plain. We realize there have to be some compromises in the overall concept, but start with that for openers.

Periodic inundation of flood plains is necessary for the survival of our water basins. Water basins react similar to the common barnyard watering trough. If the water level in the trough is maintained at a constant level, a green scum covers the water surface and sides of the trough. We all know that there are two ways to remedy this. Either dry the trough out or flood the water over and dump the scum. Our flood basins act in a similar manner in their natural fluctuations and we must retain this flexibility if we are to maintain a quality environment in Florida.

In order to assure this flexibility the following points are in order: 1. Flood plain zoning should be instituted, which will allow only land-use practices which are compatible with seasonal flood cycles and can serve our society.

2. Provide legislation establishing a green belt of flood plain vegetation which must be left along rivers and streams to protect the river, marsh, and swamp ecosystems from erosion while sustaining fish, wildlife, esthetics, and environmental quality.

3. Allow landowners to reduce their taxable acreage by the amount of wet land remaining in natural conditions. For lands to qualify for such benefit the lands must be approved by appropriate environmental agencies, and the landowner must agree to leave such lands undrained. for at least 10 years with option for renewal.

4. Include saline marshes, hydric hammocks, and other essential aquatic areas in an amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations Act; thereby, denying financial and technical subsidies for destructive drainage. Provide added protection to shallow marshes, deep marshes, and open water areas (types 3, 4, and 5) which are now covered under the protective amendment, as you so well know.

5. Educate the public as to the environmental values of flood plain areas for the production of fish and wildlife resources as well as their ability to act as tax free "biological waste treatment complex" utilizing watershed nutrients.

6. Completely review the effectiveness of Public Law 566 and provisions for purchasing land for fish, wildlife, public access, recreation, environmental quality, and other needs of our modern society. We should not continue to spend public funds to destroy environmental

resources needed by the public to put marginal lands into production for private gain while, at the same time, continuing to give agricultural subsidies to take lands out of production.

7. Extend the authority of the Soil Conservation Service over completed projects to prevent extensive drainage after the local sponsors begin project operation and maintenance.

8. Completely review the method of determining the benefit-cost ratio so that all environmental losses are charged against project benefits. Consider taking the benefit-cost analysis function out of the hands of the construction agencies. This is not a firm recommendation. It is something that we think should be looked at.

In summary, river and stream channelization throughout Florida has engulfed more natural areas than our State can afford. In most cases there is little doubt that environmental quality has been degraded by such channelization. In our affluent society it should be possible to find numerous alternatives. For once channelization occurs and we reap our short-term capital assets then we must suffer the long-term interest loss resulting from environmental degradation. For man, with all his technological ability has not been able to make a "wild river." How much is a wild river worth? As much time as you can give it. Thank you.

(Dr. Frye's prepared statement follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. O. EARLE FRYE, Jr., DIRECTOR, FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION

Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving me this opportunity to appear before your subcommittee to explain the views of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission on the environmental effects of stream channelization. Three questions were presented in your letter requesting our appearance.

1. Does my agency have data which show some of the environmental effects caused by stream channelization?

2. It is possible to protect and enhance our environment while still providing needed flood protection?

3. Should funding and construction involving stream channelization by the Department of Agriculture be temporarily halted, pending a complete review of the environmental effects of such work?

The answer to each of these questions is "Yes".

I shall briefly outline why our agency feels there is a need for this review of the program and I would like to commend the subcommittee for your earnest pursuit of answers to this problem. Incidentally, such a review between the Soil Conservation Service and involved agencies is presently underway in Florida.

The slides accompanying my presentation show areas before and after construction. Environmental effects will be readily apparent.

As recently as 1958, Florida was considered to have an abundance of surface fresh water resources. It has 7,712 lakes, covering 2,373,586 acres and 1,711 streams with a total length of 11,876 miles and is bordered on the west by the Gulf of Mexico and on the east by the Atlantic Ocean. Historically, much of its land area was periodically inundated because 60 to 70 percent of our rainfall occurs during a 120-day period. In order for man to inhabit the State, drainage was long held to be necessary. Drainage by channelization in one area has caused downstream flooding which in turn required additional downstream channelization. In many instances drainage has had a catastrophic effect on habitat and consequently on fish and wildlife resources.

River and stream channelization in Florida has created major problems. At least two Federal agencies, the Soil Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, as well as State, local, and private interests, are continuing to alter the subtropical landscape by drainage. At the 1970 Florida Water Resources Conference a presentation by the Soil Conservation Service was made in reference to Public Law 566 small watershed projects. From their investigation of approximately 500 Florida watersheds, they concluded that 250-plus watersheds were feasible for study and construction.

Since the start of small watershed projects in Florida in 1958, 16 projects have been constructed and approximately 639 miles of channels have replaced our natural streams and rivers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers public works projects have adversely affected the natural environment on approximately 958 miles of rivers and streams by channelization. These figures do not include authorized projects not yet constructed; these would add many more channelized miles. It also does not include the many miles of canalization in the "River of Grass"; that is, the Florida Everglades.

In the interest of time I would like to cite just one example of the effects of two drainage projects on Lake Okeechobee, a "highly treasured resource of south Florida.

Two channelized streams, Taylor Creek (Soil Conservation Service) and the Kissimmee River (Corps of Engineers) have aggravated the eutrophication problem in this, the second largest lake totally within the United States. The channelization of Taylor Creek under Public Law 566 in Okeechobee County has produced severe problems. Taylor Creek drains an area where the predominant land use is dairy farming. After channelization of this stream, lateral feeder canals were constructed from the dairy barns to the main canal. The manure accumulating in the barns thus is washed via the secondary and main canals into Lake Okeechobee. In some canals we have observed 6 inches of water and 6 feet of cow manure. Counting the people and cows on this 15-mile-long watershed and calculating their fecal output per day (1 cow equals 16.4 persons) we find that a fecal equivalent of approximately 3 million people live within the watershed.

The Kissimmee River receives the sewage effluent from the Orlando Urban Complex and the urban boom resulting from Disneyworld. Prior to channelization large quantities of these watershed nutrients were absorbed by flood plain marsh vegetation as the water moved overland as sheet flow through approximately 90 miles of the former meandering river channel. This nutrient laden water now moves rapidly through a 52 mile ditch to Lake Okeechobee. The channelization of the Kissimmee River not only destroyed a unique south Florida ecosystem, it is now killing Lake Okeechobee. The commercial frogging industry which once flourished in the flood plain is gone. Ten years ago, the flood plain supported 500,000 to 1 million waterfowl days per year; in 1969-73 approximately 20,000 waterfowl days were recorded, a reduction of approximately 98 percent.. The once numerous ibis rookeries are suffering from severe environmental stress, and some rookeries have been eliminated. Preliminary fish population surveys within the Kissimmee River once noted nationwide for its largemouth bass fishing, indicate after channelization there has been a reduction in the sports fishery in the order of 50 percent to 80 percent. The marsh vegetation is changing from wetland grasses to willow, dogfennel, water primrose and other moist soil shrubs while many other areas are being converted to subdivisions and improved pasture. Approximately 54 percent of the original mile-wide flood plain is dry or covered with spoil from the channel excavation. Five proposed reservoirs in the canal totaling approximately 10,000 acres which were offered as project mitigation are almost dry because of errors in assessing land contours. The watershed nutrients conveyed rapidly by the channel to Lake Okeechobee are already expressing themselves. Blue-green algal blooms were documented in Lake Okeechobee in April 1970, July 1970, January 1971, and in May 1971; four of the five canal reservoir areas in the Kissimmee River have blue-green algal blooms. The entrophication of Lake Okeechobee is accelerating which puts the agricultured and domestic water supply for South Florida in jeopardy.

We have observed numerous effects on the environmental resources of Florida caused by channelization. The hardwood and marsh borders of our streams are the final retreat for big game species in much of south Florida. When the width of a canal and its bankside spoil are combined, a swath approximately 200 feet wide of swamp and marsh is destroyed with each project. The remaining wet lands outside the swath are drained and rapidly developed. Alligators are forced to the canal where the water is available and are much more vulnerable to poaching. What is thought to be one of the many ecologic functions of the alligator is removed by channelization-their capacity to protect wading bird rookeries from predation. Alligators patrol bird rookeries to eat sick adults and young which fall from the nest and also to prey on the raccoons which swim to the rookeries to eat eggs and young. As the water level is reduced by channelization, the alligator can no longer patrol. There is a severe habitat change and the rookeries are wiped out in a very short time.

Stream channelization also results in substantial elimination of scenic resources and the environmental quality values of marsh and woodlands.

Channelization of streams degrade the water quality within the stream and its receiving waters. The swamps and marshes of the flood plains of rivers and streams comprise Nature's tax free "biological waste treatment complex," which reduce turbidity of the water and utilize watershed nutrients in much the same manner as a high-rate trickling filter of a sewage treatment plant.

Channelization causes a significant reduction in nesting waterfowl habitat for the resident wood duck and Florida duck as well as feeding areas for migratory species. Navigation by wilderness canoeists and passage of fishes are both blocked in most of the channelized streams by water control structures which lack navigation facilities because of cost.

Our agency feels that it is possible to protect our environment while providing needed flood protection. The first item of business, however, is to define a flood. It is our opinion that we do not have a flood until the water rises beyond the flood plain.

Periodic inundation of flood plains is necessary for the survival of our water basins. Water basins react similarly to the common barnyard watering trough. If the water level in the trough is maintained at a constant level, a green scum covers the water surface and sides of the trough. We all know that there are two ways to remedy this. Either dry the trough out or flood the water over and dump the scum. Our flood basins act in a similar manner in their natural fluctuations and we must retain this flexibility if we are to maintain a quality environment. In order to assure this flexibility the following points are in order.

1. Flood plain zoning should be instituted, which will allow only land use practices which are compatible with seasonal flood cycles and can serve our society.

2. Provide legislation establishing a green belt of flood plain vegetation which must be left along rivers and streams to protect the river, marsh, and swamp ecosystems from erosion while sustaining fish, wildlife, esthetics, and environmental quality.

3. Allow landowners to reduce their taxable acreage by the amount of wet land remaining in natural conditions. For lands to qualify for such benefit the lands must be approved by appropriate environmental agencies, and the landowner must agree to leave such lands undrained for at least 10 years with option for renewal.

4. Include saline marshes, hydric hammocks, and other essential aquatic areas in an amendment to the Agriculture Appropriations Act; thereby, denying financial and technical subsidies for destrictive drainage. Provide added protection to shallow marshes, deep marshes, and open water areas (types 3, 4, and 5), which are now covered under the protective amendment.

5. Educate the public as to the environmental values of flood plain areas for the production of fish and wildlife resources as well as their ability to act as tax free "biological waste treatment complex" utilizing watershed nutrients.

6. Completely review the effectiveness of Public Law 566 and provisions for purchasing land for fish, wildlife, public access, recreation, environmental quality, and other needs of our modern society. We should not continue to spend public funds to destroy environmental resources needed by the public to put marginal lands into production for private gain while at the same time continuing to give agricultural subsidies to take lands out of production.

7. Extend the authority of the Soil Conservation Service over completed projects to prevent extensive, drainage after the local sponsors begin project operation and maintenance.

8. Completely review the method of determining the benefit-cost ratio so that all environmental losses are charged against project benefits. Consider taking the benefit-cost analysis function out of the hands of the construction agencies. In summary, river and stream channelization throughout Florida has engulfed more natural areas than our State can afford. In most cases there is little doubt that environmental quality has been degraded by such channelization in our affluent society. It should be possible to find numerous alternatives. For once channelization occurs and we reap our short-term capital assets then we must suffer the long-term interest loss resulting from environmental degradation. For man, with all his technological ability, has not been able to make a "wild river." How much is a wild river worth? As much time as you can give it!

Mr. REUSS. Thank you very much, Dr. Frye.

We will hear next from Mr. W. H. Turcotte, chief of the Game and Fisheries Division, Mississippi Game and Fish Commission.