DOCSLIB.ORG

Florence, Kansas Flood Risk Management Options

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Florence, Kansas Flood Risk Management Options Florence, Kansas Flood Risk Management Options September 2018 Final Report USACE National Nonstructural Committee and USACE-Kansas City District in support of the Kansas Hazard Mitigation Team through USACE Silver Jackets Program Page left intentionally blank USACE-Kansas City District, Silver Jackets Program September 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... vii 1.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Study Purpose .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Study Authority .................................................................................................................................. 2 1.3. Study Team ........................................................................................................................................ 4 2.0. Identifying Flood Risks .......................................................................................................................... 5 2.1. Study Area.......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2. Flood Sources ..................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3. Existing Flood Risk Management Measures ...................................................................................... 6 3.0. Flood Risk Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 7 3.1. Levee’s Risk Characterization Summary ........................................................................................... 9 3.2. Risk Scenarios for Stakeholders......................................................................................................... 9 3.2.1. Primary Scenario ........................................................................................................................... 10 3.2.2. Secondary Scenario ....................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.3. Other Scenarios To Consider ........................................................................................................ 14 3.3. Risk Assessment Analysis and Evaluation ...................................................................................... 14 3.4. Land Survey ..................................................................................................................................... 15 3.5. Flood Levels ..................................................................................................................................... 27 4.0. Flood Risk Management Menu of Measures ....................................................................................... 38 4.1. Nonstructural Flood Risk Adaptive Measures ................................................................................. 39 4.2. Protecting Critical Facilities ............................................................................................................. 40 4.3. Common Nonstructural Flood Risk Adaptive Measures ................................................................. 41 4.3.1. National Flood Insurance Program ............................................................................................... 41 4.3.2. Floodplain Regulation and Floodplain Management .................................................................... 42 4.3.3. Public Alert and Flood Warning ................................................................................................... 42 4.3.4. Emergency Action Planning ......................................................................................................... 42 4.3.5. Evacuation Planning ..................................................................................................................... 42 4.3.6. Flood Openings in Foundations .................................................................................................... 43 4.3.7. Utility Service, Equipment, and Tanks ......................................................................................... 44 4.3.8. Manufactured Homes .................................................................................................................... 44 4.3.9. Buyout with Demolition/Salvage of the Building ......................................................................... 44 4.3.10. Relocation of Building ................................................................................................................ 45 4.3.11. Removal of Basement ................................................................................................................. 45 4.3.12. Elevation of Building ................................................................................................................. 45 4.3.13. Dry Flood Proofing ..................................................................................................................... 46 4.3.14. Wet Flood Proofing. .................................................................................................................... 47 4.3.15. Berms, Levees, and Floodwalls .................................................................................................. 48 4.3.16. Land Use Regulation ................................................................................................................... 49 4.3.17. Beneficial Use ............................................................................................................................. 49 4.4. Temporary Flood Risk Adaptive Measures ..................................................................................... 49 4.4.1. Common Temporary Flood Risk Adaptive Measures................................................................... 50 USACE-Kansas City District, Silver Jackets Program September 2018 4.4.2. Implementing Temporary Measures ............................................................................................. 50 4.4.3. Flood Characteristics Dictating Temporary Measures .................................................................. 52 4.4.4. Planning and Preparation of Temporary Measures ....................................................................... 52 5.0. Nonstructural Assessment Objectives .................................................................................................. 57 5.1. Description of Assessment Inventory .............................................................................................. 57 5.2. Description of Nonstructural Assessment ........................................................................................ 58 6.0. Risk Management Options Recommendations .................................................................................... 60 6.1. Tier 1, Flood Risk Management Options for the Overall Community ............................................ 61 6.1.1. Tier 1, Flood Insurance ................................................................................................................. 61 6.1.2. Tier 1, Emergency Action Planning .............................................................................................. 63 6.1.3. Tier 1, Flood Warning ................................................................................................................... 66 6.2. Tier 2, Flood Risk Management Options for the Property Owners ................................................. 67 6.3. Tier 2, Detailed Explanation of Risk Management Options ............................................................ 82 6.3.1. Tier 2, Risk Management Options for Utilities ............................................................................. 82 6.3.2. Tier 2, Risk Management Options Using Flood Openings in Foundations .................................. 82 6.3.3. Tier 2, Risk Management Option for Basement Flooding ............................................................ 83 6.3.4. Tier 2, Risk Management Option for Nonresidential Structures with Basements ........................ 85 6.3.5. Tier 2, Risk Management Option for Structures with Crawl Spaces ............................................ 87 6.3.6. Tier 2, Risk Management Option for Structures with Slab on Grade Foundations ...................... 89 6.3.7. Tier 2, Risk Management Option, Relocation .............................................................................. 92 6.3.8. Tier 2, Risk Management Option, Buyouts .................................................................................. 92 6.3.9. Tier 2, Parametric Cost-Benefit Analysis of Nonstructural Risk Management Options .............. 92 6.4. Flood Risk Management Options for Critical Facilities and Public Property .................................. 95 7.0. Suggested Risk Management Options for Floodplain Managers and Emergency Managers .............. 98 7.1. Emergency Action Plan ................................................................................................................... 98 7.2. Risk Communication .......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kansas Fishing Regulations Summary
    2 Kansas Fishing 0 Regulations 0 5 Summary The new Community Fisheries Assistance Program (CFAP) promises to increase opportunities for anglers to fish close to home. For detailed information, see Page 16. PURCHASE FISHING LICENSES AND VIEW WEEKLY FISHING REPORTS ONLINE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND PARKS' WEBSITE, WWW.KDWP.STATE.KS.US TABLE OF CONTENTS Wildlife and Parks Offices, e-mail . Zebra Mussel, White Perch Alerts . State Record Fish . Lawful Fishing . Reservoirs, Lakes, and River Access . Are Fish Safe To Eat? . Definitions . Fish Identification . Urban Fishing, Trout, Fishing Clinics . License Information and Fees . Special Event Permits, Boats . FISH Access . Length and Creel Limits . Community Fisheries Assistance . Becoming An Outdoors-Woman (BOW) . Common Concerns, Missouri River Rules . Master Angler Award . State Park Fees . WILDLIFE & PARKS OFFICES KANSAS WILDLIFE & Maps and area brochures are available through offices listed on this page and from the PARKS COMMISSION department website, www.kdwp.state.ks.us. As a cabinet-level agency, the Kansas Office of the Secretary AREA & STATE PARK OFFICES Department of Wildlife and Parks is adminis- 1020 S Kansas Ave., Rm 200 tered by a secretary of Wildlife and Parks Topeka, KS 66612-1327.....(785) 296-2281 Cedar Bluff SP....................(785) 726-3212 and is advised by a seven-member Wildlife Cheney SP .........................(316) 542-3664 and Parks Commission. All positions are Pratt Operations Office Cheyenne Bottoms WA ......(620) 793-7730 appointed by the governor with the commis- 512 SE 25th Ave. Clinton SP ..........................(785) 842-8562 sioners serving staggered four-year terms. Pratt, KS 67124-8174 ........(620) 672-5911 Council Grove WA..............(620) 767-5900 Serving as a regulatory body for the depart- Crawford SP .......................(620) 362-3671 ment, the commission is a non-partisan Region 1 Office Cross Timbers SP ..............(620) 637-2213 board, made up of no more than four mem- 1426 Hwy 183 Alt., P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Resource Management Plan and Record of Decision
    United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Tulsa District Oklahoma Resource Area September 1991 KANSAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Dear Reader: This doCument contains the combined Kansas Record of Decision (ROD) and Resource Management Plan (RMP). The ROD and RMP are combined to streamline our mandated land-use-planning requirements and to provide the reader with a useable finished product. The ROD records the decisions of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for administration of approximately 744,000 acres of Federal mineral estate within the Kansas Planning Area. The Planning Area encompasses BLM adm in i sterad sp 1 it-estate mi nera 1 s and Federa 1 minerals under Federal surface administered by other Federal Agencies within the State of Kansas. The Kansas RMP and appendices provide direction and guidance to BLM Managers in the formulation of decisions effecting the management of Federal mineral estate within the planning area for the next 15 years. The Kansas RMP was extracted from the Proposed Kansas RMP/FIES. The issuance of this ROD and RMP completes the BLM land use planning process for the State of Kansas. We now move to implementation of the plan. We wish to thank all the individuals and groups who participated in this effort these past two years, without their help we could not have completed this process. er~ 1_' Area Manager Oklahoma Resource Area RECORD OF DECISION on the Proposed Kansas Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement September 1991 RECORD OF DECISION The decision is hereby made to approve the proposed decision as described in the Proposed Kansas Resource Management Plan/Final Env ironmental Impact Statement (RMP/FEIS July 1991), MANAGEMENT CONSZOERATXONS The decision to approve the Proposed Plan is based on: (1) the input received from the public, other Federal and state agencies; (2) the environmental analysis for the alternatives considered in the Draft RMP/Oraft EIS, as we11 as the Proposed Kansas RMP/FEIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Marion Makes Water Treatment Plant Improvments
    by Bert Zerr Keeping up with new regs; Marion makes water treatment plant improvments he city of Marion is tanks. Drinking water at the time locally as Luta Creek), which located on the western was obtained from the river, meanders through town. This slope of the Flint Hills near cisterns, or private wells. By source of water was used until the center of Marion County 1904, a water system was well 1981 when the opportunity to on Highway 56. Marion is a established and by 1928, the first obtain water from Marion community of 2,000 residents Tconveniently located in the “Golden Triangle” of central Marion is a community of 2,000 residents conveniently Kansas formed by the cities of Wichita, Salina, and Topeka. The located in the “Golden Triangle” of central Kansas formed by city advertises itself as the “The the cities of Wichita, Salina, and Topeka. The city advertises Town Between Two Lakes,” Marion County Lake and Marion itself as the “The Town Between Two Lakes,” Marion County Reservoir. Marion County Lake, 153 acres in size, is less than five Lake and Marion Reservoir. minutes east of town. Marion Reservoir is a federal facility located 10 minutes west of town, water treatment plant was Reservoir became available. The between the cities of Marion and completed. This plant was used city took advantage of this Hillsboro, and serves as the water until 1964 when the current plant opportunity and installed a 12- supply for both cities. was constructed. inch line from the reservoir. Raw Marion Reservoir, which was Water was obtained via an water gravity flows to the water authorized by the intake on Mud Creek (also known plant at a rate of 670 gpm.
    [Show full text]
  • School Improvement Marion-Florence USD 408 Has Approximately 500 Students Who Are Educated in Three USD 408 Maintains a Focus on the Buildings at Two Sites
    Educational Facilities and Programs School Improvement Marion-Florence USD 408 has approximately 500 students who are educated in three USD 408 maintains a focus on the buildings at two sites. Marion Elementary continuous improvement of student School houses grades K-5, sixth, seventh performance. In addition to a District and eighth grade students attend Marion School Improvement Team, each District & Community Middle School and grades 9-12 attend building has a Building Improvement Information Marion High School. All facilities are located Team. These teams are composed of in Marion. parents, community members, staff members, teachers and Marion-Florence USD 408 is a 3A rural administrators. school district covering 237 square miles. The district offers a comprehensive The district is situated on the west edge of academic program. Forty-three certified the Flint Hills. It includes the towns of educators are employed in the district. The purpose of these teams is to Marion and Florence, Marion County Lake, Included are a District School provide input to the district in areas and the Marion Reservoir. Improvement/Curriculum Coordinator and a that will improve the quality of District Technology Coordinator. education in USD 408. As part of the process of school improvement the In recent years, USD 408 has experienced district developed the following Belief the decline in student enrollment plaguing USD 408 is a member of two interlocal Statement and Mission Statement most Kansas schools. There are cooperatives and one educational service which are revisited annually as part of approximately 500 students in grades K-12 center. The Marion County Special an overall strategic planning initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • Article 1 Title, Purpose, Definitions, District and General Regulations
    ARTICLE 1 TITLE, PURPOSE, DEFINITIONS, DISTRICT AND GENERAL REGULATIONS Sections: 1-101 Title and Authority 1-102 Purpose 1-103 Jurisdiction 1-104 Definitions 1-105 Districts 1-106 General Regulations Governing All Zoning Districts 1-107 Vesting of Development Rights 1-101 Title and Authority: These regulations, including the Zoning District maps and overlays made a part thereof, shall be known and may be cited as the "Zoning Regulations of Marion County, Kansas", and shall hereinafter be referred to as "these Regulations." Except where otherwise indicated, these Regulations were prepared and are adopted under the authority granted to Marion County by K.S.A. 12-741 et seq., and amendments thereto. 1-102 Purpose: These Regulations are intended to serve the following purposes: 1. To promote the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the citizens of Marion County, Kansas. 2. To create a variety of zoning districts sensitive to the peculiarities of the various permitted uses and designed to protect and enhance the values inherent in each zone; while encouraging the redevelopment and revitalization of the cities within the County. 3. To conserve prime agricultural land and protect it from the intrusion of incompatible uses, but not to regulate or restrict the primary use of land for agricultural uses. 4. To regulate and restrict the height, number of stories, and size of buildings; the percentage of lots that may be occupied by buildings and other structures; size of yards, courts, and other open spaces in the interests of all citizens of Marion County, Kansas. 5. To provide for adequate light and air, and acceptable noise levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Dispersal of Dreissena Polymorpha (Zebra Mussel) from Marion
    Zebra Mussels in the Neosho River Basin, Kansas: Assessing Dispersal, Colonization, and Reproductive Chronology Benjamin R. Smith1, Skyler E. Delmott1, Jason M. Goeckler2, and David R. Edds1 Emporia State University1 Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks & Tourism2 2 3 Zebra Mussel Infested Sites in Kansas Populations have been detected in many reservoirs in the state. ⃝ 2003, detected in Kansas in El Dorado Reservoir. 2008, detected in Marion Reservoir. 2010, detected in Council Grove City Lake and John Redmond Reservoir. 2011, detected in Council Grove Reservoir. Sampling Sites in the Upper Neosho River Basin N 5 Dispersal Dynamics Differential Colonization of Two River Systems • Cottonwood River population established in 2008 • Neosho River population established in 2010 Seasonal Variation in Gametogenesis of Adult Zebra Mussels • Gametogenesis is known to vary seasonally. • But it is unstudied south of the 40th parallel. 8 Zebra Mussel Size at Maturity • Known to be reproductively mature between 5 and 12 mm. • But it is unknown at what size they mature in Kansas. 9 Zebra Mussel Time to Maturity • Known to be reproductively mature between 5 weeks and several months. •But it is not known how quickly they become reproductively mature in Kansas. 10 Economic Impacts of Zebra Mussels in the Neosho River Basin Ksu.edu 11 Usgs.gov Zonal Colonization of Reservoir Reaches • Each reservoir is divided into 3 reaches Upper Middle Lower 14 15 Zonal Colonization of Reservoir Reaches (veligers) 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Mean # veligers per per liter # veligers Mean 0.2 0 Upper Middle Lower 17 19 Zonal Colonization of Reservoir Reaches 3500 (adults) 3000 2500 2000 1500 Mean # adultsMean 1000 500 0 Upper Middle Lower Effects of Lowhead Dams • Lowhead dams artificially • Provide ample structure for slow rivers behind dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Excessive Water Line Leaks Cause Hillsboro to Replace Pipelines
    By Delbert Zerr, Consultant, KRWA Excessive Water Line Leaks Cause Hillsboro to Replace Pipelines he city of Hillsboro is located in Marion County at the intersection of Highway 56 traveling east and T west and Highway 15, north and south. The Hillsboro website describes the city’s location as the “gateway to Marion Reservoir located at the edge of the picturesque Flint Hills. Hillsboro residents are in touch with nearly one million people in less than an hour’s drive; Wichita to the South, Salina to the North, Hutchinson to the West and Emporia to the East”. Marion County is also the home of Marion Reservoir, a major flood control reservoir located on the Cottonwood River. The reservoir is operated by the Army Corps of Engineers and was constructed mostly as a result of the “Great Flood of 1951”. Construction was completed in 1968. The cities of Hillsboro, Peabody which purchases from Hillsboro, and Marion all utilize the reservoir as the source of water, easily demonstrating the importance of this reservoir to the area. Hillsboro’s large elevated storage tank has a capacity of 500,000 gallons. 90 March 2019 THE KANSAS LIFELINE Water plant operator Todd Simmons demonstrates Water pipeline with valves is being installed along with tracer equipment to Larry Paine, City Administrator. wire. Valve risers are shown in this photo also. Hillsboro’s water source for many years was groundwater. The following are a few statistics about the Hillsboro Groundwater quality was rather poor with high hardness and water department: 1) The water plant capacity is 1.5 MG; sulfate.
    [Show full text]
  • Marion Lake WRAPS – 9 Element Watershed Plan Summary Flint Hills RC&D
    Marion Lake WRAPS – 9 Element Watershed Plan Summary Flint Hills RC&D Impairments to be addressed Directly addressing: Marion Lake – Eutrophication Positively Effecting: French Creek– DO Prioritized Critical Areas for Targeting BMPs • Targeting Considerations: • Cropland Targeted areas were identified after reviewing the Marion Lake GWLF, Rusle2 and BATHTUB Watershed models and gaining local knowledge, the Marion SLT choose three priority areas for Cropland BMP Implementation. • Livestock Targeted areas were identified after reviewing a Marion Lake watershed CAFO map and local knowledge. • Grade stabilization structures will be targeted based on the Watershed Institute streambank assessment. Marion Lake WRAPS – 9 Element Watershed Plan Summary Flint Hills RC&D Best Management Practices and Load Reduction Goals Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address phosphorus in the watershed where chosen by the SLT based on local acceptance/adoptability and the amount of load reduction gained per dollar spent. Phosphorus Reducing Cropland BMPs • Vegetative Buffers • Grassed Waterway • No‐Till • Terraces • Cover Crops • Wetlands • Grade Stabilization Structures Phosphorus Reducing Livestock BMPs • Rangeland Management • Alternative (Off‐Stream) Watering System Load reduction needed • The focus of the Marion 9 element plan will be the phosphours load reduction. 70,000 lbs/yr of P is the end goal of the plan. Implementing BMP’s directed at the phosphorus load reduction should also reduce nitrogen and sediment loads entering Marion Lake. 76 6,720 14,000
    [Show full text]
  • Marion County Park and Lake Citizen Science Project Report
    MARION COUNTY PARK AND LAKE CITIZEN SCIENCE PROJECT REPORT By: Ryan Burns, Ryan Buss, Tyler Clements, and Lawrence Weigel 06Dec2018 Introduction Preface In an effort to collect data at Marion County Park and Lake for the eventual development of a lake management plan, we propose to initiate a citizen science program. However, this is a complex proposal and does have its obstacles with deployment, implementation, data quality, and a few other issues. In this we will address the concerns and will elaborate on what it is to use citizen science as a tool to collect scientific data. First we will describe and characterize the lake, then summarize water quality issues that affect Kansas lakes and streams, explore issues that affect Marion County Park and Lake and similar bodies of water, and identify issues facing the Marion Reservoir now known as Marion Lake. We will then provide an overview of the proposed citizen science project. We will summarize potential water quality sampling kits and summarize literature related to citizen science projects related to water quality and other fields of science. In doing so, we will identify potential curriculums, activities, and programs, along with identifying potential groups near Marion Lake who could be recruited as contributors for this project. Lastly, we will address activities and efforts that can be done in the future that could augment citizen science data-gathering efforts. Description of Marion County Lake Marion County Lake and Park is a 153 ac (62 ha) lake with a maximum depth of 40 ft within a 300 ac (121 ha) park.
    [Show full text]
  • Resource Management Plan
    BLM LIBRARY United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Tulsa District Oklahoma Resource Area September 1991 KANSAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN ,o /RECORD OF DECISION AND PLAN Dear Reader: This document contains the combined Kansas Record of Decision (ROD) and Resource Management Plan (RMP). The ROD and RMP are combined to streamline our mandated land-use-planning requirements and to provide the reader with a useable finished product. The ROD records the decisions of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for administration of approximately 744,000 acres of Federal mineral estate within the Kansas Planning Area. The Planning Area encompasses BLM administered split-estate minerals and Federal minerals under Federal surface administered by other Federal Agencies within the State of Kansas. The Kansas RMP and appendices provide direction and guidance to BLM Managers in the formulation of decisions effecting the management of Federal mineral estate within the planning area for the next 15 years. The Kansas RMP was extracted from the Proposed Kansas RMP/FIES. The issuance of this ROD and RMP completes the BLM land use planning process for the State of Kansas. We now move to implementation of the plan. We wish to thank all the individuals and groups who participated in this effort these past two years, without their help we could not have completed this process. jl W. Tanner Area Manager Oklahoma Resource Area BHHHHmiUH RECORD OF DECISION on the Proposed Kansas Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement September 1991 RECORD OR DECISION The decision is hereby made to approve the proposed decision as described in the Proposed Kansas Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (RMP/FEIS July 1991).
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Camper Association Newsletter September and October 2018 Issue 0421 Volume 0006
    Kansas Camper Association Newsletter September and October 2018 Issue 0421 Volume 0006 KCA a State Chapter of FCRV The Kansas Camper is the official publication of the Kansas Campers Association Inc. of Family Campers and RVers. The Kansas Camper is published six times a year. Subscription is included in the membership fee for Kansas Campers Association Inc. Kansas Campers Association Inc. holds two camping conventions each year, one the first weekend in May and the other in September or October weekend. Information will be carried in the Kansas Camper preced- ing each convention giving location, fee and schedule. Kansas Campers Association Inc. Board of Directors President Don and Eileene Naasz, [email protected] Vice President Marty & Barbara Mashak, (620-459-6737) [email protected] Secretary Steve and Diane Hitchens, [email protected] Treasurer Bill and Dianne Buggeln (316) 200-1272, [email protected] Past President Harold & Lori Johnson, (316-721-0651), [email protected] State Directors Earl and Ivalee Vanderhoff, (316-830-2115) [email protected] Area I Executive Committeemen: Vern and Pam Failor, [email protected] Area II Executive Committeemen: Tony and Ann Newport, [email protected] Area III Executive Committeemen: No one there Area IV Executive Committeemen: Dale and Leslie Aikens, [email protected] KANSAS CAMPER ASSOCIATION COMMITTEES C.A.M.P.: Forrest and Faye Tennyson, , (620-251-3403) E-mail [email protected] Chaplains: Bill and Dianne Buggeln (316) 200-1272, [email protected] Conservation & Wildlife: Gerry Matney, (620-442-2404 H or 620-660-0134 C) E-mail [email protected] DASAT: Dorothy Cole, (316-755-5792) (316-755-5791) E-mail [email protected] Historian: Tony & Ann Newport, ( 316-776-2779) E-mail [email protected] Membership Development All Members of FCRV.
    [Show full text]
  • Marion, Kansas, Local Protection Project on Mud Creek at the Town of Marion, Kansas
    ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MARION, KANSAS LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT Prepared by - U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, TULSA, OKLAHOMA a. Project description. This environmental statement pertains to the proposed Marion, Kansas, Local Protection Project on Mud Creek at the town of Marion, Kansas. The report of the District Engineer has been referred to the Committee on Public Works and is awaiting authorization action by Congress. A benefit-cost ratio of 1.7 exists for this proposed project. Floods in Marion would be prevented by diverting Mud Creek around the west side of town through a diversion channel and by construction of a levee along the channel and Cottonwood River. b. Environmental setting without the project. Mud Creek, normally lazy and slow moving, flows southward through the center of Marion to its con­ fluence with the Cottonwood River at the south edge of the city and is subject to severe flash floods during periods of moderate to high intensity rainfall. The rolling plains of Marion County have been described as "scarped plains," in which strata, dipping gently to the west or north­ west, have been leveled by erosion to a plain with eastward and southeast­ ward facing rock escarpments. Surface rocks are usually shales and lime­ stones. Overburden soils are a product of the weathering of these rocks. Predominant native grasses are buffalo, gramma, and big and little bluestem grasses. Streamside understory and trees consisting of elm, locust, willow, and hackberry, with an occasional cottonwood, afford game-type habitat. Stream fishery is limited to native species: carp, bullheads, catfishes, sunfish, and minnows. The area to be protected from flooding is the city of Marion, Kansas - a well developed residential, commercial, and industrial city - which serves a wide rural agricultural area.
    [Show full text]