1973 Flood Again Justified the Federal Flood Control Projects in the Mississippi River Basin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
~~\SSIPPI 11ft? ~~ AND -€4 TRIBUT ARIES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENG INEERS LOWER MISS ISSIPPI VA LLEY DIVISION Vicksburg, Mississippi S\5SIPPI ~\-r:o AND TRIBUT ARIES POST-FLOOD REPORT 1l~13) Published by LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION AND MRC in cooperation with NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION, MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION, SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION, AND OHIO RIVER DIVISION SYLLABUS Throughout the autumn of 1972, above average rainfall began to fill fl ood control reservoirs along the tribu tary streams of the Miss issippi River. By December 1972, the basin had become saturated and very linle additional rainfall could be absorbed. Corps hydrologists noted an ominous pattern in hydrograph readings at Cairo, Illinois, the lOpOr the Lower Val ley, where the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers join. In ea rly i'vlarch 1973, morc storms developed over the Missouri River Basin, then moved into the nonheast over the Upper Mississippi and Illinois River Basins. Others blew lOW Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Kentucky. On 9 March all indications we(e that a major flood had begun. Later storms in March and April added more fl oodwaters. It took until mid-June 1973 [or the flood to run its coursefrom the State of Iowa to the Gulf of Mexico. The magnitude of the nood varied greatly in the tributary basins,'buton an overall basis and particularly o n the lower Mis sissippi River the flood ranked as one of the great fl oods of Mississippi River history. Federal flood con trol works throughout the basin, although many projens were still under construction, were highly effenive for the purposes for which they were designed and constructed. Reservoirs and other works in the tributary basins reduced local flooding, and the reservoirs combined to lower the fl ood crest on the upper Mississippi River at St. Louis, Missouri, by 2 feet, and the crest at Cairo, Illinois, on the lower Mississippi River by more than 1.5 feet. Private and local non-Federal levees throughout the basin were generally designed for lesser floods and many failed despite efforts to hold them. Although still incomplete, thecompJex Mississippi Riverand Tributaries Project for flood con trolon the lower Mississippi River, overall , performed splendidly. No Federal levees on the lower MiSSissippi were breached, and other features of the project also performed satisfactorily. As the flood developed and stage-discharge relation data were collected and studied, it became apparent that the channel capacity of both the lower Mississippi River and tlie lower portion of the Atchafalaya Basin Floodway had seriously deteriorated. A new Project Design Flood Flow Line was established and it demonstrated the need to raise many miles of levees to provide protection against the project flood. This superimposed a vast emergency levee-raising program in addition to the flood activities already in progress. A permanent levee-raising program based on the new flow line is an absolute necessity. This work is now under way. Corps of Engineers emergency activities during the flood encompassed every phase of flood fighting, ranging from cooperation with small local levee or drainage districts to direct operation of major flood control slruCLUres. On the lower .Mississip pi River, the Birds Point-New Madrid Floadway in Missouri was readied for use, but operation did not become necessary. Bonnet Carn?was again operated successfully. Old River Overbank Structure was used for the first time, as was the Morganza Floodway. Total damages with existing projects were $1,151,770,000; damages without projects would have been $15,610,193,000; total damages prevented by projects amounted to $11.185,723,000. Without Federal projects 33,768,000 acres would have been inundated. With Federal projects 16,712,000 acres were inundated. The projects saved 17,056,000 acres from inundation. Approximately 15,300 persons were displaced and 28 deaths were attributed to the flood. Over 300 deaths were reported for the 1927 flood. The 1973 flood again justified the Federal flood control projects in the Mississippi River Basin. However, the expanse of areas flooded, the monetary losses sustained, and the extent of human suffering experienced in 1973 clearly indicate the need for the completion of the authorized flood control works, expansion or modification of some existing projects, and the initiation of new projects in some areas. CONTENTS SYLLABUS ................................................. '" LIST OF TABLES ................................ VIII LIST OF PLATES .. VIII Section I AUTHORITY, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE AU']"HORITY ................. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................. .. Section II DESCRIPTION OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN, THE FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS, AND THE IMPACT OF THE 1973 FLOOD BASIN DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................... 3 BASIN FLOOD· CONTROL WORKS .................................................................. 3 Tributary Basins ..................... 3 Lower Mississippi River .................... 3 IMPACt OF THE FLOOD ...... G Section II] METEOROLOGICAL AND HYDROLOGICAL HISTORY OF STORMS AND FLOODS GENERAL II PRECIPITATION ............. II STOR .vIS ............. II DlSCI IARGE RECORDS .. .. 12 MAXIi\-IUM D1SCI·V\RGES .. 12 COMPARISON OF 1927 AND 1973 FLOODS .. 17 MONTHLY AND ANNUAL RUNOFF 17 CONTRIBUTION OF FLOW. ................. .. 2.1 RESER VO IRS ................... ........ ........ ...... .......... .. .. ..... .. .. .................... 26 CONTENTS Section IV EMERGENCY ACTIVITIES CORPS OF ENCI :-"EERS ACT IV iTI ES................. 29 Gm=l .......................... ..................................... B Acti"jties by Bas in ..................... ............... ..................... Z9 Bank Fa il ure Emergencies.. ........................................ ............. :) 1 Fl ood·Fighting T echniques .. ............ ......................................... ;")2 ACTI V IT I ES OF STA"fE AGENCIES. LOCAL I NTERESTS, AN D I NDIVIDUALS :)~l Acnvrn ES O F i\IILlTARY UNITS ............... .. U. S. Coa!>! Guard ................. .. National Guard ...................................................................................................... Fifth Lt. S. Army 62d Engineer Ba Cl a lio ll ........................ ......................... P' U BI .lC AI' FAIRS S Ui\Ii\IAR Y .... ................................... ..................... .. Scction V AREAS FLOODED, FLOOD DAMAGES, AND FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED SCCli on VI COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES GENERAl .................................................................. ............ 61 FEDERA L DISASTER ASS ISTANCE ADI\ IIN ISTRATJOi\' .. ....... .. ... 61 U . S. WEATI!ER SERVICE.... ......................... .. ........................... ........... til U. S. COAST GUARD ... Ii::! Section VII ANALYSIS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MISSISSII'I'I RIVER FLOOD PROTECT IO N SYSTEM TRIBUTARY BA SINS ........................... .. .. .. ............... 63 i\ II SSI5SIPPI RI VE R AND TRI BUTARIES PRO J ECr ........................................................... 63 General ........ ........... ... ti3 Channcl DctcrioratiOlI. P roJCCl Design Flood FloI\' Linc ,me! I.ncc-Raising .... ..... ...... ....... 63 N('('d fOl" i\ [orc Extensivc Flood Prott·ctioll .................... OIl Fuseplug I .c \"lx·~ ......... .............. .. ................. 69 Old River LO\"-S ill Control Structure................ 69 Early Completion of the \IR&:T Project ........ 69 " CONTENTS Seepage ...... ............................................................................ .. 69 Pumping ............ ....... .. ..... 69 Pipes Through and Under Levees .. ........ 70 Levee Erosion from Wave Wash. ........... 70 Channel Deterioration on Tributary Streams ................................................... 70 Liaison with Army Commanders ..... 70 All-Weather Access Roads ...... 70 Stone Stockpiles for Emergency Use ......... .. 70 Maimenance Support for Army Vehicles ............. 71 Belter Maimenance of All Flood Protection Works 71 After-Action Conference ......... ......... .. 71 \11 LIST OF TABLES Table Title Drainage Areas of the Mississippi River ........... 4 2 Average Versus Observed Precipitation.. .................. ................ 12 3 Comparison of i\!Jaximull1 Discharges of Record and 1973 Flood Discharges 16 4 Maximum Confined Di sc harges .......................... ............ .............. ........... 16 5 Maximum Discharges on Mississippi R iver for 1927 and 1973 Floods ........... 17 6 Minimum, Average, and i\!laximum Monthly Runoff in Inches ................ 25 7 Percent Contributions 10 Average Monthly Mississippi River Flow .............. 26 8 Maximum Discharges for 1973 Flood ...................................................... 27 9 Summary of Areas Inundated by Basins, 1973 Flood ................... 55 10 Summary of Areas InUlH..Iat l..>ci by States, 1973 Flood ..... 56 Summary of 1973 Flood Damage and Damages Prevented by Basins. 58 "12 Summary of 1973 Flood Damages and Damages Prevented by Stales 59 13 Original and Adjusted Flow Lines ......................... 66 LIST OF PLATES Plate Title Page I PreCIpitation, March 1973 13 2 Precipitation, April 1973 11 3 PrujeLi Design Flood ... ............. .. ................. l:i SI. Louis, Mo., Stage Hydrographs .................. ..... .. ........ 18 C,iro, Ill., Stage H ydrographs. 19 6 Memphis, Tenn., Stage I-Iydrographs 20 7 Arkansas City, Ark., Stage Ilydrographs 21 8 Vicksburg,