How Waterway Costs Have Grown - Technical Microform Data - Taxpayers' Money Has Been Poured Into The Missouri River Recklessly And Uselessly

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Himbo

Pamphlet documenting how inland waterway construction and maintenance costs rose over time, focusing on U.S. government engineering decisions for the Mississippi River system. It contrasts early estimates for navigation channel depth and width with later revisions that multiplied projected construction and maintenance expenditures far beyond original appropriations. It cites official reports and annual cost figures, arguing that increases occurred despite changing economic conditions and that maintenance estimates proved especially unreliable.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages10

Reading Time25 min

AccessFree to download

How Waterway Costs Have Grown

Taxpayers' Money Has Been Poured Into The Missouri River Recklessly And Uselessly

Official Cost Estimates Have Risen

Official Estimates of Maintenance Costs Have Risen

97-84129-8Security OwnersAssociation # How waterway costs have grown # New York COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIESPRESERVATION DIVISION ## BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET ORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILMED-EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD | 308
Z
Security owmers association.
Box 453
Hov watervay costs have grown;sone pertinent
facts on govornment engineering methods …·
New York,Security owmers association (19331
10 p.
"Supplement to 'A study of transportation by
waterway as relatod to competition with rail
carriers in continental United States.'"
Caption title:Taxpayers'money has been poured
into the Missouri river recklessly and uselessly.
3148 | | --- | Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia Universlty Libraries. RESTRICTIONS ON USE: TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA FILM SIZE: 35mmREDUCTION RATIO:_ 9:/ IMAGE PLACEMENT:IA IB IB INITIALS: 99 DATE FILMED: T-2-9 TBACKING\#: 25208 FILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES,BETHLEHEM,PA. ## How Waterway Costs Have Grown Some Pertinent Facts on GovernmentEngineering Methods SUPPLEMENT TO"A STUDY OF TRANSPORTATIONBYWATERWAY AS RELATED TO COMPETITION WITHRAIL CARRIERS IN CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES." x45 MILTON W.HARRISON,PRESIDENTSECURITY OWNERS ASSOCIATION21 EAST 4OTH STREET.NEW YORK COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES A)d七Li山 "his book is due on the do ON OCTOBER 1st,1932,the SecurityA itinoled ta ndOwners Association released the secondof its three studies of transportation agenciescompetitive with the railroads,entitled“AStudy of Transportation by Waterway as Re-lated to Competition with the Rail Carriers inContinental United States." This present pamphlet contains additionalinformation and data relative to the costs ofconstruction and maintenance of one of thegreat inland waterways,the Mississippi and itstributaries,which will serve further to augmentand round out the facts developed in the studyitself. M.W.H. January 1,1933. ## Taxpayers'Money Has Been PouredInto The Missouri River RecklesslyAnd Uselessly Oficial Cost Estimates Have Risen In the report dated April 30,1908,the Government Dis-trict Engineer,after two years'examination and survey ofthe river,recommended to the Chief of Engineers that a perma-nent navigable channel with a minimum low water depth of6-feet,and minimum width of 200 feet,could be securedby construction of dikes to contract the channel,bank revet-ment,removal of snags and occasional dredging,at a cost of $3,500,000 for construction,and $147,500 for annual main-tenance.This report was reviewed by the Division Engineerand approved May 19,1908,°reviewed by the Board of En-gineers for Rivers and Harbors and approved June 8,1908,and reviewed by the Chief of Engineers and approved Decem-ber 2,1908. Four years later,in 1912,the Government engineers raisedtheir estimate of construction cost from $3,500,000 to$20,000,000,and raised their estimates of annual maintenancecosts from $147,500 to 500,000.°In the Rivers and Har-bors Act of July 25,1912,Congress adopted the project asrecommended by the engineers and appropriated $800,000 tostart the work.Since 1912 Congress has continued to pourmoney into the river,far in excess of the $20,000,000,butthe work was not completed within the period of ten yearsand has not yet been completed. The report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscal year end-ing June 30,1926,stated(p.1079)that at that time the net total expenditures on the project "beginning with the appro-priation of June 25,1910,for systematic work on the 6-footchannel have been $13,339,079.40,of which $9,539,723.51was for new work and $3,799355.89 was for maintenance. The annual report of the Chief of Engineers for the fiscalyear ending June 30,1928,stated(p.1146-49)that at thattime about 40%o

FAQs

What does the pamphlet claim about how waterway costs changed over time?

It argues that both construction and maintenance costs for major inland waterways rose dramatically as government estimates were repeatedly revised.

How does the pamphlet describe the early government cost estimates for the river project?

It presents an early 1908 estimate recommending a navigable channel based on engineering works, with specified construction and annual maintenance costs.

Why does the pamphlet criticize later maintenance cost projections?

It points out that maintenance estimates were declared impracticable or were revised sharply, and it compares those projections to reported actual expenditures for subsequent years.

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Himbo