United States. Inland Waterways Commission.

Preliminary report of the Inland Waterways Commission. Message from the President transmitting a preliminary report online

. (page 52 of 83)
Online LibraryUnited States. Inland Waterways CommissionPreliminary report of the Inland Waterways Commission. Message from the President transmitting a preliminary report → online text (page 52 of 83)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


5,800


BuSalo Creek, Manningtou, W.
Va


2,100


Booths Creek, Monongah,W.Va .
Sandy Creek, Grafton. W. Va. . . .
Teter Creek, Nestorville, W. Va. . .


1,600
3,600
1,300



460 EEPORT OF THE INLAND WATERWAYS COMMISSION

Selected reservoir sites in the Monongahela River basin — Continued



Stream and location.



Elk Creek, Clarksburg, W. Va...
West Fork River, Clarksburg,

W. Va

Buekhannon River, Buckhannon,

W. Va

Middle Fork, Tygart, Barbour

County, W. Va

Cheat River, Tucker County, W.

Va

Tygart River. Berkeley County,

W. Va

Tenmile Creek, Millsboro, Pa

Whitly Creek, Mapletown, Pa. ..
Youghiogheny River, Friends-

ville, Md

Deep Creek, Garrett County, Md.
Cherry Creek, Garrett Countv,

Md

Muddy Creek, Garrett County,

Md

Herrington Creek, Garrett

County, Md



Catchment

area
above res-
ervoir.


Mean an-
nual flow
from catch-
ment area .


Sq. miles.
100


Second-feet.
170


380


640


310


530


140


230


820


1,400


330
310

66


560
527
112


270


690



Capacity

of reser- Capacity
voir in of reser-
square voir

miles of : (1,000,000

catchment jcubicfeet)

area.



55



136



100
380
310
140
440

330

283
69

255
55

55

13

11



5,900
24,700
18,800

8,100

23,800

19,100
15,200
3,690

20,270
4,603

4,912

1,065

900



Height
of dam.



Feet.



92
109

,77

107

200

142
180
140

240
83

64

70 I
60



Area 'of
flow line.



Acres.
4,500

15,900

13,200

4,300

6,600

10,000
6,500
2,240

4,220
3,200

3,930

1,100

760



If the above system of storage reservoirs were installed and power
developed on the dams that have been erected on the Monongahela
for canalization at an expense of over $6,000,000, the income from
water-power rental, at an average of $20 per horsepower-year would
be $887,000, or an equivalent of a 3 per cent income on an investment
of $29,500,000. On the Youghiogheny alone, where it is proposed
to install a slack-water system comprising three locks and dams, at
an expense of $600,000, proper development of storage will insure
the production of a mmimum horsepower of 4,100, the value of which,
reckoned on the exceedingly low price of $20 per horsepower-year,
would produce a total income of $82,000, which represents an interest
of 3 per cent on $2,700,000. This region is a great commercial and
manufacturing center and power is in demand. Therefore, the
estimate of $20 per horsepower-year is considerably less than that
which might reasonably be expected.



KA.NAWIIA RIVER

The basin of Kanawha River is 12,000 square miles in extent.
The river itself is subject to wide fluctuation in stage and the floods
are somewhat severe. There have been identified in the Kanawha
basin reservoir sites of total capacity sufficient to absolutely conserve
the run-ofY from 6,080 square miles, which is 50 per cent of the
entire drainage area. The effect of this conservation on floods will
be to reduce then heights by more than an equivalent proj)ortion.

The effect of such a system of reservoirs on navigation in the
Kanawha is important. The present project for improvement of
navigation provides for the maintenance of a 6-foot depth along the
lower 96 miles of the river. For the first 79 miles this is accom-
plished dming low water by 8 movable dams and for the remainder



WATER CONSERVATION AND FLOOD PREVENTION



461



of the distance by 2 fixed dams. These dams have been erected at
an expenditure of $4,124,526, and $657,000 have been expended for
care and operation, this expense increasing annually. Proper ma-
nipulation of storage from these reservoirs would produce along the
present canalized portion, without the aid of the movable dams,
increased depths, as shown in the following table :

SECTION ABOVE LOCK NO. 6



Increase of stage

Flow required

Reservoirs:

Full

Three-fourths full
One-half fuU







Duration of stage (days) .


1.0


2.0


3.0


4.0


5.0


6.0


1,570


3,420


5,680


8,400


11,400


14,800


1,860


850


514


347


256


197


1,400


640


380


260


192


148


930


425


257


174


128


98



7.0
18,300



160
120



SECTION BELOW ELK RIVER
[About 2i miles above Lock No. 9]



Increase of stage

Flow required

Reservoirs:

FuU

Three-fourths full.

One-half full



1.0


2.0


3.0


4.0


5.0


6.0


700


1,630


2,650


3,710


5,000


6,400


4,170


1,790


1,100


790


580


460


3,100


1,340


830


590


440


340


2,085


895


550


395


290


230



7.0
8,000

365
270
182



From the above table it will be seen that the storage proposed on
the upper drainage area of Kanawha River is sufficient to prolong
in the steeper section an additional 7-foot stage for a period of one
hundred and sixty days with reservoirs full, or one hundred and
twenty days with the reservoirs three-fourths full, while at the section
below the mouth of Elk River the effect is far more marked. The
adtUtional discharge of 8,000 cubic feet per second raises the stage
7 feet. The possibifities along this portion of the river for main-
tenance of navigable stage by the release of stored waters are so
great that it appears that the installation of the slack-water sj^stem
was unnecessary throughout the portion in which movable dams
have been installed.

Kanawha River basin is capable of great development for water
power. The total minimum indicated power along the river and its
tributaries, resulting from a recent survey, is shown as 335,000 horse-
power, which, with the installation of the proposed storage system,
would be enormously increased. For example, if this stored water
were equally distributed over an entire twelve months there would
be available along the main stem of the Kanawha and New rivers
an indicated horsepower of 465,000, in addition to that now available
during the low-water season, the value of which, based on a rental
of $20 per horsepower-year, would be $9,300,000 annually, equivalent
to a 3 per cent income on $310,000,000.



462



REPORT OF THE INLAND WATERWAYS COMMISSION



The location of these proposed reservoirs and facts concerning
them are set forth in the following table :

Selected reservoir sites in the Kanawah River basin



Stream and location.



Catchment
area above
reservoir.



Mean
annual flow
from catch-
ment area.


Capacity of
reservoir
in square
miles of

catchment
area.


Capacity of
reservoir
(1,000,000

cubic feet) .


Height
of dam.


Secondr-feet.

460

1,350


320
940


16,300
49,900


Feet.
177
190


980


680


32,900


164


250


180


8,000


80


90


60


3,400


74


90


60


3,300


97


1,860


780


35,900


250


5,750
620

3,500
510


390
100
920
100


20,300
6,550

59,400
6,400


135
110
125
100


770

370

2,600


60

40

300


4,000
2,900
19,400


100
100
200


80


GO


4,000


63


100


80


3,400


61


300


110


4,700


65


1,250


890


40,580


128



Area of
flow line.



Greenbrier River, Pocahontas

County, W. Va

Elk River, Clay County, W. Va. .
Greenbrier River, Lewisburg,

W. Va

Meadow River, Greenbrier

County, W. Va

Muddlety Creek, Nicholas County

W. Va

Blue Creek, Kanawha County,

W. Va

Gaulev River, Fayette County,

W. Va

New River, above mouth of

Greenbrier River

Walker Creek, Giles County, Va. .

New River, Radford, Va

Reed Creek, Wythe County, Va..
Big Reed Island Creek, Pulaski

County, Va

Cripple Creek, Wythe County, Va.
New River, Carroll County, Va. .
Eighteen-Mile Creek, Putnam

County, W. Va

Thirteeii-Mile Creek, Mason

County, W. Va

Pocotaligo River, Putnam

County, W. Va

Coal River, Kanawha County,

W. Va



Sq. miles.
320
940

680

180

60

60

1,290

3,600
310

1,740
250

380

180

1,290

60

80

230



Acres.
4,700
15,700

11,600

7,000

2,600

2,300

7,500

8,000

3,000

23,000

4,500

2,800
2,000
6,200

2,300

2,000

3,900

20,800



LITTLE KANAWHA AND BIG SANDY RIVERS

These two rivers drain important areas in Kentucky and West Vir-
ginia. The Little Kanawha has a drainage area of 2,300 square miles,
and navigation is quite important. ' There had been expended up to
June 30, 1905, the sum of $214,387. Flat-boat navigation extends
from the mouth up to Burnsville, W. Va., a distance of 120 miles.
The river is not extremely valuable as a power stream, although
there are some sites that might be utilized to advantage if the storage
facilities on the drainage area were developed. Reservoir sites have
been identified that will absolutely conserve the annual run-off from
960 square miles, which is 42 per cent of the entire drainage area.
This w^ould have a greater proportional effect upon the height of the
floods in the Tittle Kanawha itself, while its effects on floods and
navigation in the Ohio will be considered in subsequent pages.

The Big Sandy is an important river basin by reason of its enor-
mous coal deposits. The drainage area is 3,950 square miles in
extent, and the character of the basin is such that it is subject to
extreme fluctuations in river stage, and floods are severe. Up to June
30, 1905, the Government had expended on the main stream $955,000,
while on the two principal forks it had expended over $60,000. The
project for improvement requires the construction of 10 locks and
dams on Levisa Fork, between Louisa and Pikeville, Ky., and 8 locks
and dams on Tug Fork, between Louisa and the mouth of Pond Creek.



WATER CONSERVATION AND FLOOD PREVENTION



463



Three locks and dams will also be required on the main river between
Louisa and Catlettsburg. The estimated cost of this improvement is
$4,725,000.

Sites for reservoirs in the drainage basin are numerous, but for the
purpose of abating Oliio River floods and assisting low-water naviga-
tion they can all be combined in two reservoirs wliich would store the
entire mean annual flow from 3,540 square miles. Tliis would involve
the construction of dams on both Levisa and Tug forks, a short dis-
tance above their confluence, and the flooding of the countrj^ for long
distances above. Especially on Levisa Fork would the flooding be
considered somewhat serious at the present time, for there is involved
the submergence of Paintsville, Pikes\'ille, and Prestonburg, towns of
about 500 inhabitants each, all three being county seats. Wliile the
small size of these towns simplifies the problem so far as practical
reservoir construction is concerned and the damages involved would
not be great in proportion to the total cost of the reservoir, it would
involve consiilerable disturbance in the political afl'airs of these three
counties. Wliile it is true that the thfficulties are more apparent than
real, the submergence of these towns could be efl'ected only by
overcoming considerable local opposition. The practicabihty of the
installation of these reservoirs, from an engineering standpoint, and
their economic importance to the Oliio River is such that their instal-
lation is recommended in spite of the submergence above discussed.
Of course, it is true that a portion of the storage involved in these two
reservoirs could be efl'ected by the construction of several smaller
ones that would not interfere with the towns in question. An alterna-
tive plan would be to postpone the construction of these reservoirs
until all the other developments have been effected, by which time
the practicability of the whole scheme and the enormous advantages
arising from it would overcome all local opposition and the force of
pubhc opinion would carry these reservoirs through.

The locations of the reservoirs on Little Kanawha and Big Sandy
rivers, together with facts relating thereto, are shown in the following
table :

Selected reservoir sites in the Little Kanawha and Big Sandy River basins



Stream and location.



Catchment
area above
reservoir.


Mean an-
nual flow
from catch-
ment area.


Capacity of
reservoir
in square
miles of

catchment
area.


Capacity of
reservoir
(1,000,000

cubic feet).


Height
of dam.


Sq. miles.
30


Second-feet.
40


10


420


Feet.
100


140


200


120


5,600


105


680


980


680


35,210


97


150


220


150


8,060


96


-2, 100


2,940


2,100


104, 722


86


1,440


2,020


1,440


72,860


150



Area of
flow line.



Indian Creek, Murphy Co., W. Va.

South Fork, Hughes River, Mur-
phy County, W. Va

Little Kanawha River, Gilmer
County, W. Va

Right Fork, Steer Creek, Gilmer
County, W, Va

Levisa Fork, Big Sandy River,
Lawrence County, Ky

Tug Fork, Big Sand'y River,
Wayne County, Ky



Acres.
260

2,610
24,120

4,970
66,400
41,300



464



REPORT OF THE INLAND WATERWAYS COMMISSION



KENTUCKY, LICKING, SCIOTO, AND GREAT MIAMI RIVER BASINS

Complete surveys are not available over any of these basins and
therefore a complete estimate of the possibilities arising from conser-
vation on these areas can not be stated here. Were more information
available a far greater reservoir capacity would be shown, and conse-
quently the effect on Ohio River would be greater than is indicated
in tills discussion. Facts concerning these reservoir sites are set forth
in the following table :

Selected reservoir sites in the Kentucky, Licking, Scioto, and Great Miami river basins



Stream and location.


Catchment
area above
reservoir.


Mean an-
nual flow
from catch-
ment area.


Capacity of
reservoir

in square
miles of

catchment
area.


Capacity of
reservoir
(1,000,000

cubic feet).


Height
of dam.


Area of
flow Hne.


Kentucky River, Beattyville,
Ky


Sq. miles.
1,870

470
600

335
770
162


Second-feet.
2,580

648
750

.335
770
162


1,810

470
590

84
116
82
95


79,000

22,100
23,300

2,690
3,700
2,600
3,000


Feet.
120

90
110

55
58
60


Acres.
38,200


South Fork Kentucky River,


16,000


Licking River, West Liberty, Ky.
Olentangy River, southeastern


12,000
2,760


Scioto River, Delaware, Ohio

Alum Creek, Westerville, Ohio

Miami River, headwaters, Ohio .


4,400
3,160













CUMBERLAND RIVER

Conditions with reference to surveys in the Cumberland River
basin are similar to those already stated for the Kentucky and other
streams. A complete statement of the possibilities of conservation
can not be given here. In the following table are set forth the storage
facilities identified on those portions that have been surveyed:

Selected reservoir sites in the Cumberland River basin



Stream and location.


Catchment
area above
reservoir.


Mean
annual flow
from catch-
ment area.


Capacity of
reservoir
in square
miles of

catchment
area.


Capacity of
reservoir
(1,000,000

cubic feet) .


Height
of dam.


Area of
flow line.


Cumberland River, Williams-


Sq. miles.
950
670
650

1,180

640


Secondr-feet.

1,190

840

980

1,770

800


950
670
300

460

632


41,600
26, 790
14,540

22,110

25,000


Feet.
82
115
100

150

140


Acres.
33,710


Cumberland Rivor, Pinoville, Ky .

CoUins River, Minnville, Tenn

Cauey Fork River, east of Smith-


14,890
9,980

6,520


Rockcastle River, Rockcastle


15,500








TENl


LESSEE


RIVER









Tennessee River has a drainage area of -89,000 square miles. The
character of its basin varies from the mountainous portions in the
Appalachian region to the flatter country extending across the west-
ern end of Kentucky. It is a river subject to great amplitude in
river stage due to descending floods which have in the past been ex-
tremely destructive to property and especially to agricultural land.



WATER CONSERVATION AND FLOOD PREVENTION 465

Tennessee Rivor forms a system of internal waterways, capable of
being navigated more than 1,300 miles bv steamboats. In the year
1904, the tomiage amounted to 1,607,000 tons, valued at 830,000,000.
Improvements on the river up to June 30, 1905, amounted to $7,178,-
000. The Government projects are considered in three sections:
First, that part of the river Ipng above Chattanooga, Tenn. ; second,
that part lying between Chattanooga and Riverton, Ala. ; and third,
that part from Riverton to the mouth. Under the present project,
it is the intention to develop a mean low-water depth of 3 feet in the
first section. This, of course, even if it were successfid would not
encourage any great amount of water transportation along this
stretch of the river, because under modern transportation conditions
small draft boats can not be operated with profit. Along the second
section, navigation is possible from six to nine months of the year
only. There are shoals in the river wliich have been overcome or
are in process of being overcome by Government canalization. On
the lower section of the river there is a moderate and uniform slope,
with original low-water depth of about 3.5 feet over the lower 196
miles and 2 feet over the remainder of the distance up to Riverton.
The present Government project is to obtain by dredging a channel
not less than 5 feet deep at mean low water. The prospects for power
development, especiall}" in the highland portions of the river, are
enormous. The minimum indicated power developed by the low-
water flow of the river and its tributaries is over 1,000,000 horse-
power. The profitable development would be far greater than this,
while if the system of storage reservoirs available for construction
were erected the power would be increased from 10 to 12 times.

Available reservoir sites in the portions of the river basin that
have been surveyed will conserve the entire annual flow from 12,800
square miles of drainage area, or 33 per cent of the entire drainage
area of the Tennessee. Were these reservoirs constructed, the effect
on floods in tliis river would be to reduce them by a far greater per
cent than that above stated. The reservoirs practically cover the
upland areas, and the contrast between tliis and the remaining por-
tion of the area is especially marked.

The effect of the regulated discharge of the stored water above
indicated will be shown along tlu"ee broad sections of the river. The
first at Knoxville; the second at Chattanooga; and the third below
Riverton. The facts given will represent the tlii*ee sections of the
river along which improvement has been attempted and, although
the total storage above described is not advocated for purposes of
navigation, the effects of the same in increasing the stage of the
river during low-water seasons will be set forth in the following
tables which are similar to those already given.



466 REPORT OF THE INLAND WATERWAYS COMMISSION

SECTION AT KNOXVILLE











Duration of stage (days) .








Increase of stage

Flow required


1.0

970

4,250
3,187
2,125


2.0
3,220

1,280
960
640


3.0
6,380

647
485
323


4.0
9,930

416
312
208


5.0
13,700

300
225
150


6.0
17,670

233
174
116


7.0
21,840

189
142
95


8.0
26,210

157
117

78


9.0
30,780

134
100

67


10.0
35,300


Reservoirs:

Full


117


Three-fourths full . . .
One-half full


87
58







SECTION AT CHATTANOOGA



Increase of stage

Flow required

Reservoirs:

FuU

Three-fourths full .

One-half full

Increase of stage

Flow required

Reservoirs:

Full

Three-fourths full ,
One-half full



1.0


2.0


3.0


4.0


5.0


6.0


7.0


8.0


9.0


2,780


6,540


11,040


16,000


25,580


27,870


34,470


41,070


47,670


2,890


1,230


728


502


314


288


233


196


168


2,167


922


546


376


160


216


174


147


126


1,445


615


364


351


107


144


116


98


84



10.0
54,270

148
111
74



SECTION BELOW RIVERTON



1.0


2.0


3.0


4.0


5.0


6.0


7.0


8.0 9.0


1,440


4,200


7,600


11,500


15,900


20,800


26,000


31,600 37,500


5,600


1,900


1,060


700


500


390


310


250


210


4,200


1,430


790


520


380


290


230


190


160


2,800


950


530


350


250


195


155


125


105



10.0
43,600

180
138
90



The facilities for reservoir construction in the basin are set forth
in the following table:

Selected reservoir sites in the Tennessee River Basin



Stream and location.



Catchment
area above
reservoir.


Mean an-
nual flow
from catch-
ment area.


Capacity of
reservoir

in square
miles of

catchment
area.


Capacity of
reservoir
(1,000,000

cubic feet) .


Height
of dam.


Area of
flow line.


So. miles.
780


Second-feet.
1,080


690


30,400


Feet.
180


Acres.
10,000


940
560
570


1,590
770
790


270
390
380


14,700
18,500
17,100


100
100
100


10,200
8,500
12,000


3,400


5,300


3,300


163,500


160


49,000


4,050


6,300


4,000


199,600


200


70,000


290


450


290


17,400


94


12,100


2,520


7,000


860


78,000


100


54,400


380


1,050


80


7,340


100


5,120


2,110


2,900


600


26,500


60


30,000


180


500


75


6,700


150


2,840


550
240


1,450
410


380
20


.32,400
1,000


200
40


11,080
1,6S0


240
100


510
260


60
40


4,130
2,240


100
100


2,880
1,600


60


220


20


2,720


50


3,800


2,040


4,300


1,1.30


77,500


70


70,000


80


160


80


5,260


60


6,300


110


220


100


6,330


60


7,400


330


660


60


4,000


fiO


5,500



Clinch River, Scott County, Va .
Nolichucky River, Greenville,

Tenn

Clinch River, Sneedville, Term...

Powell River, Jonesville, Va

Holston River, northeast of

Knox ville, Tenn

French Broad River, east of

Knox ville, Tenn

Little River, south of Knoxville,

Tenn

Little Tennessee River, Loudon

County, Tenn

Little Tennessee River, Swain

County, Tenn

Clinch River, Roane County,

Tenn

Cheoah River, Graham County,

N.C

Hiwassee River, Cherokee Coun-
ty, N. C

Nottely River, Union County, Ga.
Toccoa River, Fannin County,

Ga

Iliwassee River, Hiwassee, Ga

Tennessee River, Rabun County,

Ga

H .vassee River, near mouth,

Tenn

West Chickamauga Creek, Walker

County. Ga

South Chickamauga Creek, Ca-
toosa County, Ga

Sequatchie River, Sequatchie

County, Tenn



WATER CONSERVATION AND FLOOD PREVENTION



467



SMALLER TRIBUTARIES OF OHIO RIVER



Topograpliic surveys are available along some of the smaller tribu-
taries of the Oliio that show good facilities for conservation. As
units, they do not appear of sufficient importance to treat separately
with reference to floods, navigation and water power, and therefore
the facts are included in the following table. It will be observed
that their united capacity is considerable and mil have highly impor-
tant effects on the main river. They will conserve the annual flow
from 3,933 square miles.

Selected reservoir sites in smaller tributaries of Ohio River



Stream and location.



Catchment
area above
reservoir.



Mosquito River, northeast of Sq.

Warren, Ohio I

Raccoon Creek, Below Beaver, I



Little Beaver River, Columbiana
County, Ohio

Yellow Creek, Hammonds%alle,
Ohio

Buffalo Creek, Brooke Coimty,
W. Va

Wheeling Creek, Wheeling, W. Va.

Guyandotte River, Lincoln
County, Ky

Mud River, Cabell County, Ky

Middle Island Creek, St. Mary's
W. Va

Little Muskingum River, Law-
rence County, Ohio

East Fork Duck Creek, Lower
Salem, Ohio

Fish Creek, southeastern Mar-
shall County, W. Va

Captina Creek, southeast of Bel-
mont County, Ohio



miles.
87

160

530

176

136
220

1,290
270



276
108
226
160



|Capacity of

Mean an- reservoir in Capacity of

nnal flow I square reservoir

from catch-' miles of (1,000,000

ment area.' catchment cubic feet)

area.



Second-feet.
98

272

900

299

231

374 i

1,800
378

860

414

162

384

272



87
160



Height
of dam.



Feet.



517


27,800


158


8,480


136
218


7,690
11,700


1,290
136


58,460
6,120


470


25,520


276


14,050


108


5,400


226


13,400


151


8,225



30

160

240

150

150
170

125
100

119

117
85
181
155



Area of
flow line.



Acres.
7,000

2,400

7,440

3,720

1,880
3,740

32,000
4,200

14,000

8,100

4,300

4,000

2,760



Facts concerning reservoir facilities of the various tributaries of
the Ohio have now been given. It should be noted that the informa-
tion concerning some of the tributaries is not complete and that some



Online LibraryUnited States. Inland Waterways CommissionPreliminary report of the Inland Waterways Commission. Message from the President transmitting a preliminary report → online text (page 52 of 83)