o LC V).S. Oajtiil Cj5iiy>5L (tfiOAjrmAZ>

( b ) ^ Coe U jd ilA JUJbOUAjCO^

‘VfXOuMUJ) lW h&MCLb aV§-

\Ottbj. EU&Aj a ^ijilo WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT by the US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS in KANSAS

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION DALLAS, TEXAS JANUARY 1977 U S ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS

FOR YOUR INFORMATION

This publication is a revised edition of a similar Several Division and District Engineers are pamphlet published in January 1975. responsible for the projects and activities of the Corps of Engineers as described in this pamphlet. Division It has been prepared to provide current information and District boundaries are shown on the fold-out map about the water resources development program of the at the end of the brochure and further information on US Army Corps of Engineers in Kanas. particular projects and activities may be obtained by addressing the appropriate office as follows:

ADDRESS INQUIRIES TO

Division Engineer Division Engineer US Army Engineer Division, Southwestern US Army Engineer Division, Missouri River Main Tower Bldg 1200, Main Street PO Box 103 Dallas, TX 75202 Omaha, NB 68101

District Engineer District Engineer US Army Engineer District, Tulsa US Army Engineer District, Kansas City PO B ox 61 700 Federal Building Tulsa, OK 74102 Kansas City, MO 64106

District Engineer US Army Engineer District, Albuquerque PO Box 1580 Albuquerque, NM 87103 (sorf 766-27#/ TO OUR READERS:

Throughout history, water has played a dominant role in shaping the destinies of nations and entire civilizations. The early settlement and development of our country occurred along our coasts and watercourses. The management of our land and water resources was the catalyst which enabled us to progress from a basically rural and agrarian economy to the urban and industrialized nation we are today.

Since the General Survey Act of 1824, the US Army Corps of Engineers has played a vital role in the development and management of our national water resources. At the direction of Presidentsand with Congressional authorization and funding, the Corps of Engineers has planned and executed major national programs for navigation, flood control, water supply, hydroelectric power, recreation, and water conservation which have been responsive to the changing needs and demands of the American people for 152 years. These programs have contributed significantly to the economic growth of our country and to the well-being of the American people.

Today, the activities of the Corps of Engineers in water resources management, under the direction of the executive and legislative branches of the Federal Government, continue to support national goals and objectives. These include conservation of our water resources, protection of our wetlands, nonstructural solutions to flood-damage control problems, total water management in metropolitan areas, flood plain management, and the preservation and enhancement of the quality of our environment for future generations.

This booklet describes the past, current, and proposed activities of the Corps of Engineers in your State. I trust that you will find it informative, interesting, and useful.

Lieutenant General, USA Chief of Engineers

t TOMORROW TODAY HOW CORPS OF ENGINEERS’ PROJECTS

L0CA17URBAN/REGIONAL PROBLEMS I | M PEOPLE ASK SURFACE: CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES TO AUTHORIZE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ASSISTANCE IN PROBLEM SOLVING t SECRETARY OF FOLLOWING APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS, DE CONDUCTS DE THE ARMY INITIAL PUBLIC MEETING: • INVESTIGATES ALL ALTERNATIVES • PERFORMS LIMITED DIRECTS -TECHNICAL FEASI­ BILITY STUDIES -ENVIRONMENTAL IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS ASSESSMENTS CONGRESS CHIEF OF ENGINEERS LOCAL PROBLEMS & A LT E R N ­ • PROPOSES MOST DIVISION ENGINEER ATIVES EMPHASIZING AUTHORIZES NATIONAL ECONOMIC FEASIBLE DISTRICT ENGINEER EFFICIENCY V ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS STUDY IDE) QUALITY 3 4 5 FORMULATION DE LATE STAGE DE STAGE PUBLIC • INVESTIGATES FORMULATION FORWARDS TO STATES/ STAGE ALTERNATIVES PUBLIC MEETING AGENCIES MEETING • PERFORMS OETAILEO - TECHNICAL FEASIBIUTY *3 STUDIES - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS­ MENTS • SELECTS PLAN FOR PROPOSAL • DISTRIBUTES DRAFT ENVIRON­ MENTAL IMPACT STATE­ MENT (EIS) (15 DAYS PRIOR TO LATE STAGE PUBLIC DISCUSS MOST MEETING) TENTATIVE PLAN FEASIBLE • MAKES DRAFT FEASIBILITY PROPOSED AND REPORT AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES DISCUSSED l^R) 9 DE PUBLIC: • REVIEWS COMMENTS TO DRAFT RESPONDS TO EIS ANDFR • PREPARES RECOMMENDED DRAFT EIS AND - REVISED DRAFT EIS DRAFT FR - f in a l f r - s t a t e m e n t OF FINDING (SOF) • REVIEWS REQUESTING PUBLIC FORWARDS TO • MODIFIES AS APPRO­ VIEWS BE SENT TO PRIATE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS - FINALFR (BERH) - REVISED DRAFT EIS • FORWARDS RECOMMENDA­ • INDORSES SOF TIONS TO BEPH • ISSUES PUBLIC NOTICE II

FIGURE 1 ARE STARTED, AUTHORIZED AND BUILT

BERH CONSIDERS VIEWS OP - PUBLIC AW) W m l^\ - STATES REVIEWS BOARD REPORT PREPARES HIS DRAFT RECOMMEN­ - AGENCIES DATIONS REVIEWS AND PROVIDES DISTRIBUTES FOR OUTSIDE RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW - REVISED DRAFT EIS (PUBLIC, - REVISED DRAFT EIS STATES, FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS) - FINAL FR (4 5 -DAY REVIEW PERIOD) - FR (GOVERNORS, FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS) TRANSMITS TO CHIEF OF ENGINEERS 13 (90-DAY REVIEW PERIOD) |4 CHIEF CHIEF SECRETARY OF THE ARMY

REVIEWS RECEIVED FORWARDS RECOMMEN­ COMMENTS DATIONS TO SECRETARY MODIFIES REPORT OF THE ARMY FOR CONSIDERATION AS APPROPRIATE REVIEWS PREPARES FINAL EIS COORDINATES WITH 0M8 - FINAL REPORT PREPARES HIS RECOMMENDATIONS - FINAL EIS FORWARDS -SOF -F IN A L EIS. SOF (CEQ, PUBLIC) - FINAL FR, FINAL EIS, SOF 15 16 (CONGRESS) 17

PROJECT OMB PROJECT FUNDING AUTHORIZATION REVIEWS CORPS BUDGET CONGRESS INCLUDES IN HOLDS SUBMITS TO CONGRESS APPROPRIATIONS BILL HEARINGS PRESIDENT SIGNS INCLUDES IN WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT BILL OR OTHER LEGISLATION

PRESIDENT SIGNS 16

LOCAL INTERESTS DE GUARANTEE TO FULFILL FORMULATES PRE-CONSTRUCTION l ' / ' - / / OBLIGATIONS REQUIRED PLANNING GENERAL DESIGN BY LAW le.g., REAL ESTATE, MEMORANDA (GDM) 11.J i j l “ COST SHARING, MAINTENANCE, -UPDATES EIS AS REQUIRED OPERATION. FLOOD ZONING) - ISSUES PUBLIC NOTICE AND CONDUCTS AT LEAST ONE ‘ W n 'i PUBLIC MEETING OBTAINS ADDITIONAL CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION AS APPROPRIATE V INITIATES AND COMPLETES CONSTRUCTION OPERATES AND MAINTAINS zi CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN 9 Dodge City Local Protection 9 Great Bend Local Protection 10 Cow Creek Channel Improvement 10 Hutchinson Local Protection 12 Wichita & Valley Center Local Protection 12 El Dorado Lake 15 Towanda Lake 16 El Dorado Local Protection 16 Douglass Lake 16 Winfield Local Protection 16 Fall River Lake 20 Toronto Lake 20 Neodesha Lake 22 Elk City Lake 22 Big Hill Lake 24 Marion Lake • 26 Marion Local Protection 27 Cedar Point Lake 27 Council Grove Lake 27 John Redmond Dam and Reservoir 29 lola Local Protection 29 Arkansas-Red River Basins Water Quality Control Study Texas, Oklahoma, & Kansas 30

MISSOURI RIVER BASIN 33 Comprehensive Plan, Missouri River Basin 34 Abilene Local Protection 35 Atchison Local Protection 35 Clinton Lake 37 Fort Scott Lake 37 Frankfort Local Protection 38 Garnett Lake 38 Grove Lake 39 Hays Local Protection 39 Hillsdale Lake 40 Kanopolis Lake 41 Kansas City Local Protection 43 Lawrence Local Protection 43 Manhattan Local Protection 44 Melvern Lake 44 Milford Lake 46 Missouri River Levee System— Sioux City, Iowa, to the Mouth 47 Missouri River Stabilization and Navigation Project 47 Onaga Lake 49 Osawatomie Local Protection 49 Ottawa Local Protection 49

i CONTENTS (CONT)

MISSOURI RIVER BASIN (CONT) Perry Lake 51 Pioneer Lake 51 Pomona Lake 52 Salina Local Protection 53 The Kansas Citys, Missouri and Kansas Local Protection 54 Topeka Local Protection 56 Tuttle Creek Lake 58 Wilson Lake 60 Indian Lake 62 Tomahawk Lake 62 Wolf-Coffee Lake 62 Kansas River Navigation 62

EMERGENCY WORK 66 Snagging and Clearing Operations (Public Law 780) 66 Emergency Bank Protection (Public Law 526) 66 Emergency Repairs (Public Law 99) 66 Disaster Assistance (Public Law 93-288) ' 66

FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES 69

SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD CONTROL AND RELATED PURPOSES 75 Kinsley Local Protection 75 Larned Local Protection 75 Florence Local Protection 75 Newton Local Protection 75 Sedgwick Local Protection 76 West Branch of Chisholm Creek Local Protection 76 Nickerson Local Protection 76 Parsons Local Protection 76 Arkansas City Local Protection 76 Park City Kansas 76 Barnard Local Protection 76 Clyde Local Protection 77 Gypsum Local Protection 77 Stranger Creek Channel Improvement 78 Stonehouse Creek Local Protection 78

STUDIES AND INVESTIGATIONS 79

PROJECTS OF OTHER AGENCIES 81 Augusta Local Protection 81 Winfield Local Protection 81 Cheney Reservoir 81 Cedar Bluff Reservoir 81 Glen Elder Reservoir 82 Kirwin Reservoir 82 Lovewell Reservoir 82

ii CONTENTS (CONT)

PROJECTS OF OTHER AGENCIES (CONT) Norton Reservoir 82 Webster Reservoir 82

Figure 1— How Corps of Engineers Projects Are Started, Faces Authorized And Built Contents Figure 2— Storage Space Allocation in a Multipurpose Lake 14 Figure 3—Flood Plain Management Services 68

Maps— Arkansas River Basin 8 Verdigris— Grand (Neosho) River Basin 19 Missouri River Basin 32 Flood Plain Management Studies Between 74-75 Water Resources Development in Kansas Follows Index

INDEX 83

in INTRODUCTION

Under a large body of law beginning with the Act of April 30, 1824, and extending through a series of flood control acts and other Federal water resources legislation, the Army Corps of Engineers has been authorized by the Congress to investigate, develop, conserve, and improve the Nation’s water, land, and related environmental resources. Today, the Civil Works program of the Corps of Engineers encompasses a broad range of resource development activities for navigation, flood control, major drainage, shore and beach restoration and protection, hurricane flood protection, related hydroelectric power development, water supply, water quality control, fish and wildlife conservation and enhancement, outdoor recreation, and environmental quality. These activities and responsibilities entail the careful coordination of many interests and demands at all stages of study and development, including consideration of environmental impacts of proposals and alternatives.

The programs and activities of the Corps of Engineers, as presented in this pamphlet, are arranged by major river subbasins which lie wholly or partly within the State of Kansas. The pamphlet illustrates the role of the Corps in planning, constructing, and operating projects for flood control, municipal and industrial water supply, recreation, and other beneficial uses. It describes projects that are completed, under construction, or in the planning stage.

All Civil Works programs and activities of the Corps of Engineers are under the direction of the Secretary of the Army acting through the Chief of Engineers. In the development of the water resources of Kansas, the Corps seeks the cooperation of the State of Kansas, the various other Federal agencies having jurisdiction in water matters, and local governmental units toward a goal of better utilization of available water for all useful purposes. The efforts of those cooperating agencies have produced significant water development progress in Kansas since 1948, when Kanopolis Lake, the first Corps of Engineers lake in Kansas, was placed in operation. Projects under consideration for future development promise continuing progress to meet the growing water needs of the State.

Each major river basin authorized by Congress for investigation is studied comprehensively to formulate a balanced plan for the best use of the water and related land resources. Communication with local interests, the State, and other Federal agencies is maintained during the development of these plans so that the desires of local interests and the plans of other agencies receive full consideration. By means of such cooperation, the resulting Corps of Engineers project becomes a compatible unit in the ultimate basin development.

In the continental United States, the Corps of Engineers is organized into 10 divisions and 35 districts whose boundaries are based primarily on drainage basins. Most of the major river basins are entirely within the boundaries of single divisions, and district boundaries are usually established to include one or more principal tributary river basins. Thus, the studies of water resources needs and development for an entire river system, such as the Arkansas River or the Missouri River, can be coordinated in a single division office where the varied and sometimes conflicting water uses can be most readily resolved and duplications of effort avoided.

The State of Kansas falls within the boundaries of two divisions and three districts. As shown on the map in the back of this pamphlet, Kansas lies mostly within the boundaries of the Kansas City and the Tulsa Districts. A portion of the State comprising the Arkansas River Basin west of Great Bend falls in the Albuquerque District. The Tulsa and Albuquerque Districts are component parts of the Southwestern Division. The Kansas City District is a component of the Missouri River Division. The addresses of these offices are shown in the front of this pamphlet.

1 In the Kansas portion of the Arkansas River Basin, water resources development planning coordination is implemented through the Arkansas-White-Red Basin Inter-Agency Committee (AWRBIAC). This committee is composed of the governors of eight basin states and representatives of all participating Federal agencies. In the Kansas portion of the Missouri River Basin, the Missouri River Basin Commission (MRBC), with comparable membership from 10 basin states, and 10 Federal agencies, aids in coordination there. In June 1964, the MRBC assumed the responsibility for evaluating the resource problems in the entire Missouri River Basin and for preparing a framework program for future implementation. This is discussed in the Missouri River Basin section of this pamphlet.

FLOOD CONTROL

Federal involvement in flood control dates back to the early part of the 19th century when the interrelationship of flood control and navigation became apparent in the alluvial valley of the Mississippi River. Due to the impact of disastrous floods affecting wide areas as well as transportation systems, Congress, in the Flood Control Act of 1936 extended that interest to the entire country.

The purpose of flood control work is to regulate floodflows and thus to prevent flood damage. The term flood control also includes alleviation of major drainage problems. These objectives are accomplished by means of lakes, local protection works, or combinations of both. Local protection is accomplished by channel enlargement and improvement, realignment, removal of obstructions, construction of levees and floodwalls, bank protection, and appurtenant works.

Lakes constructed for flood control often include additional storage capacity for multipurpose uses such as municipal and industrial water supply, water quality control, navigation, irrigation, production of hydroelectric power, conservation and enhancement of fish and wildlife values, and recreation. Where there are several lakes in a basin, their operation as a coordinated system increases the benefits in downstream areas.

With respect to local protection works, local interests are obligated to provide rights-of-way for the improvements, bear costs of relocations except railroads, hold and save the United States free from damages due to the construction, and maintain and operate the completed project in accordance with prescribed regulations.

Through June 1976, flood losses prevented by projects in Kansas through operation of Corps of Engineers projects amounted to about $1,064,995,000.

NAVIGATION

Navigation improvements provided by the Federal Government stem from the commerce clause of the Constitution, and from decisions by the Supreme Court that the Federal power to regulate commerce also includes the right to accomplish necessary improvements. Navigable waterways are today still a major means of commercial transportation. Thus the Federal Government is concerned with them not only as an element of the national transportation system, but also as a part of the overall development of the national water resources.

The objectives of navigation improvements include the following: (1) to assist in the development, conduct, safety, and efficiency of waterborne commerce— interstate as well as foreign; (2) to meet the needs of recreational boating; (3) to promote the production and harvest of seafood; (4) to enhance environmental quality; (5) to encourage the expansion of

2 existing and the development of new industrial and agricultural production; (6) to remove regional and sectional handicaps due to poor accessibility; (7) to enhance fish and wildlife resources; and (8) to enhance social well-being.

The Corps of Engineers is responsible for the construction and maintenance and operation of all Federal river and harbor projects. The Corps is also responsible for administering the Federal laws for the preservation and protection of the navigable waters of the United States. Among other things, these laws include granting of permits for structures over or in navigable waters and operations in navigable waters; alteration or removal of obstructive bridges; removal of sunken vessels or other obstructions endangering navigation; establishing anchorage grounds, special anchorage areas, danger zones, dumping grounds, restricted areas, fishing areas, and harbor lines. The Corps of Engineers is also responsible for administering Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500; 33 USC 1344). This regulates the deposition of dredged or fill material in navigable waters. The Corps of Engineers also compiles annual statistics on commercial cargoes. These data are highly important in determining the need for and justification of the improvement and maintenance of rivers and harbors for commerce and navigation. They are also of value to commercial and shipping concerns, various Federal and local agencies, and others interested in transportation.

HYDROELECTRIC POWER

Hydroelectric power long has been an important part of the Nation’s economic system and has become an integral part of the water resources development program. Power is included in a Corps of Engineers project only at the direction of Congress, which acts upon recommendations of the Federal Power Commission. Such recommendations are generally based on the current and potential market, and, of course, on the economic feasibility. Although the Corps is the constructing agent in this matter the generated power is distributed by the appropriate marketing agencies.

WATER SUPPLY

Water Supply is of increasing interest to the national economy and security, and full attention is given to this subject in the planning of river basin works. Under Section 6 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, the Secretary of the Army is authorized to make contracts with states, municipalities, private concerns, or individuals for domestic and industrial uses of surplus water that may be available at Corps of Engineers projects. The Water Supply Act of 1958 makes further provisions for water supply storage in Federal navigation, flood control, irrigation, or multiple-purpose projects. Under the terms of the Water Supply Act, reimbursement to the Federal Government by local interests for the costs involved may be extended over a period of 50 years.

In Kansas, the combined dependable yield from storage in existing Corps of Engineers lakes totals about 250 million gallons daily for water supply.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

Traditionally, Americans have sought economic expansion and development to support a growing population and to achieve a better standard of living. It has become evident, particularly within this decade, that our natural resources, including environmental quality, are not limitless. Thus, our nation is faced with critical need to provide a quality environment for its citizens while, at the same time, insuring the prudent development of its limited natural

3 resources. Wise planning is vital, then, to attain balance between economic growth and the preservation of natural beauty. Through the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970, and other legislation, the Executive Branch and the Congress have placed upon the Corps of Engineers and other Federal agencies engaged in the development of natural resources, the responsibility of seeking such a balance. The Corps, in its comprehensive studies and project investigations, considers environmental values and needs equally with economic, technical, and social factors.

Public participation is actively sought and encouraged to work in partnership with the Corps to define environmental objectives. The Corps of Engineers extends a standing invitation to all concerned citizens to participate in this vital program.

RECREATION AND FISH AND WILDLIFE

Outdoor recreational opportunities are now recognized as a national resource worthy of development to a far greater degree than heretofore. Accordingly, in the planning of water resources projects, Federal agencies now consider the needs for outdoor recreation on the same basis as for other purposes. In carrying out the Civil Works program according to the directives of Congress, the Corps of Engineers has made millions of acres of land and water areas available, including both river improvement and lake projects, for public recreational use. For example, surface areas of water available for recreation due to Corps of Engineers projects in Kansas now total about 89,544 acres.

Although facilities for recreational use of lake areas are being provided as rapidly as possible, the demand continues to exceed the increasing supply. Facilities provided for public use at lakes include access roads, boat launching ramps, navigation aids, parking areas for cars and trailers, observation points, picnic areas, campgrounds, swimming areas, and water supply. Provisions are also made for the preservation and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources. Additional privately owned facilities and services such as motels, restaurants, and sporting goods stores are generally provided on adjacent private lands. Facilities such as marinas with their attendant items for sale and rent are normally located on Federal lands on a concessionaire basis.

Wildlife is thriving within the lake areas of the Arkansas and Missouri River Basins due to an abundance of food, water, and natural habitat. The presence of wildlife provides an additional benefit to the hunter, the photographer, the student of wildlife, and to the tourist who derives enjoyment from observing wildlife in the open country.

URBAN STUDIES

The new mission of the Corps of Engineers, known as the Urban Studies program, began in 1972.

The major objective of the Urban Studies program is to use the Corps of Engineers, working in partnership with local and state governments, to develop realistic plans which can help solve water and land related problems in a given urban region for about the next 50 years, or until the year 2020.

4 In conducting urban studies the Corps will be looking atsome or all ofthe following aspectsof urban water resources:

• Urban flood control

• Flood plain management

• Urban water supply

• Wastewater management

• Regional harbor and waterway needs

• Bank and channel stabilization

• Recreation

• Lake, ocean, and estuarine protection

5

N

LEGEND Existtng w E Authorized ..._ Projects by Other Agencies 6 Channel Improvements s ~Levees

TOWANLI"- CR. %.. \

~/ WELLINGTON J, • WINFIELD ~ -9 ftRKANSAS • L.------_.;. _ _ __CIT t '· -- OKLAHOMA~' ... ::;::::>-'

ARKANSIS RIVER BASIN ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN

The Arkansas River rises high in the Rocky major feature of the basin plan, is in full Mountains in central Colorado, flows 1,450 operation for navigation. It extends from the miles southeasterly through Colorado, Mississippi River to near Tulsa, Oklahoma. Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, and Lakes located in the upper Verdigris and empties into the Mississippi River 575 miles Grand (Neosho) River Basins in Kansas above the Head of Passes, Louisiana. support the navigation project because of the water control they afford. Study of The watershed covers 160,650 square miles, extension of navigation to the vicinity of is about 870 miles long, and averages 185 Wichita has been suspended. miles in width. For 170 miles above Pueblo, Colorado, the river flowsthrough a region of In the Kansas portion of the Arkansas River rugged mountains and foothills. At Pueblo, Basin, the Corps has completed six lake it enters the Great Plains section of the basin projects and seven local protection projects. and flowsthrough rolling prairiestothehilly Two lake projects are under construction. lands in eastern Oklahoma and in Arkansas Four other lake and six other local above Little Rock. Below Little Rock the protection projects are authorized. Planning valley merges into the typically flat terrain of and design work on the authorized projects the Mississippi River Valley. The Arkansas will continue as rapidly as funds permit so River has a total fall of about 11,400 feet, with that construction can be initiated when its slope ranging from 110 feet per mile near funds are appropriated. Detailed the source to 0.4 foot per mile near the descriptions of the projects and other Corps mouth. activities follow.

Main stem flows of the Arkansas River DODGE CITY LOCAL PROTECTION downstream from the Great Bend area In Operation cannot be used for most water supply (Albuquerque District) purposes due to chloride contamination from natural and manmade sources. Some Dodge City, situated on the Arkansas River of its tributary flows are suitable for about 130 miles downstream from the domestic and industrial use with normal Colorado-Kansas State line, has a long treatment, while others require special history of severe flooding. Authorization for treatment. a local protection project for the city was passed by Congress in the Flood Control Climate in the basin is semiarid to arid in the Act of 1962. In 1965, Dodge City citizens western part (except for limited areas in the approved a bond issue to support the high mountains), subhumid in the central project. Construction was initiated in the part, and humid in the eastern portion. In spring of 1975 and completed in January some areas there are frequent dry periods 1977. and occasional long droughts. Basin population above Fort Smith, Arkansas, was Flood protection improvements consist of 7 about 3.3 million in 1970. miles of levees on the Arkansas course through Dodge City, 4.3 miles on the left Water resources development in the bank and 2.7 miles on the right, and the Arkansas River Basin includes projects in enlarging of the river channel through the Kansas and adjacent states, particularly in city, thereby enabling the river to convey a Arkansas and Oklahoma. The McClellan- 40,000 cubic feet per second flood safely Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System, a through Dodge City.

9 Total cost of the project will be percent of the area is under cultivation. approximately $7,700,000, of which Crops and physical properties in this area $6,700,000 will be Federal cost and are estimated to have a value in excess of $1,000,000 non-Federal. $15,600,000.

GREAT BEND LOCAL PROTECTION The plan of improvement, authorized by the Authorized, Not Started Flood Control Act of 1962, consists of (Albuquerque District) straightening, snagging and clearing, and deepening the existing channel. The Great Bend gets its name from its location, improvement begins at a point south of as the city is situated at the apex of thegreat Lyons and extends downstream about 26 bend of the Arkansas River just above the miles to the existing Hutchinson flood river’s confluence with Walnut Creek. The control project. Two dikes about 5 feet high city is encompassed by Walnut and Little and 2,100 feet long are also planned. In Walnut Creeks on the northeast and the addition, the plan includes two laterals with Arkansas River on the south. As such, it is a total length of about 3,700 feet and the vulnerable to flooding from both the possibility of a third lateral. The project was Arkansas River and Walnut Creek. planned for two stage development because Recognizing this flood hazard, Congress there were two project sponsors. The first authorized the Great Bend local protection stage of the project would extend upstream project in the Flood Control Act of 1965. on Cow Creek about 15 miles from Hutchinson to the Mitchell Nickerson Road. The authorized plan provides for 6.2 miles of The second stage would extend upstream leveed channel diverting Walnut Creek from the Mitchell Nickerson Road to about 2 floodflow around Great Bend into the miles southwest of Lyons, Kansas. Arkansas River upstream from the city; a 1.5- mile leveed channel diverting Little Walnut Design work on the first stage was stopped Creek floodflow into the Walnut Creek after voters failed to approve a bond issue on diversion channel; 6 miles of improved September 15,1970 to finance their share of channel with levees along the Arkansas; a project costs. No work was initiated on the tieback levee 4.3 miles long on the Arkansas’ second stage because the sponsor did not left bank upstream from the junction of the provide the necessary financial support. Walnut diversion channel; and appurtenant Sponsors of Stage II of the project were facilities. placed on the 5-year limitation by letter dated September 23, 1969. Total cost of the project is estimated at $28,960,000, of which $22,000,000 would be The project was recently reclassified from Federal cost. the deferred to the active category because the sponsors of the first stage have COW CREEK CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT demonstrated they can now assume their Authorized, Not Started financial responsibility. (Tulsa District) The estimated Federal cost of the project, Cow Creek rises northeast of Great Bend, Stage I, is $5,150,000. The non-Federal cost Kansas, and flows in a southeasterly for lands, easements, rights-of-way, and direction 120 miles to enter the Arkansas certain modifications and relocations of River about 7 miles downstream from roads and utilities made necessary by the Hutchinson. Repeated flooding of farmland construction of this project would be along Cow Creek downstream from Lyons $1,560,000. has resulted in extensive damages. About 96

10 . ___.

LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT AT HUTCHINSON

LOCAL PROTECTION WORKS AT WICHITA

11 HUTCHINSON LOCAL PROTECTION Flood Control Act of 1936. Subsequently, In Operation the West Branch Chisholm Creek extension (Tulsa District) was authorized under Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948, as amended. This local protection project is on the Arkansas River and Cow Creek within and in Construction work was initiated in May 1950 the immediate vicinity of Hutchinson. The and completed in June 1958 on the initial project was authorized by the Flood Control project. Work on West Branch Chisholm Act of 1936. Construction was initiated in Creek channel extension improvement was April 1952 and completed in 1955. The started in November 1962 and completed in project was turned over to local interests in October 1963. Cost of the project was January 1956 for operation and $18,830,000, of which $12,250,000 was maintenance as prescribed by law. Cost of Federal and $6,580,000 non-Federal. this project was $5,772,000, of which Operation and maintenance of the $3,498,000 was Federal and $2,274,000 non- completed project is the responsibility of Federal. local interests.

The project consists of 27 miles of levees The project consists of floodways and with an average height of 8 feet and a diversions, together with appropriate diversion canal on Cow Creek about 2 miles control structures designed to protect in length with a bottom width of 300 feet and Wichita, Valley Center, and rural areas from an average depth of 6.4 feet. The leveed floodwaters of the Little Arkansas River, the canal, located about 1 mile west of the city Arkansas River, Big Slough, and Cowskin limits, diverts floodflows of Cow Creek to the and Chisholm Creeks. The project provides Arkansas River and thence past the city of a high degree of flood protection to about Hutchinson between levees on both sides of 49,000 acres of highly developed urban and the Arkansas River. Appurtenant works suburban lands. includea loop levee,enlargement of existing levees, and a ring levee in the vicinity of The project diverts floodwaters of the Little Island Park subdivision northwest of Arkansas River and Chisholm Creek into the Hutchinson. Arkansas River upstream from Wichita. These combined floodwaters are then The improvement provides a high degree of passed through a floodway west of the city flood protection for 17,600 acres of highly following a course generally along Big developed urban and adjacent areas at this Slough and Cowskin Creek. The levee locality. The project had prevented flood forming the left side of the floodway is damages estimated at $9,450,000 through extended upstream on the right bank of the June 1976. Arkansas River for a distance of about 2 miles from the downstream end of the floodway. In all, the project contains about WICHITA & VALLEY CENTER LOCAL 41 miles of channel and 97 miles of levees. PROTECTION In Operation Wichita drainage canal, which was (Tulsa District) constructed by local interests to pass flows of East Branch Chisholm Creek through the This local protection project is located on city, has been cleared and enlarged to the Arkansas and Little Arkansas Rivers and provide additonal protection. Flood Chisholm Creek at Wichita and Valley damages prevented through June 1976 are Center. It was authorized originally by the estimated at $39,057,000.

12

STORAGE SPACE ALLOCATION IN A MULTIPURPOSE LAKE

CONSERVATION STORAGE DAM

FIGURE 2

14 EL DORADO LAKE w1de h1gh-level spillway, will be located in Under Construction the left abutment The outlet works, located (Tu Is a District) on the left bank of the Walnut River, consists of a gated 1ntake structure, a 11 .5- by 15.75- El Dorado Lake will be located on Walnut foot-oblong conduit for flood releases, and a R1ver approximately 4 miles northeast of El 36-lnch water supply p1pe lme At top of Dorado. It will prov1de 154,100 acre-feet of flood control pool, elevation 1347 5, and top conservation storage, 79,200 acre-feet of of conservation pool, elevation 1339 0, the flood control storage, and 2 900 acre-feet of lake w111 have areas of 10,700 acres and 8,000 storage for sediment reserve, for a total acres, respect1vely capacity of 236 200 acre-feet. The conservation storage will have a dependable The prOJeCt was authonzed by the Flood y1eld of 22.2 million gallons dally for water Control Act of 1965 for flood control, water supply. supply, water qual1ty control, and recreat1on The est1mated cost is The rolled earthfilled dam will be about $80,100,000 Construct1on on the project 20,930 feet long with a max1mum he1ght of bu1ld1ngs, overlook, and access road was 99 feet above the streambed. The 350-foot- started 1n 1973

EL DORADO DAMSITE

15 TOWANDA LAKE The proposal is to improve the channel Authorized, Not Started through the city of El Dorado by widening (Tulsa District) and deepening it for about 1.6 miles. A spoil bank levee 16,800 feet long and a training The damsite is located on the Whitewater levee 4,900 feet long will be constructed at River about 1 mile northwest of Towanda. the upper end of the project. Estimated The project was authorized by the Flood Federal cost is $2,880,000 and estimated Control Act of 1965 for flood control, water non-Federal cost is $1,350,000. supply, water quality, and recreation. Preconstruction planning studies are being Current plans provide an earth embankment suspended due to lack of economic about 11,460 feet long, including a gated justification at this time. spillway 184 feet long with four 40-foot-wide by 35-foot-high tainter gates. The top of the DOUGLASS LAKE dam will be about 82 feet above the Authorized, Not Started streambed. Two 24-inch pipes will provide (Tulsa District) for low flow and water supply. The 208,000 acre-foot lake will provide 133,500 acre- Douglass Lake was authorized for feet of storage for flood control, 46,500 construction by the Flood Control Act of acre-feet for conservation uses, and 28,000 1965 to serve the primary purposes of flood acre-feet for sediment reserve. The control, water supply, and recreation. The conservation storage will have a dependable estimated cost is $47,300,000. The lake will yield of 2.0 million gallons daily for water be located on the Little Walnut Creek, supply. tributary to Walnut River, about 7 miles southeast of Augusta. At top of conservation The lake will control runoff from the pool, elevation 1258.0, and top of flood drainage area of 422 square miles above the control pool, elevation 1270.0, the lake will damsite. At the top of the normal pool, have areas of 5,170 acres and 7,580 acres, elevation 1285.0, the lake will have a surface respectively. It will control the runoff from a area of 6,200 acres. At top of the flood drainage area of 238 square miles, and control pool, elevation 1300.0, the lake will provide 76,400 acre-feet of flood control have an area of 12,200 acres. Towanda Lake storage, 77,300 acre-feet for conservation will be one unit in a five-project system in the uses, and 18,200 acre-feet for sediment Walnut River Valley which will include El reserve. The conservation storage will Dorado and Douglass Lakes, and El Dorado provide a dependable yield of 14.2 million and Winfield local protection projects. gallons daily for water supply. Preconstruction planning studies are underway. The dam will be about 11,640 feet long with a maximum height of 89 feet above the Construction is estimated to cost streambed. Total length of the spillway will $55,900,000. be 136 feet with flows over the spillway controlled by three 40- by 35-foot tainter EL DORADO LOCAL PROTECTION gates. The outlet works will consist of a 24- Authorized, Not Started inch low-flow pipe and a 24-inch water (Tulsa District) supply pipe.

The project will be at El Dorado, Kansas, on WINFIELD LOCAL PROTECTION (1965 the West Branch of Walnut River which flows MODIFICATION) through the city and causes extensive Authorized, Not Started damage. The project was approved for (Tulsa District) construction by the Flood Control Act of 1965 as part of the basin-wide plan of This project will be located on Walnut River improvement for the Walnut River. and Timber Creek at Winfield. The basin-

16 wide plan of improvement for the Walnut would have a maximum height of 2.5 feet River, authorized by the Flood Control Act of and the south extension would have a 1965, included improvement of the existing maximum height of 17 feet. levees at Winfield. The estimated total cost of the local The plan of improvement provides for improvement is $1,340,000 ($730,000 raising about 13,000 feet of the existing Federal funds and $610,000 non-Federal). 14,500-foot levee up to 2.5 feet and Preconstruction planning studies are being extending the levee 950 feet north along suspended because of the lack of economic Timber Creek and about 7,600 feet south justification at this time. along Walnut River. The north extension

17 N

s LEGEND Existing Under Construct ion Authorized COU CIL GROVE .,... Projects by Other Agencies ~ Levees

MARION

COUNCIL CROVE

JOHN REDMOND EMPORIA MARION CEDAR POINT

Q BURLINGTON • ~ "V, ()

TORONTO lOLA

~.....--NEODESHA

FALL RIVER---.~-

I I I

ELK CITY------~~ H ~ ., :::> 0 - (/) H ULA H ---.....-----JL (J) IH COPAN r- COFFEYVILLE •:g ___....,:.__ -- OK LAH_O_M,_.,..A__, VERDIGRIS-GRAND (NEOSHO] RIVER BASIN FALL RIVER LAKE municipalities and industries and farmers In Operation who obtain their water supply direct from (Tulsa District) Fall River. These supplementary flows were also beneficial in the abatement of pollution. The dam forming this lake is located on Fall River about 17 miles southeast of Eureka, Recreation areas and facilities are available Kansas. Its construction, authorized by the for public use. Three public-use areas Flood Control Act of 1941, was started in covering 65 acres are managed by the May 1946, and completed in May 1949 at a Corps of Engineers, and three covering 200 total Federal cost of about $10,494,000. acres are managed by the Kansas Park and Resources Authority. Clubs and cottages Structural features consist of a rolled have been developed by private interests. earthfill embankment 5,545 feet long and a About 462,000 persons visited Fall River 470-foot concrete gravity-type spillway. Lake during 1976. Maximum height of the dam is 94 feet above the original streambed. Lake releases are TORONTO LAKE regulated by operation of eight tainter gates In Operation on top of the spillway, and seven slide gates (Tulsa District) controlling seven sluices that extend through the spillway. A 30-inch gate- The dam is located on the Verdigris River controlled pipe provides an outlet for about 4 miles southeast of Toronto. Its releases of supplemental water supply and construction, authorized by the Flood to augment low flows in the stream below Control Act of 1941, was started in the dam. The structure also includes a 12- November 1954 and completed for full flood inch pipe for future water supply. control operation in March 1960. The total project cost was $13,894,000. Fall River Lake has a total storage capacity of 259,000 acre-feet. During flood periods, The dam consists of a rolled earthfill 235,100 acre-feet are used temporarily to embankment and concrete spillway. It is control runoff that originates in the 585 4,712 feet long and rises to a maximum square-mile drainage area above the dam. height of 90 feet above the original At the top of the flood control pool, elevation riverbed. Floodflows are controlled by eight 40- by 25-foot tainter gates. In addition to 987.5, the lake has a surface area of 10,500 spillway regulation, releases are made acres. In addition to storage for flood through seven 5- by 6.5-foot rectangular control, the project provides conservation sluices extending through the spillway. A storage totaling 23,900 acre-feet, of which 24-inch gated pipe is provided for low-flow 8,200 acre-feet are permanent storage for releases and downstream supplemental sediment reserve and 15,700 acre-feet are water supply. for releases of water during dry periods for supplemental water supply and to alleviate The conservation pool has a capacity of stream pollution. At the top of the normal 23,300 acre-feet, of which 12,600 acre-feet pool, elevation 948.5, the lake has a surface are for sediment reserve, 10,300 acre-feet area of 2,450 acres. are for low-flow releases and abatement of stream pollution, and 400 acre-feet are for Total flood damages prevented since water supply. The normal pool has a surface completion of the project are estimated at area of 2,800 acres at elevation 901.5. During $16,630,000. In Kansas, the cities of flood periods, 172,000 acre-feet are used Fredonia, Neodesha, Independence, and temporarily to control runoff originating in Coffeyville have benefited from the project the 730 square-mile drainage area above the during floods. Although not evaluated, dam. At top of flood control pool, elevation regulated releases of water during dry 931.0, the lake has a surface area of 10,000 seasons have benefited a number of acres.

20 FALL RIVER DAM AND LAKE

TORONTO DAM AND LAKE

21 Toronto Lake functions as a unit of a ELK CITY LAKE multilake system in the Verdigris River In Operation Basin. Fall River, Toronto, and Elk City (Tulsa District) Lakes are now operating in the Kansas portion of the basin. Other authorized but Elk City Lake, located 7 miles northwest of not yet constructed lakes in the Kansas Independence, Kansas, on Elk River in the portion of the basin are Neodesha and Big Verdigris River Basin, was authorized by the Hill. The estimated monetary benefits Flood Control Act of 1941. At the top of flood attributed to operation of the lake for control pool, elevation 825.0, the lake has an prevention of flood damages through June area of 13,200 acres, and a capacity of 1976 are $17,761,000. 291.000 acre-feet, allocated as follows: 240,400 acre-feet for flood About 648,000 visitors took advantage of the control storage; 24,300 acre-feet for future recreational facilities offered at Toronto water supply to provide a dependable yield during 1976. The Kansas Park and of 10 million gallons per day; 18,000 acre- Resources Authority manages four public- feet for water quality control to provide a use areas covering 260 acres, while the dependable yield of 7.4 million gallons per Corps of Engineers manages only one, the day; and 8,300 acre-feet for sediment overlook area, which covers about 10 acres. reserve. The lake is presently operated on a seasonal basis between elevations 796.0 and 792.0 where it has surface areas of 4,450 acres and 3,550 acres, respectively. The lake NEODESHA LAKE peaked at elevation 826.32 on July 5, 1976, Authorized, Not Started sending water over the spillway for the first (Tulsa District) time.

The Neodesha Lake Damsite is located on The earthfill dam is 4,840 feet long and rises the Verdigris River about 2 miles north of to 107 feet above the original streambed. An Neodesha. The project was authorized by earthfill dike 21,712 feet long is provided the Flood Control Act of August 1941 as a along the southeast side of the lake. An unit in a four-lake system for flood control earthfill levee 13,436 feet long protects the and low-flow augmentation on the Verdigris city of Elk City. An uncontrolled concrete River in Kansas. The lake will have a total spillway, 400 feet wide, is located in a saddle storage of 90,000 acre-feet including 80,000 southeast of the dam. Controlled releases of acre-feet for flood control. At top of flood water are made through a 16-foot-diameter control pool, elevation 821.5, and top of conduit, a low-flow pipe, and a 24-inch water conservation pool, elevation 803.0, the lake supply pipe. will have areas of 7,100 acres and 1,900 acres, respectively. Construction on the project was started in February 1962 and completed in March 1966 Preconstruction planning was suspended in at a total Federal cost of $19,043,000. 1952 and the project was placed in an Through June 1976, the project had inactive status. On the basis of design prevented an estimated $9,674,000 in flood criteria and construction costs at that time, damages. the project was no longer considered economically justified. The project, About 588,000 persons visited Elk City Lake including possible development at other during 1976. Recreation facilities are sites, will be reconsidered using current available at five public-use areas of which design criteria and costs in preparation of three covering 655 acres are managed by the the Verdigris River Basin Survey Report Corps of Engineers, and two covering 1,127 presently underway. The estimated cost of acres are managed by the Kansas Park and the project in 1954 was $18,100,000. Resources Authority.

22 ELK CITY DAM AND LAKE

BIG HILL OVERLOOK

23 BIG HILL LAKE located 600 feet east of the embankment. Under Construction The outlet works will consist of a morning- (Tulsa District) glory-type drop inlet with a 7.25-foot- diameter conduit, a gated 18-inch-diameter Big Hill Lake, a unit in the comprehensive pipe for water supply, and a 42-inch low- plan for development of the Verdigris River flow pipe. Basin, will be located on Big Hill Creek about 4.5 miles east of Cherryvale and about The 1,520-acre lake at elevation 867.5 will 15 miles east of Independence, in Labette have a capacity of 40,600 acre-feet with County, Kansas. The project was authorized 13,100 acre-feet designated for flood by the Flood Control Act of 1962 to provide control, 27,200 acre-feet for water supply, for flood control, municipal and industrial and 290 acre-feet as inactive. The normal water supply, and recreation. The current pool will have an area of about 1,240 acres at estimated cost of the project is $12,900,000. elevation 858.0 and a shoreline of about 20 Land acquisition and construction on miles. project buildings and access roads are underway. The Big Hill Lake will provide complete control at the damsite of all floods up to the The earthfill dam will be 4,425 feet long and magnitude of a 50-year flood. The rise to a height of 83 feet above the present conservation pool will provide a dependable streambed. An uncontrolled spillway will be yield of 8.5 million gallons of water per day.

24 ' MARION LAKE regulation and the other for municipal and In Operation Industrial water supply connections (Tulsa D1stnct) The lake has a total storage of 146,500 acre­ feet, of wh1ch 59,900 acre-feet are available for storage of floodwaters At top of flood Construction of th1s $13,318,000 proJect was control pool, elevat1on 1358 5, the lake has started in June 1964 and completed 1n 1968. an area of 9,020 acres. The normal pool The dam is located on the Cottonwood conta1ns 86,600 acre-feet and has a surface River, a tributary of the Grand (Neosho) area of 6,160 acres at elevation 1350 5 Flood R1ver, about 3 m1les northwest of Manon and damage benefits attnbuted to lake about 46 m1les northeast of W1ch1ta It was operations through June 1976 amount to authonzed for flood control, water supply, $23,917,000 and conservation uses by the Flood Control Act of 1950 Access roads lead 1nto f1ve attract1ve public­ use areas on the lake, the overlook area, and The dam consists of a ro lied earthfi II the spillway area below the dam The areas embankment and concrete spillway, and 1s are all managed by the Corps of Engmeers 8,375 feet long The max1mum height of the and cover about 95 acres The Kansas structure 1s 67 feet above the streambed Forestry, F1sh and Game Comm1ss1on 1s The storage of floodwaters 1n the lake IS usmg 3,500 acres of land and water 1n the regulated by three gates, each 40 feet wide upper reaches of the lake for w1ldl1fe and 40 feet high, located on the spillway management and public hunt1ng lands crest. Two 24-mch pipes are located Dunng 1976 about 845,000 persons v1s1ted through the spillway, one for low-flow the lake for recreation purposes

MARION DAM AND LAKE

26 MARION LOCAL PROTECTION feet for sedimentation. The dependable Under Construction yield from conservation storage would be (Tulsa District) 7.2 million gallons of water daily. The conservation pool would have a surface area of almost 2,900 acres at elevation 1310.0. At The project was authorized in December top of flood control pool, elevation 1321.0, 1970, by Resolutions of the Committee on the lake would have an area of about 3,910 Public Works of the House and Senate, 91st acres. Congress, 2d session, under provisions of Section 201, Public Law 89-298. The project COUNCIL GROVE LAKE is designed to protect the business district of In Operation Marion, Kansas, which is located at the (Tulsa District) junction of Mud Creek and the Cottonwood River, entirely within the flood plains of the Council Grove Lake, a unit in a system of two streams, and consists of a protective four lakes that includes Marion, John levee and a floodway diversion channel Redmond, and the authorized Cedar Point which would intercept and channel Lake in the Grand (Neosho) River Basin, floodwaters of Mud Creek southwesterly controls a drainage area of 246 square miles. around the town to enter Cottonwood River It was authorized by the Flood Control Act of west of the city. The estimated first cost of 1950. the project is $5,400,000, which includes $4,500,000 Federal cost and $900,000 non- The dam is on the Neosho River about 1.5 Federal cost. Construction on railroad miles northwest of Council Grove. relocations started in June 1975. Construction began in July 1960 and was completed for operation in October 1964. CEDAR POINT LAKE Cost of the project was $11,741,000. Authorized, Not Started (Tulsa District) The crest length of the rolled earthfill embankment is6,500 feet, and the maximum The Cedar Point Lake damsite is located on height of the structure is 96 feet above the Cedar Creek about 6 miles east of Florence original streambed. The spillway is an and 45 miles northeast of Wichita. The uncontrolled open cut 500 feet wide, located project was authorized for construction by in a saddle near the right abutment. Flows the Flood Control Act of 1950. Project are regulated by a 24-inch low-flow pipe and purposes are flood control, water supply, a 17-foot outlet conduit. Provision has been and recreation. The estimated cost is made for future municipal water supply by $26,900,000. Preconstruction planning is the installation of a 24-inch pipe through the underway. structure. At top of flood control pool, elevation 1289.0, the lake has an area of As planned, the length of a rolled earthfill 5,340 acres and a capacity of 114,300 acre- embankment and spillway would be 7,120 feet, allocated as follows: 63,700 acre-feet feet, with a maximum height of 117 feet for flood control storage; 24,400 acre-feet above the present streambed. An for future water supply to provide a uncontrolled spillway would consist of a dependable yield of 6 million gallons per concrete sill and short apron located in a day; 17,500 acre-feet for water quality saddle near the right abutment. The outlet control; and 8,700 acre-feet for sediment works would consist of a gated intake reserve. The lake is presently operated on a structure, a 12-foot conduit, a stilling basin, seasonal basis between elevations 1274.0 and two 24-inch-diameter intakes, one for and 1270.0, where it has surface areas of low-flow releases and one for water supply. 3,280 acres and 2,860 acres, respectively. Storage capacities would include 37,100 acre-feet for flood control, 65,400 acre-feet Flood damages prevented by the project for conservation uses, and 6,100 acre- through June 1976 amount to $5,336,000.

27 COUNCIL GROVE DAM AND LAKE

JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR

28 About 936,000 persons visited the lake for three projects are Council Grove Lake on recreational purposes in 1976. Six public- the Grand (Neosho) River, Marion Lake on use areas covering about 922 acres are the upper Cottonwood River, and the managed by the Corps of Engineers. The authorized Cedar Point Lake on Cedar larger percentages of people who visit the Creek, a tributary of the Cottonwood River. lake go there for camping and fishing. These projects have been authorized primarily for flood control and low-flow JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR regulation and will benefit an area of 312,000 In Operation acres in the Grand (Neosho) River Basin (Tulsa District) above Pensacola Lake. Anticipated average annual benefits from operating the four- John Redmond Dam is on the Grand project system are $4,754,500. (Neosho) River, approximately 2 miles northwest of Burlington. The project was John Redmond Reservoir was placed in authorized for construction by the Flood flood control operation in July 1964, and Control Act of 1950. The total current cost is through June 1976 had prevented $28,372,000. Construction began in July $28,091,000 in flood damages. 1959 and was completed in December 1965. About 647,000 persons used the recreation The project consists of an earthfill facilities at the lake in 1976. The Corps of embankment with a gated concrete chute- Engineers manages 11 public-use areas type spillway located near the east end of covering about 2,927 acres. In addition, the the dam. The total embankment is 21,790 Flint Hills National Wildlife Refugehas5,100 feet long, constructed to a height of about 87 acres of land open to public hunting. feet above the original streambed. A 24-foot­ wide road is provided along the crest of the dam. Spillway discharges are regulated by IOLA LOCAL PROTECTION In Operation 14 tainter gates, each 40 feet wide and 35 (Tulsa District) feet high. Two 24-inch-diameter low-flow pipes and one 30-inch-diameter water This local protection project is on the left supply conduit for future use, are located bank of the Grand (Neosho) River at lola. through the concrete nonoverflow section. The project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1936. Construction began in At the top of flood control pool, elevation March 1938 and the completed works were 1068.0, the reservoir has an area of 31,700 transferred to the city of lola in September acres, and a capacity of 644,600 acre-feet, 1938. Repairs to the project were initiated allocated as follows: 562,500 acre-feet for flood control storage; 34,900 acre-feet for late in 1965 and completed early in 1966. future water supply to provide a dependable yield of 24.5 million gallons per day; 27,600 The lola levee consists of an earth acre-feet for water quality control; and embankment about 1 mile long, with an 19,600 acre-feet for sediment reserve. The average height of 10.5 feet, and provides lake is presently operated on a seasonal protection to about 50 acres of urban land basis between elevations 1039.0 and 1036.0, currently utilized for a city park with where it has surface areas of 9,400 acres and fairground buildings, athletic field, stadium, 5,900 acres, respectively. swimming pool, and other similar improvements. Cost of the levee was John Redmond Dam and Reservoir is a unit $23,790, of which $22,290 was Federal and in a system of four projects in the Grand $1,500 non-Federal. The project has (Neosho) River Basin in Kansas authorized prevented an estimated $4,442,000 in flood by the Flood Control Act of 1950. The other damages since it was placed in operation.

29 ARKANSAS-RED RIVER BASINS WATER Additional chloride control projects in the QUALITY CONTROL STUDY TEXAS, two river basins were authorized by Public OKLAHOMA, & KANSAS Law 91-611 in 1970 by the 91 st Congress, 2d Authorized, Not Started session. A project approved for construction (Tulsa District) in Kansas is designated as Area III. It is a fresh water diversion reservoir on the A two-part report was completed which Cimarron River in Clark and Comanche recommended the construction of structural Counties. Preconstruction planning is improvements to control pollution from underway. natural chloride source areas in the two basins. Projects authorized for construction by Public Law 89-789 are located in the Red River Basin, Texas.

30

N

w~w ...... E CLINTON PERRY s -- GROVE MO. ONAGA-­ TUTTLE CREE

MILFORD-~ . . a_·,'o t--~-:--::-;--NEB. . -- ct"J-- . , LOWEWELLrn-- ~ ..:il KAN. #NORTON Q • nG OR,( KIRWIN u., -N. r - -- ~ $

1 -- olo ..-1/1____. .. ---: GLEN ELDER "rO WEBSTER RESERVOIR '"- -z,. ~NOlAN LIN.E R!v~~ KANSAS ~J.'. CITY ~~ TOPEKA• ...... )... - 1 _ SMOKY... Hli.l. AI~ . _, -_,- , - ~ ~ -~, ...... _~'-----·, • ABILENE :J"OMAHAWK --.... J LAD De~ · CEDAR BLUFF ~ CR. ~woLF­ COFFEE PONONA WILSON~ MELVERN -... KANOPOLI GARNETT~ HILLSDALE

LEGEND FORT SCOTT. ' Existing ' Under Construction Authorized ..... Projects by Other Agencies MISSOURI RIVER BASIN MISSOURI RIVER BASIN

The Missouri River is the largest tributary of urban growth, which places great demands the Mississippi River. The basin has an area on the resources, the hard choices that must of 529,000 square miles and consists of be faced in allocating limited public funds about one-sixth of the area of the among competing demands for public contiguous 48 states. It extends from the services, the recurrent human and Continental Divide, down the eastern slope economic destruction caused by of the forested Rocky Mountains through uncontrolled floods, the scarcity of water the semiarid Great Plains, to the humid resources, the pollution of streams, areas of Missouri. All or part of Nebraska, protection of the environment, and the Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, special needs for resource development in Wyoming, Kansas, Missouri, Colorado, underdeveloped areas. An appraisal of these Iowa, and Minnesota are included in the problems is required if a prudent course of basin. It is characterized by great variations future action is to be determined for the of topography, climate, soils, geology, conservation and use of our natural natural resources, and the intensity of resources. A comprehensive framework human occupation and development. With plan was formulated for the long-range this wide diversity of climate and development and optimum use of the basin’s physiographic features, water or lack of it, is water and related land resources. This plan the root of many of the basin’s economic provides a broad guide for the best use, or difficulties. Well over half of the population combination of uses, of water and related of the basin is concentrated along its humid land resources of the Missouri River Basin. It eastern border, where the farming provides guidance for all agencies and conditions are most dependable and where groups undertaking detailed planning of principal manufacturing industries provide specific projects and developments, to employment. The extensive but more assure that they fit into the framework. Such rugged and drier western part contains a a program will provide for foundation for relatively small portion of the basin’s 1970 growth in the economy of the basin, the population of nearly 8 million. In the western region, and the Nation. portion of the basin, droughts have turned extensive farm areas into dust bowls, and In the Kansas portion of the Missouri River have forced the farmers to dispose of their Basin, the Corps has completed six lakes livestock and, often, to abandon their land. and 13 local protection projects. Three other Conversely, floods have long plagued the lakes and two local protection projects are entire Missouri River Basin. They have under construction. Preconstruction destroyed crops, drowned livestock, planning is underway for two additional lake severely damaged cities and small projects and one navigation project. Of the communities, and taken many lives. These 150 units originally contemplated in the troubles have stimulated a search for entire Missouri River levee system, four of solutions. the seven units which protect lands within the State of Kansas have been completed. In the Missouri River Basin, as well as in Three survey investigations are underway. other river basins, the countless problems Detailed descriptions of the projects and involved in development of the resource other Corps activities in the Missouri River base have been enumerated many times. Basin follow. These problems include the accelerating

33 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MISSOURI the overall plan of development. In the RIVER BASIN project formulation stages the Corps of (Missouri River Division) Engineers actively cooperates with local, State, and other Federal interests to The Flood Control Act of 1944 gave birth to determine the best solutions for flood the Nation’s first attempt at solving its water problems and related water resource needs. resource problems through a comprehensive approach to river basin By the end of 1976, the Corps of Engineers development. The legislation, which has and the Bureau of Reclamation had placed come to be known as the Pick-Sloan Plan, 91 lake projects in operation in the Missouri was based upon separate proposals River Basin. These lakes have a combined recommended by the Corps of Engineers storage capacity of about 100 million acre- and the Bureau of Reclamation. feet. Construction of 10 additional lake projects is underway, which will provide Designed primarily to provide four basic further storage capacity of more than 8 benefits— flood control, irrigation, million acre-feet. The Corps of Engineers generation of hydroelectric power, and has completed 63 local protection projects improvement of navigation on the lower in the Missouri River Basin, and has eight Missouri River— the measure has since others under construction. The latter figure incorporated benefits for improved includes the Missouri River levee system as municipal and industrial water supplies, a single project. land treatment and enhancement, water quality control, conservation of fish and An outstanding feature of the program is the wildlife, and public recreation. control of the upper Missouri River, effected principally by a system of six lakes on the The plan originally provided for building main stem to regulate the runoff from the some 103 dams and lakes to provide storage entire upper half of the basin. These lakes capacity of approximately 110 million acre- were formed by the construction of Fort feet for multipurpose use; local levees and Peck Dam in Montana; Garrison Dam in floodwalls to protect municipalhand North Dakota; Oahe, Big Bend, and Fort industrial and agricultural areas; and a Randall Dams in South Dakota; and Gavins system of levees on both sides of the Point Dam in Nebraska and South Dakota. Missouri River between Sioux City, Iowa, The system has a combined capacity of 75 and the mouth to protect hundreds of million acre-feet, of which more than 16 thousands of acres of bottom lands against million acre-feet are for flood control. flooding. Planned uses of stored water included the irrigation of some 4 million As these six lakes comprise the backbone of acres of land and the generation, ultimately, the basin water storage system for of 13 billion kilowatt-hours of hydroelectric multipurpose services, a sound plan for their power annually for industrial and municipal operation is essential. This is accomplished expansion, for pumping irrigation water, through the Reservoir Control Center at the and for other domestic uses. Regulation of Corps Division Office in Omaha, Nebraska. overflows is essential to navigation on the Guided by the recommendations of a Missouri River. special coordinating committee of state and Federal agency representatives the Center In addition to the projects in the plan, many develops an annual operating plan to govern others had been authorized by Congress the operation of the reservoirs through each prior to 1944, some of them closely ensuing year. associated with the comprehensive plan. New projects have been and are being Completed and partially completed flood authorized by Congress as the need control projects in the Missouri River Basin becomes apparent, and they are added to have prevented $4 billion in flood damages

34 through June 1976. The six main stem and residential developments were long reservoirs generated about 13.5 billion subject to damaging floods from Mud Creek kilowatt-hours during calendar year 1975. and Smoky Hill River. In 1927, local interests Total power generation by all of the constructed a partial channel improvement hydropower projects in the upper Missouri project on Mud Creek; however, that project River Basin system amounted to 15.3 billion proved inadequate for flood protection. In kilowatt-hours during the same period. Abilene proper, 1951 flood damages amounted to $469,000. Over 8.4 million recreation days were generated by visitors in 1975 at the six main Authorized in 1954 as a unit of the Kansas stem projects whereas over 26 million River Basin plan, construction of the Abilene recreation days were generated by projects project was started in September 1957 and within the Missouri River Division. completed in May 1960. The project consisted of straightening and widening Operation of the six main stem reservoirs Mud Creek through the city, cutting the flow during calendar year 1975 made possible distance about in half, and building levees the movement of approximately 2.3 million and floodwalls along the improved channel. tons of commerce on the Missouri River in It also included extension of the Union the reach from Sioux City, Iowa, to the Pacific Railroad bridge and construction of mouth. a new Santa Fe Railroad bridge. The First Street Bridge was extended by and at the The Missouri River main stem reservoir expense of local interests. Although the size system was filled to normal operating levels of the creek through the city was increased for the first time in 1967. Since that time, to four or five times its previous width, it was inflows into the reservoir system have done with minimum damage to residential averaged above normal during six of the 8 property. Only four buildings were removed. years, thereby assuring continued excellent service to all functions. In 1975 the runoff The Federal cost of the Abilene project was from the total basin above Gavins Point was about $1,100,000 and the non-Federal cost about 35.5 million acre-feet, 153 percent of $287,000. normal and the greatest since records began in 1898. In the process of regulating this ATCHISON LOCAL PROTECTION unprecedented runoff, and reducing In Operation downstream river stages by up to 10 feet, (Kansas City District) record-high storage and release levels occurred at several of the main stem This local protection project on White Clay projects. However, the 1975 maximum Creek at Atchison was authorized by the release rates from alliprojects were Flood Control Act of 1962iand a contract for exceeded frequently prior to project construction was awarded in June 1967. The operation, and would also have been plan of improvement features a 2,345-foot exceeded on numerous occasions since cut-and-cover conduit, together with some operations began were it not for the control channel stabilization and improvement for afforded by the upstream reservoirs. the diversion of White Clay Creek through the main business and industrial areas of the ABILENE LOCAL PROTECTION city. The conduit was placed in full In Operation operation in June 1970. The project has (Kansas City District) been coordinated with the US Soil Conservation Service and the Atchison This project is located at Abilene, county Urban Renewal Agency and provides a high seat of Dickinson County, about 1 mile north degree of protection from residual flows of the junction of Mud Creek and the Smoky which remained uncontrolled by the Soil Hill River. The major business, industrial, Conservation Service White Clay-Brewery

35 • •

.... .

• CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT FOR MUD CREEK AT ABILENE

CONTROL TOWER WITH SERVICE BRIDGE AT CLINTON LAKE

36 Creeks watershed protection program Resources Authority. More than 9,000 acres which was completed in August 1965. will be licensed to the Kansas Forestry, Fish and Game Commission for game Atchison, county seat of Atchison County, management. with most of its commercial and industrial areas situated in the flood plain of White The 1976 estimate of cost of the Clinton Clay Creek, suffered three floods in July Lake is $56,400,000. 1958— the first, on July 11, being the most severe ever experienced in the city. Damages resulting from the three floods FORT SCOTT LAKE totaled an estimated $4.1 million, of which Authorized, Not Started more than $3.5 million occurred in the July (Kansas City District) 11 flood. Fort Scott Lake will be located on the The Federal cost of the Atchison project was Marmaton River about 5 miles west of Fort about $4,100,000 and $265,000 non-Federal. Scott. The project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1954 and modified later CLINTON LAKE as a result of an economic restudy. Under Construction Preconstruction planning has been (Kansas City District) completed and the improvement is now awaiting appropriation of construction Clinton Lake, now under construction, is funds. It will serve as a unit in the flood located on the Wakarusa River about 4 miles control and water conservation plan for the southwest of Lawrence near the confluence Osage River Basin. of Rock Creek with the Wakarusa River. The earthfill dam will be 9,250 feet long and rise The lake will control a drainage area of 279 to a maximum height of about 114 feet above square miles and provide protection to the present streambed. It will control the about 37,500 acres along the Marmaton runoff from a drainage area of 367 square River, including Fort Scott and additional miles. The lake will have a total initial areas downstream in Missouri. Plans call for capacity of 397,200 acre-feet, of which an earthfill dam 5,500 feet in length, rising 258,300 acre-feet will be allocated to flood about 69 feet above the present streambed, control storage and 138,900 acre-feet to with gated outlet works and uncontrolled multipurpose and sedimentation uses. At chute-type spillway. The lake will have a full flood control pool, elevation 903.4, the gross capacity of 249,900 acre-feet lake will extend upstream beyond the town including 163,600 acre-feet for flood of Richland, and have an area of 12,800 control, and 83,300 acre-feet for acres. At top of conservation pool, elevation multipurpose and sedimentation uses. The 875.5, the lake will have an area of 7,000 lake will have surface areas of 5,000 acres acres. Construction was started in 1972. and 11,700 acres, respectively, at top of Initial lake impoundment is scheduled for multipurpose pool, elevation 846.9, and top 1978. Because of the location of Clinton of flood control pool, elevation 865.8. Lake relative to Lawrence, Topeka, and Kansas City, it is expected that more than a To meet recreation needs several public-use million visitor-days annually will be areas will be developed, including one to be experienced by the end of the first 3-year operated by the Kansas Park and Resources operating period. To accommodate this use, Authority. five public-use areas will be developed, including one to be developed and operated The 1976 estimate of cost of the Fort Scott as a State park by the Kansas Park and Lake is $51,000,000.

37 FRANKFORT LOCAL PROTECTION channel improvement and realignment of In Operation Black Vermillion River and Little Timber (Kansas City District) Creek, a new Missouri PacifiC Ra1lroad bridge, alteration of the Union PacifiC The Frankfort local protection project is Railroad bridge, and diversion ditches and located at Frankfort on the Black Vermillion drainage structures. River and Timber Creek. The project was authorized in 1958. Construction was The total cost of the Frankfort project was initiated in March 1962, and completed in $1 ,395,000, of which $1,271,000 was Federal October 1963. The city is situated on the and $124,000 non-Federal. north bank of the Black Vermillion River above 1ts confluence with the Big Blue River, GARNETT LAKE and aboul 35 miles north of Manhattan. Authorized, Not Started Twenty damaging floods and a number of (Kansas City District) lesser overflows have been experienced in the past 61 years. The maximum flood of Garnett Lake, a part of the flood control and record on May 30, 1959 caused damages of water conservation plan for the Marais des $353,000. The project provides protectton Cygnes River Basin, has been restudied to for Frankfort against a flood approximately determine its economic justification and has 70 percent in excess of the maxtmum flood been reclassified to inactive category. of record. Through June 1976, the project Original plans provided for the project to be had prevented flood damages amounting to located on Pottawatomie Creek about 3 $112,000. miles north of Garnett in Anderson County The project would control runoff from 334 In general, the project includes 3.4 miles of square miles of drainage area. Preliminary levee along the east, south, and west of the plans call for an earthf1ll dam 3,500 feet long, low-lying part of Frankfort, 3.7 miles of rising to a height of about 92 feet above the

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT AND LEVEE WORKS AT FRANKFORT

38 present streambed. The lake would have a 11,500 acres, reaching to about 5 miles north gross capacity of 186,000 acre-feet, of which of the county line on Soldier Creek and 2 160,000 acre-feet would be allocated to miles north of the county line on Little flood control and 26,000 acre-feet for Soldier Creek. multipurpose and sedimentation uses. The multipurpose pool would cover an area of The 1976 estimate of cost of the Grove 2,400 acres at elevation 920.0 and at top of project is $91,700,000. flood control pool, elevation 953.0, the lake would have an area of 9,200 acres. HAYS LOCAL PROTECTION Authorized, Not Started The impoundment would provide a high (Kansas City District) degree of protection to 11,100 acres along Pottawatomie Creek including the town of Intense rainfall along Big Creek, Chetolah Osawatomie. It would also help Creek, or Lincoln Draw, above Hays, results protect about 50,000 acres on the Marais in flash flooding, which poses a constant des Cygnes River in Kansas and additional threat to life and property in the city. areas downstream along the Osage River. Records show that in the last 60 years, four Garnett Lake, together with the other major floods have occurred on Big Creek at authorized projects in the basin, would Hays. The most disastrous to the city of significantly improve low-flow conditions in Hays was in the May 1951 flood when six the lower reaches of the Marais des Cygnes persons lost their lives, and property and River. income losses amounted to about $2,500,000. After this flood, local interests The 1969 estimated cost of the Garnett constructed a project consisting mainly of project was $38,600,000. channel improvements and levees to protect Hays from floods on Big Creek and the two GROVE LAKE tributaries. These works, completed in 1954, Under Construction proved inadequate during the Big Creek (Kansas City District) flood in 1957, and during a Lincoln Draw flood in 1959. Grove Lake, now under construction, is a key link in the flood control and water A local protection project at Hays* on Big conservation plans for the Kansas River Creek, tributary to Smoky Hill River, was Basin. Authorized by the Flood Control authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1965. Act of 1962, the project will be located in The principal features of the project will be Shawnee County at the confluence of channel improvements and additional Soldier Creek and Little Soldier Creek about levees along Big Creek, a diversion plan for 7 miles northwest of Topeka. Lincoln Draw, and a small highway dam- detention impoundment plus channel The earthfill dam will be 9,300 feet long with improvements and levees on Chetolah an average height of about 75 feet above the Creek. The detention dam was completed by valley floor. The project will control the the Kansas Highway Commission in runoff from the drainage area of 259 square connection with construction of Highway I- miles. The lake will have a gross capacity of 70. Local interests will construct the Lincoln 293,500 acre-feet, with 147,900 acre-feet Draw diversion with the Federal allocated to flood control storage, 145,600 Government contributing to the overall cost. acre-feet to multipurpose water supply and recreation uses, and 29,000 acre-feet to The project is being designed to minimize sedimentation. The full multipurpose pool at the amount of channelization on Big Creek. elevation 959.0 would form a lake of about A master plan has been prepared for the 7,010 acres. At top of flood control pool, Frontier Historical Park to guide elevation 975.0, the water would cover about redevelopment and to minimize the impact

39 of construction The B1g Creek port1on has be located in M1am1 County on Btg Bull been des1gned to allow for shrub vegetation Creek, a tn butary of the Mara1s des Cygnes to grow along the channel to provide wildlife R1ver , about 40 m1les southwest of Kansas cover C1ty The project w1ll control ad ratnage area of 144 square mtles Land acqU1srt1on began In an election on July 18, 1973, the crtrzens tn 1974 Hillsdale 1s scheduled for of Hays voted aga1 nst the project Work on complet1on tn 1982 plans and spec1f1cat1ons for the proJeCt wh1ch were neanng completion has been An earthfrll dam about 12,000 feet long, terminated 1nclud1ng a drke sectron of 3,300 feet with an uncontrolled chute spillway, w1ll nse about The 1973 est1mate of cost of the project 1s 78 feet above the present streambed. The $5 ,000,000 Federal and $3,910,000 non­ lake w1ll have an 1n1t1al storage capac1ty of Federal 160,000 acre-feet, of whrch 81 000 acre-feet w111 be for flood control and 79,000 acre-feet HILLSDALE LAKE for multtpurpose and sed1mentat1on uses Under Construction The multipurpose pool w1ll cover 4,580 acres (Kansas C1ty D1stnct) at elevation 917 0 At top of flood control pool, elevation 931 0, the lake will have an Hillsdale Lake, now under construction, wrll area of 7,410 acres

ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AT HILLSDALE LAKE

40 The lake will protect 7,000 acres and the city the dam. Releases from the lake outlet works of Paola between the dam and the mouth of go into the Smoky Hill River through a Big Bull Creek. Operating in conjunction reinforced concrete tunnel 14 feet in with other impoundments (Pomona, diameter and 2,442 feet long. Melvern, and Garnett) in the Marais des Cygnes system, Hillsdale Lake will help The total lake capacity is 433,000 acre-feet, reduce flood damages on 44,000 acres along of which 371,600 acre-feet was initially the Marais des Cygnes River, and additional reserved for temporary storage of areas along the Osage River. Multipurpose floodwaters originating from the drainage storage in the Hillsdale Lake will alleviate area of 7,860 square miles above the dam, community water shortage problems and and 61,400 acre-feet was for multipurpose provide water to improve low-flow and sedimentation uses. The surface area of conditions in the lower reaches of the Marais the normal pool is 3,815 acres at elevation des Cygnes River. Facilities to be built under 1463.0. At top of flood control pool, the recreational development program will elevation 1508.0, the lake has an area of require cost sharing with local or State 13,900 acres. In 1949, the Corps of agencies. Because no local governmental Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation sponsor has yet contracted for recreation agreed that 162,500 acre-feet of flood development, the project master plan control storage in Kanopolis Lake would be provides only for minimum facilities for made available at some future date for public health and safety for the initial phase. irrigation. This would be in exchange for 191,860 acre-feet of storage capacity in the The 1976 estimate of cost of the Hillsdale Bureau Cedar Bluff Reservoir which would Lake is $55,700,000. be used for flood control. A cooperative study with the Bureau of Reclamation has KANOPOLIS LAKE resulted in a Bureau report which outlines a In Operation plan for utilization of the 162,000 acre-feet of (Kansas City District) storage in Kanopolis Lake. That report is being reviewed by Federal and State Kanopolis Lake is located about 30 miles agencies and Congressional hearings have southwest of Salina on the Smoky Hill River. been held on the plan. Bills have been It was the first of the Kansas River Basin introduced in both the House of multipurpose lakes. Construction started in Representatives and the Senate for 1940 and was completed in 1948. Initial cost authorization of the plan. of constructing the completed project was $12,328,000. Total estimated Federal Principal beneficiaries of Kanopolis Lake, in cost of the project including $274,000 for conjunction with the Bureau of supplemental recreation development is Reclamation’s Cedar Bluff Reservoir 150 $12,602,000. Since completion it has miles upstream, are Salina and about 98,000 become well known for its performance in acres of rural area along the Smoky Hill flood and drought periods and as a popular River below Kanopolis Dam. A local recreation area. Through June 1976, the protection project at Salina, completed in project had prevented flood damages 1962, is supplemental to Kanopolis and amounting to $30,865,000. Cedar Bluff control. Had these local works been in place during the unprecedented The dam is a rolled earthfill structure, 15,360 flood in 1951, excess water from the Smoky feet long including a dike section on each Hill River and two uncontrolled creeks abutment, with a maximum height of 131 would have been safely passed through feet above the original streambed. An Salina. Water releases during drought years, uncontrolled chute-type emergency providing improved and sustained flow, spillway, 500 feet wide, is located through a have been beneficial to downstream rural natural depression west of the south end of and municipal areas, principally at Salina.

41 -

ENJOYING SAILBOATING ON KANOPOLIS LAKE

KANOPOLIS DAM AND LAKE

42 Kanopolis Lake also helps to reduce floods additional rights-of-way, as needed, and will along the Kansas, lower Missouri, and make highway bridge alterations. The Mississippi Rivers, and also helps to improve raising of the existing protection will start at flow and water quality in those streams. about Kansas River mile 1.0 and extend upstream, progressively increasing in The development of Kanopolis Lake as a height to a maximum of about 6 feet. pilot project for the Kansas park system became a reality in October 1958 when the The 1976 estimate of cost of the Federal Government granted a 50-year lease modification of the Kansas City project is to the Kansas Park and Resources Authority $50,111,000 Federal and $5,920,000 non- for use of a 780-acre tract along the east Federal. shore of the lake. Additions have brought the total acreage under lease to the Park LAWRENCE LOCAL PROTECTION Authority to 1,585 acres. The Park Authority Under Construction has constructed many improvements, (Kansas City District) including picnic shelters, roads, sanitary facilities, showers, overnight camping The Lawrence local protection project along areas, and boat launching ramps. the Kansas River was authorized in 1954.

The principal recreational activities at Lawrence, the county seat of Douglas Kanopolis Lake are fishing, boating, County and home of the University of swimming, picnicking, camping, and Kansas, is a center of industrial and retail hunting. Public-use areas provide picnic development, served by important and camping facilities, drinking water, transportation and utility facilities located sanitary facilities, swimming areas, and on both banks of the Kansas River. All areas public boat launching ramps. The north of the river, including about 8,000 recreational opportunities offered at acres of residential, industrial, and Kanopolis are enjoyed by many people. The agricultural lands and a small areaalong the recreation use during 1976 was 700,000 south bank containing the Santa Fe Railroad visitor-days. yard and passenger depot and the municipal water and sewage treatment plants, are KANSAS CITY LOCAL PROTECTION (1962 subject to flooding. Local attempts at flood MODIFICATION) protection have proven inadequate. The Under Construction improvements, under construction, along (Kansas City District) with the upstream impoundments, will protect the area from a flood of 1951 This project is located along the Kansas proportions which caused damages of River at Kansas City, Kansas. Modification $3,121,000. Recurrence of the 1951 flood of the existing local protection works is (prior to completion of the current project) currently underway. Authorized in the Flood would result in damages totaling about Control Act of 1962 as part of the plan for $15,650,000 at present day prices and improvement of the Kansas River Basin, the development. modifications will involve the Argentine, Armourdale, and Central Industrial District The Corps project consists of about 18 miles units and bridge and approach alterations. of new levee, 6 miles of channel modification for Mud Creek, 0.6 mile of bank protection, Work now in progress consists of raising and alterations of sewer, water, and and modifying the existing levees and powerlines. Stage I on the left bank of the floodwalls, expanding the underseepage Kansas River was placed in a construction control features, making certain bridge status in July 1967 and it is now complete. alterations, and providing appurtenant Stage II downstream from Massachusetts facilities. Local interests have furnished Street Bridge was initiated for construction

43 in August 1969 and is complete. The city of approximately $13,400,000 damages Lawrence in the autumn of 1973, requested affecting 1,530 residences and 289 business that recreation facilities be provided for establishments. Two lives were lost and Stage I and Stage II. The recreation plan is 5,800 persons were displaced by the being developed. Planning is complete for floodwater. Stage III, South Lawrence. In June 1976 the city of Lawrence indicated that it was no Through June 1976 the project had longer interested in constructing the South prevented flood damages amounting to Lawrence unit of the flood protection $3,229,000. project. A construction contract on Mud Creek was awarded in May 1976 and should be completed in 1978. This will complete the MELVERN LAKE flood protection for North Lawrence. In Operation (Kansas City District) Through June 1976 the project has prevented flood damages amounting to Melvern Lake, on the upper Marais des $4,086,000. Cygnes River, became operational in August of 1972. The dam is about 4 miles The 1976 estimate of cost of the Lawrence west of Melvern in Osage County. This project, including the South Lawrence unit, project teams with Pomona Lake on 110- is $11,800,000 Federal and $2,650,000 non- Mile Creek in providing important benefits Federal. to rural and urban areas downstream, including the cities of Ottawa and MANHATTAN LOCAL PROTECTION Osawatomie, where local protection In Operation improvements were planned to operate in (Kansas City District) conjunction with this upstream lake control.

This local protection project is located at The lake is designed to control a drainage Manhattan on the left bank of the Kansas area of 349 square miles. The project River between the mouth of Wildcat Creek features an earthfill dam 9,650 feet in length, and the mouth of the Big Blue River, and ties rising 123 feet above the streambed, with back along the right bank of the Big Blue. gated outlet works and uncontrolled chute- The completed improvements include type spillway. The lake has a gross capacity 28,840 feet of levee, 4,100 feet of channel of 363,000 acre-feet, of which 200,000 acre- improvement on the Kansas River, feet is allocated to flood control, 137,000 modification of the Rock Island Railroad acre-feet to multipurpose, and 26,000 acre- bridge, relief wells, and two small pumping feet to sedimentation uses. The plants. multipurpose pool has a surface area of 6,930 acres at elevation 1036.0. At top of The project supplements the control flood control pool, elevation 1057.0, the lake provided by Kanopolis, Wilson, Milford, has a surface area of 13,950 acres. Tuttle Creek, and Harlan County Lakes, and several Bureau of Reclamation reservoirs This project provides substantial protection having flood control storage. Construction to 6,100 acres along the upper Marais des was started in April 1961 and completed in Cygnes River, and contributes to the the fall of 1964 at a total cost of $2,754,000, of protection of 85,600 acres downstream in which $2,489,000 was Federal and $265,000 Kansas and additional areas along the was non-Federal. Osage River. The severity of the drought from June 1952 to April 1957 clearly During the 1951 flood, when 60 percent of indicated the need for multipurpose storage. Manhattan was affected by overflow from Melvern, together with Pomona Lake, could Kansas and Big Blue Rivers, the city suffered have sustained the minimum desirable flow

44 of 30 cubic feet per second in the Marais des wildlife management The recreat1on use Cygnes R1ver throughout this period. dunng 1976 was 1,000,000 VISitor-days. Road Improvements have been authorized The lake at multipurpose pool level provides tn the lake area by Public Law 93-251 The a water-based recreation facility expected to in1t1al cost of construct1ng the completed attract more than 1 million visitors annually. proJect was $37,404,000 Total esttmated S1x public-use areas have been developed to Federal cost of the project 1nclud1ng accommodate the public recreational $347,000 for supplemental recreat1on needs The Kansas State Park and development IS $37,751,000 Resources Authority is developing one of the areas as a State park. More than 9.000 Through June 1976 the proJect had acres will be licensed to the Kansas prevented flood damages amounttng to Forestry, Fish and Game Commisston for $9,106 000

..._ -,._,. --.•t -.. ~ '\ r • .; . , , . . ' "- .·>4·.-.-~ . . . ,.., - - ...... ·-,.-._ .

•

. J- \.: ''·~-- ,_

SERVICE BRIDGE AND CONTROL TOWER AT MELVERN LAKE

45 MILFORD LAKE Reservo1 r, on White Rock Creek m Kansas In Operation Milford Lake prov1des storage capac1ty of (Kansas City Distnct) 700,000 acre-feet for flood control, 300,000 acre-feet for future water supply, and This project on the lower Republican River 160,000 acre-feet for sediment reserve The combtned with Tuttle Creek Lake on the Big dam 1s 6,300 feet long, with a crest height of Blue River, Perry Lake on the Delaware about 140 feet above the stream bed, and has R1ver, and other existing and authorized an uncontrolled chute spillway The 407,000 lakes will effect substantial damage acre-foot multipurpose pool has a surface reductions on the mam stem of the Kansas area of 15,600 acres at elevation 1144 4 and a River Authorized m 1954, construction shoreline of about 163 m1les At top of flood started tn 1961 and was completed m 1972 control pool, elevation 1176 2, the lake has The dam is located about 4 miles northwest an area of 32,300 acres of Junct1on City in Geary County, about 8 nver miles above the confluence of the Republican and Smoky Hill R1vers which Control of the runoff from the lower sect1on form the Kansas Rtver near Junction C1ty of the Republican Rtver Valley ts requtred for protect1on of urban centers and agncultural The proJeCt controls the runoff from a lands along the Kansas and lower Mtssoun drainage area of 3,328 square miles in the R1vers The effect of upstream lakes has Republican River Valley downstream from been constdered in determinmg the hetght the Corps of Engineers' Harlan County Lake of levees for local flood protection projects on the main stem m southern Nebraska, and on the Kansas and Mara1s des Cygnes the Bureau of Reclamation's Lovewell R1vers

AERIAL VIEW OF MILFORD LAKE

46 The recreational use of Milford Lake started The levees which make up the Missouri while the lake was filling. The recreational River levee system are constructed of use during 1974 was 1,570,000 visitor-days. semicompacted earthfill. The average Modern facilities to accommodate visitors height of the levees is 12.6 feet and the top have been constructed at 10 public-use width is 10 feet. Drainage structures through areas to provide safe, orderly access and the levees are provided to minimize ponding recreational use. This includes surfaced water on the protected land. Of the 150 units roads, modern sanitary facilities, boat originally contemplated in the entire ramps, and other pertinent facilities in Missouri River levee system, seven units are quantity to meet heavy use demands. One located in the State of Kansas. Of these area has been licensed to the Kansas Park Kansas units, four have been completed and and Resources Authority and developed the others are in a deferred or inactive into a major State park including a status. Levee unit R-440, which was concession operation. Other areas have completed in 1960, is nearly 11 miles long been licensed to Clay County and the city of and protects more than 4,100 acres of Wakefield and to the city of Milford for agricultural land north of Atchison. A further development, and will be operated second unit, R-460-471, is about 15 miles and maintained by these entities. Sixteen long and protects 13,100 acres of Missouri thousand seven hundred acres have been River bottom land opposite St. Joseph, licensed to the Kansas Forestry, Fish and Missouri. Unit R-482 is located in northern Game Commission for wildlife Doniphan County and was completed in management. In June 1965, the partly 1954. This unit is more than 8 miles long and completed project prevented an estimated provides protection to 4,700 acres. The $4,617,000 in flood damages. The initial cost other operational unitin Kansas, R-500,was of constructing the completed project was also completed in 1954 and the 4-mile levee $48,269,000. Total estimated Federal cost of protects 1,500 acres of bottom land near the project including $716,000 for Iowa Point in Doniphan County. supplemental recreation development is $48,985,000. Through June of 1976 the Kansas units of the Missouri River levee system have been Through June 1976 the project had credited with preventing more than prevented flood damages totaling $6,682,000 in flood damages. $83,024,000. MISSOURI RIVER STABILIZATION AND MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM— NAVIGATION PROJECT SIOUX CITY, IOWA, TO THE MOUTH Under Construction Under Construction (Omaha and Kansas City Districts) (Omaha and Kansas City Districts) The unimproved Missouri River was a wild, The authorizing legislation for the Missouri unpredictable stream, many-channeled and River levee system, the Flood Control Act of meandering, virtually useless for 1944, called for the construction of about commercial navigation, and a constant 1,500 miles of levees along both banks of the threat to any development along its banks. Missouri River from Sioux City, Iowa, to the The stabilization and navigation project is mouth. These levees were designed to designed to stop bank erosion and operate in conjunction with the main stem meandering, and to provide for the low-cost lakes on the upper Missouri River and with transportation necessary to full economic tributary lakes located in the lower part of development of the region. The existing the Missouri River Basin. Many of these project, as modified by Congress in the lakes have been completed and others are in River and Harbor Act of 1945, provides for a a construction status. 9-foot channel, 300 feet wide, from the

47 mouth of the river to Sioux City, Iowa, a Although navigation on the Missouri River is distance of 735 miles, of which about 123 still in its infancy as compared with other miles is along the eastern boundary of inland waterways, there is a substantial Kansas. Both distances reflect an potential tonnage available. A survey of adjustment of river mileages made in 1960. nearly 1,500 industrial plants, milling interests, grain companies, steel firms, and The project is of the open river regulation other manufacturers was made in 1950 and type with no dams or barriers to form on the basis of these contacts, it was slackwater pools. Instead the tremendous estimated that potential commerce of energy of the flowing river is put to work to approximately 5,000,000 tons annually maintain its own channel in an alignment could be expected to develop for shipment fixed by means of dikes and revetments to on the Missouri River. Representatives of favor the movement of barges and tows. some of the firms operating barges on the With the riverbanks permanently secured in river believe the potential tonnage now the desired alignment, the scouring action greatly exceeds that figure. of the flowing water on the riverbed, rather than on the banks, will dig out and maintain The stabilization works perform additional the desired channel width and depth. important functions as part of the comprehensive program for the Missouri During the 1976 navigation season, the River Basin. The completed works will project provided the following channel prevent the annual destruction by erosion of dimensions: from Sioux City, Iowa, to more than 9,000 acres of farmland and will Omaha, Nebraska, a limiting depth of 8.5 open up an additional 188,000 acres of new feet and a limiting width of 250 feet; from land to agriculture. Permanently secured Omaha to Kansas City, a limiting depth of riverbanks are necessary before the 8.5 feet and a limiting width of 220 feet; and, authorized levee system along the Missouri from Kansas City to the mouth, a limiting River below Sioux City can be constructed. depth of 8.0 feet and a limiting width of 220 The levees are a vital part of the flood control feet. program for the main river.

The 1976 estimate of cost of the project is Benefits attributable to stabilization, $450,000,000 Federal and $6,949,000 non- navigation, and levees on the Missouri River Federal. Work completed through June 1976 as of July 1976 from work already completed had a Federal cost of $406,369,000. were estimated at approximately $979,900,000 based on prices current at the In 1953, two privately owned common time of accrual. carriers started regularly scheduled operations on the river as far upstream as Although no recreational facilities were Omaha, Nebraska. These operations have included in the initial project authorization, been supplemented in more recent years by Section 207 of the Flood Control Act of 1962 several contract carriers. Commercial provided authority under which plans were tonnages have increased from a mere initiated in 1965 for development of public- 152.000 tons in 1953 to a high of nearly use recreational sites along both banks of 2.800.000 tons in 1971. Shipments in 1975 the Missouri River from Sioux City to the were within 500,000 tons of equaling the mouth. A total of more than 60 recreational 1971 rate. The main commodities being areas are envisioned for the entire length of shipped are grain, steel products, the river. By January 1976, 20 sites had been petroleum, chemicals, minerals, molasses, completed and three others were in the building materials, machinery, and detailed planning stage. The overall plan vegetable and animal products. calls for development of three recreational

48 areas in Kansas and two of these are now The plan of protection provides for 4.7 miles complete. The construction of these of levee construction, two channel cutoffs, recreational facilities requires cost sharing five stoplog gaps, and appurtenant works, and other participation by non-Federal local all supplemental to upstream lake control. interests. Construction was initiated in May 1968, and was completed in the fall of 1970 at a cost of ONAGA LAKE $2,037,000 Federal and $348,000 non- Authorized, Not Started Federal. (Kansas City District) Through June 1976 the project had Onaga Damsite is located on Vermillion prevented flood damages totaling $800,000. Creek about 16 miles southwest of Onaga and 6 miles northeast of Wamego. This OTTAWA LOCAL PROTECTION project, for which preconstruction planning In Operation is essentially complete, is a part of the flood (Kansas City District) control and water conservation plans for the Kansas River Basin. Its construction was The local protection project at Ottawa on the authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1962. Marais des Cygnes River was completed in The 9,000-foot-long earthfill dam will rise to November 1962 and turned over to the city a maximum height of about 90 feet above the for operation and maintenance. valley floor. It will control the runoff from a drainage area of 301 square miles. The lake The local protection project includes as will have a gross capacity of 328,000 acre- main components the following: 4.3 miles feet, of which 221,000 acre-feet are allocated of levees on both banks of the river; 1,490 to flood control storage and 107,000 acre- feet of floodwalls, including 337 feet of 50- feet to multipurpose and sedimentation foot-high gravity wall, with movable gated uses. At full flood control pool, elevation gaps for railroad and vehicular traffic; 2.3 1056.0, the lake will have a surface area of miles of channel improvements including 10,600 acres and will extend up the 1,600 feet of channel change on Wilson Vermillion Creek Valley to within 3 miles of Creek; alteration of one highway bridge; Onaga. The multipurpose pool will cover removal of one vehicular bridge; about 5,320 acres at elevation 1028.0. construction of a railroad bridge to replace an existing bridge; and construction of three Three recreation areas are planned to pumping plants to provide for interior provide facilities for an estimated 460,000 drainage and sewage. The Ottawa works, in initial visitors per year. conjunction with the operation of upstream Pomona and Melvern Lakes, are designed to The 1976 estimate of cost for the authorized protect the city against a flood of at least Onaga Lake is $62,000,000. 1951 magnitude, which affected 111 city blocks in Ottawa and caused damages OSAWATOMIE LOCAL PROTECTION estimated at $5,500,000. Partially completed In Operation works prevented damages amounting to (Kansas City District) $1,250,000 during high waters in 1960,1961, and 1962. Osawatomie is located in the flood plains on a narrow ridge between the Marais des Through June 1976 the project had Cygnes River and Pottawatomie Creek. A prevented flood damages estimated at flood in 1928 inundated a large part of the $7,738,000. Cost of the project was about town, affecting 250 residences. The 1951 $4,463,000 Federal and $876,000 non- flood damage was estimated at $762,000. Federal.

49 PERRY DAM AND LAKE

J

FISHING BELOW OUTLET CONDUIT OF PERRY LAKE

50 PERRY LAKE on the east side of the lake, and with In Operation Highways 24 and 92 on the west side, are (Kansas City District) now in the planning stage. During 1976 recreational usage totaled 1,250,000 visitor- Perry Lake (started in 1964 and completed in days. 1971) is located about 4 miles north of Perry # on the Delaware River. Closure of the dam The initial cost of constructing the was completed in August 1966. completed project was $47,928,000. The total estimated Federal cost of the project, Through June 1976 the project prevented including $816,000 for supplemental flood damages estimated at $114,473,000. recreation development is $48,744,000.

The earthfill dam is 7,750 feet long, with a PIONEER LAKE crest height of 120 feet above the original Recommended for Deauthorization streambed. The dam will control runoff from (Kansas City District) a drainage area of 1,117 square miles, all in the more humid section of Kansas. The lake Pioneer Damsite is on the Arikaree River provides 480,000 acre-feet of storage about 7.5 miles upstream from the capacity for flood control and 290,000 acre- confluence of the Arikaree River and the feet for multipurpose and sedimentation North Fork of the Republican River near uses. The multipurpose pool covers about Haigler, Nebraska, and is about 12 miles 12,200 acres at elevation 891.5. At top of southeast of Wray, Colorado. The lake flood control pool, elevation 920.6, the lake would extend over the State line into has a surface area of 25,000 acres. Colorado.

At the request of the State of Kansas, Pioneer Lake, now in an inactive category, 150,000 acre-feet of water supply storage was authorized for construction by the has been included in the multipurpose pool. Flood Control Act of 1944. It was to be a unit of a plan for protection against disastrous Perry Lake protects 3,200 acres in the floods, such as in 1935 in the Republican Delaware River Basin below the dam and River Basin, and also a unit in the plan for the helps to protect 53,000 acres along the Missouri River Basin. Preliminary plans Kansas River and additional areas along the provided for a dam about 7,800 feet in length Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. Perry, to rise about 125 feet above the valley floor. Lawrence, Bonner Springs, and Kansas City benefit from the flood control provided by The primary purpose of the project was Perry Lake. flood control, with 87,000 acre-feet of the gross capacity of 115,000 acre-feet Perry Lake, which is the third largest in the presently allocated for that purpose. At top State of Kansas, offers outstanding of flood control pool, elevation 3381.0, and recreational opportunities close to the large top of multipurpose pool, elevation 3345.5, centers of population in northeast Kansas the lake would have surface areas of 3,520 and western Missouri. To meet the resulting acres and 1,460 acres, respectively. recreational needs, 11 public-use areas and Irrigation possibilities were also considered. two group camp areas totaling 6,768 acres A high degree of flood protection would be are being developed. Eleven thousand acres provided to about 2,100 acres along the are licensed to the Kansas Forestry, Fish and Arikaree River, and the project would Game Commission for wildlife contribute to protection along the upper management. A total of 16 miles of road Republican River, including a few small improvements consisting of three segments communities. which will provide a bituminous surface road connecting with Highways 24 and 16 Pioneer Lake is eligible for deauthorization

51 under the provisions of Section 12 of the prevented flood damages amount1ng to Water Resources Development Act of 1974, $14,758,000 Pomona was constructed at a and 1t has been recommended that the cost of about $13,300,000 project be deauthonzed The rolled earthfill dam 1s 7 ,750 feet long POMONA LAKE w1th the crest about 110 feet above the In Operation orrginal streambed The outlet works (Kansas C1ty D1stnct) cons1sts of an Intake gate tower, a horseshoe condutt, and a st1lltng basm A Pomona Lake project is located about 30 l1mited serv1ce uncontrolled chute spillway miles south of Topeka on 11 O-M1Ie Creek 1s 1n the rrght abutment The lake has a gross Constructron started in 1959 and the project storage capac1ty of 246,500 acre-feet, of was completed rn 1964 as a un1t of the flood wh rch 162,000 acre-feet are reserved for control and water conservation plan for the flood control, 56,000 acre-feet for low-flow Mara1s des Cygnes R1ver Basin The dam supplementation and water supply, and controls 97 percent of the 322 square mrles 28,000 acre-feet for sedrment reserve The of drarnage area 1n 1 OO-M1Ie Creek and surface area of the 84,000 acre­ Draggon Creek Basins lm poundment of the foot multipurpose pool IS about 4,000 acres multipurpose pool was initiated in October at elevat1on 974 0 w1th a shoreline of 52 1963 mrles At top of flood control pool, elevatron 1003 0, the lake has a surface area of 8,600 Through June 1976, the project had acres

POMONA LAKE LOOKING PAST VASSAR PARK TOWARD DAM

52 Public recreation access to the lake is Creek and contributes to the protectron of provrded at nine developed recreatron 85 600 acres along the Marais des Cygnes in access areas, one of which is licensed to the Kansas and addrtronal acres along the Kansas Park and Resources Authority for Osage Rrver in Mrssoun Wrth both Pomona development and operation as a State park. and Melvern Lakes rn operatron, water Basic facilities such as roads, parkrng areas, released from therr multipurpose pools boat launching ramps, water supply. tor lets, maintarn a mrnrmum flow of about 30 cubrc and prcnicking and camping facilities have feet per second at Ottawa through drought been modified and improved to meet the perrods to rmprove the qualrty of water continued increase in recreational use The downstream. annual visitation for 1976 was 900,000 vrsrtor-days. SALINA LOCAL PROTECTION In Operatron • Road Improvements have been authonzed (Kansas Crty Drstnct) rn the lake by Public Law 93-251. Thrs local protectron proJeCt at Saltna rs on Pomona Lake, teamed with Melvern Lake the Smoky Hrll Rrver and Dry and Mulberry now rn operation on the upper Marars des Creeks The c1ty 1s the maJor markettng, Cygnes, effects important flow reductrons at trade, and transportatron center for central Ottawa and Osawatomie and in rural areas and northwestern Kansas Srnce 1948 when as well. Pomona Lake alone provrdes Kanopolrs Lake was completed on the protectron to 3,700 acres along 11 0-Mrle Smoky Hrll, the city has had the benefrt of

-

CHA NEL CUTOFF PROTECTS SALINA FROM SMOKY HILL RIVER

53 flood reductions and supplemental water construction was started in 1940. Amended supply from that project. In July 1951, the plans on which the present project is based absence of local protection works (which were authorized by the Flood Control Acts had been recommended as a necessary of 1944, 1946, and 1954. supplement to lake control) permitted inundation of the city when a severe storm To facilitate construction, management, and struck in the area below Kanopolis Lake. operation, the overall project was set up in Flood damages at that time were estimated seven units. The geographical units are: the at $3,342,000 bringing to well over Fairfax-Jersey unit on the Missouri River in $20,000,000 the total flood damages Kansas; the Argentine and Armourdale units suffered by Salina since and including 1903. on the Kansas River in Kansas; the Central Industrial District unit, which lies in both As authorized by Congress in 1954, and States and is bounded on the west by the subsequently modified and expanded, the Kansas River and on the north by the Salina project, integrated with lake control Missouri River; and three other units, the upstream, provides protection against a North Kansas City, East Bottoms, and flood considerably greater than the 1951 Birmingham units, all in Missouri. The flood. Since completion in 1961, the project design and construction of each of these has prevented flood damages amounting to units was coordinated with the others, yet $4,923,000. each became effective as it was completed, and each is operationally independent. Generally, the project includes 17 miles of Complete effectiveness of the overall levees with average height of 8 feet, 4 miles project is contingent upon adequate lake of channel improvement, and 4.5 miles of control in the upper Missouri and Kansas cutoffs in Smoky Hill River, including a high- River Basins. Levees, floodwalls, relief wells, water overflow diversion improvement and and pumping plants comprise the main diversion of 6.4 miles of Dry and 1.9 miles of protective structures. Other major elements improvement of Mulberry Creeks, two include channel and floodway pumping plants, and alteration of six improvements in both rivers, bridge and highways and four railroad bridges. approach alterations, and the Liberty Bend cutoff in the Missouri River immediately The cost of the Salina project was about downstream from Kansas City. $3,879,000 Federal and $1,960,000 non- Federal. The project was partially completed when the unprecedented 1951 flood on the Kansas THE KANSAS CITYS, MISSOURI AND River struck the area. Works along the KANSAS, LOCAL PROTECTION Kansas River afforded protection up to and In Operation beyond their design discharge for several (Kansas City District) days prior to the final crest, but all were finally overtopped. Ironically, in the heavily Located at the confluence of the Missouri industrialized Fairfax-Jersey Creek District and Kansas Rivers, the Kansas Citys include along the Missouri River, the levee about 32 square miles in the flood plains of protection would have been adequate but the two rivers. This area, containing major flooding resulted from rupture of the industrial, transportation, and municipal covering over Jersey Creek, where a facilities and some residential development replacement pressure conduit had been (having a total value of approximately $4.7 scheduled for construction in a few days. billion), is incorporated in the Kansas Citys The remaining local protection along the flood control project. Missouri River, supplemented by intensive floodfighting activities, prevented flood The local protection project was authorized damages estimated at $264,640,000. This by the Flood Control Act of 1936 and saving, together with losses prevented

54 dunng other floods from 1943 through June Lovewell, Glen Elder, Norton, and Cedar 1976 amounts to about $1,740,370,000. Bluff Flood control operat1ons at Bureau projects are under the d1 rect1on of the The few lakes in place on the upper Missouri Kansas C1ty D1stnct of the Corps · of R1ver teamed with the Kansas Citys Eng1neers. (M1ssoun-Kansas) levees to prevent damage during the major Missouri River Three small lakes on streams tributary to the flood 1n 1952. Since that time, these upper lower Kansas R1ver were authonzed by the fvl1ssoun impoundments have been Flood Control Act of 1962 They are Onaga supplemented by the completion of on Vermrllton Creek, Grove at the additional lakes. While control of the Kansas confluence of Sold1er Creek and Little River is not complete, substantial headway Soldier Creek, and Clinton on the Wakarusa is being made. R1ver Clmton Lake and Grove Lakes are under construct1on Th1s same Act also Tuttle Creek project on the Big Blue River, authonzed the Kansas C1ty, Kansas, local Wilson on the Saline River, Milford on the protection proJect wh 1ch provides for lower Republican River, and Perry on the mod 1f1cat1on of the portron of the Kansas Delaware River, all of which have been C1ty proJeCt along the Kansas R1ver completed, have important flood control 1nvolv1ng the Argentine, Armourdale, and effects on the main stem of the Kansas River. Central lndustnal D1stncts and alterations to In addition, six Bureau of Reclamation bndges and approaches to prov1de a higher reservoirs, with flood control effects on the degree of protection The h1gher protection main stem of the Kansas River, have been for the Argent1ne 1s completed The completed. They are Kirwin, Webster, Armourdale port1on IS under construction

'

ARMOURDALE UNIT MODIFICATION

55 and the Central lndustnal District 1s long been harassed by overflows of the scheduled to be under construction in late Kansas R1ver and 1ts three tnbutanes, Fiscal Year 1977 Soldier, Halfday, and lnd1an Creeks

The est1mate of cost of the Kansas Cttys Ex1st1ng works wh1ch protect a small port1on project as authonzed 1n 1944 IS $42,500,000 of South Topeka were completed m 1939 Federal and $5,120,000 non-Federal Work on the North Topeka port1on of the project wh1ch was authonzed 1n 1936, was TOPEKA LOCAL PROTECTION postponed 1ndef1nitely 1n 1940. Th1s In Operation postponement permitted further study of the (Kansas C1ty District) problem and resulted in a modified plan wh 1ch was authonzed 1n 1954 as part of the Th1s State cap1tal and 1ndustnal and defense Kansas R1ver Basm plan The mod1f1ed plan center 1s located astnde the Kansas R1ver mcludes Improvements based on stud1es of about 85 m1les above the mouth Although the 1951 flood much of the c1ty south of the nver is above flood he1ghts, important railroad and In July 1951 , floods on the Kansas R1ver and mdustrial developments, the mun1c1pal 1ts mmor tributaries in the Topeka area waterworks, and the mun1c1pal a1rport are mundated most of the South Topeka flood located 1n the 3,300-acre flood plam along platn area and the ent1 re North Topeka area the south bank of the nver, and are subject to causmg damages est1 mated 1n excess of destructive floods The north Topeka area, $34,000,000 (flood year pnces) of approximately 5,100 acres, including business, residential, industrial, and The Topeka local protection project now 1s spec1al1zed small farm developments, has completed, and supplemented by adequate

I

.,.._.,,.._- •

OAKLAND UNIT OF TOPEKA FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT

56 upstream lake control, and will provtde North Topeka, Oakland, Auburndale, and protection against a flood even greater than South Topeka un1ts of the overall plan The the 1951 flood. T his project, as authonzed, Soldter Creek d1versron un1t, which was cons1sts of seven pri n cipal untts completed 1n 1961 , 1ncluded construct ton of Construction featu res include some 39 approximately 10 mtles of new channel, 18 mtles of new levees; raistng and m ties of new levees, three new railroad reinforcement of 2.6 miles of extstmg levee, bndges, two new State highway bridges, 1 ,000 feet of new floodwall; nprap bank and SIX new county road bndges. {The State protection; five separate systems of reltef and county bndges were constructed by wells; 17.1 miles o f i mproved channels, 11 local 1nte rests ) pumping plants to take care of intenor drainage and relief well dtscharge, Through 1976, the Sold1er Creek diverston construction o f four new railroad bndges, prevented flood damages esttmated at and major alterations to the two Kansas $44,256,000 Rtver railway bridges. Construction of the proJect requires the extensive alteratton of The Waterworks unit construction 1ncluded ex1sting street and highway bridges. A new levees, slope protection, and perhaps the h1gh-level Kansas Avenue bridge was only 1nd1vtdually pumped pressure rel1ef completed by local interests in 1967 to well system in the Un1ted States The replace the old bridge which collapsed rn Auburndale untt levee construction was 1965. coordinated w1th Interstate htghway work completed m 1961 Two pumptng plants, Major construction to date has included reltef wells, and a sublevee were also completion of the Soldier Creek d tvers1on, constructed as part of thts unit Local waterworks, a railroad bridge alteratton, tnterests constructed one rat I road bridge

SOLDIER CREEK DIVERSION SHOWING JUNCTION WITH KANSAS RIVER

57 The Oakland unit completed late in 1968, of an existing pumping plant, floodwall, includes 9 miles of new Shunganunga Creek stoplog gap, pressure relief wells, and bank channel, a pumping plant, pressure relief and slope protection. wells, replacement of one railroad bridge with a box structure, abandonment of two The South Topeka unit involved raising and street bridges, and construction of one new reinforcing the existing levee, pumping street bridge. Further improvements consist plant, installation of an underseepage relief of 1.8 miles of levee, slope protection, 2 system, and modification of existing miles of new channel, removal of eight street floodwall drainage system. The eight bridges and one footbridge, replacement of stoplog gap was completed in 1973. three street bridges, and 509 feet of floodwall. Estimated flood damages Through June 1976, the South Topeka unit prevented through June 1976 amounted to prevented flood damages estimated at $5,414,000. $17,444,000. The cost of constructing the project was about $21,175,000 Federal and The Santa Fe Railroad bridge over the $10,383,000 non-Federal. Kansas River has been lengthened and the Rock Island bridge has been provided with TUTTLE CREEK LAKE lifting devices to raisethe bridgeduring high In Operation river stage. (Kansas City District)

The Auburndale unit, completed in 1963 Tuttle Creek Dam is about 10 river miles provides protection between the upstream from the mouth of the Big Blue Waterworks and South Topeka units on the River and about 6 miles north of Manhattan. right bank of the Kansas River. The The project was authorized by the Flood protection consists of 1.3 miles of levee Control Act of 1938 and modified by later including 2,600 feethof zoned highway fill acts. Construction was started in October (constructed coincident with the 1-170 1952 and the project was placed in operation embankment). Nine hundred feet of in the summer of 1962. Situated near the sublevee (Waite Street levee) is located mouth of the Big Blue River, one of the along the west side of a 350 acre-foot largest contributors to floods on the Kansas ponding area. A 2,000 foot, rockfill River, Tuttle Creek Lake is considered a key underseepage control berm is utilized with unit in the Kansas River Basin lake system. It 15 fully penetrating, gravel-packed artesian provides benefits for flood control, wells which discharge directly into the recreation, and augmentation of low-water ponding area. One 3-foot sandbag gap is streamflow to the Kansas, lower Missouri, located at Storey Street. Ward and Martin and Mississippi Rivers. Creeks were joined and diverted directly to the river through the ponding area. A four- The earthfill embankment isabout7,500feet barrel gated structure is used for the Ward- long and rises about 157 feet above the Martin diversion channel. Relocation of original streambed. The lake has a gross three major sewerlines and construction of a storage capacity of 2,346,000 acre-feet, of railroad bridge were required. Estimated which 1,933,000 acre-feet is allocated to flood damages prevented through June flood control and 413,000 acre-feet to 1976 amounted to $166,000. multipurpose and sedimentation uses. The multipurpose pool at normal level, elevation Construction of Stage I of the North Topeka 1075.0, has a surface area of 15,800 acres. At unit completed in November 1964, includes top of flood control pool, elevation 1136.0, levees, drainage structures, and bank and the lake has an area of 53,600 acres. The slope protection. Construction of Stage 11 of adjacent lands are available for farming or this unit was completed in the fall of 1966, grazing under the Government leasing including two pumping plants, modification program or through retention of the land by

58 the owners under flowage easement State-operated park areas, concess1ona1res arrangements. are l1censed to sell suppl1es and furnish serv1ces for wh1ch a fee 1s normally charged As part of the Tuttle Creek project, a levee Approximately 12,000 acres are licensed to has been built around the northeast portton the Kansas Forestry, Ftsh and Game of the town of Blue Rapids to shield against Comm1ss1on for w1ldl1fe management. The temporarily 1m pounded water when the lake recreat1on usage at Tuttle Creek was 1s at full pool. The cost o f this improvement approximately 1,500,000 v1s1tor-days 1n was $900,000. 1976.

Recreational use o f the lake and project land Road improvements have been authonzed IS provided at 12 public-use areas rang1ng 1n s1ze from 76 to 439 acres. Fo ur of the areas rn the lake area by Public Law 93-251 have been I icensed to the Kansas Park and Resources Authority for operation as State The in1t1al cost of constructing the parks and have been further developed by completed project was $80,051,000 Total the State for that purpose. Basic facillttes est1mated Federal cost of the project prov1ded consist of roads, parktng areas, rncludtng $369,000 for supplemental boat launching ramps, group shelters, recreatron development 1s $80,420,000 comfort stations, water supply , and Through June 1976, 1t has prevented flood p1cn1ck1ng and camping sites. In two of the damages of $289,158,000

SAILBOATING ON TUTTLE CREEK LAKE

59 WILSON LAKE multipurpose pool covers about 9,000 acres In Operat1on at elevat1on 1516 0, and has a shorelme (Kansas C1ty District) about 100 miles long. At top of flood control pool, elevation 1554 0, the lake has a surface area of 20,000 acres W1lson Lake on the Salme R1ver 1s located about 10 m1les north of Wilson and 20 m1les W1lson Lake prov1des a high degree of east of Russell. It was authonzed by the protection to 60,000 acres 1n the Sal1ne Rtver Flood Control Act of 1944 Construction flood pla1n 1nclud1ng the towns of Beverly, started m 1961, and was completed m 1966 Culver, L1ncoln, Sylvan Grove, Tescott, New The dam is about 5,600 feet long w1th a crest Cambna, and Vesper In coordmat1on w1th he1ght of about 160 feet above the ongmal other Kansas R1ver Bas1n un1ts, the project streambed The lake controls runoff from helps to reduce flooding on 210,000 1,917 square m1les of area and prov1des add1t1onal acres m the Smoky H1ll and storage capac1t1es of 511,000 acre-feet for Kansas Rtver flood plams. Multipurpose flood control and 265,000 acre-feet for storage 1s used to supplement flows for multi purpose and sedimentation uses The downstream uses

• -

-

AERIAL VIEW OF WILSON DAM AND LAKE

60 The project provides a water recreation been licensed to the Kansas Park and factltty 1n north-central Kansas, an area Resources Authonty for development and where natural lakes do not exist, and where operat1on as a State park A concess1ona1re lakes have received extensive public use. has been l1censed to sell supplies and The proximity of the project to Interstate 70, prov1de serv1ces for wh1ch a fee 1s normally whtch passes 7 miles south of the lake, charged 1n add 1t1 on to the bas 1c faci l1t1es makes it a desirable overnight stop for prov1ded tn the State park There were through-State vacationers Five public-use 700,000 VISitor-days 1n 1976 areas have been developed to meet the recreation needs and prov1de access to the lake. One area is located below the dam, Through June 1976 W1lson Lake had along the outlet channel, pnmanly to prevented flood damages amounting to accommodate fast water f1sh1ng $4,374,000 The 1n1t1al cost of constructmg Approximately 6,000 acres are licensed to the completed project was $20,015,000 the Kansas Forestry, Fish and Game Total estimated Federal cost of the project Commission for wildlife management One tnclud1ng $125,000 for supplemental of the areas providing access to the lake has recreation development ts $20,140,000

- - --

WILSO STATE PARK MARINA AT WILSON LAKE

61 INDIAN LAKE The 1975 estimated cost of Tomahawk Lake Authorized, Not Started is $44,400,000 of which $6,570,000 is the (Kansas City District) estimated non-Federal reimbursable cost for recreation facilities and $4,200,000 for Indian Lake would be a multipurpose project water supply. on Indian Creek, with the damsite located slightly to the east of Schlagel Road, in Tomahawk Lake was placed in the inactive Johnson County, Kansas. category in 1976 because of a lack of support from local interests. The compacted earthfill dam would be4,800 feet long and 80 feet above the valley floor. WOLF-COFFEE LAKE The multipurpose pool would have a surface Authorized, Not Started area of 590 acres at elevation 966.0, and a (Kansas City District) lake of 980 acres at elevation 981.0, and would be available for public use and Wolf-Coffee Lake, now in the recreation. The total lake capacity would be preconstruction planning stage, will be a 22,900 acre-feet, of which 10,500 acre-feet multipurpose project on Blue River are for flood control, 4,600 acre-feethfor immediately upstream of the new US recreation, 4,900 acre-feet for downstream Highway 69, about 3 miles south, and 0.5 releases, and 3,000 acre-feet for sediment mile west of Stanley, Kansas. reserve. The compacted earthfill dam will be 4,800 The 1975 estimated cost of Indian Lake is feet long and 100 feet above the valley floor. $40,900,000 of which $5,700,000 is the The multipurpose pool will have an area of estimated non-Federal reimbursable cost of 1,300 acres at elevation 965.0. When full the recreation facililies. lake will have an area of 2,430 acres athelevation 983.0 and will be available for Indian Lake was placed in the inactive public use and recreation. The total lake category in 1976 because of a lack of capacity will be 67,300 acre-feet, of which support from local interests. 29,200 acre-feet are for flood control, 8,300 acre-feet for water supply, 2,700 acre-feet TOMAHAWK LAKE for downstream releases, 18,100 acre-feet Authorized, Not Started for recreation, and 9,100 acre-feet for (Kansas City District) sediment reserve.

Tomahawk Lake would be a multipurpose The 1976 estimated cost of Wolf-Coffee project on Tomahawk Creek, with the Lake is $59,100,000 of which $5,870,000 is damsite immediately upstream of 115th the estimated non-Federal reimbursable Street in Johnson County, Kansas. cost for recreation facilities and $8,630,000 for water supply. The compacted earthfill dam would be 2,900 feet long and 79 feet above the valley floor. Wolf-Coffee Lake remains in the active The multipurpose pool would have an area category pending the decision of local of 850 acres at elevation 894.0. When full the interests on sponsorship of recreational lake would have an area of 1,340 acres at development and water supply storage. elevation 910.0, and will be available for public use and recreation. The total lake KANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION capacity would be 35,900 acre-feet, of which Authorized, Not Started 15,800 acre-feet are for flood control, 5,500 (Kansas City District) acre-feet are for water supply, 7,700 acre- feet for recreation, 2,100 acre-feet for The Kansas River navigation project from downstream releases, and 4,800 acre-feet the mouth of the river upstream to Turner for sediment reserve. Bridge, a distance of 9.33 miles, was

62 authorized by a resolution approved by the navigation for the lower 9.33 miles from the Senate Committee on Public Works adopted mouth of the Kansas River to the Turner on December 12, 1973. The House Bridge, consisting of a channel 9 feet deep Committee on Public Works approved such and 150 feet wide. Initial construction would a resolution on April 11, 1974. consist of training and bank stabilization structures at critical locations, and dredging The original study for the Kansas River in certain areas to establish a low-flow navigation considered a project from the channel. Such action would result in the mouth to Lawrence, Kansas, a distance of least environmental effect and the lowest approximately 80 river miles. That project annual cost of alternatives considered. was not found to be economically feasible. The lower 9.33 miles, however, was found to be economically feasible and was The 1976 estimate of cost for the Kansas recommended for construction. That River modification to the Turner Bridge is project was subsequently authorized and $5,021,000, of which $5,000,000 is Federal includes improvements to provide harbor and $21,000 is non-Federal.

63

EMERGENCY WORK

SNAGGING AND CLEARING protection of county bridge abutment at a OPERATIONS total cost of $197,000, including $48,100 (PUBLIC LAW 780) Federal and $148,900 non-Federal.

Under Section 13 of the Flood Control Act of In 1970 a Kansas River protection project on 1946, the Kansas City District completed a the left bank at DeSoto, Kansas, to protect a realignment project on Delaware River county bridge abutment, was completed at a south of Perry, Kansas, in June 1953 at a Federal cost of $25,600. Federal cost of $3,313. In 1975 an emergency bank protection EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION project was constructed along the Saline (PUBLIC LAW 526) River at Tescott, Kansas, to protect a sewage lift station. The Federal cost was $21,500. Pursuant to Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of July 1946, emergency bank EMERGENCY REPAIRS protection works were constructed by the (PUBLIC LAW 99) Tulsa District in 1951 along the right bank of the Arkansas River in Rice County, south of Emergency operations of the Corps 'of Alden. This work was constructed for the Engineers include rescue work during purpose of protecting the west abutment of floods and other emergencies, and repair, an important Arkansas River Bridge restoration, and strengthening of levees and crossing and consisted of installing a other flood control works threatened or system of tetrahedral jetties at a total destroyed by floods, including privately Federal cost of $11,700. Other projects constructed levees. Cost of emergency completed in the Arkansas River Basin repairs in Kansas during fiscal years 1975 include one near Burlington on the Grand and 1976 were $210,000 in the Arkansas (Neosho), completed in 1972 at a cost of River Basin and $118,547 in the Missouri $46,278 and one in Allen County on Owl River Basin. Creek completed in 1974 at a cost of $34,521. DISASTER ASSISTANCE The Kansas City District completed the (PUBLIC LAW 93-288) following projects in the Missouri River Basin in 1953 and 1954 under this Public As a result of extensive flooding in the fall of Law: (a) Smoky Hill River works on right 1973, portions of Kansas were declared bank south of Solomon, Kansas, to protect major disaster areas. The Federal Disaster county bridge abutment, Federal cost Assistance Administration (FDAA), Region $44,000; (b) Kansas River protection on left 7, requested Kansas City District to perform bank at Lawrence, Kansas, to protect US preliminary, detailed, interim and final Highway 24 Bridge abutment, Federal cost damage surveys. Preliminary and detailed $6,600; and (c) Kansas River north of surveys were made in 16 counties. Interim Eudora, Kansas, works on right bank for and final surveys were completed in 1975.

66

FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEME T SERVICE§

To Encourage Wise Use and Avoid Flood Dar1,ag4

...

~, 0

4y

Agriculture ;r Open uses • ~ ~ · Parking Recreation Floors Above Floods No Storage Fi ll eng Allowed Floo d Restrictions

68 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Corps of Engineers through its Flood providing guidance and reference material Plain Management Services program, are published and distributed to ensure authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1960, orderly, uniform, and effective compiles and disseminates information on administration of this program. It is the floods and flood damage potentials and responsibility of the State and local general criteria for guidance in promoting government agencies to publicize the the best use of flood plain areas. The information and put it to use through objective of the program is to provide planning groups, zoning boards, private guidance for development in flood-prone citizens, engineering and planning firms, areas in order to minimize future flood real estate and industrial developers, and losses. The purpose of the authorization is others. State and local agencies also are to make available to Federal, State, and local expected to help provide assistance, advice, governmental agencies, on their request, and guidance to ameliorate flood hazards. information, guidance, and advice on flood hazard. Application by a local agency in Kansas fora flood-plain information study is made to the The program includes preparation and State coordinating agency, the Kansas dissemination of flood plain information Water Resources Board, 109 West 9th reports; guides, pamphlets, and related Street, Topeka, Kansas 66612. That State research; provision of technical services and agency coordinates applications, guidance in the use of basic data and establishes priorities, and forwards the preparation of applications; assistance in application to the appropriate District preparation of flood plain regulations; Engineer. Assistance in preparing advice on structuralhfloodproofing of new applications can be obtained from the and existing buildings; and long-range Kansas Water Resources Board or the Corps comprehensive flood damage reduction of Engineer offices in Albuquerque, Kansas planning which includes all of these City, or Tulsa. activities. The program helps to roundout the National effort in treating flood problems and complements other Corps flood control In Kansas, numerous requests have been efforts. received for flood plain information resulting in letters, talks, and speeches to A typical flood plain information report various city and civic groups to explain the program and assist with applications for includes maps or mosaics, profiles, charts, tables, photographs, and narrative reports. describing or predicting the extent, depth, probability, and duration of past and future Flood plain information report activity in flooding. Public information pamphlets Kansas streams is noted below:

ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN

Map Key Title District Status

1 Ark Riv, Dodge City, Albuquerque Report published December Kans 1969.

69 ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN (CONT)

Map Key Title District Status

2 Special Flood Hazard Albuquerque Report published May 1972. Information, Ark Riv, Dodge City, Kans

3 Special Flood Hazard Albuquerque Report published June 1970. Information, Ark Riv, Ft Dodge— Wilroads Gardens, Vicinity of Dodge City, Kans

4 Ark and Pawnee Riv, Albuquerque Report published February Larned, Kans 1971.

5 Little Ark Riv and Tulsa Report published April 1974. Sand Cr, Sedgwick, Kans

6 Little Ark Riv and Tulsa Report published June 1974. Black Kettle Cr, Halstead, Kans

7 Ark Riv, Derby- Tulsa Report completed June 1975. Mulvane, Kans

8 Ark Riv, Garden City, Albuquerque Report published March 1972. Kans

9 Special Flood Hazard Tulsa Report published January Information, Ark Riv, 1971. Arkansas City, Kans

10 Dry Turkey and Bull Tulsa Report published August Cr, McPherson, 1972. Kans

11 Special Flood Hazard Tulsa Report published February Information, Labette 1973. and Little Labette Cr, Parsons, Kans

12 Special Flood Hazard Tulsa Report published October Information, Rock Cr, 1974. Burlington, Kans

13 Special Flood Hazard Tulsa Report published October Information, Whiskey 1974. Rock Crs, Independence, Kans

70 ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN (CONT)

Map Key Title District Status

14 Grand (Neosho) & Tulsa Report published June 1965. Cottonwood Rivs, Kans

14A Special Flood Hazard Tulsa Report published January Information, Gypsum 1976. & Dry Crs, Wichita, Kans

14B Grand (Neosho) & Tulsa Report completed September Cottonwood Rivs, 1976. Emporia, Kans

15 Sand & Slate Cr, Tulsa Report published September Newton, Kans 1971.

16 Verdigris, Fall, & Tulsa Report published January Elk Rivs, Kans 1966.

17 Walnut & Whitewater Tulsa Report published April 1968. Rivs, Kans

MISSOURI RIVER BASIN

18 Kansas Riv from Kansas City Report published April 1965. Junction City, Kans, to the Mouth

19 Kansas & Wakarusa Kansas City Report published April 1969. Rivs in the Vicinity of Lawrence, Kans

20 Shunganunga Cr, Kansas City Report published December Topeka, Kans 1968.

21 Smoky Hill Riv from Kansas City Report published May 1967. Salina to Junction City, Kans

22 Big and Chetolah Crs Kansas City Report published June 1969. & Lincoln Draw, Hays, Kans

23 Jersey Cr, Kansas Kansas City Report published December City, Kans 1969.

24 Blue Riv & Tributaries, Kansas City Report published May 1970. Johnson County, Kans

71 MISSOURI RIVER BASIN (CONT)

Map Key Title District Status

25 White Clay Cr, Kansas City Report published July 1970. Atchison, Kans

26 Three Mile Cr, Kansas City Report published December Leavenworth, Kans 1970.

27 Wildcat Cr, Kansas City Report published December Manhattan, Kans 1971.

28 Missouri & Kans Kansas City Report published January Rivs, Kansas City, 1972. Kans

29 Mulberry & Dry Crs, Kansas City Report published March 1972 Salina, Kans

30 Blue & Kansas Rivs, Kansas City Report published May 1972. Manhattan, Kans

31 Smoky Hill & Saline Kansas City Report published June 1972. Rivs, Salina, Kans

32 Five Mile Cr, Kansas City Report published June 1972. Leavenworth, Kans

33 Deer Cr, Topeka, Kansas City Report published September Kans 1974.

34 Turkey Cr, Kansas Kansas City Report completed January City, Kans 1974.

35 Sappa Cr, Oberlin, Kansas City Report completed November Kans 1973.

36 Marais des Cygnes Kansas City Report completed July 1973. Riv, Vol I, Ottawa, Kans & Vicinity

37 Indian Cr, Topeka, Kansas City Report completed September Kans 1974.

38 Big Cr, Ellis, Kans Kansas City Report completed November 1974.

39 Marais des Cygnes Kansas City Report completed January Riv, Vol III, 1975. Pottawatomie Cr, Garnett to Osawatomie, Kans

72 MISSOURI RIVER BASIN (CONT)

Map Key Title District Status

40 Half Day Cr, Topeka, Kansas City Report completed January Kans 1975.

41 Marais des Cygnes Kansas City Report completed January Riv, Vol II, 1975. Osawatomie to Ottawa, Kans

42 Beaver Cr, Atwood, Kansas City Report completed January Kans 1975.

43 Cedar Cr, Johnson Kansas City Report completed October County, Kans 1975.

44 Mill Cr, Johnson Kansas City Report completed June 1976. County, Kans

73 I

I [N -V'\ lE B V'\ • 0 • c. ·- d: >PL > s -- - ~-+------._...:1...... ~..,.., • REPUBLIC a~ < © ATWOOD ~ KIRWIN LOVEIELL l> ~ ":1) RESERVOIR RESERVOIR 11£SEitVOIIt JOSEPH SOlOitiON -- v ~ . -- 2~"' ~ _::O;..:.._f ~ M I§ S URI / FOI'/R I v E R ION e ...... - FORK OF 50LOitl0~ 051 GLEN ELDER '-~e "'-..,.'" WEBSTER RESERVOIR MIL FORO ~e RESERVOIR LAKE

WISSOU!Itl d ftiVEft IASIN I ~TOMAHAWK SIIOI(Y CEOAR 6WFF ~/NOlAN RESERVOIR WOLF-COFFEE ~ •.CANOPOLIS

0

KANSAS TY 4L. t(Q) (Q) 1 ' - MC PHERSON 1./\IILY' COTTONWOOO FALLS

IS\e

''h8i 4r""'"'''"'W'f·-~·..--.A .. •f J Mt

·~b/c/-tf~ PARSONS• BIG HILL I

~~ fi'EYVI LLE L (Jj(f ______.:~:=...:Ll.=-- .Q!!!T2!!, • ' ~ e ' --'------""" ~ 27 _l ~~ ~ I (Q) ~ l IA.c SMALL PROJECTS FOR FLOOD CONTROL AND RELATED PURPOSES

Under special authorization from Congress, north side and 5 miles on the south side. The the Secretary of the Army is authorized to project will protect the community and allot funds for the construction of small adjacent lands from the Standard Project projects for flood control and related Flood on Little and Big Coon Creeks and the purposes not specifically authorized by Arkansas River. The draft of the Detailed Congress but deemed advisable in the Project Report is out for field level review. opinion of the Chief of Engineers. Projects of this type, known as Section 205 projects, LARNED LOCAL PROTECTION are subject to certain prescribed limitations, Arkansas River Basin the most prominent of which are: Not more (Albuquerque District) than $2,000,000 shall be allotted under this Section for a project at any single locality, The proposed project consists of 2 miles of except that not more than $3,000,000 shall levees on the north side of the Pawnee and be allotted for a project if the project Arkansas Rivers protecting the community protects an area which has been declared a from the Standard Project Flood. The draft major disaster area in the 5-year period of the detailed project report is out for field immediately preceding the date the Chief of level review. Engineers deems such work advisable; the work shall be complete within itself; and the FLORENCE LOCAL PROTECTION Federal Government shall not be committed Arkansas River Basin to any additional improvement to secure the (Tulsa District) successful operation of the project. Construction of levees to provide local flood As in many other parts of the country, protection at Florence was completed in leaders in a number of Kansas communities October 1964. The improvement provides a are interested in obtaining such Federal protective levee 8,310 feet long, extending assistance. At their request, Corps of along the northeast, east, and southeast Engineers representatives have made sides of the city of Florence and affords a investigations and have participated in high degree of protection to 200 acres of conferences for the purpose of determining highly developed urban land from the feasibility of and economic justification floodwaters of the Cottonwood River and for several small flood control projects. Doyle Creek.

Ten projects under study or already built Through June 30, 1976, the project had under this authority in Kansas are discussed prevented flood damages estimated at in the following paragraphs. Ten Arkansas $7,397,000. River Basin projects are described first, and five Missouri River Basin projects thereafter. The project cost $508,000, of which $370,000 was from Federal funds and KINSLEY LOCAL PROTECTION $138,000 non-Federal. Arkansas River Basin (Albuquerque District) NEWTON LOCAL PROTECTION Arkansas River Basin The proposed project consists of a semi­ (Tulsa District) ring levee with the opening on the east side. There will be 4 miles of levees on the towns Sand Creek, a tributary of the Little Arkansas River, has been the cause of minor Monetary benefits to this project are flooding in Newton as often as once each included in the totals reported as year. Major floods occurred in 1904, 1915, attributable to the Wichita and Valley Center 1917, 1923, 1951, 1960, and 1965. A plan of local protection project. improvement has been constructed to protect the city from flooding. That plan NICKERSON LOCAL PROTECTION provides about 3 miles of channel Arkansas River Basin improvement through Newton with clearing (Tulsa District) and snagging about 1 mile upstream and v2 miles downstream. The improved channel At the request of local interest, has an average depth of 16 feet and varies in investigations are scheduled to begin in width from 100 to 150 feet. The estimated fiscal year 1977 to determine the feasibility cost of the Sand Creek improvement was and economic justification of a local $496,000 Federal and $144,000 non-Federal. protection project on the Arkansas River The project was turned over to local and Bull Creek. interests for operation and maintenance in July 1967. PARSONS LOCAL PROTECTION Arkansas River Basin Through June 30, 1976, the project had (Tulsa District) prevented flood damages totaling $623,000. Investigations are scheduled to begin in SEDGWICK LOCAL PROTECTION fiscal year 1977 of the feasibility and Arkansas River Basin economic justification of a local protection (Tulsa District) project on Labette and Little Labette Creeks. The study is being made at the request of At the request of local interests at Sedgwick, local interests. investigations are underway to determine the feasibility and economic justification of ARKANSAS CITY LOCAL PROTECTION a local flood protection project on Little Arkansas River Basin Arkansas River and Sand Creek. The (Tulsa District) Detailed Project Report studies are scheduled to began fiscal year 1977. Local interests have requested a study of a flood control project on the Arkansas and WEST BRANCH OF CHISHOLM CREEK Walnut Rivers. A feasibility and economic LOCAL PROTECTION justification study is underway. Arkansas River Basin (Tulsa District) PARK CITY KANSAS Arkansas River Basin This small flood control project, located (Tulsa District) upstream from the existing Wichita and Valley Center project, was completed in The study of a local protection project on the October 1963 at an estimated cost of main branch of Chisholm Creek is being $750,000, of which $364,000 was Federal made at local interests request. The definite and $386,000 non-Federal. project report studies are scheduled to start in fiscal year 1977. The project includes straightening of West Branch of Chisholm Creek and increasing BARNARD LOCAL PROTECTION the channel capacity. This corrected a flood Missouri River Basin problem caused by rapid runoff from the (Kansas City District) upper portion of the watershed and protects about 2,300 acres of farmland and some Located at the junction of Rattlesnake and urban property. Salt Creeks in the Solomon River Basin,

76 Barnard is entirely within the flood plains of stabilize channel flow line, slopes, and the two streams. A levee constructed by riprap. local interests in 1934 proved inadequate, and a movement to obtain Federal GYPSUM LOCAL PROTECTION assistance for Barnard was initiated by local Missouri River Basin leaders in 1952. A Corps project was started (Kansas City District) in January 1957 and completed and turned over to the town for maintenance in Gypsum is located about 20 miles southeast September 1957. This project consists of a of Salina, Kansas, at the confluence of levee which practically encircles the town, Spring, Bull Run, and Hobbs Creeks with plus channel cutoffs, interior drainage Gypsum Creek, and lies entirely within the facilities, and emergency closures. The flood plain of these creeks. Spring and Bull project, for which costs were $127,900 Run Creeks flow through the city, which is Federal and $33,000 non-Federal, prevented on the left bank of Gypsum Creek about 1OV2 major flood losses in March 1960 and again miles south of the confluence of Gypsum in May 1961. Through June 1976 the Creek and the Smoky Hill River. Floods Barnard local protection works had occur frequently, and several high-water prevented flood damages amounting to periods per year are not unusual. During $216,000. 1973 the town was flooded to various depths 12 times. The most damaging floods of CLYDE LOCAL PROTECTION record occurred in October 1941 and July Missouri River Basin 1951. Inundation of the entire town of (Kansas City District) Gypsum reached depths of 5 feet. Similar floods occurred in 1903 and 1928. The 1951 This project, consisting of channel flood damage totaled $703,000. improvements and levees on Elk Creek at Clyde, relocates the stream north and east Preliminary plans provide for a levee around around the town rather than through it. A a large portion of the city, diversion of high highway and bridge relocation was flows in Spring and all flows on Bull Run coordinated with the flood control work. The Creeks into Gypsum Creek south of the city project was initiated in April 1962, and and improvement of the Gypsum Creek completed and turned over to the sponsor channel. The preliminary cost estimate for for maintenance in April 1963. The project the project is $2,000,000 Federal and provides a high degree of protection for the $373,000 non-Federal. The Detailed Project city, which suffered two severe floods in the Report is complete. 12 years immediately preceding completion of the project. The maximum flood of record following enactment of the National in September 1958 resulted in damages Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the need estimated at $950,000. The initial cost of to restudy the project became apparent. An construction of the completed project was architect-engineering contract was $394,000 Federal and $186,000 non-Federal. completed in 1973 which considered various Total Federal cost of the project is $883,000 alternatives and an environmental including $489,000 for rehabilitation work. assessment. Another architect-engineering Through June of 1976 the Clyde local contract for preparation of advance plans protection project had prevented flood and specifications was completed in 1975. damages amounting to $23,000. Under the current schedule, construction of the project is tentatively scheduled to start The project was rehabilitated during 1974 to late in calendar year 1976.

77 STRANGER CREEK CHANNEL prevented $469,000 in flood damages. IMPROVEMENT Missouri River Basin (Kansas City District) STONEHOUSE CREEK LOCAL PROTECTION Stranger Creek is a left-bank tributary of the Missouri River Basin Kansas River, draining 533 square miles in (Kansas City District) Leavenworth, Jefferson, and Atchison Counties. In the lower part of the watershed, This small flood control project, located on the Stranger Creek channel was choked Stonehouse Creek in the vicinity of with trees and brush which caused frequent Williamstown, was completed by the Kansas overklows. Clearing work on this project City District in 1952 at a Federal cost of started in March 1963 and was completed in $143,000 and a non-Federal cost of $40,000. September 1964. The improvement In addition, the Kansas State Highway consisted mainly of removal of obstructions Commission awarded contracts totaling from the channel and clearing the banks of $265,000 for improvement and relocation of trees for a distance of about 50 miles from highways in the area, and the Union Pacific the mouth to a point near Easton. Removal Railroad engaged in work amounting to over of overbank fringe to prevent trees from $50,000 for alteration of a bridge. The falling into the stream and to facilitate project includes levees and channel maintenance was included in the project. improvements which provide flood After cutting and clearing, the affected area protection to 3,000 acres of land, the village was treated with a brush-killing chemical of Williamstown, US Highways 24 and 59, and a maintenance program of periodic and a portion of the main line of the Union spraying was prescribed to prevent Pacific Railroad. A contract was completed regrowth. The cost of the Stranger Creek in 1969 to rehabilitate the channel at several improvement was $337,000 Federal and locations at a cost of about $104,500. $6,000 non-Federal. Through June 1976 this local protection works had prevented damages estimated at Through June 1976 this project had $30,000.

78 STUDIES AND INVESTIGATIONS

In addition to the projects that have been justified. These reports are requested by the authorized for construction, Congress has Congress for stated localities and local requested that numerous studies and interests. Studies and reports pertaining to investigations be made to determine if these investigations are listed below. additional improvements are economically

SURVEYS IN ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN

Study Purpose Scheduled Completion

ALBUQUERQUE DISTRICT

Ark Riv from John Determine if further 1982 Martin Dam, Colo, improvement of Ark Riv and to Great Bend, tribs in Kans in the interest Kans of flood protection are advisable at present time. Two interim reports, one on Bear Creek and one one Kendall Lake will be prepared.

TULSA DISTRICT

Ark Riv and Tribs, Comprehensive investigation 1981.The navigation Great Bend, Kans, of flood control, conservation, studies were suspended in to Tulsa, Okla navigation and allied water FY 75 because a preliminary uses in Ark Riv analysis indicated that Basin. the navigation extension could not be economically justified at this time.

Cimarron Riv, Comprehensive investigation 1981. Report combined N. Mex, Colo, Kans, of flood problems and water with Great Bend, Kans, and Okla resources in Cimarron Riv to Tulsa, Okla. Basin.

Grand (Neosho) Riv, Survey-scope study for Indefinite Okla and Kans coordinated development of water resources of basin.

Halstead, Kans Investigation of flood Report completed in problem on Little Ark Riv 1976 and has been in vicinity of Halstead. forwarded to Southwestern To be reported as an Division for further interim report to the processing. comprehensive study of Ark Riv and tribs.

79 SURVEY IN ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN (CONT)

Study Purpose Scheduled Completion

TULSA DISTRICT (CONT)

Verdigris Riv, Survey-scope study for 1982 Okla and Kans coordinated development of water resources of basin.

SURVEYS IN MISSOURI RIVER BASIN

Study Purpose Scheduled Completion

KANSAS CITY DISTRICT

Big Blue Riv Basin, To determine the advisability Completed in 1973. No Kans and Neb of improvements for flood structural improvements control and related water were recommended. resources development.

Nemaha and Little To determine the feasibility Completed in 1973. No Nemaha Basin, Neb of providing flood control structural improvements and Kans measures. were recommended.

Osage Riv Basin, To determine need for Completed in 1974. No Kans and Mo additional lakes and other structural improvements improvements on tributaries were recommended. above existing and authorized projects in the basin.

Missouri Riv, To determine the feasibility Completed in 1974. Atchinson, Kans of flood control improvements.

Metro Region of To formulate and evaluate Scheduled for completion Kansas City, Mo, alternative plans for the in 1978. and Kans management of the water resources of the metropolitan area.

Harlan County To determine whether the Completed in 1973. No Lake, Republican existing project should structural improvements Riv, Neb and be modified in any way, were recommended. Beaver Cr, Kans and whether flood protection is necessary on Beaver Creek.

Big Blue Riv, To determine the need for Scheduled for completion Marysville, Kans additional improvements in FY 78. for flood control.

Kansas Riv and To identify significant Scheduled for completion Tributaries Bank erosion problem areas in FY 79. Stabilization and provide for the reduction of erosion and stabilization hazards.

80 PROJECTS OF OTHER AGENCIES

The Corps of Engineers is charged with the The basin-wide plan of improvement responsibility of formulating rules and recommended by the Corps of Engineers for regulations for the use of storage space the Walnut River, authorized by the Flood allocated to flood control at all lakes Control Act of 1965, includes authority for constructed wholly or in part with Federal improvement of the Winfield levees. funds. The Act authorizing this assignment Preconstruction planning studies are to the Corps of Engineers is Section 7 of underway for the levee improvement. Public Law 534, 78th Congress, 2d Session, approved December 22, 1944. In carrying CHENEY RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF out that responsibility, rules and regulations RECLAMATION) for operating flood control storage have In Operation been worked out in cooperation with the (Tulsa District, Arkansas River Basin) applicable partnership agency having project construction responsibility. The This project, completed in 1964 by the US Kansas projects of other agencies discussed Bureau of Reclamation, is located on the below include two local protection projects Ninnescah River about 23 miles west of and one lake project in the Arkansas River Wichita. The dam controls the runoff from Basin followed by six lake projects in the 901 square miles of drainage area and is Missouri River Basin. 24,500 feet long, rising to a maximum height AUGUSTA LOCAL PROTECTION (WORKS of 86 feet above original streambed. The reservoir has a controlled storage capacity PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION) of 247,930 acre-feet, of which 80,860 acre- In Operation feet are allocated for flood control, 151,780 (Tulsa District, Arkansas River Basin) acrefeet for conservation, 14,310 acre-feet Local protection levees, located at Augusta for fish and wildlife storage, and 980 acre- in Butler County on the right bank of the feet for sediment reserve. Since completion, Walnut River 80 miles above its junction with the project has prevented $4,838,000 in the Arkansas River, were authorized by the flood damages. At top of flood control pool, Flood Control Act of June 1936 at an elevation 1429.0, and top of conservation estimated cost of $128,400. Within 2 years pool, elevation 1421.6, the reservoir has thereafter, a project essentially the same as areas of 12,420 acres and 9,540 acres, that authorized was constructed by the respectively. Kansas Works Progress Administration. CEDAR BLUFF RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF WINFIELD LOCAL PROTECTION (WORKS RECLAMATION) PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION) In Operation In Operation (Kansas City District, Missouri River (Tulsa District, Arkansas River Basin) Basin) Local protection levees, located at Winfield in Cowley County on the Walnut River, were Cedar Bluff Dam and Reservoir, completed authorized by the Flood Control Act of June in 1951, is located 9 miles south and 9 miles 1936 at an estimaned cost of $108,000. The west of Ellis on the Smoky Hill River. The following year a project essentially the same dam is 12,570 feet long with a maximum as that authorized was constructed by the height of 134 feet, and controls a drainage Kansas Works Progress Administration. area of 5,300 square miles. The total storage

81 allocation is 376,950 acre-feet, of which and 3 miles west of Lovewell on White Rock 191,860 acre-feet is for flood control. Creek. The dam is 8,500 feet long with a maximum height of 91 feet, and controls a Through June 1976 the project had drainage area of 354 square miles. The total prevented flood damages of $8,942,000. storage allocation is 92,150 acre-feet, of which 50,460 acre-feet are for flood control. GLEN ELDER RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF RECLAMATION) Through June 1976, the project had In Operation prevented flood damages of about (Kansas City District, Missouri River $2,532,000. Basin) NORTON RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF Glen Elder Dam and Reservoir, placed in RECLAMATION) operation in 1969, is located in western In Operation Mitchell County on the Solomon River. The (Kansas City District, Missouri River dam is 14,830 feet long with a maximum Basin) heighthof 130 feet, and controls a drainage area of 4,945 square miles. The total storage Norton Dam and Reservoir, completed in allocation is 976,000 acre-feet, of which 1966, is located approximately 2 miles 736,900 acre-feet is for flood control. southwest of Norton on Prairie Dog Creek. The dam is 6,540 feet long with a maximum Through June 1976 the project had height of 100 feet, and controls a drainage prevented flood damages of $5,660,000. area of 716 square miles. The total storage allocation is 136,700 acre-feet, of which KIRWIN RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF 100,000 acre-feet are for flood control. RECLAMATION) In Operation The project had, through June 1976, (Kansas City District, Missouri River prevented flood damages at $1,515,000. Basin) Kirwin Dam and Reservoir, placed in operation in 1956, is located near Kirwin, on WEBSTER RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF the Solomon River, North Fork. The dam is RECLAMATION) 12,646 feet long, with a maximum height of In Operation 119 feet, and controls a drainage area of (Kansas City District, Missouri River 1,373 square miles. The total storage Basin) allocated is 314,550 acre-feet, of which 219,370 acre-feet is for flood control. Webster Dam and Reservoir, placed in operation in 1957, is located 8 miles west Through June 1976 the project had and 2 miles south of Stockton on the prevented damages of $2,290,000. Solomon River, South Fork. The dam is 10,720 feet long with a maximum height of LOVEWELL RESERVOIR (BUREAU OF 107 feet, and controls a drainage area of RECLAMATION) 1,150 square miles. The total storage In Operation allocation is 260,740 acre-feet, of which (Kansas City District, Missouri River 193,640 acre-feet are for flood control. Basin)

Lovewell Dam and Reservoir, placed in Through June 1976, the project had operation in 1958, is located 2 miles north prevented flood damages of $2,832,000.

82 INDEX

Abilene Local Protection 35 Hutchinson Local Protection 12 Arkansas City Local Protection 76 Indian Lake 62 Arkansaas-Red River Basins Water Quality Introduction 1 Control Study, Texas, Oklahoma, & Kansas 30 Investigations, Studies and 79 Arkansas River Basin 9 lola Local Protection 29 Atchison Local Protection 35 John Redmond Dam and Reservoir 29 Augusta Local Protection 81 K a n o p o lis Lake 41 Barnard Local Protection 76 Kansas City Local Protection 43 Big Hill Lake 24 Kansas Citys, Missouri and Kansas Local Cedar Bluff Reservoir 81 Protection, The 54 Cedar Point Lake 27 Kansas River Navigation 62 Cheney Reservoir 81 Kinsley Local Protection 75 Chisholm Creek Local Protection, West Kirwin Reservoir 82 Branch of 76 Larned Local Protection 75 Clinton Lake 37 Lawrence Local Protection 43 Clyde Local Protection 77 Levee System— Sioux City, Iowa, to the Comprehensive Plan, Missouri River Basin 34 Mouth, Missouri River 47 Council Grove Lake 27 Lovewell Reservoir 82 Cow Creek Channel Improvement 10 Manhattan Local Protection 44 Disaster Assistance (Public Law 93-288) 66 MAPS: Arkansas River Basin 8 Dodge City Local Protection 9 Verdigris— Grand (Neosho) River Basin 19 Douglass Lake 16 Missouri River Basin 32 El Dorado Lake 15 Flood Plain Management Studies Between El Dorado Local Protection 16 74-75 Elk City Lake 22 Water Resources Development Follows Emergency Bank Protection in Kansas Index (Public Law 526) 66 Marion Lake 26 Emergency Repairs (Public Law 99) 66 Marion Local Protection 27 Emergency Work 66 Melvern Lake 44 Fall River Lake 20 Milford Lake 46 Figure 1— How Corps of Engineers’ Projects Missouri River Basin 33 Are Started, Authorized, and Faces Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Plan 34 Built Contents Missouri River Levee System-Sioux City, Figure 2— Storage Space Allocation in a Iowa, to the Mouth 47 Multipurpose Lake 14 Missouri River Stabilization and Figure 3— Flood Plain Managment Navigation Project 47 Services 68 Navigation, Kansas River 62 Flood Plain Managment Services 69 Navigation Project, Missouri River Florence Local Protection 75 Stabilization and 47 Fort Scott Lake 37 Neodesha Lake 22 Frankfort Local Protection 38 Newton Local Protection 75 Garnett Lake 38 Nickerson Local Protection 76 Glen Elder Reservoir 82 Norton Reservoir 82 Great Bend Local Protection 10 Onaga Lake 49 Grove Lake 39 Osawatomie Local Protection 49 Gypsum Local Protection 77 Ottawa Local Protection 49 Hays Local Protection 39 Park City, Kansas 76 Hillsdale Lake 40 Parsons Local Protection 76

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1977 O 772-265 83 INDEX (CONT)

Perry Lake 51 Toronto Lake 20 Pioneer Lake 51 Towanda Lake 16 Pomona Lake 52 Tuttle Creek Lake 58 Projects of Other Agencies 81 Valley Center Local Protection, Salina Local Protection 53 Wichita & 12 Sedgwick Local Protection 76 Water Ouality Control Study Texas, Small Projects for Flood Control and Oklahoma, & Kansas, Arkansas-Red Related Purposes 75 River Basins 30 Snagging and Clearing Operations Webster Reservoir 82 (Public Law 780) 66 West Branch of Chisholm Creek Stabilization and Navigation Project, Local Protection 76 Missouri River 47 Wichita & Valley Center Local Stonehouse Creek Local Protection 78 P ro te ctio n 12 Stranger Creek Channel Improvement 78 Wilson Lake 60 Studies and Investigations 79 Winfield Local Protec ,.on 81 Tomahawk Lake 62 Wolf-Coffee Lake 62 Topeka Local Protection 56

84 I I ~ [E lB. - a ""0 -- \ I \. ""C. ------o REPUBLIC K: I U -- \: 7 ""'\ ~ © KIRWIN RESERVOIR SOLOMON NAVIGATION J( O f MISSOURI RIVER ~R K V lE R D n--v n o f\1 'liGATION PROJE'CT ---.....Sl - -:R- -....;: ONMA FORK OF SOLON ON GLEN ELDE LAKE I LEAVENWORTH ~ - ' -...... WEBSTER RE SERVOIR /C.4NSAS CITtJ. KANS. MILFORD RESERVOIR LAKE (196." NoD) ii !i !(~5A5 CITY MISSOURI d RIVER BASIN

I OMAHAWKLAKt 'NOlAN LAKE ~WOLF-COFFEE LAKE

0

·-- - II .. lt.i#,. ._PAOLA - -- ' ' 'X'" ~--- ~ ---· · · · ·~"" I I _ ' '-H'\. ... ~~ .,.,.. - ...... ~ -A.aftADt A ~ ...... ' - ..... I - ' I - ...... v © © 1 - - - - . ~- - - . -~ - - - .. CoTTONWOOO ~ NC5t:.NYCJif'( ~ (iA/fWr. I I FALLS _ _ _ \ LAKE ~I CEDAR POINT LAIC£ I ""\:

~ARDEN CITY ~ ..,4~.1(4Ns4s o t~ ~ L------4<<9u ~ -r BASIN ~ ~C/<"-9nu£ u- I "'< S..q"' -'!CY'--

BIG HILL ELK CITY rr 0 N IELD LAKE S 0 U T,H W E S) T E R N

,RKANSAS CITY ~uFFEYVILLE • ._'? y 1 _ _ ] , ~ _ _ ~ ~T~ '\\ · r 1 -- 'S\ ~ 5'?( (Q) rf\ l Ao LEGEND AUTHORIZED CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROJECTS UNDER NOT CONS TRUCTION LAKE COMPLETE STARTED ~ .,... WATERWAY ~~ ~ ~ LEVEE ~ !\~ ~'---' CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS (J (J AND BANK STABILIZATION (J

NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT ------CORPS OF ENGINEERS c SMALL FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTC 0 WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

OTHER PROJECTS IN KANSAS JANUARY 1975 LAKES OR RESERVOIRS Scalt of mtltt ~ ~ ~ 25 0 25 50 '75 ---1 I - CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS !- 5--1 * A PORTION OF THE STORAGE CAPACITY IN THIS U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION RESERVOIR IS ALLOCATED TO FLOOD CONTROL AND OPERATED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS. r --- ., ------1 I I I ------.,---- ' \ 'tJ I' ,, I c I I \ \ I

' y I' W ICHITA

--- -·

L A

r

0 I OF

/ r 0

) •

•