 |
[Footnote C: Including water discharged through fixed openings, in a flood similar to that of October, 1903. Maximum discharge, 12,000 cubic feet per second.]
With the exception of the Millington reservoir site where the cost of the dam is a small factor, the elevation of flow line in the various reservoirs which determines the capacity was fixed so as to afford an approximate storage equal to a run-off of about 8 inches from the drainage area above each dam site. This amount is somewhat in excess of the run-off for the flood of October, 1903. It was found impracticable on the Rockaway reservoir site to provide for a storage greater than 6 inches. On the Wanaque the amount which can be stored falls slightly under 8 inches, while on the Ramapo it is possible to obtain only 5-1/2 inches, by reason of the fact that with a greater storage capacity the slack water would reach into New York State. The economical height for a dam at the lower end of the Great Piece Meadow, if such dam is provided with fixed discharge openings which will carry a maximum outflow of 12,000 cubic feet per second, will provide a reservoir which will dispose of a run-off of 9 inches on the drainage area above.
The following combinations of reservoir sites, with their respective drainage areas, proportional storage, and estimated costs, give the facts necessary for final deductions:
+ -+ -+ -+ - Drainage Water Equivalent Site. area. collected. area Cost. retarded. + -+ -+ -+ - Square miles. Inches. Square miles. Ramapo 140 5.5 96.25 $900,000 Wanaque 83 7.7 80 1,000,000 Pequanac 52 8 52 1,800,000 Rockaway 114 6 85.5 600,000 -+ -+ + Total 389 313.75 4,300,000 ======================================================= Ramapo 140 5.5 96.25 900,000 Wanaque 83 7.7 80 1,000,000 Rockaway 114 6 85.5 600,000 Millington 56 31 56 370,000 Total 393 317.75 3,870,000 ======================================================= Great Piece 773 4.5 435 2,625,000 Mountain View 380 8 380 3,340,000 + -+ -+ -+ -
The necessity to retard the flow of or provide storage for approximately 380 square miles of highland drainage area has been determined after careful study, and there has been deduced an amount which may safely be expected to represent the maximum for the highest floods. When the highland tributaries are sufficiently checked the natural storage on Great Piece Meadow in its effect upon flood control becomes more apparent. Our investigations show that the holding back of the flood flow—that is, 8 inches run-off on approximately 380 square miles of flashy drainage area above Great Piece Meadow—is necessary to reduce the discharge in the river through the city of Paterson to 14,000 cubic feet per second for a flood similar to that of 1903.
From the foregoing table, in which different reservoir projects are compared, it is seen that only the reservoirs designated as Great Piece and Mountain View will fulfill the requirements within a reasonable limit of cost. It is also shown that a combination of any other available sites would involve the expenditure of more money for their construction and the control of less tributary drainage area than is fulfilled by the demands of the Passaic drainage basin. We are therefore brought to the conclusion that only two of the projects above set forth will be effective. First, the construction of a regulating dam on the main stream above Little Falls, which we have called the "Great Piece" Meadow Reservoir, and second, the building of a dam at Mountain View across Pompton River. The relative cost of these reservoirs, constructed for flood control exclusively, is $2,625,000 for that on Great Piece Meadow and $3,340,000 for the Mountain View site. Details of these estimates are as follows:
Estimate of cost of Great Piece Reservoir, dam at Little Falls.
[Elevation of flow line, 178.5 feet. Storage and disposal of 9 inches collected.[D]]
Earth excavation, 17,600 cubic yards, at 35 cents $6,160 Rock excavation, 8,800 cubic yards, at $2 17,600 Rubble masonry, 29,100 cubic yards, at $5 145,500 Ashlar masonry, 1,800 cubic yards, at $12 21,600 Facework of rubble masonry, 2,850 square yards, at $1.50 4,275 Concrete masonry, 250 cubic yards, at $6 1,500 Slope paving, 300 cubic yards, at $2 600 Crushed stone, 150 cubic yards, at $1.50 225 60-inch cast-iron pipe in place, 360 tons, at $35 12,600 Relocation of railroads, Erie, 5 miles, at $20,000; Delaware, Lackawanna and Western, 4.5 miles, at $40,000 280,000 Relocation of highways 170,000 Real estate: Above Mountain View 500,000 Additional for village of Singac 100,000 22,000 acres, at $50 1,100,000 ————— 2,360,000 Add for engineering and contingencies 240,000 ————— 2,600,000 Protection of pipe lines, Newark and Jersey City 25,000 ————— 2,625,000
The effectiveness of a reservoir built upon the lines proposed in the case of Great Piece Meadow depends upon the adjustment of outflow so that the channel below will not be overborne, while at the same time sufficient storage capacity is afforded to hold temporarily the water which enters above the dam in amount greater than the carrying capacity of the outflow apertures. The dam across Passaic River above Little Falls would be provided with apertures which would discharge 12,000 cubic feet per second under the maximum head in the storage basin. As the flood rises these apertures would discharge a constantly increasing amount of water to the maximum, and for a considerable time thereafter the maximum would be maintained, the discharge decreasing after the flood according to the height of water remaining in the reservoir.
[Footnote D: Includes water discharged through fixed openings for a flood similar to that of October, 1903. Maximum flow, 12,000 cubic feet per second.]
Estimated cost of Mountain View Reservoir.
[Elevation of flow line, 202 feet. Storage of 8 inches on watershed.]
Earth excavation: Stripping dam base, 83,500 cubic yards, at $0.30 $25,050 Core wall trench, 24,900 cubic yards, at $1 24,900 Rock excavation, 10,100 cubic yards, at $2 20,200 Rock fill in dam, 197,000 cubic yards, at $1.25 246,250 Rubble masonry, 23,200 cubic yards, at $5 116,000 Concrete, 30,000 cubic yards, at $6 180,000 Gate chambers and tunnels 65,000 Reconstruction of highways 142,400 Reconstruction of railroads 815,000 Real estate 1,360,000 ————— 2,994,800 Engineering and contingencies 325,200 ————— 3,320,000 Protection of Newark pipe line 20,000 ————— Total cost 3,340,000
[Same for elevation of flow line, 204 feet. Storage of 9 inches on watershed.]
Earth excavation: Stripping dam base, 85,200 cubic yards, at $0.30 $25,560 Core wall trench, 26,000 cubic yards, at $1 26,000 Rock excavation, 10,600 cubic yards, at $2 21,200 Rock fill in dam, 214,000 cubic yards, at $1.25 267,500 Rubble masonry, 24,500 cubic yards, at $5 122,500 Concrete, 30,500 cubic yards, at $6 183,000 Gate chambers and tunnels 65,000 Reconstruction of highways 142,400 Reconstruction of railroads 815,000 Real estate 1,435,000 ————— 3,103,160 Engineering and contingencies 336,840 ————— 3,440,000 Protection of Newark pipe line 20,000 ————— Total cost 3,460,000
The final recommendation of the committee involves the consideration of two projects for flood storage, one on Great Piece Meadow and the other above Mountain View on the Pompton. In making such recommendations the committee is of the opinion that it must take into account matters of engineering policy with regard to future needs and contingencies, as well as the bare necessities of the present.
If there were none other than the single problem of prevention the committee would advise the construction of the reservoir on Great Piece Meadow by reason of its smaller probable cost and its equal efficiency. It is plain, however, that there are many important features of public policy involved in the subject at hand. Population in the valley of the Passaic is developing so rapidly that in only a few years the present sources of water supply will be inadequate. The whole subject of water supply for northern New Jersey demands immediate consideration, and it would not be wise to take up the matter of prevention of flood damage in the Passaic without basing the value of every project upon its adaptability for use in future water-supply needs.
By expending $2,600,000 a great reservoir could be constructed upon Great Piece Meadow which could not be adapted for any purposes except to regulate floods; it would stand in season and out of season a huge feature of the valley and entirely useless and inoperative save on the occasion of high water. However great might be the needs of the inhabitants of the Passaic Valley for a conserved water supply, the construction on the meadows, representing an enormous expenditure, would furnish no solution of the problem. It would admit of no enlargement for water-supply storage and would be available for no purpose except flood regulation.
When we consider the Mountain View project, however, we find that as a measure for the prevention of flood damages it fulfills all the requirements and provides in addition all the possibilities and advantages demanded inevitably in the near future. The Mountain View site is an ideal one for the reservoir, and its initial development for flood catchment does not involve the expenditure of a dollar that would be lost in the development of the basin to greater capacities for water supply. From its lowest level, at 202 feet above tide, to its maximum capacity, at a level of 220, there would be no depreciation. Every dollar spent in the initial construction would be effective in the maximum development.
The probable cost of Mountain View reservoir, estimated at $3,340,000, exceeds that of Great Piece by $700,000. It is realized that to many persons this margin may seem very wide. Let us consider briefly just what it really represents.
Suppose, for example, that the Great Piece project is constructed at a cost of $2,600,000. After the elapse of a few years it will be necessary to provide additional storage in the Passaic highlands for water supply or the maintenance of water power. The Mountain View reservoir, or its equivalent in capacity and cost, will then be necessary. The situation will then be as follows: By constructing the Great Piece reservoir in preference to the Mountain View for flood catchment, $700,000 would be saved. We can consider that this amount might be expended to pay a part of the cost of additional conservation above referred to. If, on the other hand, Mountain View had been constructed, there would have been paid on the final cost of conservance the sum of $3,340,000, which, as stated in previous pages, would also have effected flood relief. There would then be the difference between $2,600,000 and $700,000, or $1,900,000, which represents the actual loss which would accrue by reason of the construction of Great Piece reservoir.
The engineering committee, after presenting the merits of both Great Piece Meadow and Mountain View projects, therefore recommends the adoption of the latter in spite of its greater cost, because it is believed that in the end the construction of the Great Piece project would involve an expenditure not warranted by public economy or general expediency.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS.
1. Great floods in the Passaic Basin arise only after a specially violent precipitation.
2. Under present conditions floods may be expected at frequent intervals.
3. A part of the damage along the lower valley is the result of encroachments on the part of individuals and public and private corporations.
4. The channel in the lower valley may be improved at certain points by straightening it and judiciously making cut-offs.
5. Without the construction of numerous levees the lower valley channel can not be made to carry great flood waters without damage.
6. Immunity from floods can be effected only by the construction of catchment reservoirs in the highlands or levees in the lowlands.
7. Levee construction would involve more damage than is now caused by floods, and the cost thereof would be prohibitive.
8. Flood catchment reservoirs may be constructed economically and provide storage to compensate for the dry-season flow, thereby maintaining water power at Paterson, Passaic, and other points, and providing for municipal water supply in the future.
INDEX.
Arch street bridge, Paterson, destruction of; 27
Beattie's dam, flood flow at; 16-17 flood period at; 9 view of; 16
Bridges, destruction of; 26-27
Capacity of streams, increase in; 28
Central Basin, damage in; 24 flood in, descent of; 14-15
Charlotteburg, rainfall at; 11, 12
Chatham, flood period at; 10
Chester, rainfall at; 11
Cranberry Pond, dam at, failure of; 24
Damages, discussion of; 23-28
Darlington, reservoir site at; 33
Dixons Pond, reservoir site at; 37
Dover, rainfall at; 11, 12
Drought, relation of rainfall to; 12
Dundee dam, flood flow over; 17-22 flood flow over, diagram showing; 20 flood period at; 9 floods at, comparison of, figure showing; 18
East Jersey Water Company, damage at pumping station of; 25-26
Elizabeth, rainfall at; 11
Essex Fells, rainfall at; 11, 12
Flood, descent of; 14-22 period of; 9-10 prevention of; 28-44
Flood damage, plates showing; 26, 28
Floods, general conclusions concerning; 44-45
Great Passaic Swamp, reservoir site at; 38-39
Great Piece reservoir, cost of, estimate of; 42
Greenwood Lake, use of; 34
Hanover, rainfall at; 11
Hebrew quarter, Paterson, devastation in, plate showing; 28
Highland tributaries, damages along; 23-25 descent of flood in; 14-15
Hotel, wreck of, plate showing; 26
Little Falls, dam at, view of; 16 damage at; 25-26 flood flow at; 16-17 flood period at; 9 rainfall at; 12
Longwood Valley, reservoir site in; 37
Lower Longwood, reservoir site near; 38
Lower Valley, damage in; 25-28 improvements in, discussion of; 29-31
Ludlum Steel and Iron Company, water front of; 24
Macopin dam, flood flow at; 15-16 flood period at; 10
Main street bridge, Paterson, destruction of; 27
Midvale, proposed reservoir near; 34
Mill district, Paterson, effects of flood in, plate showing; 26
Millington, reservoir site near; 38-39, 40
Mountain View, reservoir site at; 31-33, 40
Mountain View reservoir, cost of, estimate of; 43
New York City, rainfall at; 11, 13
Newark, rainfall at; 11, 12, 13
Newark water department, information furnished by; 16
Newell, F. H., letter of transmittal by; 7
Newfoundland, reservoir site near; 36, 40
Nigger Pond, dam at, failure of; 24
Oakland, reservoir site near; 34
Obstructions to flow of Passaic River, discussion of; 29-30
Old Boonton, flood period at; 10
Passaic, damage at; 27-28 inundated lands at, plate showing; 28
Passaic Basin, reservoir sites in upper; 38-39 storage facilities in, effect of; 11
Passaic River, bridge over, plate showing; 28 flood flow of; 17-22 diagram showing; 20 flood period on; 10 floods on, comparison of, diagram showing; 18 flow of, obstructions to; 29-30
Passaic Valley, rainfall in; 11, 12
Paterson, damage at; 26-27 flood district of, plate showing; 24 flood-water lines in residence district of, plate showing; 16
Hebrew quarter in, devastation in, plate showing; 28 mill district, effects of flood in, plate showing; 26 rainfall at; 11, 12 residence district, flood-water lines in, plate showing; 16 views in; 16, 24, 26, 28
Pequanac Basin, reservoir sites in; 35-36, 40, 41
Pequanac River, damage along; 24 flood flow of; 16 flood period on; 10
Petersburg, reservoir site near; 37
Plainfield, rainfall at; 11
Pompton Lake, dry bed of, plate showing; 24 reservoir site at; 33-35
Pompton Lakes, damage at; 24
Pompton Lakes dam, plate showing; 24
Pompton Plains, damage at; 24 highest water at; 10
Pompton reservoir, discussion of; 31-33
Powerville, reservoir site near; 37
Precipitation, amount of; 11-14
Prevention of floods, discussion of; 28-45
Rainfall, amount of; 11-14 relation of drought to; 12
Ramapo River, damages along; 23-24 flood on, time of; 9
Ramapo Valley, reservoir sites in; 33-34, 40, 41
Reservoir sites, comparison of; 40-44
Reservoirs for preventing floods, discussion of; 28, 31-40
Residence district, Paterson, flood-water lines in, plate showing; 16
Ringwood, rainfall at; 11, 12
Ringwood Creek, reservoir site on; 35
River street, Paterson, view of; 26
River Vale, rainfall at; 11, 12
Rockaway Basin, reservoir sites on; 37-38, 40, 41
Rockaway River, flood period on; 10
Saddle River, reservoir sites on; 39-40
Sherrerd, M. R., aid by; 15
Smith, G. W., quoted on changes in channel at Little Falls; 25
South Orange, rainfall at; 11, 12
Splitrock Pond, reservoir site on; 38
Spruce street, Paterson, washout at, plate showing; 26
Stickle Pond, proposed reservoir at; 36
Stony Brook, reservoir site on; 37
Storage reservoirs for preventing floods, discussion of; 28, 31-40
Streams, capacity of, increase in; 28
Vermeule, C. C., quoted on Pompton reservoir; 31-32
Wanaque Basin, reservoir sites in; 34-35, 40, 41
West Street Bridge, Paterson, destruction of; 26
West Brook, reservoir site on; 35
PUBLICATIONS OF UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
The publications of the United States Geological Survey consist of (1) Annual Reports; (2) Monographs; (3) Professional Papers; (4) Bulletins; (5) Mineral Resources; (6) Water-Supply and Irrigation Papers; (7) Topographic Atlas of United States, folios and separate sheets thereof; (8) Geologic Atlas of United States, folios thereof. The classes numbered 2, 7, and 8 are sold at cost of publication; the others are distributed free. A circular giving complete lists may be had on application.
The Bulletins, Professional Papers, and Water-Supply Papers treat of a variety of subjects, and the total number issued is large. They have therefore been classified into the following series: A, Economic geology; B, Descriptive geology; C, Systematic geology and paleontology; D, Petrography and mineralogy; E, Chemistry and physics; F, Geography; G, Miscellaneous; H, Forestry; I, Irrigation; J, Water storage; K, Pumping water; L, Quality of water; M, General hydrographic investigations; N, Water power; O, Underground waters; P, Hydrographic progress reports. The following Water-Supply Papers are out of stock, and can no longer be supplied: Nos. 1-14, 19, 20, 22, 29-33, 46, 57-64. Complete lists of series I to P follow. (WS=Water-Supply Paper; B=Bulletin; PP=Professional Paper.)
SERIES I—IRRIGATION.
WS 2. Irrigation near Phoenix, Ariz., by A. P. Davis. 1897. 98 pp., 31 pls. and maps.
WS 5. Irrigation practice on the Great Plains, by E. B. Cowgill. 1897. 39 pp., 11 pls.
WS 9. Irrigation near Greeley, Colo., by David Boyd. 1897. 90 pp., 21 pls.
WS 10. Irrigation in Mesilla Valley, New Mexico, by F. C. Barker. 1898. 51 pp., 11 pls.
WS 13. Irrigation systems in Texas, by W. F. Hutson. 1898. 68 pp., 10 pls.
WS 17. Irrigation near Bakersfield, Cal., by C. E. Grunsky. 1898. 96 pp., 16 pls.
WS 18. Irrigation near Fresno, Cal., by C. E. Grunsky. 1898. 94 pp., 14 pls.
WS 19. Irrigation near Merced, Cal., by C. E. Grunsky. 1899. 59 pp., 11 pls.
WS 23. Water-right problems of Bighorn Mountains, by Elwood Mead. 1899. 62 pp., 7 pls.
WS 32. Water resources of Porto Rico, by H. M. Wilson. 1899. 48 pp., 17 pls. and maps.
WS 43. Conveyance of water in irrigation canals, flumes, and pipes, by Samuel Fortier. 1901. 86 pp., 15 pls.
WS 70. Geology and water resources of the Patrick and Goshen Hole quadrangles, Wyoming, by G. I. Adams. 1902. 50 pp., 11 pls.
WS 71. Irrigation systems of Texas, by T. U. Taylor. 1902. 137 pp., 9 pls.
WS 74. Water resources of the State of Colorado, by A. L. Fellows. 1902. 151 pp., 14 pls.
WS 87. Irrigation in India (second edition), by H. M. Wilson. 1903. 238 pp., 27 pls.
The following papers also relate especially to irrigation: Irrigation in India, by H. M. Wilson, in Twelfth Annual, Pt. II; two papers on irrigation engineering, by H. M. Wilson, in Thirteenth Annual, Pt. III.
SERIES J—WATER STORAGE.
WS 33. Storage of water on Gila River, Arizona, by J. B. Lippincott. 1900. 98 pp., 33 pls.
WS 40. The Austin dam, by Thomas U. Taylor. 1900. 51 pp., 16 pls.
WS 45. Water storage on Cache Creek, California, by A. E. Chandler. 1901. 48 pp., 10 pls.
WS 46. Physical characteristics of Kern River, California, by F. H. Olmsted, and Reconnaissance of Yuba River, California, by Marsden Manson. 1901. 57 pp., 8 pls.
WS 58. Storage of water on Kings River, California, by J. B. Lippincott. 1902. 100 pp., 32 pls.
WS 68. Water storage in Truckee Basin, California-Nevada, by L. H. Taylor. 1902. 90 pp., 8 pls.
WS 73. Water storage on Salt River, Arizona, by A. P. Davis. 1902. 54 pp., 25 pls.
WS 86. Storage reservoirs of Stony Creek, California, by Burt Cole. 1903. 62 pp., 16 pls.
WS 89. Water resources of Salinas Valley, California, by Homer Hamlin. 1903.—pp., 12 pls.
The following paper also should be noted under this heading: Reservoirs for irrigation, by J. D. Schuyler, in Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV.
SERIES K—PUMPING WATER.
WS 1. Pumping water for irrigation, by Herbert M. Wilson. 1896. 57 pp., 9 pls.
WS 8. Windmills for irrigation, by E. C. Murphy. 1897. 49 pp., 8 pls.
WS 14. Tests of pumps and water lifts used in irrigation, by O. P. Hood. 1898. 91 pp., 1 pl.
WS 20. Experiments with windmills, by T. O. Perry. 1899. 97 pp., 12 pls.
WS 29. Wells and windmills in Nebraska, by E. H. Barbour. 1899. 85 pp., 27 pls.
WS 41. The windmill; its efficiency and economic use, Pt. I, by E. C. Murphy. 1901. 72 pp., 14 pls.
WS 42. The windmill, Pt. II (continuation of No. 41). 1901. 73-147 pp., 15-16 pls.
WS 91. Natural features and economic development of Sandusky, Maumee, Muskingum, and Miami drainage areas in Ohio, by B. H. Flynn and M. S. Flynn. 1904.—pp.
SERIES L—QUALITY OF WATER.
WS 3. Sewage irrigation, by G. W. Rafter. 1897. 100 pp., 4 pls.
WS 22. Sewage irrigation, Pt. II, by G. W. Rafter. 1899. 100 pp., 7 pls.
WS 72. Sewage pollution near New York City, by M. O. Leighton. 1902. 75 pp., 8 pls.
WS 76. Flow of rivers near New York City, by H. A. Pressey. 1903. 108 pp., 13 pls.
WS 79. Normal and polluted waters in northeastern United States, by M. O. Leighton. 1903. 192 pp., 15 pls.
SERIES M—GENERAL HYDROGRAPHIC INVESTIGATIONS.
WS 56. Methods of stream measurement. 1901. 51 pp., 12 pls.
WS 64. Accuracy of stream measurements, by E. C. Murphy. 1902. 99 pp., 4 pls.
WS 76. Observations on the flow of rivers in the vicinity of New York City, by H. A. Pressey. 1902. 108 pp., 13 pls.
WS 80. The relation of rainfall to run-off, by G. W. Rafter. 1903. 104 pp.
WS 81. California hydrography, by J. B. Lippincott. 1903. 488 pp., 1 pl.
WS 88. The Passaic flood of 1902, by G. B. Hollister and M. O. Leighton. 1903. 56 pp., 15 pls.
WS 91. Natural features and economic development of the Sandusky, Maumee, Muskingum, and Miami drainage areas in Ohio, by B. H. Flynn and M. S. Flynn. 1904.—pp.
WS 92. The Passaic flood of 1903, by M. O. Leighton. 1904.—pp., 7 pls.
SERIES N—WATER POWER.
WS 24. Water resources of State of New York, Pt. I, by G. W. Rafter. 1899. 92 pp., 13 pls.
WS 25. Water resources of State of New York, Pt. II, by G. W. Rafter. 1899. 100-200 pp., 12 pls.
WS 44. Profiles of rivers, by Henry Gannett. 1901. 100 pp., 11 pls.
WS 62. Hydrography of the Southern Appalachian Mountain region, Pt. I, by H. A. Pressey. 1902. 95 pp., 25 pls.
WS 63. Hydrography of the Southern Appalachian Mountain region, Pt. II, by H. A. Pressey. 1902. 96-190 pp., 26-44 pls.
WS 69. Water powers of the State of Maine, by H. A. Pressey. 1902. 124 pp., 14 pls.
SERIES O—UNDERGROUND WATERS.
WS 4. A reconnaissance in southeastern Washington, by I. C. Russell. 1897. 96 pp., 7 pls.
WS 6. Underground waters of southwestern Kansas, by Erasmus Haworth. 1897. 65 pp., 12 pls.
WS 7. Seepage waters of northern Utah, by Samuel Fortier. 1897. 50 pp., 3 pls.
WS 12. Underground waters of southeastern Nebraska, by N. H. Darton. 1898. 56 pp., 21 pls.
WS 21. Wells of northern Indiana, by Frank Leverett. 1899. 82 pp., 2 pls.
WS 26. Wells of southern Indiana (continuation of No. 21), by Frank Leverett. 1899. 64 pp.
WS 30. Water resources of the lower peninsula of Michigan, by A. C. Lane. 1899. 97 pp., 7 pls.
WS 31. Lower Michigan mineral waters, by A. C. Lane. 1899. 97 pp., 4 pls.
WS 34. Geology and water resources of a portion of southeastern South Dakota, by J. E. Todd. 1900. 34 pp., 19 pls.
WS 53. Geology and water resources of Nez Perces County, Idaho, Pt. I, by I. C. Russell. 1901. 86 pp., 10 pls.
WS 54. Geology and water resources of Nez Perces County, Idaho, Pt. II, by I. C. Russell. 1901. 87-141 pp.
WS 55. Geology and water resources of a portion of Yakima County, Wash., by G. O. Smith. 1901. 68 pp., 7 pls.
WS 57. Preliminary list of deep borings in the United States, Pt. I, by N. H. Darton. 1902. 60 pp.
WS 59. Development and application of water in southern California, Pt. I, by J. B. Lippincott. 1902. 95 pp., 11 pls.
WS 60. Development and application of water in southern California, Pt. II, by J. B. Lippincott. 1902. 96-140 pp.
WS 61. Preliminary list of deep borings in the United States, Pt. II, by N. H. Darton. 1902. 67 pp.
WS 67. The motions of underground waters, by C. S. Slichter. 1902. 106 pp., 8 pls.
B 199. Geology and water resources of the Snake River Plains of Idaho, by I. C. Russell. 1902. 192 pp., 25 pls.
WS 77. Water resources of Molokai, Hawaiian Islands, by Waldemar Lindgren. 1903. 62 pp., 4 pls.
WS 78. Preliminary report on artesian basins in southwestern Idaho and southeastern Oregon, by I. C. Russell. 1903. 52 pp., 2 pls.
PP 17. Preliminary report on the geology and water resources of Nebraska west of the one hundred and third meridian, by N. H. Darton. 1903. 69 pp., 43 pls.
WS 90. Geology and water resources of a part of the lower James River Valley, South Dakota, by J. E. Todd and C. M. Hall. 1904.—pp., 23 pls.
The following papers also relate to this subject: Underground waters of Arkansas Valley in eastern Colorado, by G. K. Gilbert, in Seventeenth Annual, Pt. II; Preliminary report on artesian waters of a portion of the Dakotas, by N. H. Darton, in Seventeenth Annual, Pt. II; Water resources of Illinois, by Frank Leverett, in Seventeenth Annual, Pt. II; Water resources of Indiana and Ohio, by Frank Leverett, in Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV; New developments in well boring and irrigation in eastern South Dakota, by N. H. Darton, in Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV; Rock waters of Ohio, by Edward Orton, in Nineteenth Annual, Pt. IV; Artesian well prospects in Atlantic Coastal Plain region, by N. H. Darton, Bulletin No. 138.
SERIES P—HYDROGRAPHIC PROGRESS REPORTS.
Progress reports may be found in the following publications: For 1888-89, Tenth Annual, Pt. II; for 1889-90, Eleventh Annual, Pt. II; for 1890-91, Twelfth Annual, Pt. II; for 1891-92, Thirteenth Annual, Pt. III; for 1893-94, Bulletin No. 131; for 1895, Bulletin No. 140; for 1896, Eighteenth Annual, Pt. IV, WS 11; for 1897, Nineteenth Annual, Pt. IV, WS 15, 16; for 1898, Twentieth Annual, Pt. IV, WS 27, 28; for 1899, Twenty-first Annual, Pt. IV, WS 35-39; for 1900, Twenty-second Annual, Pt. IV, WS 47-52; for 1901, WS 65, 66, 76; for 1902, WS 82-85.
Correspondence should be addressed to
THE DIRECTOR, UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, WASHINGTON, D. C.
THE END |
|
