RETURN - water.ca.govwater.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/cvfmp/docs/dd-dvd/House-Document-2.pdf ·...

- .

7 8 ~ ~ CONGRESS COMMITTEE ON FLOOD CONTROL COMMITTEE I .. . I d Session } HOUSE or REPRESENTAT~VES .. . { D o n a ~ ~ ~ - N a l . . >qi

; . .q .: , ' I .. ., i i f

RETURN TO E. A. BRULE,

Chief Administrative Assistant

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

R E P O R T

OF

THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS WITH ACCOMPANYING PAPERS AND ILLUSTRATIONS, ON A PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION AND SURVEY OF SAN JOAQUIN RIVER' AND ITS TRIBUTARIES-MOKE- LUMNE, STANISLAUS, TUOLUMNE, MERCED, CHOW- CHILLA, AND FRESNO RIVERS, CALIF.. AUTHORIZED

#' -

2 . - -~ . . . . - W - g r A r n - - -. L- ; GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHMQTON : 1944

IV. Irrigation, reclamation and power data-Continued. Existing development. Future development. Value. Marketability. List of plates:

IV-1. Mean monthly precipitation and mean monthly temperatures-San Joaquin River area.

IV-2. Schematic diagram of water use in San Joaquin River area. IV-3. Principal generating plants and transmission lines. IV-4. Service areas of California power systems. IV-5. Past and predicted electric power plant capacities and

Dower consumntion in norther11 California. List of maps:'

IV-A to IV-C. Irrigation, reclamation and ground water data. IV-D. Power development.

V. Plan of improvement: I. Selection of plan.

11. Reservoir operation. 111. Geology of dam sites. IV. State water plan and Central Valley project. '

List of plates: V-1. Comparative cost-Merced River storage. V-2. Comparative cost-Tuolumne River storage. V-3. Comparative cost-Stanislaus River storage. V-4. Jacksonville Reservoir-Area and capacitv curve. V-5. New klelones Reservoir-Area and cnpacity curve. V-6. Jacksonville and New hlelones Reservoirs-Economio

comparison-Reservoirs of various sizes with revetment, channel enlargement, and levees.

V-7. San Joaquin River-Friant Reservoir-Snow-melt run-off- release curves.

V-8. Tuolumne River-Jacksonville and Don Pedro Reservoirs -Snow-melt run-off-release curves.

V-9. Stanislaus River--New Melones Reservoir-Snow-melt run-off-release curves.

V-10 to V-13. Reservoir operation and San Joaquin River discharges. flood seasons 1905-06, 1906-07, 1910- 11. 1937-38. . - - - -

V-14 to V-24. ~ e i e r v o i r operation studies-1896 to 1938. V-25. Jacksonville dam site foundation data. V-26. New hlelones dam site foundation data.

VI. Benefits from improvement.. Flood-control henefits. Collateral benefit,s. List of plates:

VI-1. Discharge-loss relations-Reachea I to V. VI-2. Discharge and stage-loss relations-Reaches VI to X. VI-3. Tuolumne River-Proposed Jacksonville Reservoir irrigation

data. -

VI-4. Stanislaus River-Proposed New Melones Reservoir irrigation data.

VI-5. Tuolumne River-Power production of present Don Pedro and La Grange plants.

VI-6. Stanielaus River-Power production of present Melones plant. VI-7. Stanisla~ls River-Proposed plan of improvement, comparissn

of ~o ten t ia l Dower available. and Dower obtainable with preient

VII. Cost of improvement: I. First cost.

Revetment, channel enlargement, and levees. Flowage areas.

11. Maintenance and operation. 111. Local contributions.

r-? 'e*. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES,

CALIFORNIA

WAR DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS,

T.Vashington, February 9, 19.44. Subject: San Joaquin River and its tributaries-Mokelumne, Stanis-

laus, Tuolumne, Alerced, Chowchilla, and Fresno Rivers, Calif. To: The Secretary of War.

1. I submit for transmission to Congressmy report with accompanying papers and illustrations on prelimlnn esamination and surve of 7 4 S n ~ i Jonquin River ant1 tributaries, esc usive of strcnms in Tu are Bnsin, made under authority of the Flood Control Act npproved June 22, 1936, which provitlcs for nn esamination of the "Sacramento and San Jonquin Rivcr Vnllcys, California," nnd of "San Jonquin River from Hcrndon to Antiocli and its main east-side tributaries." Under the first-named nutliorizntion separate feports are being made on other areas in thr Sacramento and Snn Jonquin Valleys.

2. Tlle area covered by this rrport comprises the San Joaquin River and its wateished north of Icings River and other streams tributnr to Tulare Lalte Bnsin, which together constitute the south 9 lialf of t lc Snn Jonquin \'alley, and ~vhich, escept during major floods, contribute no run-ofi to thr San Joaquin River. Streams in the latter arca, Littlcjohn Crcck and Calaverns River stream groups, and minor tl.ibutarirs in hlercecl Coullty, are reported upon separately. The San Jonquin Rivcr l~ns its sources in thc Sicrra Ncvndn, flo\its generally soutliwcst tllrough the mountnins nnd foothills to the vicinity of Friant ~vhcre it.cnte1.s thc flat alluvial valley through \vhich i t floas west 60 miles to hlcndota mid\vsy of the valley floor. At hientlota tlie river turns northwest nnd flows 157 miles to Pl'lossclnle a t the head of the San Joaquin delta, an estcnsive nrea of reclaimed tidal swnmp- lands througll which the river flows with numerous side clmnnels and sloughs to join the Sacramento River at the head of Suisun Bay near Antloch. The river drains an area of 17,000 square miles, esclusire of the Tularc Lalie Basin drainage arca. llerccd, Tuolumne, Stanls- laus, and XIokelumne Rivers, principal tributaries of tlie Snn Jonquin Rivcr, likcwise have their sources in the Sierra Nevada, flow in a gcnernlly wcstrrly direction through the mountains and foothills to cnter tlie alluvial valley nnd join the main river from the east In its lower reaclies. Principal activities in the San Joaquin Valley include raising, processing, nnd distribution of agricultural products. Stock- ton, a t the liead of the delta, and Fresno, just south of the San Joaquin

d watershed, are the principnl comnlercial and distributing centers serving the nrca under consideration. The lower San J o ~ ~ q u i n River is under improvement for navigation, the existing projects providing for a 30-foot sliip channel to Stoclcton and various minor irnprove- ments for the bcnefits of light-draft navigation in the delta channels.

1

3. Agricultural development in tllc Snn Joaquin Valley is largely dependent on tlie run-off from meltinv snows for its irrigation water supply as precipitation on tllc vnllep floor will not support growtli of most faim crops. Of thc 5,000 sqllare miles comprising tlie San Joaquin Valley north of ICinpp Rivcr, some 805,000 acres nre farmed, under irrign tion. Extensive irrjgnt.ion worlis, inclucling inaign tion storage reservoif-s with an aggregate cnpncit.~ of 800,000 acre-feet and an elaborate system of canals, supply botli gravity and pumped water t o these lands. Coincident tvit'l~ tlie development of the aren for irrigation, inclividunl Ianclowlers built levees and otlier works for the protection of tlieir properties, but tlic improvements were uncoordi- nnt,etl and in geiic!ral are inefrcctire against 1n.rge floods. Also a - measure of floocl protection is provider1 by irrigation calla1 banks construct,ed on high ground adjncent to tile rivcr wl~icli serve the dual purpose of cnnnl banlis and river levees. 111 the Snn Joaquin delta . nn area of so111c 279,000 ncres out of n total arca of 500,000 ncrcs lins becn rcclaimetl by the construction of levecs wliicl~ protect the lands again~t. tidnl overflow and ngninst nll but t.lle ln,lgcst floods on tlie Son Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers. Hytlroclectric plants on the upper San .Joncjuin River and its mnjor tributaries linve n co~nbinecl instnllccl capacity of npproximntcly 800,000 kilowatts. Rcgtilnt.ion for these plnnts is prvvided by reservoirs with un aggregate cupncity of 1,800,000 acre-feet., of H-hicli 1,250,000 ac1.e-feet is uscd also for regulation of st,rcam flow to provide irrigation and domestic water supplies.

4. Floods wllich arc comparntivcly frrqucnt on the Snn Joaquin River and its tributnri.es are of two types, tliose that occur during the winter as n resillt of intense rainfall and tllosc wliicIi come in tlie late spring ns n result of liielting snows in tile mountain areas. Since 1900 tl~ere have been 38 floods of damaging magnitude on tlic xiinjor streams of the Snn Jonquin River group, 15 of wliicli resulted primarily fivm rains wliile the remaining 23 were caused by melting snows. The area subject to inundntion in thc San Joaqlliri Vnllcy above tlie hcad of the delta is approxiniately 390,000 ncrcs, of wllicli 160,000 acres are partinlly protected by levecs. In the delta 279,000 acres have been protected by levees against ordinary floods on the Sail Joaquin and Sncrnnieuto Rivers, but due to tlic liniitcd lieiglit to which levees can. be built these lands may bc illuntlated by major

' floods on tlie 2 rivers. Bnsecl upon dnmnge ddatn collrctetl following the recent floods of tllc 1937-38 season wllen 3 rain floods nnd 1 snow flood occurred causing direct damages of $5,000,000, and upon available information as to past flootls nnd to conditions in the area subject t9 mundation, it is estimated tllat direct flood dninages along the San Joaquin Valley and tlie San Jon uin delta arca will average $1,425,000 annunlly. Local interests, 3 nrgclv due to the large ant1 d~maging floods t'hat have occiu-red in recent years, desire t.llat effective means 1)e tnken to control floods in the San Joaquin Valley by means of reservoirs and other appropriate means.

5. The plan found most suitable b tlie district engineer for providing flood protection in the San. f oaquin Valley provides for the construction of storage reservoirs a t the Jacksonville site on the . Tuolumne River and a t the New Melones site on the Stanislaus River, and their operation in the combined interests of flood control, irrigation, and downstream power development; for tlie purchase of flowage easements over certain of the overflow areas dong the San

Joaquin River not now extensively developed, to be used as natural detention basins; and for channel-improvement works and levee construction and reconstruction along the lower river. The plan also contemplates that Frinnt Reservoir, now under construction

h a s an elcment of the Central Valley project, w-ill be so operated as to -afford the maximum degree of flood control compatible with its

primary use for irrigation. Jtlcksonville Reservoir would be constructed with a gross storage capacity of 317,000 acre-feet, all of which would be used jointly for flood control and water conservation. New Melones Reservoir woulcl be constructed with a gross storage capacity of 450,000 acre-feet,, of which 110,000 acre-feet would be allocated to compensate for irrigation and power storage a t the existing Melones Reservoir which will be submerged by the proposed project. The remaining 340,000 acre-feet of storage will be used jointly for flood control and water conservation. The plan of reservoir operation contempla.tes entering the rainy season on December 1 with sufficient space in the reservoirs for the control of winter floods. This space would be kept available for winter flood control until April 1, by which time snow surveys of the mountain are- are available. If run-off of flood proportions is predicted the reservoirs would be drawn down to provide storage space for control of late spring flood run-off. After danger of floods has passed the reservoirs would be filled gradually to provide wat'er .for irrigation use. Pro- visions are made in the plans for the New Melones Reservoir for

. delivering water to tlic existing Melones pressure tunnel for the development of power a t cxisting plants. Development of power a t the Jncltsonville Reservoir is not contemplated a t present, but provisions are made for a possible futuro power installation. The costs of the proposed improvements as estimated by the district engineer are as follows: Jacksorlvillc Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8,676,000 S e w RIelones Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - 6, 155,000 Flo\rage easc~nellts- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800,000 Channel ilnprovernents and levees- _ - _ _ - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,969,000

T o t n l - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18,600,000 Annual charges, including $124,000 for maintenance and operation,

would be $1,014,000. The proposed improvements would largely eliminate flood losses, would conserve an estimated average of 77,000 acre-feet annually of water now lost to irrigation use, and would benefit existing downstream power plants. The district engineer estimates the average annual benefits that would accrue from construction of the project as follows:

$958,000 Value of water conserved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107,600 Benefits to esisting power plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 517,400

Total average annual benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,583,000

I-

I n addition, operation of Friant Reservoir as proposed would prevent additional flood losses estimnted to average $240,000 annunlly.

.dThe district engineer finds that the latter benefits would justify a charge to flood control of $3,500,000 of the first cost of Frinnt Re- servoir.

9713-2

6 SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

has commented on the above-mentioned reports in n summary report dated Allgust 1943, presented to the Flood Control Committee of t.ho House of Represcntatives. In that report the Bureau states that tho revetments, channel enlargements, levees, nnd ensemcnt,~ along the lower reaches of the San Joaquin Rirer are desirable improvements for flood protection; that for the purpose of fully conse~ving the run-off .- of the Tuolumne River for irrigation, municipal, and power uses the J.icksonville Reservoir sliould be built to a cn.pncity of 416,000 acre- feet; and that the New hlelones Dnm should be constructed to a height sufficient to provide a total capncity of 1,100,000 acre-feet in order to conserve all possible water for irrigation, municipnl, and power use. If immediate construction should be lim.itec1 to a capacity of 317,000 acre-feet for the Jaclrsonvillc Reservoir and 450,000 acre-feet for t,he New hlelones Reservoir the Rurenu is of the opinion that the dams should be constructed in sucli n mannor that they can be enlarged

- - - a t &future date. I n a communication to the chairman of the Flood Control'Committee dated August 17, 1943, the Bureau further staled that-any authorization of the proposed flood-control reservoirs should provide that before construction is st,artcd tlie stored cnpacity required for all purposes and the allocation of this capncity to the different uses shollld be determined cooperatively by engineers of the War Department and the nurenu of Reclamation; that after completion the flood-control r~sen-oirs should be operated and maintained by the Federal agency responsible for the operation antl mnintenance of the Central Vslley project; and t;hat irrigation, power, and municipal water supply charges should be determined in nccordance with existing reclamation laws by 'engineers of t.he Burenu of Reclamation in cooperation with those of the Wnr Department.

12. Construction of the New hlelon~s Reservoir to provide a capacity of 1,100,000 acre-feet, as prnposed by the Burenu of Reclamation, ~ o u l d involve an incrcnsed initial expenditure wliicli further development of the nrea niay warrant in the iaterest both of a higher degree of protection and for the development of more consen.ation storage than would be provided by the smaller reservoir of the district en- ginecr's plan. The New Melones Reservoir therefore should be constructed in such a manner that it, can be raised in the future to provide the cnpacity proposed by the Bureau.

13. I n nccordance with the policy indicated by existing legislation the cost of the New Melones Reservoir sliould bc borne jolntly by the United States and the wnter use~s, the United States benring the cost for flood protection and power development and the water users the cost for irrigation. I n that the exact rranner and use of the capacity which would be provided for irrigation purposes will be influenced by future developments in the area and must talic cognizance of compli- cated water rights governed by State law- and the dcsires of local interests owning such rights it nppeals impracticable at this time to evnlu- ate the conservation storage or determine n proper division of the costs between flood control, power, and irrigation. Continuing studies by the Bureau of Reclamation, this Department, and the local organizations will establish the best plan of operation and appropriate cost allocation. Under these conditions it is considered appropriate that '-

provision be made for the construction of tlle reservoir with Federal funds, and that after completion and when use of the stored water is made, conservation interests be required to pay the United States for the beneficial use of the new conservation capacity, either in lump sum

S A N JOAQUIN RIVER A N D TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 7 or annual instnlln~ents. Payments for power benefits should be determined in nccordance witli the provisiom of the Federal Power Act.

14. I n my opinion the c.onstruction of t#lie New hfelones project and rT Federal participntioii in the projects on the Tuolulnne River will pro-

: vide urgently nccded flood control. Authorit for such construction (w and participn.tio~l sllollld be undel:stood to inc ude autliority to muke i

modifications~of the pltins and stornge nllocations ant1 to make arrnnge- ments for payment by tlic Stnbe or other rcsponsiblc agency to thc United States for the new conservatioll capacity in the New 3,lelones project wlien uscd. Locnl intcrcsts, including tile State engineer, have given their approval to tlic plans proposed herein.

15. I accortlingly rccornmend tlic followirlg improverneiits generally in accordance with tile plnns of t,hc district engineer and my comments herein and witli modilications thereof as in t.11e tliscration of thc Secrc- tary of M'nr ant1 tlie Cliicf of Enginee~s may be advisable:

(a) Construction of New h,lelones Reservoir on St,nnislaus River, Calif., for I?ood control and other purposes, a t nn estimated first cost of $7,810,000 and $30,000 annunlly for lnaintcnnncc and opcrntion;

( b ) That in lieu of thc construction of tlie proposed Jaclcsonville Reservoir an expenditure, to the extent justified by ~~roportionate ben-

. efits for flood control, estimated a t $5,800,000 for the equivalent of 330,000 acre-feet in Jaclisonville Reservoir, be autliorizcd toward the first cost of the proposed uew Dori Pedro Reservoir or other suitable reservoirs in Tuolumne Basin, provided that local interests co~lstruct, maintain, and operate the clams and reservoirs,. allocate storage for flood control nncl agree to operate sucli storngc in a.ccortlancc with rules ant1 rcgulntiolls prcscribcd by the Secretary of War;

(c) Construction of clianllel improvement works alid levee construction antl reconstruction on San Joaquin I-liver and tributary clinnnels, a t an estimated first cost to the Unitcd States of S2,875,000; subject to the condition t,llat the Stnte of California or other responsible local agencies give assul*nllces satisfnctol-y to tlic Secretary of War that they will (1) furnish flowage rights to overflow certain lands along the main San Jonqnin River and all lauds, easements, and rights- of-way necessary for construction of ler-ces; (2) holtl nnd save tlie United States free from damngcs due to the construction works and their subsequent maintenance and operation; antl (3) ~nsintnin ail levees and clianncl improvements after completion in accordance with regulatioris prescribed by tlic Secretary of l\'ar.

E. REPBOLD, dIajor Generul,

- Chief of Engineers.

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, V7ashington, September 8, 1041.

San Joaquin River ant1 tributaries, California.-3lol;elumne, Stmis- -. laus, Tuolumne, Nerced, Cliowchilln, and Fresno Kivels.

Maj. Gen. JULIAN L. SCHLEY, .s/ Chid of Engin.eers, United States Army, Tl,'ar Department,

T4'ashington, D. C. DEAR GENERAL SCHLEY: The commcrlts and conclrisions of this

Cornmissic~~ with respect to the proposed Jaclrsonrille and New Melones Reservcilu, on the Tuolumne n~ id Stal~islnus Rivers. Calif.,

8 SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA I recommended by the district engineer a t Sacmmcnto, Calif,, the division engineer a t San Francisco, Calif., and the Board of Engineers - for Rivers and Harbors, for const,ruction by the United States, are submitted in response to your letter of Janua.ry 27, 1041, transmitting a copy of the reports by the district and division engineers and by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. .-

If the recommendations of the Bonrd of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors should be adopted:

1. Concrete dams wor~ld he constructed at the Jackso~lville site on the Tuolllrnne '

River, immediately above the Don Pedro Reservoir of the Turlock and Modesto irrigation districts, and on tho Stanislaus River just. below ant1 sul>mereinp t.he present Melones Dam, to provide flood protection. and t,o provide water cu~~se-va- tion in the interest of irrigation and of power generation a t existing hydroelectric power plants.

2. As part of the flood-protection project, channel improvements woulcl be mado, levees constructed. and floware easements along the San Joaquin River would be - - - acquired.

3. The proposed Jacksonville Dam would he provided with a 16-foot diameter penstock for the future development of hydroelectric power at the dama; the proposed New hl~lones Reservoir wo111d be connected by tllnnel to thc existing hlclones plant of the Pacific Gas & Electric Co., with provision for the future installatisn of additional genernting capacity.

4. The cost to the Federal Government for these improvements would be about $20,000,000; to local interests for irrigation Lwnefits, $1,435,000. .

The Board finds that Friant Dam, now under construction on tlie San Joaquin River by the Bmeau of Reclamation, is an essential element in any plan for flood control in the St111 Joaquin Basin, and that its value chargeable to flood control, is $3,500,000.

The State of Clnifomia has developed a State water plan for the i

conservation, development, and utilization of the water resources of tlie State. The plan envisages.the ultimate total utilization of the water resources in conjunction with the Inncl, to produce tlie maximum in public benefits. The Sail Joaquin River and its tributaries, and the basin of tlie Sacramento River, together constituting tlie Great Central Valley, arc included in tliis general plan. This plan would provide for, ultimately, about 1,000,000 acre-feet of storage capacity on both the Tuolumne ancl Stanislaus Rivers, to be obtnined by single reservoirs, each of this capacity, a t tlic Doc Pedro ancl Melones sites.

Under tlie plan recomme~ldetl by the Board the esisting Don Pedro Dam and Reservoir would be preserved and the stornge in the Don Pedro and Jacksonville Reservoirs together would total 608,000 acre- feet; the storage in tlie New hielones Reservoir would be 450,000 acre-feet. While these storages are less tllan those contemplated in the dtimate State plan, they \\rolild effect a large dcgree of control of the Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers. From n rcvicw of the reports of your Depnrtment. and from studies by the Commission's staff, i t appcnrs tlint these reservoirs wonld meet economically the requirements for flood control and all needs for irrigation tlint can be fore- seen for tlie near future. I t also appenrs that, when the need ultimately develops for the still greater control of tlic run-off in these streams, envisaged in the State water plan, the proposed Jacksonville and New Melones Reservoils will not prevent the accomplisl~ment 1 of the objectives of the plan. In this connection it is suggcsted that, when these projects reach a definite project stage, consicleration be given to so designing the dams that, if desired, they may later be raised or become parts of larger structures.

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 9

The stutlies which the Commission has caused its staff to make sliow tliat tlie proposed reservoirs linve apprccinble potential power values, and that variations from tlie'pla~i of the district engineer for the operation of tl~eir storage wo~~lt l result in greater power benefits

.-t.ha.il a.rc indicated ill the report. iVlien tlie projects reach tlie detail L d e ~ i ~ l s t q e , this matter will be rliscussed wiili your Department

rultl definite rccommcntlutions with respect to penstoclts and power facilities, ns wcll as tlic operation of t,he reservoirs, will be made.

Consitleration llr~s also l~een given to tlie dcsirnbility of including power installatio~ls at each project coincident. \\-it11 its initial construction. Tile Co~nmission observes that while the energy that could bc gcncmtcd a t tlic!se projccts \voultl be useful in the national defense program if available in the very near futurc, ot.hcr measures wliich nre being taltcn to meet t,lie emergency power ncetls niay warrant a dclap in tlie instnllatiori of power facilities if t,licsa projects are undertaken in t'lie post-emergcncy period.

Tlic Comniission co~~clutles, from the reports of your Departnient and stutlirs by its own staff, thnt the Jn.cksonvillc ancl New Mclones Dams and Rcscrvoirs, if constructcd substantinlly as recommended by t l ~ c I3oarcl of Engineers for Rivers and Harhols, would conform to a comprcllensive plan for the tlevelopmerit of the rcsourccs of the Tuolumne and St'anislnus Rivers; that their construction is desirable ant1 justified in the public interest; and that tllese projects merit nuthorization by the Congress.

Sincerely, LELAND OLDS, Chairman. -

lSecond endorsement]

THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS, TVashin.gton, D. C., December 2, 1940.

T o the CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY: I . The Board concurs in general in the views of the district and

division engineers. There is a need that measures be taken to control floods on the San Joaquin River and that strenm flow be regulated in the interests of irrigation. The proposed Jacksonville ant1 New Melones Reservoiis, with gross storage capacities of 317,000 and. 450,000 acre-feet, respectively, supplemented by local clinnnel improvement works and levees and the effect of Friant lieservoir, now under construction, would largely meet these needs. The regulation of strenm flow to be effected by the two proposed reservoirs also would be of value to existing downstream power developments. Section 10 (f) of the Federal Power Act provides that the Fetleral Power Commission sliall fix a rensonable and equitable annual cllnrge to be paid to tho United States for such benefits.

2. Benefits that would result from construction. of the proposed improvements exceed tlie annual charges by a substantial amount

,- and in the opinion of the Board the project is fully justified. The \- benefits of stream flow regulation to water users, including the value

of the increase in yield of irrigation water supply and the benefits of adjusting strenm flow to meet the seasonal demands of irrigation, would in the opinion of the Board have an average economic value estimated a t $215,000 annually. These benefits represent 13.75 percent of the total nnnunl benefits estimated to accrue from construction

On

em

m

kjY

@

YIE

: 2-

0 W

P s.

' E

FS

3 4

2

- 0 ,=

"z

-

y-w P e

0

c ".

t;'

3 c 0,

ac

tog

0 ij.-!,

if;?,, PK

l O

g 093

es

s

z- a-.

3

am

0 4

m

K

lEK

G.-

Q a z-

rn 3

'g z=

m a

%Z

z


examination, wliicl~ wns made in coopcration with the Bureau of Reclamation, gave particular attention to the economic justification of including nn increment of flood-control storage in Frinnt Rescrvoil., now under construction by that Buretzu. A complete survey of the flood problems of the San Joaquin Vnlley wns reconmendcd. In the case of streams in Mndera County and the Mokelumrle River nrca, - recommendation for further consideration wns limited primarily to their effect upon Snn Joaquin River. The preliminary examination report was reviewed by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. The Chief of Engineers nuthorizecl a survey of the Madcra County' group and Mokclumne River on July 13, 1938, and of the San Joaquin River group on August 19, 1938. Because the survey of Maclert~ County streams nncl Mokelumne River wns limited primaril to their i effect on San Joaquin River, their survey is included with t le survcy of San Jonquin River. This survey of Ssn Joaquin River includes the effect of all its trubutaries thereon. The control of floods on Calaverns River and Littlejohn Creek, however, will llnve little effect on Snn Joaquin River nncl is considered in a scparata survey report now under preparation. Surveys of Rings River and Tulare Luke, and the Fresno County group were submitted April 10 and 29, 1939, respectively.

11. GENERAL STATEMENT

3. Ezisting project.-There is no existing War Department project for flood control on any of the streams cov,ered by this report. Exist- ing projects for navigation are discussed in paragraph 34.

4. Maps.-Published maps of the area are United States Geo- logical Survey quadrangles, scnles 1:31,680; ::li2,500; and 1:125,000. Maps and drawings included with this report are listed below.

1 . General ma . 2. Tuolumne River; Jacksonville Reservoir. 3. Jacksonville Dam; general lay-out. 4. Jacksonville Dam; details. 5. Stanislaus River; New 3Ielones Reservoir. 6. New Rlelones Dam; general lay-out. 7. New Melones Dam; details. 8. Flowage rights; sheet 1. 9. Flowage rights; sheet 2.

10. Revetments, channel enlargement, and levees.

5. Prior TT7ar Department re oh.-In addition to the preliminary T examinations for flood contro mentioned in paragraph 2, the War Depnrtment hns made reports as listed in table 1.

TABLE 1.-Prior lTrar Department ~ood-control reports, San Joaquin River

1 Only enclosures Nos. 1 aud LO aro prlntod.

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER .4XD TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 13

Remarks

Flood control in Ean Joequln Valley was stnted to require further Investigation.

Concluded that Federal particlpa- tion in construction of Friant Dam not warranted on the basis of any cxpected flood-control benoflts.

6. Reports by otho. agencrles and acknowle(lgments.-The San Joaquin Rivcr area l ~ a s bccn reporter1 upon for various purposes by Fcdoral, State, and local agencies. A part.ia1 list of tlioso data, wllich wcrc of

,-, assistance in tllc preparation of this report, is givcn in nppcnclix 1.l - , 1nvcst.igations and surveys lmve been made wit,ll the least duplication w of effort dua to coopcrntion on tlie part of ilumcrous agc!~lcies uld

olganizatioils locatcrl i11 tlic ares. A ptwtial list of the various ugencies supplying such coopc?ration is given in n.ppcndis I.'

7. Scope of report.-The scope of this report., as to spccific problcms of flood control, water consc!rvation, and po1vc.r protluc~.ion, is confincd to dcfinite areas lying within the gcncral aroa covered by the Sali Joaquin Rivcr System, cxtcnding from the Kings Rivcr Basin on the soutll to m~cl including the Mokclumnc Rivcr Basin and the San Joaquin Dcltn on tllc nortli. The hydrologicnl effect of tlic contributions of floodwat.er from all tributnrics to t,he floods of the main river was included. For tho purpose of developing a projcct, flood damage data wcre incluclccl only for tlic srcss floodctl by San Joaquin River below Friant Dam, Rlercc!cl, Tuolumnc, and Stanislaus Rivci-s and tllc delta distrihutaric~s of Sail Jonquin River. 1~looc1 tlamcrge occurs on otllcr strrnm or crc?eli groups lying within tho San Joaquin Rivcr wat,crshcd. Tlzoso arc tlie Mntlcra County stream group, the Mcrccd County stream group, t,he Lit,tlcjohn Crc?cl; group, tllc Calaveras Rivctr group cmd tho &Iolcelumnc Iti-cer group. The Ale1 ced County stroam group, tlic Littlnjolln Creel; group, and tho Calaveras River group will be thc subjects of scparate survey reports. Tlle h,Tadcm County stream group is herein consiclcred only as to the downstream c!ffects of its flooclwatcw. Tlic? Mokt?lumne Rlvc-r group is considcrcd as lo t l i ~ dowiistrcam eflc?cts of it,s fioodwaters and the possibility of coordinating operation of csisting rescrroirs for mora cftkctivo flood-control rcgulrrt.ion. Tllc upstream tlumagc! caused by the two latter groups was found, in tlic! preliminary examination, to be insufficient to justify rcmedial works. Particular attention llas been given to the amount of flood control to be cffectcd by Fricmt Dam, now under construction by t,hc Bureau of Itc!clumation.

8. The hydroelectric power studies of this report are confined to the streams on which improvements are considered. No pourer generation is contemplated a t Friant Dam.

9. Studies pertuinirig to the further conservation of irrigation water are likewise limited to the streams and areas for whicll improvements are considered, and as a part of the multiple purpose use of flood- control reservoirs on Stnnislaus &nd Tuo lum~~e Rivers. . Conservation - use of Friant Reservoir, as planned in the Centrn.1 Valley project, in fully considcred in studies of flood control operat.ion proposed in this report.

111. DESCRIPTION H. Doc. No.

191

191

10. Ge~~etal description.-The area covered by this survey includes the watersheds of San Joaquin, ~Merced, Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and

p r Mokelumne Rivers, together with their tributaries and contiguous i b lands. This area is about 140 miles long and 120 miles wide, embrac-

ing about 17,000 square miles of land lying in Fresno, mad era, Merced, Mariposa, Stanislaus, Alpine, Tuolumne San Joaquin, Calaveras, Contra Costa, Sacramento, Amador, and h l Dorado Counties. I t is

1 Not printed.

D&%tzbb. Dec. 29,1030

May 6,1934

= --- 71

73

. Sublect

Partla1 report on the E m - niento San Joaquin and Kern Kivers, Cnlir. inar- igetion flood control, power,'lrrlgatlon). ...-. do .....-. ....-------.----

Session

3

2

I

bounded on the north by Cosumnes and lower San Joaquin Rivers, on the south by Kings River, and on the east and west by the crests of the Sierra Nevada and Coast Range, respectively. The valley portion of this area, embracing about 5,000 square miles, constitutes the northern half of the San Jonquin Valley separated from the southern half by tlie Kings River Ridge, a low delta barrier projected across " the trough of the valley by Icings River. Tliis ridge forms tile northern confine of Tulare Lnke Basin which, during flood run-off receives tlie drainage waters of the southern hnlf of the Stbn Joaquin Basin, excepting that ortion of Icings River run-off which renches San Joaquin River t lrou h Fresno Slougll. San Joaquin River 7 provides the only outlet to t le sea for the drainage waters of the entire San Joaquin Basin, which, together with the Sacramento Basin, forms the Great Central Valley of California. Tributary streams affecting flood conditions of the main stem of San Jonquin River are listed in the following table which also gives their drainage areas and maximum watershed elevations.

TABLE 2.-Drainage areas and watershed elevations, Sun Joaquin River lributaries

11. San Joaquin River.-San Jonquin River drains a large area on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada in Fresno and 3ladern Counties. This area is bounded on tlie south by the Icings River watershed, and on the north by the Fresno and Upper Merced River Basins. Tlle two principal streams of t,lle upper watershed arc! the Middle a.nd South Forks, bot,h of which rise in glacial lakes near the summit. Below the confluence of these forks a t about elevation 3,600 feet the river flows through a nnrrow, deep, rock-bound canyon until i t debouclles from tlle footl3ls near Friant. . From there i t flows in a westel-ly direction about 60 miles to a point near Mendota, midway on the valle floor. Above this point, tlie river is referred to as the upper San f oaquin. . It then 'turns abruptly to the northwest and meanders about 157 miles to Mossdale a t the head of the San Joaquin Delta. Through the delta area, the river is affected by tides. Prior to reclamat,ion, the delta consisted of swamp and overflow islands separated by a network of slouglls. Extensive development of this fertile region over the pa.st 60 yenrs hns resulted in the reclamation

SAN J O A Q U I N RIVER A N D TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

Maximum elevation of waterslied --

Fed 1 3 . m 13.000 7, OLMI 6.000 3.300 2,500 4.m 1. 5*,

13.O(X) 12. MY) 10.00(1 2, (iUO R.f100

ln, nn &owl 3,MX)

?.000 1. 2W I. i W

B tream

Kings River ...................................... San Joa uiu Rlvcr ................ ~ r e s n o h v e r ..... I:::::::::::::: ................ Chowchilla River ...................................... hlar ipsa Creek ........................................ Owens Creek. ......................................... Bern Creek ............................................ Burns Crrek ........................................... Alerccd River .......................................... Tuolunlne River ....................................... Stnnlslaus Rivrr .................................. 1.ittLJohu Creek group.. .............................. Gala\-cr a!... ........................................... hlokrlomne River ..................................... Cosun~ncs River .................................. Panochc Creek ................................... Los Banos Creek ................................. San Luis and Homem Creek ........................... Orestimba Creek. .....................................

and cultivation of practically a11 of the available land in tlle delta. Dredge cuts from which levee material has been taken add to the maze of channels and interconnecting sloughs. At tlle lower end of the delta near Collinsville, San Joaquin River joins with Sacra- mento River to form Suisun Bay. Channel data for San Joaquin

r' River are given in table 3, and stream profiles are included in appendix I.'

TABLE 3.-Chanml length8 and average rate8 of fall, Sun Joaquin River

I , I

Source

Sierra Nevada ............. .. do .......................

1:::: do ....................... do ....................... do ....................... do ....................... do ....................... do ....................... do ....................... do .......................

.-.--do ....................... do ....................... (lo ....................... do .......................

-....do ....................... Coast Range ................

--.-.do ....................... do ....................... do .......................

Channel

Drainage area abovo valloy floor

S\ltrarr miles 1. W4 1,031

2i0 238 127 37 i 8 15

1,054 1,543 OW 1 ~ 2 . 394 R32 241 291 216 1118 72

12. Merced River.-h~lerced River drains the western slope of the Sierra Nevada in Mariposa and Merced Counties. I t s watershed is bounded on the south by the upper Snn Joaquin River Bmin and on the north by the Tuolumne River Basin. I t s two main brnnches, Merced River and South Fork of Merced River, drain the high mountain areas. At about elevation 4,000 feet Merced River flows through Yosemite Valley, in Yosemite National Park. About 15 miles below the valley tlie main river is joined b the South Fork, whence i t con- tinlles westerly to its junction with an Joaquin River near Newman. B Channel data are given in table 4, and stream profiles are included in appendix I.'

-- Hosdn-awn:

Soulh Fork ................................................ hliddle Fork ...............................................

Main channel: Conflurncp 01 South end hf iddle Forka to Big Creek----. .- Rlg Crwk to Friant ........................................ Frlant to hlendole .........................................

..... ................................ hlendota to hlossdnle l Mossdale to Cullinsville ....................................

I TABLE 4.-Channel lengths and average rates o j fall, Mwced River

Headwaters: I 1 I I

m 36

61 157 54

13. Tzcolumne River.-Tuolumne River drains an area on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada lying in Stanislaus and Tuolumne Counties. Its watelshed is bounded on tohe north by the Stanislaus River Basin and on the south by the Merced River Basin. I t drains its high mount air^ area wit11 four main branches: the main Tuolumne and the North, Middle, and South Forks. The main Tuolumne has its source in glacial lakes and flows 165 miles southwesterly to its

N o t prlnted.

13,000 11,500

% 3 0 ~ 155

(I)

Mermd Rlver to up rend of Yosemite Valley ............ .................................. l h a u f i ~ w r n i t e A l l e y Lower end Yosemite Val ey to eonfluenw with South Fork. 8011th Fork ................................................

Maln channel: Comluenoe of South Fork to Exchequer Dam .............. ..................... Exchequer Dam to Ban Joaquln Rlver

-----

?g 2, 150 m 155

0 (1)

24 10 I7 43

40 63

~. .

188 . TM

70 40 1 I .-----

13,000 4,300 3,900

11,000

1.600 KO

4, a00 3,800 1,600 1,600

600 46

348 40

140 n0

!a 7

,n f? ,tj SAN JOAQUIN RIt'ER A S D TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

junction with San Jonquin River. At. about clcrntioll 1,800 fcct the South Fork with its tributary the Middlc Fork enters thc main stream. Cllnnnel lengths and rates of fttll n.re given in tnblc 5, n.nd stream profiles are incluclecl in appendis I.'

TABLE 5.-Channel lengths and average rates of fall, Tuolumne River .- I I

Channel

Headwaters: North Fork ......------...-------------------.---------- - I 200 hllddle Fork .-....-...-...---------- ------. - -- -- ---- -. South Fork .........--...-- .- -------------------.----------- hfnin T~rolumm to Hetch Hetchy Dam ..--..-,.......----- 170 . . -. . . - - .

Maln channel: lletch Hetchy Dam tomntluenca with South Fork .-...-.- 80 Sauth Fork to North Fork ........-..--..------------------ 40

North Fork to Don Pedro Dam .-....--..---..------------- 35 Don Pedro Dam to Sat1 Joaquin ........................... 6

14. Stunislaus River.-Sta~~islaus River drains a narrow basin on II the western slope of the Sierra Nevada in Tuolumne, Calnveras, and

Stanislaus Counties. I t s watershed is boundcd on t,he south by the Tuolumne River Bnsin and on the north by the Calaveras and uppcr Mokelumne Basins. The main stream is formed by the 'unction of 4 the North and Middle Forks a t elevation 1,300 fect. his flow is further augmented by the South Fork which joins the river a t about elevation 950 feet. Channel lengths and gndients nre given in tnble 6 and stream profiles are included in appendlx I.'

TABLE 6.-Channel lengths and average rates offall , Stanislaus River

Channel

Hesdwaters: North Fork .-.............-------------..------ 40 9.000 1.300 180 hllddle Fork -.-.......-....----------------------------- --- 10. OU) 1. 300 1W buthE'ork ....... 1 .......................-----------.---- I 1 9 . W I 1.

Main channel: Contluei~ce North and Mlddle Forks to South Fork ........ 46 South Fork to Melones Dam ....-.-...-.-.-- ... ------------- 25 hielones Dam to Knights Ferry -..-...-.----. .- ------------. Knights Ferry to San Joaquln .....-......-------.-- 3

15. Other tributaries.-Ot.ller major tribut.nlics to San Jonquin River arc Icings (Fresno Slougl~), Fresno, Cliowchilla, Culevoras, nlld Moke- lumne Rivers. Tlie survey report of liings River recommended tlic construction of Pine Flnt Reservoir as pnrt of a project wliicll would limit the contribution of Kings River to the Snn Joaquin River to 4,750 cubic feet per second. Fresno, Chowchilla, and Calaveras Rivers have very little of their w-atcrslwds above the 5,000-foot level and therefore do not have the sustained snow run-off common to the other major tributaries of San Joaquin River, but do contribute t.0 , the winter rain floods of that stream. =

BAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, L~~LIFOHNIA

10. The minor tPributaries to Snn Joaquin River are footllill and mountain st8renlns whicll tlrnin the rolling lantls of both the Sierra Const Ranges. Tliey arc depc.ntlent upon rains for tllcir flows anc tlry during thc summer montlts escept where Jvnstc or return w

F- from irrigation activities is cliscliarged into than. The areas clrn by thesc strcnnls support scnttercd growtlis of scrub oak, brush, various grasses. Such growths do not substaiitially retard 1.~11-ofT tllcse streams arc. subject to Ynsh flows during winter storms.

17. CZimafe.-The bnsin has two well-defined sensons, winter snmlncr. The climate of the upper mountain area is typicnl of Sierra Ncvndn and is characterized by cold winters with llcnvy s ant1 w-arm dry summers. Temperatures vnry from -20" F. in wii to 90" F. in summer. The winters in thc valley are short and I with frequent rnins wl~ile summers are long and hot wit11 practic no ram. The meail mnsimum, and rnininlum ten~pelnturcs in valley arc 75O nnd 45"F., respectively, with n mcnn nnnunl of 60 Change in rclntire humidity is great, commol~ly vctrying froin I! 90 percent during the. year. The long growing senson nntl other fa1 nble conditions hnve stimulat.ed extensive agricultural developmen

18. Fhysiographic characteristics.-The Sierra Nevada on the (

side of the valley presents a somewllat uniform slope from its c westward to the valley flool.. This westerly slope is broken by a se of ridges forming crests secondary to the main divide. These seco ary ridges are broken down and crosscut by surface drainage and monumcnted by erosion-resisting peaks. Surface features are v diversified. The crests are serrated and rocky with precipitous slol Below elevation 3,000 feet the topography is rollin , interspersed v, rocky knolls and numerous rock outcrops. Tlrc fower footl~ill ar are less undulating and gradually merge into tlie valley plain a t ab the 300-foot contour. Elevations on the valley floor rnnge from be1 sea level in the dclta area to about 300 feet a t the upper end of rallcy. Tnblr 7 gives the distribution of drainage areas by elevatil for San Joaquin River and its major tributaries.

TABLE 7.-Distribution of tnorrntain drainage areas by elevations, Sun Joaquin R and principal tributaries

I

Iilnpr ..--..-.......------..------.-----. 283 U p ~ r Ban Joaquin .....--..-..--.-----.-.------- 182 Fresno .....-...-...--------------..-..--.. 167 Cbowchilla .-.......---------------.---.--...---- 161 hferccd .....-.-.--.-----------..------.- 191 'rilolurnno ..-....-.---.---.----.-.--~--.----.---. 248 Stanislaus ......--..-.----.------..-.-...s------. 223 Calnveras ...-......----------------.----. 301 Alokrlumno .-......----------------.-.--.-----.- 121 Cosumucs ...--..-...-------------------..------- 238

I I I I I tF Doos not Include valley dralnap.

L w 10. The Const Ranee westerly of the valley present.^ a more round,

profile with rolling 11111s which do not possess the rum edness, stet slopes, nor the high elevations common to the Sierra Sevada. Fe peaks esceecl 5,000 feet in elevation.

20. Geology.-The Sierra Nevada is a "block range" consisting essen- tially of a single massive block of tlle earth's crust which has been dislocated and tilted toward the southu~est. I t rises in a bold escarp- ment dong its eastern fault line reaching maximum elevations a few miles from its eastern base. From this crest it falls westerly in a comparatively flat slope to tlle floor of the Great Central Valley. Tho , present range came into being about the dawn of the Quaternary period and wns subjected to minor disturbances throughout f.lle Tertiary period. I t is composed largely of grnnitic rock, .masslye granite batholiths having invndecl tlie folds of older rock wll~ch com-

osed the two ancestral ranges formed during the Paleozoic and the fuassic periods. Subsequent erosion of this older rock covering has exposed the granitic formation over-large areas. Considerable de- posits of slate, lava, quartzite, and limestone representing the roots of the two older ranges are found, along the lower portion of tlie western slo e nnd in a feu- places nenr the crest. 8 21. The an Joaquin Vnlley ori mated as a structural trougll about the time the granites invadcd the 8ierra Nevada. I t has been alterna- tively lifted nnd depressed, receiding erosion from the Sierra in the first instance and sea-laid layers of sllts and sediments in the second. The present surface, laid over these layers of Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments, is of relatively recent origin. I t is composed of a great number of alluvial fans originating in the mouths of the canyons which bring the drainage watcrs from the mountains on either side.

22. During comparatively recent geologic time, the western margin of the Great Central Valley has buckled, broken, and upheaved to form the Coast Range. As a result this range is composed largely of sedimentnry rock. Igneous rock where they esist are scnmcd and friable.

23. Soils and vegetative cover.-The slopes of thc Sierra Nevada are generally tree covered wherever soil has found lodgement. Abovo the 8,000-foot contour, the effects of exposure combined with the preponderance of rock formation are reflected in a scattered mixture of alpine growths. Below this line and extending down to tlle upper foothills, a dense forest cover is afforded by the increased soil depth, heavy precipitation, and favorable temperatures. Residual soils which have withstood erosion form the lands of tho foothill areas. Vegetation consists principally of grasses, brush, and scattered oaks. Lands of the valley floor are highly productive, about onc-half of the entiro valley being classified as clnss 1 lnnd, Thc valley soils are mainly fine alluvium. Lands of the delta nrea are among the best in the State and are capable of continued intensive cultivation. They have been built up by accumulations of vegetation, and silt brought down by the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. These ' soils, commonly referred to as peat land, blanket most of the delta arca with a spon e-like mat varying from 5 to 45 feet in thickness. "1 A detailed land .c assification map is given in appendix I. Tnblc 8 summmnrizes t h ~ s clnssificntion.

SAX JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 19

TABLE 8.-Sumnra~y of land classificalion, San Joaqtrin River area

1 1,snd elassiflcations are explalncd as blloa-s: Clms 1: 'rhm* are Lhr I)est lands. Boil texture, topography, nnd feasibility of irrlgatlon makes posslhlo

good yields of mmlrrntc mst. C l m 2 : Fair lands, dlffcr h n r class 1 b e c a w of presence 01 hardpan, roughness, altall or other dcle-

Class 1

'

1 ............................................... 2 ........................................ 3 .............................................. 4 ............................................... 5. . . - . . . - - . - - - . . . - . ... . . . . . . - - - . . . - - . - - . . . - . . . .

Total ....................................

tcriuus facturs. Clam 3: 'l'hcw lands judged by pregcnt standar(ls, do not fustlly development. However. Improved

melIlc,ds of nlkall r e r ~ ~ o b a ~ or a reduction in land lcvrling a,su may cvcntually lace th im in class ?. Clam 4: '1'hc.w hnds arc t ~ m lmur fur productiun of regular crops and nrr sultahle only for pasture land

where flood irrigatiu~~ Is posihlis. C l m 5: 'I'hcse arc ~~unncricultural lands. Tl~e l r poor quality may be due to alkali, shallow soil, hardpan,

rouplincss, or n conlbinaliun of thew Iaeton. 2 Co~npri$es a~,l~rori~lralclg 65 percent of Sacramento-Sen Joar~uin Delta.

14. Population.-Prior to 1850, settlers in the San Joaquin River nrea u7erc few in number. IT-it11 the construction of n rnilroatl througli thc valley cluril~g the periotl bet\vcen 1869 nncl 1875 the popillation brpnn to inc~.cnse, unrl, aided by fnvornble soil a~lcl climntic conditions combinccl with irrigation possibilities, n stcntly growth lias coiltinucd to the presc.nt. For the 30-year period following 1900, the nrcragc clcccnniul rate of populntion increase in the Sn~i Joaquin Valley urns 57 percent as compnrrcl to 17 percclit for the United Stntcs ns a whole. Tnblc 9 ivrs the popi~lnt~ion by TI counties for Sari Jonquin Rircr Valley n s o tninccl from the Unitcbtl Stntcs cc~~sus nlitl othcr sources. T'lie rnasimum poprllntio~l (inclutling miprntory agricidturnl workers) of nrcns subject to ilootlirlg is abor~t 35,800. Ful.thrr populatioll clnta are given in tnl~les 1 to 4, nppcntlis I.'

\'alley floor lands

-- Acrm 1.nri3.m

K1. YXI 492,iw 2 1 9 . ~ ~ 1 4 3 . m

2,104,WJ

TABLE 9.-Pop~clnlion b y counties-Son Joaquin River Vallev counties

Foothill lands

Ancs 3.400

12, MU) 818, ax) 613, srn

0

9i4900

I rlassl!icntion of Ills lQRO pnpulaLlon Is approximately 15.1 percent foreign-born white, 73.5 parcent natlve whlla. and 11.1 percent other races.

2 E s t i ~ ~ ~ n t e d by Stule or Caliiornin T a r Digest Bulletin. a lncluded in Frwuu County.

25. Income producing activities.-Fnrming nncl related nctivities are the chief sources of income in the area. lnclustrinl activity consists

(L pririncipnlly of processing and distributing of agrirulturnl products.

San Joaquln Delta landsf

A crea 261.000 17. aY) 1,ml

0

27U.W

county

h s n o .........-.-..---- Madpra ........--.-. .... hIcr(~vl ......-...-..-..- S l ~ I I k i a u ~ ..........---- Pan Jon? ...-........ Conlra osta ...........

Total ..-..........

' N u t printed.

Acres 1.33',000

ilk?. 5lNl i51. ilU 8U. 4111 13. $3)

3,ciTXl.OcYJ

1.10 I l m / lf io / 1 l a 0 l m 1

144.3i9 IT. It;( 3G.718 56,611

10",Ul0 i 8 . W

iSGR7 &,W

15.118 22.52? £4, i31 3 , G

204,100

19% 1

155.000 21, 51W) 47.!MX) i0.2cr0

1%). XI0 UG.WU

---- 129.779 12.203 21.579 43,55i i9.UU5 U.&9 -----

343,912

4.m (3)

1.141 2215 U.435

430,430

6.336

J 2.bOi li.1VJ

221.050

37,802 6, 31i4 9.215 0.550

35.45"

9.478 I

5.6513 &.iSL

24.349 18,016

116,489

32.026 (4

&,I335 10.MO Z&,GZg 13.515 S,X2'

22, i54 45.153 60.759 92,205 I S..ltil , l?.SL5

n n L - SAN JUAlJUlN Kl\'YH AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA ' P,

SAN J0.4QVIN RIVER AKD TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 21

A deep-water navigntion cllannel to Stockton makes i t the transportation and distrib~t~ion center of tlie nrea. Agriculture alone pro- duced a gross income of over $135,000,000 in 1938. In 1937, the vnlue of manufnctured products exceeded $477,000,000. TI7ith the exccp- tion of natural gns prodr~ctioll in t$lie Snn Jonquin Delta (vnlued a t about $485,000 in 1937), mineral production is lnrgely confined to the monntain areas and is not seriously nflected by valley floocls. Further income producing data are given in tables 5 antl 6, nppcndix :.I

26. Property oaluation..-The nssessetl \Tnluations of lands ?n tlie nrea under considerntion vary from $2 per acre for mountaln and footl~ills grazing lands to $200 per acre for t l ~ e best orchards nnd vine- yards on the valley floor. Business properties (Innd only) in towns and cities are assessed on a frolit-foot basis ranging from $10 to $2,000 per front foot. Assessed vnlue of residential properties (land only) in and near populntion centers vnries from $300 to $4,000 per acre. Assessed valuntions represent approximntely one-half of nctunl values and are shown in table 10. Further dnta regalding nssessed valua- tions are given in nppenclis I.'

TA~LE 10.-1937-38 assessed valttalio~rs, Son booqltin Rieer Valley nreas

............ Frcsno ....................... $247,321,000 1 Son Jonr~uin Rlrer ..... hladera ...................... 28.436,MIO do ........................ ................. ..... ...................... hiereed.. 53,396,000 do.. Ftnnislnus .................. 62.171.OM ..... do-- ...................... ....................... .... Sun Joaquin ........... .-.-.- ll'J.63(1.000 (lo-- ..... ....................... Contra Costa .............. .. 117.115,000 do.

.................................... Aierwd Mercvrl River ................. .................................. Stanislaus Tuolunlnc Hivrr .............. ..................................... ............. Do Stutlislsus lliver. ..................................... ...................... Son Joa~luin do.. - Total ................ :- G28,3OJ,000 ....................

I I

I These swmd values reprcscnt normnl wndlllons. neductiou of assessed values on flooded lands have not heen eonsldured.

27. T~ansportation jaci1ities.-The Atcliison, Topekn & Snnta Fe, the Southern Pacific, and t<he Western Pacific Rnilroacls adcquntcly serve tlie clevelopecl portions of the nrea with mnin nlid hrnnch lines. The main lines nft'ord rail connections with Los Angcles on the south nnd San Frnncisco nnd Sacramento on tlie nortli. The follou~ing secondary milroads provide ample facilities for local and interurbnn transportation: Y0semit.e Valley, Tidewater & Soutl~crn, San Joaquin & Eastern, Sierrn, and Centml California Trnction.

28. A liigllly developecl liiglm-ay nnd road system nft'ords ensy nccess to all parts of the subject area, there being al~out 10,730 miles of Federal, State, and county higllmnys, ancl about 3,570 miles of national forest, fire protection, toll, and other roads. (See table 10, appendix I.) Ullitecl Stcltes Highway 99 connects ~ i f h Sacrnmento on the north nnd Los Angeles on the south. During the 1937-38 floods, about 90 miles of h i g l ~ ~ a y s and roads wcre flooded. Tlie total mileage subject to flooding is about 571 miles. (Seo table 11, appendix I.)

Not printed.

29. Bridges.-There are 78 bricl es over. the valley reaches of the rivers of the Snn Joaquin group. (gee t,able 12, appendix I.)] Britlges rcquiring modificnt,ion or rclocntion because of proposed improvements are considered in section 311. - I rn.

. I . .w' IY. ESISTING INPROVEMENTS

I 30. Improveme.11.t~ +for good control and rec2~mation.-Indi\~idual owners have protcct,ed their lands to tlie extent of their ability without regard to the problems of ndjncent owners. About two-fifths of t l ~ e 1m~nd in tlle area subject. to inundation now has some degree of protcc- tion. In recent years some help has been extended by tlie State in the form of bn.nk and levee protection worli and levee repairs.

31. Above the mout.l1 of \.lerced River there nre approximately 305,000 ncres of land lying in the flood plain of Snn Joaquin River.

I About 125,000 ncres in this area are nil'orded varying degrees of protection by reinforced irrigation canal banks constructed nlong the high ground adjacent to the river anel serving tlie dual purpose of canal bank mltl river levee. As the construction of thcse dual purpose worlis llns becn in progress since 1850, i t is inlpossible to obtain dnta on iloocl-protection cost, pnrticularlp since their primniy purpose wns the trnnsportntion of irrign.tion water. From the mouth of Ricrced River to the hen(l of the delta, the flood plnin is somrwhat narrower and embraces only about 85,000 ncres. Approximatcly 35,000 acres in this rencll nre affortlecl partial protection by levees constructctl a t a cost of about $1,500,000. The Snn Jonquin River Delta, contni~ih~g about 279,000 ncres, wns, in its original statei subject to t,idal overflow

..as well as Aootl inundation. Extensive activity since 1880 has resulted in the rcclamntion of nll n.vn,ilnble land in the delta nren. The cost

I of existing levers in the Snn Joaquin Delta is estimnted a t $20,000,000. The location ant1 cxt.ent of the existing flood-control antl reclnmation works arc sliown on mnps IV--4 to C,' "Irrigation n.nd Reclnlnation Dnta," in nppendix IV.1

32. Improaemeats .for irrigation.-Extensive irrigation works hrin bot,ll gravity and pumped water to about 805,000 acres of agricult.ilra f land in the nrea under consideration. Reservoirs with a combincd capacity of approximately 800,000 acre-feet, and about 5,000 miles of cnnals nnd laterals nre used to regulate and di~t~ribute water to these areas. The investment in irrigation worlrs in the San Joaquin River area is estimated a t $55,000,000. Irrigation maps and additional data are given in appendis 1V.I

33. Existing power clevclopment and distribu.tion.-A number of liydroelectric pla.nts have been const,ructed on San Joaquin River and its major tributaries. I n many instances, these plants are fed from rcsei-voirs which nre ut,ilized also for irrigation and domestic water supplies. A11 of the existing plants feed into an extensive transmission system ~\-Iiich adequately serves the whole San Joaquin River area. Power development. nnd distribution are largely by the

\ (Y-& Pacific Gas R. Electric Co. and it4s subsidiary, the San Joaquin Light d ,.- h Power Corporntion, and the Southern California Edison Co. The

Modesto & Turlocli irrigation districts serve the area within thcir district boundaries wit11 electricity. Hydroelect.ric plants in t l ~ e San

22 SAN JOAQUIX RIVER AND TRIBUT?\RIES, CALIFORNIA

Jonquin River area linvc a combined instnlled capncity of about 800,000 kilowatts and an avernge annual output of n proximately P 3,000,000,000 lrilowatt-hours. Hegulntion for these p unts is provicled by reservoirs with total capacity of 1,800,000 ncre-feet of which - 1,250,000 acre-feet is used jointly for regulatio~i of either do~nestic or irrigntion water supplies. (See appendix IV.)' \

34. Existing improz~ements jor . narigafi?~. -Nnvigntion on San Joaquin River lind its inception w~t l i csplor~~ig partles about tlie year 1817. It was not until the discove~y of gold in 1S4S1 however, that. commercial nsvigatio~i became an importnnt factor. Prom that time until 1870, the San Jon uin River served as the main line of trl~nspor- 1 tation as far up the v d ey as Alendota nnd occasionally to Hernclon. Completion of n railroad up the enst sicle of the valley in 1869, and another up tho west side in 1889, rcsulted in n trend toward rnil trnnsportntion. The marked seasonal variations of flow in San Jonquin River, with navigation impossible a t low stages, creatcd a condition favorable to. tlie rnilroatls which ofl'erccl continuous ancl depenclnble trnnsportat~on. As ngri~ult~urnl activities increased, more arid more water was diverted from the river, further hnndicapping navigation until a t present the limit of tidal influence is considered tlie prnctical hencl of navigation. Existing liavigatioil projects undertaken by tlic MTnr Department consist of tlie Stockton decp-water channel which affords cleep-draft navigation between Stockton and Suisun Bay and vnrious minor p~~ojects for tlie benefit of light-dmft nnvigation in the cl~annels of tlie San Jonquin Delta.

35. Tlie original deep water cliannel project, autliorized in 1927, providecl for a channel 2Gfeet deep ancl 100 feet wide. Autl~orizations subsequent to 1927 provided for enlargelnents to a depth of 30 feet ant1 a width of 175 feet which in 1938 was incrensecl to 225 feet. Tlie enlargements are under construction. Alinual nppl.opriations provide for the mnintenance and improvement of tlie interconnecting slougl~s of tlie cleltn in tlie interest of navigation. The enlargemelit of Old River to a clinnnel 80 feet wide and 10 feet deep tlirougll tlie lower delta wns nutliorizetl in 1937 but has not been completed. A like project providing a channel 100 feet wide nntl 9 feet deep was authorized for AIiddle River nnd certain connecting clintmels in 1935. This work was completed in 1937. These severnl improvements for navigation have the effect of increasing the flow-carlying cnpacity of tlie S a ~ i Joaquin Delta channels. On San Joaquin River above Stockton, the existing project provides for contraction works, snagging, nncl cut-offs to facilitate light-drnft navigrttion to Hills Feny, 85 miles upstrenm. Becnuse dive~sions for irrigation hnve made navigation imprncticable abovc the tidal section, which ends about 10 miles above Stockton, maintenance above this point has been abandoned. On h4okelumne River, from its moutli to Galt-New Hope Bridge, tlie existing project provicles for removing snags ant1 obstructions and for occnsionnl clredging of slioals to providc 3- to %foot depths.

t .L

36. -4 public hearing t,o develop the desires ancl views of local interests was held by tlie district engineer a t Stockton on April 13, 1937. This hearing wns attendee1 by representatives of tlic district

Not printed.

engineer's office and various buleaus and services 'of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, together wit11 approximately 88 persons representing State, civil, irrigation, industrial, commercial, agriculturnl, and private interests. Abstracts of

,r.l\ 'the portions of this public hearing pertaining to the San Joaquin Hiver '.,' are included in appendix I.' A t this hearing, discussion of San

Joaquin River was confined to that portion lying between the Stanis- laus and Sacramento Rivers, including the S R I ~ Joaquin Delta. Local interests present,ed no definite plans for improvement. They desire floocl control, whether i t be accomplished by storage or bypass methods. I n support of their desires, they presented the following statements:

(a) Floods on San Joaquin River threaten thousands of acres of highly developed land.

(I) Floods in the delta area not on1 cause excemive crop losses but result in heavy damage to soils by erosion. $hen inundated, whole tracts of land are out of use for a t least 1 year. Large expenditures are necessary to pump the wat,er from the land and repair levees.

(c) Many important rail and highway arterials lie within the flood-threatened area and are subject to closure and damage.

( d ) The flood hazard constitutes a threat to the security and normal develop ment of the affected areas.

37. Tlie floods of 1937 nnd 1938 resulted in widespread damage on Snn Jonqnin River and its major tributaries nnd made evident tlie necessity for n comprel~e~isive plan of control embracing tlie cntire San Jonql~iu River system.

38. Resolutions nncl other communications from irrigation districts ant1 otlier local public organizations, received by tlie district engineer since t,lle flootls of 1037 nild 1938 and pertainin to irrigation, powcr or flood-control features of a proposcd mu y tiple-purpose flood- control project on Sall Joaqiiin River, arc included in appcnclix I.'

VI. HYDROLOGY

39. Generu1.-Tllc Snn Joaquin River is subject to two types of flootls-rnin floods and snow-melt floods. Rain floods hare high peak flows and nre of small ~o lume . Snow-melt floods hnve vcry large volume but only modcrnte peak flow.

40. Generctl eir uracte~istics of stor?ns producing rain.fal1 i n the area..- Flood-producing rainfall is associated witli general storms occurring during the winter season from Novcmber through April. These storms last from 3 to 15 dnys, but tlie intense rainfnll is broltcn up into a series of short storms lnsting 3 to 10 hours, separated by periods of little or no rainfall. Thesc periods last 18 hours to 3 dnys. The San Joaquin River and its tributaries drnin s n area whicli is boundcd on tlie easterly and westerly sides by high mountains. General storms originate over tlle Pncific Ocean and must cross the barrier of the Coast Range to reach the nrea. The speed of travel of storms is rapid nrid rninfall occurs practically simultaneously over the entire nrea. Table 11 lists the 10 major storms wliich have occurred in tlie San Joaquin River area since 1900 and gives the locntions of the

' storm centers. These were general storms \vhicli originated over the Pncific Ocenn to the west and movecl inland to cause widespread precipitation over the entire area. Further data re arding these storms, particular1 those of March 1907 and Decem er 1937, are given in appendix 9 I.' fl

=Not prlnted.

24 S A N JOAQUIX RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

TABLE 11.-Dales and locations of storm centers-Son Joaquin River area Loeollon of dorm

center March 1906 -----------------------------------, South of area. hlarch 1907 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . North of area. January 1909------------------------------------------- Do. January 1911- - ..................... ------ - - - - - - Within area. January 1 9 1 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - South of area. March 1 9 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - North of area. February 1 9 3 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - South of area. Dccernber 1937- ----- - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- - -- - - - - ---- - - -- - - - - - - Within area. . .February 1938------------------------------------ Do. March 1938 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Do.

41. General distribution and range of precipitation on the area.--Pre- cipitation is caused primarily by the l~fting action of the continuous wall of mountains on incoming air masses and general1 increases with P elc~at~ion. It is deficient on tlle western half of t ie valley floor, wluch is partly shieldecl by tlie Coast Range. I ts seasonal occurrence is concentrated in the period from November through April, only about 15 percent of the total precipitation falling outside this periocl. Normal seasonal precipitation increases from 8 inches a t Los Banos on the valley floor to 55 inches a t the 7,000-foot levcl. At liiglier elevations, the precipitation decreases progressively to lcss than 50 inches. Maximum storm precipitation is distributed in the same general pattern, increasing from less t,llan 2 inches on the valley floor to 22 inches a t the 5,000-foot level. At higher elevations, maximum storm precipitation decreases progressively to less than 15 inches. The persistent snow line does not ~iormnll lie below about the 5,000- T foot level. Storm precipitntion is general y rain below the 4,000-foot level, either rnin or snow from the 4,000 to the 8,000-foot level, nnd snow nbovc that level.

42. Snou~fa11.-All winter storms produce snowfall nt high elevations either during tlle entire storm or during tlie lntter pnrt of tlie storm period. Below tlle 5,000-foot level, tlie snow pack usually is mclted between storm periods, wliile above that level tlie snow pnck usunlly accumulates throughout the entire winter season until it is melted during R/Lay, June, and July.

43. Run-of.-Run-off from the major tributnries is largely con- ccntrated in two periods-the November througli April rain period and the May through July snow melt period. During the first period, flow is erratic, rising to peaks of short duration follom-ing qeneral storms. During the second period, flow is steady, rising to a pro onged peak of moderate height during hiay, June,.or July. Run-off data nre given in tables 12 and 13.

TABLE 12.-llfonlhly distribulion of nalurol run-off-nlnjor Saa Joaquin tributaries I

I Average percent of mean seasonal rundl

TABLE 13.-Variation of natural seasonal run-of during p& of record-San

I Joaquin River Basin streams

Stream and statlon

Ban Joaquln River at Friant ..............

Memd River at Ex- chequer .............

Tuolumne Rlver at La.Orange ..........

Btanalaus Rlver below hlelones power- house ...............

44. Snow surveys.-Surveys of accumulated snow pack in tlle San Joaquin area are made montllly durin the winter and spring period by the State of California cooperative %now Survey. Depth, cliarac- ter, and water content of the snow pnck over a network of selected ranges are measured. From a comparison of these measurements with similar measurements made in previous years, estimates of the volume of tlle snow melt run-off are made, \vhich liave prover1 accurate within 10 percent and often within 5 percent of the measured run-off. Since these estimates arc made from 1 to 2 months before tlle snow- melt run-off, ressevoir-operation lans can be prepared well in advance of tlle occurrence of snow-melt A" oods and the reservoirs drawn down

I to provide tlie necessary space for storage of run-off.

45. Data on past rain floods.-Rain fioocls are caused by intense

1 encral storms u~liic11 produce nearly simultaneous floods from the Pbwcr renclies of all the tributaries. Tlre rain run-olf is sometimes augmented ljy tile mrlting of snow a t intermediate clevntions. Since tllcse indivitlnnl tributary flootls are of short duration, and originate a t witlcly separated points, they do not syncllrollizc a t any onc point nncl tllc main cllu~inel pcnlc flow is materially less than the sum of the tributary pcalc flows. Tlie typical rnin flood hydro raph on the main San Joaquin River is of short duration, with severa 7 secondary peaks corresponding to the peaks of major tributary floods. Table 14, below, shows masimum discharges which would rcsult from a recurrence of the major rain floods of record.

............................... Perlod of m r d (yean). Mean m n a l run& (acre-rwt) ....................... Mnximum seasolla1 run-oll:

Volume (acrereel) ................................. Year of occurrcnm.. ...... .. ...................... Perccut of mean ....................................

Mlnln~ulri seasonal runan: Volume (acre-feet) ................................. Year of oceurreucr ................................. I'ercent of mean ....................................

Ep 1.24 1.01

B 1 As impalred by cxistlnz storage.

Ban Joa- uin at

%riant

43 1,787,000

3.954.000 IWN)

221.3

446.000 I924 24.9

Year

March 1908 ....................................................... &larch 1807 ......................................................... January 1909 ........................................................

...................................................... February 1011 ......................................................... March 1935

No vek- ber

1.47 1.P

Meregd River at

Exchequer

37 958,000

2.132.000 1W7

222.5

252.000 1 W24 26.3

3faxlmum day mean flow in 1,M)O eublc feet per second 1

July

10.44

6.32

1.08 1.79

1.25 I 1.42 7.37

5.57

De- oem- ber

232

254

Tuolumnc River at Ln Qrango

---- 43

1,671,000

3,758,000

1 W! 200. r

657.000 1024 29.8

Vernalls

51 87 46 45 50

Newman

23 26 I5 n 33

2.95 6.28

2.81 I 5.81

k; --- 3.12

1.68

Btanlslaw Rlvcr be. low Mel-

lonespower. house

35 1,173,000

2,709.WO 1W7

9 8 . 6

!t50,000 1924 21.3

IIetch Hetehy crossing ---

49 63 24 47 49

4.08 6.58

?e%: ber

1.26 .72

1.40

1.71

7.60

8.10

.SO

1.24

"pub- ary --------- 5.07

8.01 10.80

1262

Mar,

8.37

11.85

21.45

17.49

15.58

17.00

June

24.22

?0.28

24.09

24.65

dprll

13.71

15.62

May

24.70 25.41

2 6 SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, 'CALIFORNIA

46. Data concernin large rain floods' on the major tributaries of :Sari Joaquin River areyisted in table 15.

TABLE 15.-Rain flood data, joolhill stalions of San Joaquin River and tributaries [Natural flow (unimpaired by existing storage)]

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AT FRIANT

Year llemarks

Prior to remrd: January 1862 Oreater than 1837 hut less thou 18137. .......... Dcwmber 1867 110 65 ............ Mnxi~num llow 01 history; estimated from &)a-

wn'. streams. Perlod 01 remrd:

No actupl record available.

..........

hlERCED RIVER AT EXCHEQUER

Prlor to record: Jnnuary 1862 .................................... Oreater than 1837 hut less thnn 1887. December 1867 ......... 1 1 62 I ..... I ..... I Muximum flow of historr. n1mat.l from ad]&

ccut streams. Porirnl of record:

March 1907 .............. 43.0 27.5 27.5 287 At hlerced Falls. Janum February 1911 1 46.0 1 45.0 37.2 1 232 1 Do.

........ DecernLr 1837 1: 50.0 45.0 33.7 1.10 From Kiltridge record. I I I I I

TUOLUMNE RIVER AT LA ORANGE

BT.iNISLAU8 RIVER BELOW MELONES RESERVOIR

Prlor to record: I I l I I

Prlor to remrd: January 1862 ............ December 1807

Perlod of record: March 1907 .............. January-Fchruary 1Q11..

.......... December 1937

47. Data on snow-melt floods.-Snow-melt floods are causod by the melting of the accumulated snow pack on the upper reaches of the major tributnri:~. The flood run-off is sometimes augmented by late .s rlng rains falling on melting snow. Since these individual tributary A d s are of long duration, they ovsrlap in their passage down the main chamiel and produce a pealc flow that is nearly equal to the sum of the tributary peaks. Secondary peaks are caused by periods of high temperatures which accelernto melting. The maximum San

Jmuar 19(12 ............ Decem r 1867

Period of record: . March 1907 .............. Jaouar February 1911 ~ c c e m L r 1937 ........ 1:

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALlFORNIA 2

I30

64.0 W. 0 71.0

Jonquin River disehargcs which woulcl probably result from a recu rcnce of majoi snow-melt floods of rccorcl are given in table 1 Tabulat,ions of largo snow-melt run-offs on tlie major tributaries of tl San Joaquin Rivcr arc givon in table 17.

/g

77 ..................................

52.0 67.0 Ffi.0

52.0 52.5 62.1

87

63.0 60.0 61.0

I

.+rB TABLE 16.-Major snow-melt joods--Jlain San Joapzcin River

hiaximum day mean Bow in 1,O 1 cubic frut lxr .xwld 1

Year

............

500 392 ZX2

61 ..................................

57.2 43.0 42.0

1 Nervmm / H e t c h l Hetchy Vernnli

CrossUl&!

Estlmnlcd from hlgh-water marks. arealer thnn l 83 i hut slightly less than 1802.

TABLE 17.-Snow-melt jlood data-Foothill stations of San Joaquin River and tributaries

57.2 36.9 39.6

[Natural flow (unlmpalred by existing storage)]

BAN JOAQUIN RIVER A T FRIANT I I I

............

533 24G 110

Year

Estimated from high-water marks. Oreater than 1 1 7 but slightly less than 1862.

Marlmum

Remarks

I 1 I

MERCED RIVER AT EXCHEQUER

Prior to record: 1867 ............................................. 1 W ............................................. 1885 ............................................. 1890 .............................................

Period of rcwrd: 189.5 ................................. IW ................................. 1905 ................................. 1907 ................................. 1911 ................................. ~ e a .................................

Estimated from wetness Indim. Do. Do.

20.0 18.4 26.3 18.0 23.1 3 . 3

Prior to record: 1676 ............................................. 1890 ............................................. 1895 .............................................

TUOLUMNE RIVER AT LA QRANOE

1 , m ' 2, MK)

1,600

2 . m

2% 3,500

2,230 1,370 3.370 2, yU) 2.890 1 7 3 0

Period of m r d : 18W ................................. 8.8 740 1YCfl.. ............................... 15.3 1907 ................................. 10.6 f:8 1911 ................................. 10.5 1,PiO 19 38 ................................. 12.3' 1. 220

Estlmated from wetness Indlees. Do.

Estlmated from wetness Indim. Do. Do. Do.

Estimated lrom Hemdon rewrd. no. Do. Do.

Prlor to record: 1876 ............................................. I895 .............................................

Period of record: 1904 ................................. IWE ................................. 1907 ................................. 1911 ................................. 19X3.. ...............................

17.9 19.6 17.3 18.2 20.2

2,700 2,500

1, 800 2. 580 2,529 2,040 2,200

TABLE 17.-Snowmelt flood data-Foothill stations of San Joctqrtin River and tn'bt~tariee-Continued

STANISLAUS RIVER BELOW MELONES RESERVOIR

48. Reconstitution o j past floods.-In order to arrive a t nn average 'annual flood-loss figure, i t is necessnr to know- the tlamnge which would result from a recurrence of d l ?' loods of record nntler present conditions of reservoir storage in the mountnins nncl of lcvecs around natural overflow lands in the main river vnlley. This necessitated the determination of the l~ydrogmplls of these floods a t various points (called index stations) on the river system. These reconstituted hydrographs were obtairled for the stations above the delta by a system of reach routing. This procedure is not applicable in tlle lower part of the delta, since flood stngcs tlirougl~out this area nre dependent more upon tides and Sacramento River high flows than on the floocl discharge of the Snn Joaquirl system. r l de~niled tlescription of the metllods nlld procedures usctl is given in appendis 11.'

49. Backwater computations.-ln arrlcr to estublish flood-plane ~ l e - vations to be used in estimating cost of necessary le\-ees, backwater computations were made through the Upper Delta nntl up San Joaquin Rivcr to the moutll of ,\lcrced River. The ohservetl high- water profile and discharge of the Rlarch 1038 flood formecl the bnsis of an analysis to determine roughness coefficiel~ts for these computations. Details of this study are given in nppaldix I1.l

Year

Prior to record: 1876 ............................................. 1895 .............................................

Period of record: 1904 ................................. 18M1.-. .............................. 1907 ................................. 1911 ................................. 1933 .................................

otllcr years prior to recorded stream-flow measurements which began about 1900, but hecause of the undeveloped ilature of the area reccivcd only minor notice.

62. Of nll tlle known floods, those of 1861-62 were of the greatest magnitude wllc~l the Sail Joaquin River area is considered as a whole.

g; Sustained record-breaking st>nges were reached severnl times during the season. I t was reported that 30 inches of rain fell in 10 dnps in the low mountair1 wntelslleds of the Tuolumne nnd Stanislnus Rivers. Precipitntion at Stocktoll on the valley floor reached 15 inches in 1 month, \vliich is slightly more than the 90-year avernge seasonal total. Further dntn on enrly floods are given in appendix I.'

53. General.-During the period of stream-flow mensurcments, \vhich bcgnn about 1900, there have been 38 floods of damaging mngni- tude on the nlnjor strcnms of the San Joaquin River group. Fifteen of thcse flootls resulted primarily from rnins and the remaining 23 were caused by melting snow. The most recent floods representing tlle 2 types occurred during the 1937-38 season, when 3 rain floods and 1 snow-melt flood occurred. Tlle floods of the 1937-38 season nre the only ones for \\~hich detailed and accurate records of flood damnge nre nvnilnble. Damages resulting from these floods were compilcd from questionnaires obtninetl by extensive field surve s. This informntion wns used as a bnsis for determining the probn b" le future tlnmnge which mnp be expected to occur if no flood cont8rol project is uuntlertnlren. The nrea flooded in 1937-38 and the area which would bc inundated with a recurrence of the maximum floocl of record (either tlle hlnrcll 1907 or January 1911 floocl) nre shown on mnp, enclosure 1.

54. Dioision. of area.-In making flood-damage studies over such

Henlarks

- Estimated from \vrtness Indices. Do.

Maximum /

an cxtensive'nrc.a complicatecl by tributary inflow nncl varying crop practices, it wns found convenient to rorlsider the nrea by subareas, these being defined . . by n division of the channels into reaches, as

lnentl daily, 1,MW cubtc

leet per sc.co~~d

15.6 14.5 12.2 11.3 13.2

described in table IS. TABLE 18.-Damage reaches

I I t

Total run- 011, 1.W ncrc-lcet

-- 4 100 1,900

I, 240 1,CW 1,670 I , 650 1,4W

1 1

'Not printed.

Reach limits

Friant to Mendota .... ..... TO hIerced ni~er

XIerced F ~ I ~ S tomouth. La Orange Dam to nlouth. K n i g h t s Ferry t o mouth. Merced Rlyer to Tua-

lumne R~ver. TO Stantslaus River-.-

TO Southern P ~ C ~ B C R. H. (Mossdale).

To Turner Cut on San J o q u i n Hlver and Ind~an slough on Old River.

TO Sacramento River-

VII. HISTORY OF EARLY FLOODS I\ 0.

I . 50. General.-It is known thnt 'the San Jonquin Ynlley has esperi- enced many major floods. Legends handed thwn by the Illtlialls tell I of periods when the valley became a vtlst unbroken sea causing great 11

suffering and loss of life among thcir tribes. These lcgcntls are III partially substantiated by the written accounts of t,lle various early 1v

Spanish explore13 who \risted the valley ill the latter part of the v eighteenth century. Some of these accounts refer to the area as a VI p e a t valley, while others allude to i t as an inlnnd sen,. This apparent VII inconsistency reveals the widespread extent of t.hese early floods. VIII

51. Early ?~ist~ricdfEoo~ls.-The first flood mentioned in t.he records of t l ~ e earliest white settlers in the Snn Joaquin area occurred in 3 IX

January of 1847. Other floods of unusual magnitude nre stated to '- 4

have occurred during the yeam 1849-50, 1851-52, 1861-62, and x 1867-68. Widespread,' but less severe, flootls occurretl in many

'Not prlnted.

County

Fresno and Madern ... Presno. hindera, and

Airreed. ............. 3lrrcrd.. ..........-.- Stanislnus

Sun Joaquin and Stan- islnus. Merwd and Stenis-

Btanislnus iarrs. ......... .... San Joaquin .......... San Joaquin, Contra

Costa, and Ala- meda.

8e.n ~oaquin, contra Costa, and Sacra- mento.

River ] Index station

Sari Josquill .... l Friant. I

...........

Lcnath of rcnch :;z

02 118

%3 51

BO

37

11

21

n

28

----. .......... .......... do J Menclota

......... Merccd ...... Tuolumne

...... Stantslaus

.... Sen Joaquin

-----do .......... ..... do ..........

.......... -..-.do

.......... .---.do

Exchequer Darn-- Tuoluu~ne C.iby..-

..... Mclones Dam

.......... Newman ' etch Hctehy

Vernalis erasing. ........... ......... Mossdale

Venice ~ s ~ e n d gage.

55. Damage from rain Jloods.-Rnin floods cause considernble damage to standing crops, lands, buildings ancl equipment, levees, roads, I bridges, and irrigation structures. Normally, the lligli discharges, characteristic of this type of flood, nre of short cluration, so that floocl crests, as they proceed downstream, arc greatlv retluced by channel f and overbnnk storage. The mnjor portion of the nren subject to L : flooding is rural witli little concentration of populntion.

56. Damage-from snow-melt floods.-Dnmnges from snow-melt floods result principally to agriculturnl arens. nnd, because of the sustninrd I

high flows, both annual and pc~rennial standing crops'mny be injured. The senson of occurrence is such that, in somc rcaclic~s wllere double cropping is prncticcd, seconcl plnntings mny bc preventecl, thus causing an out-of-production loss. This type of flood is generally preceded by one or more rain floods and the resulting inundation may 1,e clue to insufficient time and means to permit ndequate repair of levees dnm- '

aged by the enrlier floocls. 57. Damages during 193798.-Table 19 gives n summary of direct

and inclirect dnmages resulting from the 1937-38 flootls. Of tlie total nmount of this dnmnge, nbout 10 percent can be nttributecl entirely to snow-mclt.

58. Recurring $ood damage.-The 1937-38 flood losses folmed tlie bnsis for estimating the average nnnual dnmnge in enell of t l ~ e reaches. These losses reprrsent a specific instnnce ~rcsulting from n single season's flooding. Because protective mensurcs hare changed since tlic 1937-38 floods, nd'ustmrnts were made to elimilintc certain non- recurring items. .4\so, since crop yielcls and prices vary from yenr to

I

pear, avcrnge (1925-38) yielcls and prices were usecl to clctermine probable recurring dnmnges. Bnscd on these ndjusted losses, dnmnge curves were developed by determining tlic arcn wliicll would be flootled a t various flood dischnrges or stnges, and the correspontling recurring damnges. A curve showing probable direct dnmnge (excluding scep- age) was prepared for cacll 1.encl1. 111 constructillg tlicse curves, dnmnge wus plotted against discharge for nll rcnclies except reacll X where, becnusc of tidal efl'ect, stnge \vns usetl. For tliose renclies subject to scepnge damngc (Nos. 11, VII, VlII, anti IX), curves showing this dnmnge also were prepared nnd were bnsed on tlic mnximum discharge equaled or excecdecl for 7 consecutive days, this period being the averngc flood duration required to cause such damage. Indiroct damnges from floods smaller tllnn tliose of 1937-38 coulcl riot be cwralu- sted nnd were collsidered to be negligible. Tlie 1937-38 indirect damnges were assigned to any flood which wvould cause tlirect damnges approximntely equnl to or exceeding the 1937-38 tlirect (lamage.

59. Average annuul flood duma e.-Each flood of record was routed through the river system, as exp f' ained in paragraph 48. The routed discharges were then applied to the stage or discharge-loss curves to obtain the probable direct damages. The total of the direct damages thus obtained when divided by the number of years of record gave f the avera e annual direct damage. The iudirect damages were ,. determinet by multiplying the 1937-38 indirect damages by the number of times direct damages from the floods of record approached or exceeded the 1937-38 direct damages and dividing this product . by the number of years of record. Further details of analysis of flood damages are presented in appendix 111.' Table 20 summarizes the results of these studies.

TABLE 20.-Average annual $ood damage

60. Intangible damage.-In addition to the losses susceptible of evaluation, floods on the streams of the San Joaquin River group cause numerous intangible damages which seriously affect the welfare and growth of the area. The most serious of these intangible damages are:

Reach

I. ....................................................... I1 -...................................................... ...................................................... 111 Iv ...................................................... V -...................................................... VI ...................................................... VII ..................................................... VIII .................................................... I K ...................................................... X .......................................................

.............................................. Total

(a) Loss to the traveling public. (b) Contamination of domestic water supplies by floodwaters. (c) Menace to lives and social security of residents. (d) Suffering and inconvenience caused by moving from and returning to the

flooded area. (e) Losses resulting from the interruption of utility services including domestic,

industrial, electrical power, telephones, end railroads. (I) Spread of plant disease and weed seed. (g) Impregnation of surface soils with alkali and otherwise reduced prodi~c-

tivity of the soils. (h) Inability of farm owners in the flood hazard areas to secure Goverlilnent

loans. , ( a ) Disruption of business and community life resulting in a geileral retardation . of normal expansion and growth.

Total

23 36, 000 50. MO

140,000 ""000 52,000

", cuo 682.000 369. W

I, 460, 000

DLwt damwe

%E 35, OUO 46. MX) 198,000 67,000 m. 000

IM1.000 382, MW 369,000

1,425,000

61. Irrigation in San Joaquin River Valley is gencrnlly nccomp1ishe:l by gravity or pump diversion of stream flow. Pumping from ground- water is largely confined to areas within t,he enst-side irrigation dis- t.ricts and, except in the case of the lMacIera irrigation dist,rict, is done primarly for drainage, though reuse of drainnge water for irrigation is practiced to some extent. No irrigation storage exists on upper San Joaquin River and diversions are dependent upon natural stream flow as modified by upstream power reservoirs. Friant Dam, under ronstruction on San Joaquin River, will provide irrigation storage

I Not printed.

z:zJ %OoO 2,000 1, 0% 4, 2,000 6, OM) 3.000

12, 00 ................ ................ 36,000

P I

SAN JOAQUIN R I m R AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 3 I

for Mndera irrigation district and for arens outside of San Jonquj River Basin. Sacramc~lto River water will be used to rcplace Sn Joaquin water diverted from the basin. Under this plan, an adequnrl water supply will be made vvailable for lands now depe~ldent upa

.-- a dcficicnt Snn Jonquin Rlver. Irrigation reserv0.il.s on Mercd~ -; Tuolumne, ant1 Stanislaus Rivers have ~iormally p~ovlded satisfact01

supplies for developed, arens now dependent thereon. On Tuoluin~ and Stanislaus Rivers, recent increases in irrigated areas and trenr toward crops requiring more water indicate tlie necessity of addition storagc. Water supply and present and probable future crop demanl are given in table 21. Ft~tller irrigation data are presented in a pcndix IV.'

TABLE 21.-Water supply and present and future irrigation demands, Tvolvmne d Stanislaus River Areas I

.................. MLnlmom seuonal moll (September-October) 1824 ,rial run-08 I, 8 i l . W

crop demand.^ ...................................... ...... ; I -. .,

Mean seam 1, l i 3

Present pross I 403

Probable luture gross crop demand too ............................... ..... I I

X. SURVEY

62. Surveys were necessary to obtain data on l~ydrology, fla damages, possible improvements, and other pertinent matte Studies of flood cliaracteristics indicated that a plan for adequate flc control should provide for detel~tion st.orage on the tributaries a channel irnprovemcnts on the main stem.. Therefore, instrument aerotopograpliical, geological, and eophysical surveys were made various dam a.nd reservoir sit.es anc of the Sari Jonquin channel ar k The dam sites finally selected as being the most suitable ~vere s veyed and examined in dctail. Field and office studies were made l~ytlrology, flood dnmage, power development, and irrigation. T11 studies are described in detail in various appendices and the rest are discussetl in appropriate paragraphs of thls report. In connect with the survey, the district cnginee~: inspected the nren and sites of proposrd improvements from time to time.

XI. HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER

63. St,udics and surveys were made regarding existing PO tlcvclopment, probable future tlevclopment, value of firm and seco ary power, ant1 marketability of power (see appendix IV).' I t 1

concluded from these. studles that new power lants in connect P with proposed reservoirs arc not now economlca ly feasible. On1 small part of the power resources of the major tributaries of I Joaquin Rivcr has been developed, but the construction of new mr plnnts in the near future is not probable and in any event the ef

-,' t,hereof on flood control would be minor. The effect of the propc p1a.n of improvement on csisting power developments is given paragraph 90.

Not prlnted.

34 S A N J O A Q U I N RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

XII. PLAN OF IMPROVEMENT

64. General.-Determination of tlie most suitable plan for control- lin floods of the San Joaquin River group has been based on the fol F owing: I

r (a) Flood flows of Fresno Slough, distributary of Icings River, and of the upper b,

San Joaquin River as used herein shall include the hypothetical regulatory effect of the proposed Pine Flat Reservoir and of Friant Reservoir operated as recommended by tlie Engineer Department.

(b) The interrelated nature of the different parts of tlie area precludes separate consideration of any major part thereof.

(c) Flood waters which now flow to the sea are valuable to tlie area and should , be conserved as fully as practicable. (d) Complete protection of the San Joaquin Delta is not attainable through

control of the San Joaquin River system since tides and Sacramento River floods are major causes of damaging stages in the lower delta

(e) Consideration of complete control of floods greater than those of record (past 3 5 4 0 years) is not warranted because the area subject to darnage is and will probably remain predominantly rural. (I) Silt deposition in foothill reservoirs in this area would be minor and would

affect storage but little during life of a project (see appendix V).' 65. Madera County stream group.-The constlvction of reservoirs

on any of the streams of the Madera County stream group for the purpose of alleviating flood conditions on San Joaquin River is not justified. These streams empty into a reach of San Joaquin River which is mainly unreclaimed and which has large overflow storago capacity. With flows in San Joaquin River reduced by Friant Reservoir, the benefits to be derived from dams on Fresno or Chow- cliilla Rivers mould not equal the cost thereof (see appendix V).'

66. Mokelumne River group.-A high degree of contl.01 of tlie Moko- lurnne River abovc its confluence with Cosumnes Rivor is providcd by present operation of reservoirs on Alokelumne River. Statements from interests controlling these reservoirs indicate that such operation will be continued. Reduction of flood flows below the confluence would have to be accomplished by control of Cosumnes River, which is not justifiable (see appendix v).'

67. Methods of damage prevention considered.-Consideration was given to the following possible methods of preventing damage.

(a) Abandmmenl of area subject to flooding.-This plan would cost a t least $60.000,000 and is ~ineconomicsl and im ractical.

(b) Spreading fiodwater8 to permit afsorPtion.- he only s11itaMe absorptive lands are highly developed and present ground water conditions would prohibit spreading (see map IV-A to C. aoaendix IW.1

(c) Bypassing jloodwalers &oihd darnige- area.-With operation of Friant Reservoir as described in paragraph 82 (a), flood discl!?rges would be such that no bypass above the PvIerced River would be needed. l h e onlv practical bypaw would extend alon the west side of San Joaquin River from a poirlt just above the mouth of the ~uofulnne River ilortherly about 25 miles to a point on Old River about 4 miles above the mouth of Grant Line Canal. The cost of this bypass together with necessary levee work up to hlerced River and enlargement of Old . River b l o w the bypass (all with capacity sufficient to safely p a s the maximum discharge of record) would be about $23,000,000 and the ratio of benefits to cost would be 0.7:l. Floodwaters would not he conserved under this plan.

(d) Charnel enlargement and 1evee.s.-Under this plan existing levees would be raised and strengthened, and new levees constructed where necessary; to provide a co~itinuous system of levees alon the S ~ I I Joa uin River below the klerced River, along the lonver portion of tlie %uoluxnne and Ztanislaus Rivers, and through the upper delta (reach IY). Through the lower delta (reach S) certain channels

Not prlnted.

S A N JOAQUIN RIIrER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 35

wor~ltl hr enlarged. 'I'hi# systcxn would provide capacity t.o safely pass the n~nxi- muin discharge of record. The cost ~rould he about %;16,000.000 and the ratio of henofits to cost would be 0.8:l. Untler this plai~ also, vnluable floodwaters would he wastetl.

. (e) Rrs~rvoirs only.-To limit flood discharges to noridnntaging flows by means of reservoirs rrlone would require reservoirs on all the major tributaries with a

" ~ c o m b i l l e d capacity exceeding 4,000,000 acre-feet. This is impracticnl of atmill- nient. (j) Reservoirs with modification of present levee syslen~.-Various con~bi~~ations.

of lcvces and rc~el.voirs were inv~etigated. I t was concluded that no flood ~tor&gc can be cco~~olnically obtained at. pre$ent 011 tlie 3Ierced Itiver. Arno~lg those reservoir sites considered I ~ u t not found to be lvell suited for flootl control were the Onkdalc and Parrott Ferry sites on Stariislal~s River, and t.11~ Cherry Vallcy sit.e which was inclt~ded ill the plan proposed by t.he city of Sari Francisco

! for control of Tuolu~n~le Iiivcr (see appendix I ) . These studies indicated that the most suitable sites on the Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers are Jackso~iville and 1- Kew >Ielones sites, respectively. Plate \'-6 1 (bascd on prclixninary costs and

: bellefib) r;lrows the eco~~omic ratios for various capacities of reservoirs a t tliesc sites.

I 68.. Selected p1a.n of im.provement.-Tl plan of improvement selected co~isists of the follow in^ fcaturcs: -

(a) Use of Friant Reservoir to obtain tlie maximum flood control possible withorlt im~)a i rme~~t of irrigation yield; i. e., operation in accordance with criteria given ill paragraph 82, (a).

(b) Jacksoncille Reservoir on the Tuolutline River, capacity, 317,000 acre-feet; niasimuni flood storage, 317,000 acre-feet.

(c) New Me1011es Reservoir on the Stanislaus River, capacity, 450,000 acre- feet; n l a s i ~ ~ l u ~ n flood storage, 340,000 acre-feet.

(d) Perpet.ua1 use of the overflow areas described in paragraph 80 and shown on maps, enclos~~res 8 and 9,l as natural detention reservoirs.

(e) Hevetmct~ts, channel en la rge~ne~~t , and levee const.ruction and reconstruction generally as dexcril,cd ill paragraph 81 and show11 OII map, eticlosure 10.

69. Friant Reseraozr.-Tliis reservoir, situated on upper Snn Jon- quin Rivt~r nclw the town of Frinnt is now ulltler construction by the UU~PILII of l~rclnmntion ns a unit of the Central Valley .project. I'rcsel~t p l n ~ ~ s PI-ovirlc for gross storage of 520,000 ncrc-fcet, lnactlre s toru~c (below canal outlcts) of 130,000 ncre-feet, ant1 flood outlet capnclty esccetl~r~g 12,000 cubic feet per second before any of the avtivc stornge spncr IS occopit~tl. Usin these fentures, stutlirs have 'i hcen nlntle to cletcrminc the method 0. operation?~hirh wou!d give the masilnurn drrrrre of flood control w~tliout lmpnlrlng tlie irr~gntion '> - yiclil (sce parngrtiph 8 2 (a)).

70. Jaclrsonot l le Reuer~,o.tr.-This rese~lvoir would be ' formed by the constructioi~ of n tlnm on T~~o lumne R ~ v e r about three-fourths mile tlowrlstrcnm from \lroods Creek nnd the settlement of Jncksonville and .just ~it.11in tlic bacliwatcr limits of Don Pedro Reservoir. I t \irould control tlxc run-off from ahollt 1,450 square. miles.. The reservoir woultl have a capacity of 317,000 acre-fect a t lts maxlmum water surface rlevation of 867 feet mean sea lerel. Tlie reservolr woulil ~lxtend about 12 miles upstream from tlie dam, covering portions of MToods Cwck and Moccasin Creek Valleys and would inundate the small settlc~nent of Jacksonville. The maximum water st!rfnce nrcn would bc npproximately 2,900 acres. The. reservolr slte 1s sllown on mnp, enclosure 2.' Tlie creation of this reservoir would ~~ec.cssitntc:

(a) Relocation of approximately 7.8 niiles of Hetch Hctchy standard gage constrr~ction railroad, includilig the cox~struction of 2 single-track railroad bridges. ' Not printcad.

( b ) Relocation of npl~roximately 9.2 n~iles of State 11ighway and 0.5 rnile of county higll~vay, includillg the cotlstr~lction of o t ~ e county highway bridge.

(c) Relocntion of 4.7 miles of 1.ransmission line and 9.1 tnilcs of tclcplione line.

71. Jucksonzville Dam.-Tlic proposetl dam would I)r ~~s t rn ight , ity type, concrcte structure wit11 a nlnsim~im hciglit of 308 feet above strenm becl and a crcst lcngtli of 1,040 Icet. A St,t~te Iiigh~vny woultl cross on the dam. Generul design feat'urcs of tlie proposccl structrlre nre sho\s-n on eliclosures 3 nritl 4.' For geolog of tlic sitc, st!e nppendix V.'

72. Spillway.-An ovc~flow s )ill\vny of oger typc with fiscd rrcst elevntion of 839 feet menn sea level ~voald be loeutad iri t,lie rentrll portion of tlic clam. Tlle spillway \\rollld be cquippetl with tlirce 28 by 100-foot drum type crcst gates, operatcd both nut80mat.icnlly ant1 mnnually. Tllc cliscliarging cnpacity of the spill~vny wit11 crcst gfitcs fully lo\vered 1s-oultl bc npprorimtltely 200,000 cubic fect pcr secoutl. The spillwny capncity under vniying surcliaige co~itlitio~ls is sl~own oil inc1osul.e 3.'

73. 0utlet.s.-The floocl oi~tlct,s would consist of u l)uttt?iy of sevcli 72-inch steel-lincd contluits tlirougli the clnrn witli ccntcr elevntion of

. 665 fcet menn sen level. T\vo sluic.t? outlets of 48 intrhcs tlinmetc-r \vould pass through the dam nt elevntion 005 frct lnc~lrl sen Invnl. Encli of tlie nl)ove outlets would be cquippc!cl wit,li ltri cmcrgcncy nrid u service gate of ring-follower type, operntrd by hydrnulic prcssurc. Provision \voulcl be ninile for manual operation. On(. 16-foot dinmctcr stecl lined power concluit with ccntcr clcvntion of 688 fect menn sca level mould pnss t.hrougli the dam nt thc left nbut.mc~it.. l'rovision

! \{-ould be lnnile for future installation of a cntcrpillar type control ~ u t o to be locntccl at the upstrennl fncc of tlie clam. Tliis power contluit would be providctl \vith n tcmpornry h~mispliericnl-steel bul!ihcncl. The masinlum discrli~~rging cnpncity of tlic Hood slid sluice or~tlcts would be approsimntely 18,000 cubic feet per secontl. Cnpncity of tho flood nntl sluice outlets unckr varying hcntls is sliown on ertclosr~re 3.'

74. New Aifelones Reserz.oir.-Tllis reservoir would be crcatcd by tlie construction of a dam on the Stanislaus River in Iron Canyon about two-thirds mile below the present Slelones Dam and about 14 miles above the town of I(llig11ts Ferry. I t would control the run-of? from about 900 square miles. The reservoir woulcl have a capncit,y of 450,000 acre-feet a t the spillway crest, elevation 850 feet meon sea level. To improve irrigation yield n.nd power production, the bottom 110,000 acre-feet of tlie reservoir would be reserved therefor and woultl not be ut.ilized for flood stornge. Tlle reservoir would extend about 17.4 miles upstream from the clam ant1 would submerge the small settlement of Melones and the present Melones Dam and Reservoir (owned 'ointly by the Oakdale ancl South Snn Jonquin irrigation districts). !It is contemplated that in lieu of monetary compensation to owners of the existing reservoirs, the services furnished thereby would be continued under the proposed piaject a t no cost to these ownci-s. Tlie maslmum water surface area would be approimately 4,300 acres. Tlie reservoir site is shown on mnp, enclosure 5. Tlic creation of tliis reservoir nTould necessitate: I'

ir (a) Relocation of about 0.7 mile State highway, including construction of one

bridge; relocation of approximately 0.6 mile of county higl~way including one bridge; and relocation of about 4.5 miles of private road.

(b) Relocation of 3.2 miles of trans~nission line and 7.6 miles of telephone line. 1 Not printed.


75. AJ, J4elones Dam.-The proposed clam would be a constant angle-arch type concret,e structure with a m%xin~unl height of 355 fcet above stlseam bet1 and a crcst lengtli of 918 feet. General de.sign

. .. features are slionrn on enclosures 6 and 7.' For geology of tlie site, scc nppcndix V.' " 7G. Spilllm?l.-Tlie spillway would be of tlie overpour type, utilizing tlie c!ntirc crcst length of tlie clnm. Tlie cerit,ral portion woulrl have a crest lcngt*h of 315 fret nntl n70uld be depressed 5 feet below t.he slde sgctions wliicli n~oultl llnrc a crest elera.tion of 855 fect mean sea lcvcl.

~ ~

Aeration picrs woultl be provitletl to prevent formation of vacuum. The clischarping capacity o f tlie depressed section of the spillway under a surc1in.1-gc of 5 feet would be approximntcly 11,400 cubic feet pcr sccontl. The capacity of the entire spillway and tlie variation tltcrnof with tlept,ll of surrllarge are sliown on enclosure 6.'

77. Flood out1els.-The flootl out.lets woultl consist of a battery of two 48-inr11 nnd four 72-inch steel-lined conduits througli t11r:dnm nt cent,cr clerntions of 545 ancl 540 fect mean son level, respectively. Eacli flootl outlet woultl bc equipped with nn ernergcncy gate mcl a service gate of t,l~e ring-follower type operated by hydlaulic pressure, Provision would bc made for mnnunl opcmtion. Access to t.he gates would be tlirougl~ n radial gallery from the front fnce of the dam. The mnsimum tliscllarging cnpncity of the flood outlets would .be approxiriintcly 14,700 cul)ic feet per seconcl. Capacity under varylnf hentls is sliown on enclosure 6.'

78. Provision .for co.nnection to existing Afelones power plant.-l'lii: provision would consist of n 16-foot diameter concrete-linc prcssurt tunnel nroiind tlia left nbutment of the dam and a head-reductio~ works conucrting tlie proposed tunnel to the esisting Melones pressurc tunnel. Tlic ~)roposcd tunnel iiltalce would be of the subniergec grizzly type with inrert a t elevntiorl 630 fect mean scn lcvcl. AI ernergcncy gate shaft woultl be provided on tlie tunnel iinmcdiatel~ apstreual from the dam, Tlie emergency gate would be of caterpillui typc, 12 by 16 feet, and operatecl by meclinllicnl hoist a t the top of t.hl shnft above masimum reservoir level.

79. Tlie head-reduction works \vould be required to limit tlie hcac on the existing Melones power plant to a safe value. These work: would consist csscntinlly of an inclined steel riser pipe connecting a the lower end of the proposed pressure tunnel and discliargilig a t tla top through appropriat,~ regulating valves and energy absorbers iritc a regulat,ing basin with floor elevation 721 feet mean sca level. Wate from tliis basin would pass into a vcrt.ica1 shaft connected directlj to the csist.ing Mclones pressure tunnel. The regulating basin woulc be cquippetl a t the opposite end from the sllnft with a 14 by 15-foe, tnintcr spillwny gate, operating automatically in conjunctioii with tl~l regulating vnlves, to mnint.ain the pool a t a const,ant elevation of 74, feet men11 sea lcvel. A short section of inclined tunnel connectin1 tlie proposcd pressure tunriel with tlie existing Mclones pressure tunne would be provitletl for tlie purpose of bypassing flows when tlie reser voir clevntion is within snfe limits for the existing power plant. Botl - the steel riser pipe nnd tlie inclined tunnel would be provided witl 144-uich butterfly shut-off valves operated mechanicnll and provlsio~ would be macle for manud operation. Provision wouf~ also b mad' to t,he proposed 16-foot pressure tunnel for the future connection of I

Kot printed.

12-foot penstock to provide for possiblo futnrc utilization of head beyond the safe limits of tlle existing power plant.

80. Natural vaJle?/ storage-Flowage rights.-To insure the continued effectiveness of natural valley storage, i t is proposed to reserve, for overflow, those lands which now flood naturally a t about tlle discharges to which the proposed improvements would regulate the maximum flood of record. The areas for which flowage rights would be required are shown on maps, enclosures 8 and 9.'

81. Revetments, channel enlargement, and 1ez)ees.-To stabilize existing channels and to prevent destrilction of levees by bank caving, revetment of approximately 58,000 linear feet of river bank, and 6.7 miles of levee set-back incidental thereto, would be required on the lower portion of Stanislaus River, on San Joaquin River between Tuolumne River and Stockton, on tlle Deep Water Channel, on Paradise Cut, and in Old River, all generally as sllown on map, enclosure 10. The necessary channel enlargement would consist of the removal of obstructions a t three points in Paradise Cut as shown on map, enclosure 10. I n order to make effective the leveo system which now exists along San Joaquin River between Merced River and the upper delta, relocation, raising, and minor extensions would be necessary, generally as shown on map, enclosure 10. Approximately 11.7 miles of levee relocation would be required nnd npproximately 41.1 miles of existing levee would need to be rnisecl. Extensions of present levees would total approximately 3.0 miles. The capacities of th'e leveed and enlarged channels, with 3-foot freeboard, would be as given in table 22.

82. Reservoir operation.-The proposed reservoir operating criteria were based upon control of the floods of tlle period of record. During tlle rain flood senson, December khrou h March, certain specified storage space would bo kept available f or flood control, and, after about April 10, flood-storage requirements would be predicated on snow survey reports. With operation as given herein there wo~ild have been no spillway discharge during any floods of record a t either Jacksonville or New Melones Dams. The daily operation for thc major flood seasons of 1905-6, 1906-7, 1910-11, and 1937-38 would have been as shown in appendix V on plates V-10 to 13. Tllc operation of proposed reservoirs during the period of record and the effect upon flood discharges above the delta (Vernalis) are sliown in appendix V on lates V-14 to 24. Proposed criteria for operating Friant, Jacksonvi P le, and New Melones Reservoirs are given herewith and further det.ails are included in appendix V.l As used herein, net release means total release minus irrigation diversions.

(a) Frianl Reservoir, rain-flood season.-A minimum of 70,000 acre-feet of storage would be kept empty from December 1 to April 1 except during temporary storage of floodwaters. During and after a flood, a net release of 7,000 cubic feet per second would be maintained until the temporarily stored water is discharged.

f early snow survey reports should indicate abnormal snow-melt run-off, net releases not exceeding 7,000 cubic feet per second would be made in order to make available on April 1, 300,000 acre-feet of storage space. Under this o ra tion all rain floods of record would have been controlled to a maximum net recase of 7,000 cubic feet per second.

Snow-tnelt-flood season.-Operation after about April 10 would be on the basis snow-melt run-off-release curves (pl. V-7) I used in conjunction with the snow survey reports. Under this operation the snow-melt floods of record would have been controlled to a lnaximum net release of 9,500 cubic feet per second for 1906 and 7,000 cubic feet per s e c o ~ ~ d for all others.

a Not prlnted.

f \ - d


( h ) Jacksonville Reservoir, rain-flood senson.-This reservoir would be kept empty from December 1 to April 1 exccpt tl~tring temporary storage of floodwaters, which would be released a t the rat,e of 6,000 cubic fect per second net until the flootl crest on the 111ain San Joaqrtin shall hnve passed the T~~olumne Rivcr, after which the relrase would be increased to not rnorc Lhan 9,000 cubic feet per sccond net, d-q.ndinq on m%iu Ssn Jos311in discharg?~.

Sttow-~r~cl/-jlood season.-Opcratiol~ after about April 10 would he on the bn.qis of the Y I I U \ V - I I I C ~ ~ ~ , ~ u ~ I - ~ I T - N ~ I c ' ~ ~ ~ curves (1)). 17-8) 1 I I S : . ~ in connection with the snow-survey reports. Under this operntion all s~low-mdt floods of racord would have I>ccli co~itrollrct to a maximum net release of 9,000 cubic fect per sccond.

(c) A'EIU hielones I<eservoir, tui91-jlood smamt.-Excel,t clr~ring tcmpora~y storage of tlood\vntc.rs. tlic ~ ~ l i ~ l i ~ n u n l space nv~lilnl,le in this reservoir wo~lld be 175,000 acre-feet on December 1, 223,000 acre-fcct on Ju~lunry 1 and Fcl,r~lary 1, and 340,000 ucrc-feet on hIarch 1 and April 1. Te~l~porarilp stored rain floodwater wo~~ltl f)c rcblensrd at. tllc rate of 6,000 cubic feet per second net u~ltil, the flood crest on the r n n i ~ ~ S ~ I I Joaquin shall have pnssrct tlle St~anislaus Ill\*cr, nftcr which the release would be increased t,o not rnorc than 8,000 cul>ic feet pcr second net, d(q~cntlinr: on maill San Joacluin cliscllarges.

Snow-nrcll-./lootl sect so?^.-Ol~c~ratio~i nftcr n l ~ o r ~ t April 10 mould he based upon the snow-rnelt-rel[!ase cllrvcs (111. V-9) 1 tlsed in conncrct.ion with the? RIIOW SIIIVOY reports. Lnder this opcratio~i all snow-nlvlt flootls of record would liuve been controllctl to n masimuln net release of 8,000 cubic feet, per second.

83. Comparison of eristing and proposed channel capacities and disclturges.-Cnpncitics of existing clmnnds and maximum flood flows of rrcol.tl ns compnrecl to project cliannel capac~tics and mn~imurn discllnrgcs as regulnted by proposctl project nrct shown in tnhle 22.

TABLE 22.-Channel capacities and madmum discharges, present and proposed

I Cuticftcl I Cublc Jtrf I Cubic Jtrf ' Cubicftd Enn Joer~uln River: mr accond'ptr srrond per arcond ptr atcosd

At Friant ..........-.----- 15.MJO %.CW I (I) 9, %U Skoers I31ancb to Men- / ?.MI /......---.I (3) I.--. .....-, Cop.wlty exceeded once.

Abnvc hlerccd River ...... Merwcl At Excllrrluer I<irer: ...........-.

Nmr ~~ruullr ............... Tuolutlrtle Hiver:

h t La Grunge ..-..........

Remarks Nnnle and reach 01 stream

Nenr n~outh -...-....... ... Stonisluus Itivcr:

Urluw hleiunes Dam--..-- h'wr nloutll .....-----.. ...

6an Junquin Jlivcr: Ilclow hlerwd River..---. Hrlaw ' ~ I I ~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I C Itivrr ... biluiv ~Y~rrisl;lu:i I<irur ....

Upoer dellu chat~ntls.. ........ Ulr~ted Stntes Et~aineer De-

i~rtn~cr~t Oagc-Vculice Is- LIl<l.r

fifnd- n:um

regul~ted dis-

charge 3 Irle.rll ddilp

I niuul Maxi- un- 1 ~roject

11,600

18.500

21.000 li, tiW

9,000

10,700

8.000 11,100

26, rX)O 33. 5UU 33. nNI 38, MI

1U. 1

----

Presellt ml '~c i ly

31, 500

26. GOO

21,000 1i.W

42, iM )

43,800

66. BW 01. N O

33, OM) 63, OW b i , IW S2.8UO

I1.U

Capscity exceeded irrfre-

No regulation proposed (par. 67 UJ). .

Irrigation diversions not In. cluded.

rcgul~tcd c. ,p~city

I Coniplete protecUon unattain- able (par. Wd).

dis- chnrge 1

n,eun daily

I I I

I \\'ill, repetition 01 floods or record under eslsting eondltlons. 2 \\'it11 rvpetition 01 Iloocls of record under pruposed prulect. a x o cllaltgc. 4 I I I bactivuter. 1 \\.11h ~~ruxi~rrum anter supply leve1,ln Ssn lonquln River resulting from a recurrena? of the Uoods of

with 3- loot lree

bout4

record under 1)rol)osed projeci.~ 6 L)ischar~e nL lirsL lever: failure or overtopping. 1 Stuge S ~ I O W I I r.~tIrcr Li1311 discharge b w u s e UI tidal d e c t .

40 SAX JO-4QUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA

84. Coordination with Centrd Va.lley project and State water plan.- (a) Frianl Reservoir.-The flood-control use of Friant Reservoir as proposed

herein -would not impair its effcctive~tess for irrigation tw co~~templated under the Central Vallcy project.

(b) Jacksonville Ilescrvoir.-Thc proposed Jacksonville Ileservoir would not interfere wit11 the rtlt.in~ate Don I'edro Rcecrvoir of 1,000,000 nrrc-feet descrihctl in the State plan, l,ut this ult.imnte Don l'edro Reservoir would render the Jack- sonville and the preset~t Don I'edro Dmns ol)soletc. Because of tlcvelop~ncnts conten~plated on I'uol~tmne lliver by the city of Sari Francisco, it is doubtful that the ultimate Don IJedro Dam will ever I~ecome necessary.

(c) Kew illelones Kesermir.-The State wnt.cr p!?tt proposes a reservoir on Stanislaus liiver of 1,090,000 acre-feet capacity. 1 he practicability of such a reservoir wo~tld depend on large-scale irriyatio~i and power clevelop~~~cnts which do not appenr ccot~o~nically feasible a t this time. Flood cotttrol would he improved 1it.tlc over that provicled by the 450,000 acre-foot reservoir proposed in this report, the constr~!ctior~ of which would not ~)reclude future construction of a new dam to increase the reservoir size t,o that proviclcd in the State water plan.

SIII. COST OF IMPROVEMENT

85. Estimated cost qf proposed works.-The. cst,imatccl first cost of the proposed improvomcnts, including tho portion of the first cost of Friant Dam cl~argcable to flood control, is $22,100,000. Tllc annunl or economic cost would be $1,235,600, inclutling $126,600 for maint,c- nancc and operation. Detai!s regarding these costs arc given in tables 23 and 24 ~ n d in appendix VII.'

TABLE 23.-First cost of itnprovements

Dams and reservoirs: Portion of cost of Friant Dam chargeable to flood control----- $3,500,000 Jacksonville Dam and Reservoir:

Dam and appurtenant works---- $5,739, 500 Engineering and contingencies, a t

15 percent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 860,500 $6,600, 000

Roads, bridges, and utilities----- 845, 800 Clearing - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 87,500 Gages (6 record in^, radio report-

inq) (2 recording only) - - - - - - - 20, 700 ,

Total- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' 954,000 Engineering and contin-

gencies, a t 25 percent-- 239,000 1,193,000

Land and improvements -------- 630,700 Acquisition, a t 40 percent-- 252, 300

883,000

Total, Jacksonville Dam and Reservoir ----------- 8,676,000 New Melones Dam and Iteservoir:

Dam and appurtenant works---- $3,388,000 Engineering and contingencies, a t

15 percent --------------..--- 508, 000 $3,896,000

Roads, bridges, and utilities----- 474, 000 Clearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96,000 Gages (1 recording, radio report-

ing) (1 recording only) - - -_- - - 3, 000 - ~~

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573,000 Engineering and contin-

gencies, a t 25 percent-- 143,000 716,000

Not printed.

TABLE 23.-First cost oj improvements I I

- D a m and reservoirs-Continued. New Melonas Darn and Reservoir-- -- Co~~tinued.

Land and improvements -------- $1, 144,000 'd Acqt~isition, a t 35 percent- - 399, 000

$1.543.000

Tot.&], NCW Melones Dam and Reservoir - - - - - - - - - $6, 155,000 Revetments, channcl enlargement and levees:

Revetments ---- - - - - - - - -------- - - - - - - - - - - $1,450,000 Clianncl enlargement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,300 Levec construction and reconstruction ----------- 774, 700 Rights-of-way for levees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 000 Clearing for levees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,000

Total - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2,375,000 Engineering and contingencies, a t 25 percent- 594, 000

Tota l - - - - - . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2,969,000 Flowage easements:

Easements along main Sun Joaquin River- ------ $600, 000 Acquisition, a t 33% percent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 200,000

800,000

Total estimated first cost --------------------------- 22, 100,000

TABLE 24.-Annual or econonric cost of inrprooemenls

(a) Federal investment: (1) Portion of cost of Friant Dam chargeable

to flood control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,500,000 (2) &timated expenditure for Jacksonville

l h r n and ILesen-oir - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8,676,000 ~ ~ ~

(3) Interest during const.ruction, 3 percent of item (2) for one-half of estimated 3-year construction period - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 390,000

(4) Estimated espenditure for Xew Melones Dam and Reservoir - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6, 155,000

(5) Interest. during const,ruction, 3 percent of iten1 (1) for one-half of estimated 2-\-ear construction period - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 185,000

(G) Value of Federal lands to be submerged- - 25,000

(7) Totn! Federal investment in dams and reser- V O I ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $18,931,00(

(8) Estimated expenditure for revetments, ehant~el enlargement, and levees- - - -- - $2, 875,000

(9) Interest during constrnction, 3 percent of item (8) for one-half of estimatcd 3-year construclion period- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 129,400

(10) Total Federal investment in revetments, channel enlargement, and levees- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,004,001

11 1) Total Federal investment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21,935,001 ,--, (b) Federnl annual carryit~g charge:

(1) Interest. 3% ~ercen t of item (a) (11) - - - - $767,700 ,-, - - (2) ~rnort,izhth;n' of depreciation and obso-

L lescetlce, it,em (a) (7) (35 percent on 25-year basis) ----..----------------- 224,000

(3) Amortization of depreciation and obsolescence, item (a) (10) (356 percent on 25-year basis) ..----------..---------- 77, 100

SAN' JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, C.4LIFORNIA 43

TABLE 24.-Annual or economic cis1 of improvemenls-Continued

(b) Federal annual carrying charge-continued. (4) Maintenance and operation of dams,

reservoirs, and gnges - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $23,500 (5) Maintenance of revetments and chan-

n e l s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - G5,000

(6) Total gross Fcderal a~inunl currying charge--- $1, 157, 300 (7) Reimbursement by local interests for i11-

terest and amortization of $1,095,030- $51,400 (8) Reimbursement by Sta~iislaus Itivcr in-

terests of one-half of maintenance nnd operntion cost of Ncw RIelones Dam and Rescrvoir (see item ( d ) (14)). . - - - 3,000

(9) Total reimburscment by local interests---- - - - 54,400

(10) Net Federal annual carrying chnrge ---------- 1, 102,900 (c) Non-Federal invest,ment:

(1) Funtls to IJC cont,ributed by local interests t,o first cost of reservoirs (see (d) ( I ) and (3))--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - None

(2) Estimated expenditure for lcvce rights-of- way. . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $94,000

(3) Flowhge easements. . . -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 800,000

(4) Total non-Federal investmen6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 894,000 (4 Non-Federal annual carrying charge:

(1) Interest. 4% percent of item (c) (4). . --- - $40, 200 (2) Reimbursement of Fedcrnl interest, a t 3%

percent on $1,098,000 (see ( b ) (7)) - - - - - 38, 400 (3) Reimbr~rsement for ainort~izatio~i of de-

preciation and obsolescence of $1,09S,000 of Federnl investment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13, 000

(4) Reimbursement for one-half of maintenance nnd operation of New hlclones Dam nnd Reservoir -----. - - - - - - - - - - - - 3,000

(5) Maintenance of levees.. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38, 100

('3) Total non-Federal annunl carrying charge- - - - - 132,700

( 4 Total aiinr~nl cost- - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,235, 000

XIV. BENEFITS FROM IMPROVE~IENTS

86. Genera.1.-The benefits which would result from the proposed plan of improvement are:

(a) Flood control benefits: (1) Direct: Reduction of direct flood damages. (2) Indirect: Reduction of indirect flood losses.

(b) Collateral benefits: (1) Improvement. in irrigation water supply. (2) Increase in .power production.

(c) Intanqible benefits: (1) Reduction of intangible flood losses. (2) Appreciation in lnnd values due to improved land use.

(A) FLOOD CONTROL BENEFITS

87. Reduction of direct flood damages.-The present estimated average G annual direct flood damage of $1,425,000 would be reduced to about $261,000 by construction of the proposed plan of improvement giving a net direct flood-control benefit of about $1,164,000. Table 25 shows,

by reaches, (a) the average nnnud direct damn es under present 7 conditions; (b) residual direct damages with contro by Friant Reser- voir alone; (c) residual direct damages with control by proposed plan; (d) direct flood-control benefits from Friant Reservo~r alone; (e) direct floocl-control benefits from proposed plan.

..=' TABLE 25.-Dired flood-control benefits

Reach

Average annual direct flood damage ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ! ~ t

I ....--...,.~......~~~.~----------- m,m 11 ........-........--------.--------- 145.000 I11 .................----------------- 35.m I V --................--.-------------- 4e,m V .....--.-..........-------------------- 138.W V I --...............----------.---- bi,000 \:I1 ...............------.----------- 28.000 VIII ....-..........---.---------- 1913,000 IX ...-.............--------------- 382,000 x ............-.....----------------- 3tiY.000 --

Total ..--...-......---------------.-- I, 425,000 -- 0 , I I. la; ma

88. Redudwn qf indirect flood losses.-The present estimated nvcr- nge annual indircct flood losses of $35,000 woultl be reduced to nbout

I $1,000 by tlie proposed plan of improvement giving a net indirect flood-control bcncfit of $34,000. Table 2G shows, by reaches, (a) tho

! average annual indirect flood losses under present conditions; (b) rcsitlual intlirect losscs with control by Friant Rescrvoir alone.; ( c ) residual indircct losscs wit11 control by proposed plan; ( ( I ) ~nclvect flood-control bencfits from Friant Reservoir alone; (e) indirect flood- control benefits from proposed plnn.

TABLE 26.-Indirecl flood-control benefils

Average annual Indirect flood Average annual Indirect damage Hood-control benefils

Rcnch Present Friant

I ...-.-.-.....-.-------.----------------- 11 ....-.--..-....----------------.----- *

111 ..---....--....-------------.-------- I V ....---...-.---..-------.------ v .......-...-----..----*---------------- VI ......-........-----.----.------. VII .... ..-----..-.---. v111 ....--.........A--..-...--..--------- 1X ...-..--.........--.--------.. X......----......-.---.------*.*..------

Total .-...-.......-----.-----.-------

s5.000 2,000 1.000 4.000 2.m 4000 3,000 I%m

--------..-- .----.--.---

35,000

0 0

$1,000 4.000 2,000 4.000 3.000 11.0~0

---------.-- ------------

0 0

$1,000 0 0 0 0 0

------------ ----------.- - - -

25,0001 1,000 10.0001 34.000

$5,000 2,000

0 0 0

2,000 0

1,000 ------------ ------------

U.000 2, 000

0 4.000 2,000 6, 000 3.000 12.000 --------. - - - .-----------

44 SAN JOAQUIE; RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORKIA

(B) COLLATERAL BENEFITS

89. Irrigation benefits.-New reservoirs on Tuolrlmne and Stanislaus Rivels, ns included in tlie proposed plan of improvement, would improve both the yield and scasonnl distribution of irrigation watcr sup-

. plies. These ndditional yields avernge 13,600 acre-feet and 63 ,300 t acre-fcet of primc wnter annually on Tuolumne nntl Staliisluus Rivers, respectively. Studies of the value of primc irrigation water in the area show that the average value is $1.40 pcr acrc-foot a t tlie reservoir. (See appendix IV.) Applying this unit value, tlie annual net benefits to irrigation are Tuolumne River, $19,000; Stanislnus Rivcr, $88,600; or a total of %107,600. Further detail on irrigation benefits is given in nppendis V1.l

90. Power benefits.-The proposed reservoirs on Tuolumne and Stn~lislnus Rivcrs also would ~mprove powcr production a t the existing downstream plnnts. Change in annual procluction of plants on Tuolumne River would be primary power, incrensc of 78,000,000 kilowatt-hours; nnd secondary power, decrease of 23,000,000 kilowatt- hours. At AJelones plant on Stanislaus River the cl~ange in nnnual production would be primnry power, increase of 61,000,000 1-'1 rl owatt- hours; and secondaly power-, tlecrcase of 6,700,000 kilowatt-hours. Stuclies of the vnlue of power show that tlie average value per kilowatt- hour for primary power is 4.0 mills and secondary power 1.3 mills. (See appendix IV.) Applying those unit values, the annual power benefits would be Tuolumne Rivcr, $282,100 ; Stanislnus River, $235,300; or a totnl of $517,400. Further data on incrcascd power output and benefits are given in nppcndix V1.l

(c) INTANGIBLE BENEFITS

91. Reduction of intangible flood losses.-Rctluction of losses not susceptible of evaluation are considered as intangible benefits. Losses of this type eliminated or greatly rcduccd by tlie proposed plan of improvement arc given in paragraph 60. Witli tlie exception of loss of life, recortls of which are not availnble, all of the intangible losses have occurred during tlie pcriod of record. Unclcr present conditions and probable future conditions, recurrence of thc major floods of record will cause even greater intangible losses than have occurred in the past. Such future intangible losses may even equal thc direct damages.

92. Appreciation of land d u e s clue to improved land use.-With the removal of the flood hazard through flood control, suitable lands now intermittently farmed to low-income crops, could bc rcgularly culti- vated to more productive, higher type crops. As thcrc can be no guaranty that such changes in cropping actually woultl be undertaken, this potential increasc in Iantl value is consideretl to be an i~itnligible benefit and has not been evaluated.

SUMMARY O F BENEFITS

93. Flood control and collateral: benefts.-Tablo 27 gives the totnl 1'. flood control and collateral benefits resulting from control by Frinnt t' Reservoir alone and from the proposed. plan.

Not prlnted.


TABLE 27.-S-ummarg-Flood'conlrol and collaleral benejts

I Average annual flood control end wllaceral beneflts

Type of benrfit

Totals ......-....-.------ ... - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - . 1 240.000 ( 1,823,000

~ r r % ~ t i i n : luolumne . - . . - ~ . . . ~ . ~ - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - . . - - - Stanislaus ....... . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - . - - - . . - - -

Power .......---.-...-...---- .--..--* - - - - ~ - . - - - - - - - - - - . - 'I'uolumne .--.-.. .-------------- ... . - . Stnnislaus . - . . - . . . - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - .

XV. DISCUSSION

91. General.-Flood control in tho San Joaquin River area is fun- dnrnentnlly a matter of controlling flows from the tributaries to within the capacity of tlic Snn c)uuquin channel. Control solely by Icvees or bypasses or nny combination of tllem would not be economical, would aggravate flood conditions within thc lower delta, and would not consenre yalunble watcrs. Neither would reservoirs alone provitle an economical method of control. Rcservoir storage in combination with irnprovemcnts in the existing levee systems and with utilization of naturd vdley storage would provide tlte most economical and fensible method of control. Storage reservoirs proposed in the plan of improvement have capacities slifficicnt to rcducc drimnging flows rcsultillg from floods \vhich have occurl*cd during the period of rccord to a justifiable minimum. As the areas wlucll woulcl be dnmnged by a recurrence of the iioods of rccord will probably not undergo future large scale cleve!opment, complete protection against flootls grentcr tlian any of tl~ose of record is considered to be beyond thc limits of cconomic justification. Under operatZion of the proposed plan of improvemcllt, about 82 percent of the total avcrage nnnunl flood damage for the period of record would be prevented. About 58 percent of the residual flood damnge would occur in the lower delta wllerc additionnl reduction of damage has been shown to bc nonpreventable by control of the San Joaquin River group alone. Fnrtlier protection for this area will be considered in an authorized survey for floocl control of Sacramento Rivcr. Benetits, anticipded to result from the proposed improvements, would escecd the cost, the ratio of annual benefits to annud cost bcing 1.5:l.

95. Friant Reservoir.-Under the opcrntion outlined in paragraph 82 a , tlie reduction in flood damages due to Friant Reservoir would be $240,000 annually. (See par. 93.) Assuming a life of 40 years and the snrne benefit to cost ratio as for the entire proposed project, the flood-control vnlue of t h s rcservoir would be about $3,500,000. I n order for flood control t o warrant a Federal participation of this amount in tlie construction of Friant Reservoir, Friant Dam must be constructed to include tlie features described in parngmph 69 and operated as described in parngrnph 82 a.

.---.--------- ----.- .- -- - - - - P) .---.-------.-

.---.-------- -

19.000 M, (jUO

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 282.100 W 5 . m

\


96. Maintenance and operation.- (a) Jacksonville and New Melones Dams and Reservoirs.-In order to assure

proper functioning of these improvements, the United Sbatcs should maintain and operate them. This operation wortld be a s desired by local interests after the flood-control r e q ~ ~ i r e m r n t . ~ , as outlincd hercin, have been complied with. The annual cost of this maintenance and operation is estimatcd to be $7,500 for Jacksonville Dam and Rcscrvoir and 8,000 for New hhlones Dam and Reservoir. t. (See appendix V1I.l) These items have been included a s Fcclcrnl charges in the estimate of annual cost. Because Stanislaus River irrigation interests would be relieved of maintaining and operating the present Rlelonrs Reservoir a t a n estimated annual cost of $3,000, this amount should bc paid nnnu~ l lp to the Federal Government and has therefore been shown a s a Federal credit and as a non-Federnl charge in the estimate of annual cost.

I (b) Revetntents and channels.-Maintenance of revetments and leveed channels I

I should be assumed bv the United States. I t is estimated that this would amount to approximately $65,000 annr~allv. (See appcndis V1I.l) These items have ' been included as Federal charges i ~ i the estimate of annual cost. i

i (c) Levees.-The levecs in the San Joaqr~in area arc now mnintaincd by local ! interests and this maintenance should remain a local responsibility. The main- 1

tenance cost of levees in the delta (below Southern Pacific bridge a t Mossdale) , is not considerrd as n project cost bccause no improvement of these 1r:vces is

contemplated (except where necessary to permit revetment of banks), and because, . ; in calculating the benefits which would result in th? delta from the proposed

' project, i t was assumed that ma in tc~~ance would continue to be only as affective a s in the past. Adequate maintenance of tlie improved levee system 011 San I

Joaquin River frcrn Southern Pacific bridge a t hlossdale to Merced River, and on T ~ ~ o l u m n e and Stanislaus Rivers mithin influence of backwater from San Joaqvin River t o the upper liniit of proposed levee construction and re-o~~struc- t icn a s shown on enclosure 10, is estimated to cost $38,100 annually. 'Phis i amount has been included as a non-Federal charge in the estirnat.~ of annual cost.

( d ) Supervision of project.-The cost of the I2cdernl supervision necessary to assure the proper flood-control operation of the proposed project, and maintenance and operation of gaging stations is estirrat.cd to be $10,000 annually, and this amount has been included a s a Federal charge in the estimate of annual cost. (See appendix lrII.)1

97. Local contribution to first cost.- (a) Jacksonville and New Melones Reservoirs.-Bencfits to irrigation interests on

the Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers have bcen based upon future desirable irriaa- tlon water supply as determined by these intemsts and substantiated in studies for this report. The Stanislaus River irrigation interests have definitcly requested (see rcsolutions in appendix 1)' t ha t they be allowed to participate in a multiple- purpose improvement on Stanislaus RiGer.

Of the $1,198,000 annual flood-control benefits which would accrue to the roposed project, approximately $830,000 is attributable to Jacksonville and

!?ew hlelones Reservoirs alone. (Sce pan . 87, 88, and appendix VII.)I Annual collateral benefits from these reservoirs would be $107,600 for irrigation and $517,400 for power. (See pars. 89 and 90.) Irrigation benefits are about 7.4 percent of the total benefits estimated to accrue to the project because of these two reservoirs. Since the conservation of water is one of the functions of the project and in keeping with general policy with respect to projects involving the consumptive use of water, local irrigation beneficiaries of the regulated flow to be provided by the proposed improvements should participate in the cost thereof in proportion to their benefits. This would a n ~ o u n t to a participation to the extent of $193.000 on Tuolumne River and $905,000 on Stanislaus River. Contributions which should be made because of increased production a t Don Pedro, La Grange, and Melones power plants would be determined and collected under the provisions of section 10F of the Federal Power Act.

(b! F'lolurrge n'glrls.--ln the proposed plan of improvement, natr~ral valley tora age on San Joaquin River is an essential factor in controlling flood AOWR. I t is proposed t o preserve thesc! valley storage arelrs from fu twe recl~mation by the .. purchase of flowape rights. An alne~idnicnt t o the Sacramento and Snn Jcaquirr drainage ip*. passed by the California State Legislature in 1839 provides, when ly' 1 required, for the acq~~isit ion of flowage rights n r~d their conveyanre to the Iir~ited States free of cost. Flowage rights needcd for the proposed plat1 of improvement

'Not printed.


are estimated t o coat $800,000 and are included in the cs t in~ate of cost a s a !Ion- Federal invektmcnt.

(I:) Levers.-Right?-of-wrr~ necessary for the proposcd levee works should be furnished by local ii~terests. The cost thcraof is estimated to be $94,003.

5

v" XVI. CONCLUSIONS

98. The district engineer concludes: (a) That, under present conditions of development, future floods

in the San Joaquin River area will result in an average annual damage of about $1,460,000.

(b) That adequate protection can be provided by the construction of improvements herein proposed a t an estimated initial cost of $22,100,000 (including that portion of the cost of Friant Reservo~r chargeable t i flood c&trol). ^

(c) That charge to flood 'control of about $3,500,000 of the first cost of Friant Reservoir would be justified by the flood-control benefits to result. ~rovided the reservoir is built to imnound 390.000 acre-feet of act& storage of which 70,000 acre-feetLwould be' for flood control only, is equipped with flood outlets having a capacity not less than 12,000 cubic feet per second when the storage is 130,000 acre-feet (the amount of inactive storage), and is operated for flood control n s described in paragmph 82a.

(d) That incidental use of stored water would improve present irrigation practices in bot,h the Tuolumne and Stanislaus River service areas, for which improvement local interests should participate in the initinl cost of proposed reservoirs ns follows:

(e) That the War Department should maintain and operate the dams, reservoirs, str~am-gagin stations, revetments, and channels a t an estimated anmmal cost of $88,500, of which t3,000 should be repaid by Stanislaus River irrigntion interests.

Cf) That local interests should maintain tlie improved levee system in a condition satisfactory to the Secretary of War a t an estimated anllual cost of $38,100.

(g) That total average annunl benefits would be $1,823,000, and the ratio of benefits to cost would be 1.5 : 1.

(h) That the proposed project would result in increased powcr production from existing power plants a t Don Pedro Dam, La Grange Dnm, and h4elones Dam.

(i) That tlie development of hydroelectric power a t the proposed Jacksonville Dam and an addition to the present plant a t Melones are not economically justified a t this time. (j) That new upstrenm developments for the generation of hydro-

electric power would have little direct effect on flood control. . (k) That the continued use of levees constructed by local interests

and the preservation of natural valley storage are necessary parts of an adequate plan for flood control.

Tuolurnne River Irrlgutlon Interests ..-------.--.------.-------------------.. Stanislous River irrigation Interests ......----~---------.-----------

E:ZE;t

$193.000 805.00U

Payable In 40

;g,y;;:; or-

SJ. 000 42,400


(1) That the cooperation to be required of local interests will be I forthcoming.

(m) That no project is economically justifiable at this time for either Chowchilla or Fresno River, or on thc other streams of the Mndera County group; nor is a project warranted now for Merced River or

. Mokelumne River. XVII. 'ENDATIONS

tl 99. Tho dist,lic t cnginocr rccorr?mcnds: (a) That a flood-cont.rol projcct for San Joaquin Rivcr and tribu- , tarics bo adopted nt an cstiw-atcd first cost of $22,100,000.

j (b) That tAc projcct includo tho construction of Jacksonville Rcsor- ! voir nlitli a gross storage capacity of 317,000 acrc-fmt, New Mcloncs 1 Rcscrvoir with a gross storago capacity of 450,000 acre-feet, and i revetments, channrll cnlnrgcmont., nnd lovcc construction and rncon- i struction, all substnntially as ouilirled herein, nt an ~st~imntctl first : cost of $18,600,000; ancl a chni-gc to flood control of $3,500,000 of tllc : first cost of constructing Friant Rcscrvoir, providccl an agrccmc!nt is

cffcctcd to construct an.d opcratc said rr?sorvoir in accordance with thc provisions of paragraphs 98 (c) and 82 (a). i

(c) That tho participn'iion of thc Unitcd Stntcs in tllc first cost of t,hc projcct bc $21,206,000 of which ~1,098,000 would be rcpaid by l ~ c d instcrcsts.

(d) That thc Statc of Californin or othcr local intcrcsts contributo townrd thc first cost of thc project (1) $1,098,000 to bc pnicl, upon 1 con?plci.ion of thc projcct, in 40 nnnunl installm.cnt.s of $51,400 cach, I .

1 (2) all rights-of-way for lcvccs at an ostim.ntcd cost of $91,000, and (3) flowago rights for overflow arcas doscribccl hcrcin at nn cstimntod cost of $800,000. i

(e) T l ~ n t m.aintcnancn and opclaiion of rcscrvoii*s, d a ~ . s and ap- purtcnnr?.ccs, s t r e a m - I . stations, rovctmcnts, and cllnnnds bc t.11~ rcspo~sibilif of tho Unitcd a t an cstimatcd n~inual cost of $88,500, anc i" t,hat $3,000 of this aw.0un.t be ropaitl b local intorcsts. 1 (j) That mnintcnancc of proposcd project lcvccs, a r' ong San Joaquin

i Rivcr irom Rlcrccd River to Soutl~c!rn Pncific Railroad briclgc at I Mossdalc and along lowor rcachcs of Stnnislaus and Tuolumnc Kivcls, j 1 be tho responsibility of locnl intcrcsts a t an cstirnatc:d nnnual cost of 1 $38,100; and that tho maintcnnncc of nll other Icvoes nlong t.ho river / and in the doltn continuc to bc thc responsibility of local in'ccrosts.

(g) That bnfore construction is st.arted on any clomcnt of the plojcct, the Statc of Calilornia, or otlior rosponsil~lc? local agc!ncics, gi\-c nssur- anccs satisfactory to the Secretary of U'ar t.hat they will contributo toward rhc first cost of t:hc projcct as provided in parngraph 99 (d).

(h) Thnt t.11~ Statc of California shall pnss legislation wliich slinll mnko illcgnl, on lands rescrvod for ovcrflo\v, cons:ructic n of any lcvccs, di tcllcs, or other worlts wliich m.ight rcclucc or ilnpcdc such ovcrflo\v, excnpt as may be approved by the Socrotnry of F a r .

(i) That, if the proposed worlr is authorizcd, an initial allotment of $6,000,000 be made to permit the cfficicnt and timely prosccution of \

the work. e L. B. C H A ~ ~ B E R S , 1%' 1

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District En.gineer.

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER A N D TRIBUTARIES, CALIFORNIA 49

[Pint endonement]

OFFICE, DIVISION ENGINEER, SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION, Sun Francisco, June 10, 1940. - To: Thc Chief of Engineers, Unitcd States Army.

1. This report covers the San Joaquin River group, comprising Snn Joaquin, Mokelumnc, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced, Chowchilln, ancl Fresno Rivers nnd tlieir tributaries in tlie northerly portion of the San Joqauin Valley, Calif. The watershed of the group, lying within 14 counties, comprises 17,000 squnre miles of which 5,000 square miles are 011 t,hc San Jonquin Vnlley floor. The area is bounded on the north by the northerly limit of the Cosumnes River watershecl and lower Snn Joaquin River, on the south by the Icings River ridge, and on the east and west by the crests of the Sierra Nevada and Coast Range respectively. Tlie San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys together folm the Grcnt Ccntrnl Vnlley of Califorllia and have a common outlct to the Pncific Ocean through San Francisco Bay.

2. Tlle report gives consideration to thc hydrological effects of tht flootls of all tributary streams, but does not include consideration oj locnl flood problems of five stream groups within the general nrea Separate reports will consider locnl flootl problcms of the A.Icrcec County strcnm group, the Littlejohn Creek group, and the Calaverar River group. No further reports will be submitted on local flooc problen~s of Chowchilln and Fresno Rivers or of Mokelumne River a! the prcliminnry cxnminations covering those strcams concluded tl>a~ rcmetlial works are not justified a t this time. However, consicleratlo~ llns been given in this report to the possibility of coordinating tllc operation of existing reservoirs on Mokelumne River for more effec tive flood coiltrol regulations.

3. Snn Jonquin Rlvcr flows westerly through mountain and footllil cnnyons of tho Sicrrn Ncvadn, dcbouches on the valley floor ncn Friant, nntl flows thence 60 miles to the valley trough near Mendotr whrre it is joined by Fresno Slough, a flood channel from Rings River It thcn flows northwesterly about 157 miles to the hcnd of tlie Sal Joaquin delta at hiossdnle. A network of interconnkcting tidal chnn nels and sloughs co\-ers the reclnimcd delta of 320,000 acres, formed! a swamp and overflow area. At the lower end of the delta, nen Collinsville, Snn Jonquin River joins with Sacramento River and form Suisun Bny. About 20 rivers, creeks, and strenm roups are tributaq to Snn Jonquin River from the ensterly side ancf 6 principal creel< join it from the west. side. The largest east side tributaries are Merced Toulumnc, Stnnislnus, and Mokelumne Rivers, which rise in the higl Sierra Nevatln slid contribute major flood flows to the river.

4. Tllc estimated 1938 population of the entire arca was 524,00( nntl of the area subject to flooding was 25,800. Agriculture nnd th processing and distribution of n ricultural products are tlle principa sources of income of the genera 7 area. Agricultural income in 193: was more than $135,000,000. The value of manufactured product in 1937 excrecled $477,000,000. Property vnlues in the gencral arc, - are estimated at over $1,250,000,000, of which about $55,000,000 ar within tlle aren subject to flooding. The nrea is adequately serve( with railroad and highway facilities.

50 SAN JOAQUIN RIVER AND TRIBUTr\RIES, CALIFORNIA

5. Avernge annual precipitation varies from nbout 8 inches on the valley floor to 55 inches in the mountains. Precipitation occurs principally from November Lo April and is negligible durin the summer and fall. It normally ceeurs as rain below tlle 5,000 &ot level and as snow a t higher elevations. Snow normally falls during the months and is retained until the following spring. Hun-off data o Snn Jonquin River and the main tributaries follow:

San Jonquln River at Frisnt. .-..-....-......-... .... Memd River at Exchequer .........-----.-.--------. Tuolumne River at Ln Orange .e............-----------

Stanislnus River below Ivlelonss .-....... .------------ 250. MX)

There are two distinct types of floods. Rain floods of high peak flow and short durntion occur during wiiit.er months, in which flood crests of tlie tributaries do not synchronize a t any point. Snon--melt floods occur in May, June, and July, llave a moderate peak flow and long duration, and produce main channel penk discliarges nearly equnl t,o the sum of tributary penlrs. Based on mensured floods of record, and without nllowance for greu.t historic floods, t,lle district engineer con- servatively estimates the average annual dnnlage from future floods a t $1.460.000.

6. hstensive irrigation systems, which include 800,000 acre-feet of reservoir storage, over 5,000 miles of canttls, ri,ncl estunnted to have cost $55,000,000, serve gravity and pumped water to about 805,000 acres. Installed hydroelectric generating capacity above the valley floor is nbout 500,000 kilowatts ant1 the annual power output is n.bout 3,000,000,000 kilowatt-11oui.s. The power plants are served by rescr- veil, l~aving n total capacit'y of 6,800,000 ncre-feet, of mhicl~ capncity 1,250,000 acre-fect is used jointly for irrigation and domestic water supply. War Department navigntion projects include the Stockton deep-water channel and the improvement of several minor cl~annels for light draft vessels. AWove the moutll of Mercctl River about 309,000 acres are subject to floodino of which 125,000 acres are afforded varying dcgrecs of protection ?;y local works. Between hsferced River and the deltn 85,000 acres are subject to inundation, of which 35,000 acres are pnrtially protected by levees provided by local interests a t a cost of nbout $1,500,000. Farmed areas of 280,000 acres in the delta are protected by levees provider1 by local interests a t n cost of nbout $20,000,000. Local interests desire additional flood control by the most suitnble methods to protect the endangered arcas.

7. The district engineer ~on~lucles: That adequate protection can be provided by the constr~ct~ion of improvements nt an estimated total first cost of $22,100,000 and a t a total nnnual cost for operation and maintenance of $126,600; that resulting annual benefits would be $1,823,000 and the ratio of benefits to cost would be 1.5 t o 1; thnt r . benefits to irrigation would accrue from the construction of proposed 4 reservoirs nnd the interests benefited should participate in the cost thereof; that increased power production would rcsult a t esisting downstream plants but that the installat~ion of new power generating capacity, while physically feasible, is not economically justifiable a t

' this time; that continued use of existing levees and natural valley storage are necessnry for adequate flood control; that cooperation required of local interests will be forthcoming, and that no flood storage cnn be economically obtained a t present on Merced River.

8. The district engineer recommends: That flood-control improve- [ -merits on San Joaquin River and tributnries be constructed a t ao estimnted total first cost to the United States of $21,206,000, of which

I I $1,098,000 would be repaid by local interests and including a charge I to flood control of $3,500,000 of the first cost of constructing Fria1:t

Rescrvoir, provided tlie reservoir is constructed and operated In nccordance with provisions set forth in his report; that the improve mcnts comprise Jacksonville and New R'lelones Reservoirs, with grosr capacities of 317,000 and 450,000 acre-feet, respectively, and reveb ments, channel improvements, and levees, all as described in the plar of improvement; that operation and maintenance of reservoirs, dam! and appurtenances, stream-gaging stations, revetments, and channel: be a responsibility of the United States, a t an estimated annual cos of $88,500, $3,000 of which to be contributed by local interests; tha the State of California or other local interests, prior to any construc tion, give assurances satisfactory to the Secretnry of War, that the: will (a) contribute $1,098,000 toward the first cost of the work payabl in 40 annual installments of $51,400 each; ( b ) furnish without cost t the United Statcs all rights-of-way for levees, estimated to cos $94,000, and flownge rights for overflow areas, estimated to cos $800,000; (c) contribute an annual sum of $3,000 toward the operatio of New hliclones Dam; (d) maintain all of the improved levee system above Mossdale Bridge, a t an estimated annual cost of $38,100, an continue to maintain all other levees along river channels and in th delta; that the State of California pass le "h islation whlch shall mali illegal, on Iands reserved for overflow, t e construction of levee! ditches, or worlrs, which might reduce or obstruct overflow, except 8 may be approved by the Secretary of War; and that, if the propose work is authorized, an initinl allotment of $6,000,000 be made to pel

. mit the timely and efficient prosecution of the work.. 9. The division engineer concurs in the concluslons and recon

mendations of the district engineer. However, he believes that t t nllowance for engineering nnd contingencies in cost estimates for tl proposed Jacksonville and New hlelones Dnms should be increase from 15 to 25 percent of the estimated. construction cost to, moi ndequntely allow for possible construct~oll and other uncertalntler This would increase the estimate of first cost by $913,000, making total first cost of $23,013,000 for the whole project. The ratio (

benefits to costs would then become 1.42 to 1. The estimated fir cost to the United States would be $22,119,000, of which $1,164,0( would be repaid by local interests in 40 nnnual installments of $54,5( each. The division engineer is of the opinion that. the benefits ha7 been calcul~ted on a very conservative basis, that intangible benefi are o'f considerable moment, and that the value of these lmprov ments to the community ns a whole is considerably greater thf

.... indicated by the evaluated benefits. WARREN T. HANNUM, Colonel, Corps of Engineers,

+n neer. Division C gi 0

RETURN - water.ca.govwater.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/cvfmp/docs/dd-dvd/House-Document-2.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of RETURN - water.ca.govwater.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/cvfmp/docs/dd-dvd/House-Document-2.pdf ·...