DOCSLIB.ORG

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAIN and FLOOD, FEBRUARY 27 to MARCH 4, 1938 by LAWRENCEH

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAIN and FLOOD, FEBRUARY 27 to MARCH 4, 1938 by LAWRENCEH MAY 1938 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW 139 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAIN AND FLOOD, FEBRUARY 27 TO MARCH 4, 1938 By LAWRENCEH. DAINGERFIELD [Weather Bureau, Los Angeles, Calif., June 19381 The season of 1937-38 (beginning July 1, 1937) has period which were directly the cause of the great flood. been marked by wide cont>mstsin rainfall over southern Showery conditions on the 3rd and 4th were followed California. Los Angeles was rainless from May 31 to by frequent threat,s of rainfall thereafter for 9 or 10 days October 2, 1937, inclusive, a eriod of 125 days, followed and actual rain on se.vera1days from a. series of depressions by 67 days, or until DecemE er 8, 1937, with only two appearing off the Cdifornia cod, which moved slowly light showers, tot,aling 0.03 inch. The combined period inland over the coast to the northward of the Los Angeles of 192 days ha.d only 0.03 inch of precipitation. This region. These were followed, however, by a well-defined long dry period is second only to that of 1927, when no anticyclone on the 13t,h, 1oc.ated over the Pacific Ocean measurable rainfall occurred at Los Angeles for the 107- new the thirt,iet,h parallel. The esta,blishment of this day period from April 13 to Oct,ober 26, although t,races high pressure field, and its continuance in modified form we,re recorded each mont,h. The re.cent drought was during the remainder of March brought relief to the rather de,hit,ely ended by t,he rain of December 9-12, flooded areas, through the attending fair weather. 1937, and pre,cipitation was ample aad approximately The saturated condit’ion of t,he soil in Ventura, Los normal during the re.niainde.r of December and through Angeles, San Bernmdino, Orange, and Riverside counties, January 1938. from mountains to coast, prior to the arrival of the major The closing days of January, however, were marked sborm of Msrc,h 3, 1938, prepared t,he way for the heavy by intense disturbances over the Gulf of Alaska and ad- run-off. jacent North Pacific waters, with strong southeasterly While the rainfall over the area involved, during the trends near the Pacific coast of North America, which had cold-front passage of late Fe,bruary 28 to March 1, was been absent or deficient in the earlier depressions of the generally excessive and the run-off rather marked, damage season. This change in storm development and move- would have been small if it had not been followed, after ment ushered in a period of almost continuous and the lapse of a few hours, by t,he second and much heavier frequently heavy rainfall over this area of California rainfall of lat,e March 1 to 2, inclusive, with slight amowits during the first half of February, during which period the occurring on the 3rd and 4th. The run-off from the March soil became well saturated with moisture. 2 storm was extremely high, bringing with it vast quan- The tendency to form disturbance,s near and off the tities of silt, gravel, boulders, and debris generally. Pacific coast featured the late January, February, and As in the case of the historic 3-day rainfall (over a early March period. A storm which developed northeast lesser part of the area more recently covered) of December of Hawaii moved slowly eastward (followed by a well- 30, 1933January 1, 1934, inclusive, the orographic developed Pacific HIGH) and moved inland near the Bay influence was a decidedly potential factor. The San region on February 9. This was an exceptionally violent Gabriel and the San Bernardino Mountains, with their disturbance, attended by precipitation throughout Cali- east-west trend, lying directly across the path of the fornia, heavy over the northern part of the State, and high moisture-laden winds, performed the functions of fixed winds and ga.les over most coastal districts and inland to and permanent “fronts” mechanically accomplishing the and beyond Sacramento. chilling of t,he tropical maritime air and precipitating its A series of North Pacific and Gulf of Alaska depressions moisture during tdie recent, storms as in the case of the prevailed from February 26 to March 4, 1938, extending great 3-day storm of 4 years ago. Just as the 3-day t,heir maximum sphere of influence hundreds of miles storm was a record breaker for 61ie period and area farther southeastwa.rd than normdly over the Pacific involved, so was the recent 5-day rainfall the heaviest coast area. On February 27, a rather shallow distur- known for the period invo1ve.d-at least since accurate bance moved slowly in over the southern Ca.lifornia coast measurements have been generally available. attended by a general light ra,in on the 27th, a.nd int.er- In the recent storm period, the greatest recorded mittently through the 28th. During the night of Feb- amoimt, 33.20 inche.s, occurred at Kellys Hamp in the ruary 28-March 1, heavy rain occurred as the result of the Snn Gabriel Mountains at an elevation of 8,300 feet. passage of a cold front which moved in from the nort!i- Also, in the same mountains, Hoegees Camp, elevation west. No general rain occurred after this fronhl passage 2,G50 feet, reported a total of 30.08 inche.s; this same until March 2, with the arrival of a more intense dis- stsatmionreceived the greatest amount in the 1934 New turbance. This disturbance likewise developed northeast Year’s storm (19.91 inches). In the San Bernardino of the Hawaiian Islands and while the center moved to t’he Mountains, Lake Arrowhead, near the headwaters of Oregon coast, the region of greatmestintensity took place Deep Creek, which will be referred to later, at an elevation over southern California. Warm-front action and a of nearly 5,000 feet, reported 30.49 inches. A consider- pronounced orographic effec,t. produced the greatest in- able number of mountain stations received between 20 tensities and amounts of precipitation of t.he entire storm and 30 inches of rain as shown in table 1. Unauthenticated | Downloaded 09/29/21 11:44 AM UTC 140 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW MAY1938 TABLE1.-Precipitation data (inches and hundredths), Feb. 67 to Mar. 4, 1938, inclusive, for Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties [Precipitation for 24 hours ending near sunset unlesa otherwise indicated] - Eleva- February March Greatest tion - - - Storm Station Latitude mgitude above total m. 8.1 1 2 3 4 lhour I Date O# 118 16 a, 075 0. M 0.23 0.89 3.05 0.81 0.m _____.___.____.__.5.55 117 50 62 .30 1.00 .ga 1.27 2.40 .10 ___._.__.._______.6.03 118 a3 4,060 1.24 .w 1.62 7.64 1.42 .17 .__._._______.__._13.02 118 08 1.3% 1.86 2. 75 2. 18 8.33 .62 .____..__._._.__._15.74 117 55 - - - - - - -. 1.57 1.93 2.13 2. 98 .02 .______.___.____..8.63 118 01 - - - -.-. (1’ Bo 2.73 2.35 7.30 .57 _______._________ .________ 14.55 118 11 1.26 2. 62 2.62 8.10 1.00 _________ __.____._15.60 118 11 ::E 1.65 2. e3 3.23 8.47 1.36 _________ ____.__..17.54 118 53 1,155 .42 1.89 2.74 6.98 .87 ._____--___-----. .-___.--_12.00 118 19 30 .49 1. 62 1.22 1.45 2.18 .03 ..________________6.99 117 M 602 1.33 2.25 2.30 6.72 .84 T .____._...____.___13.44 117 55 675 1.2.5 2.34 2.41 7.00 .gs ._.__________..___13.96 118 12 2.620 .% .65 1.74 .32 .____--____._..___3.57 117 58 378 1. 60 1.60 1.71 5.88 .87 ~......---- ._.._____ 11.46 116 63 2, 330 - - - - -.. 1.65 1.27 2.24 2.70 .25 .________..___.__.8.11 116 55 2,m .a 1.28 1.76 1.01 4. 08 .33 .._...___...____._ 9.09 116 b5 3, .46 .95 1.75 .90 6. 25 .46 .__._____._.____..10.76 118 11 160 1.65 1.31 1. 85 4. 60 .42 ~ ..__....._._.____._9.83 117 48 2.850 6. 18 .62 9.40 .92 .08 .40 2 17.20 117 46 3, 100 ‘?50 4. so .n 5.43 .-. - -. .. ..___....__.____.. ._____.._ 117 48 1,880 1.56 6.38 .88 9.32 1.10 .39 2 19. fJ4 118 24 255 1.42 2.24 1.79 6.08 30 ____.._____.___.__.._.____ 11.83 117 28 1.750 (9 5.50 2 15 (9 9.75 ___..______.______17.40 116 59 4.96 3.39 1. 54 1s. 08 $!00 26.95 117 49 ?E 1.24 3.66 3.42 6.58 .07 117 41 6,660 2.00 2.50 1. Bs 6.80 4.48 118 12 2,050 1.20 3.28 3.00 10.83 2.05 20.36 118 09 2, Qrm 1. 17 .27 .91 6.82 .48 8. 65 118 16 1,350 1.33 2.08 2. M 7. 02 .76 13.73 118 14 2.616 1. 18 3.36 3. 15 8.88 1. 10 18.53 118 18 650 .07 1.28 1.92 .70 2.85 7.01 118 18 665 1.41 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Some Preliminary Rainfall Totals from Around the Area
    Print This Page Go Back | Version: Current 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Font: A A A | MISCELLANEOUS HYDROLOGIC DATA SRUS46 KLOX 261623 RRMLOX PRECIPITATION SUMMARY NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 630 AM PDT MON MAR 26 2012 ...FINAL PRECIPITATION TOTALS... ...SNOW REPORTS IN INCHES FOR THIS STORM... LAKE OF WOODS ELEVATION 4500 FEET...... 2 INCHES LOCKWOOD VALLEY ELEVATION 5500 FEET...... 5 INCHES PINON PINES ELEVATION 5500 FEET...... 4 INCHES CUDDY VALLEY ELEVATION 6000 FEET...... 6 INCHES PINE MTN CLUB ELEVATION 6500 FEET...... 8 INCHES FRAZIER PARK ELEVATION 6000 FEET...... 10 INCHES MT. PINOS ELEVATION 8800 FEET...... 12 INCHES MTN. HIGH RESORT ELEVATION 7000 FEET...... 14 INCHES WRIGHTWOOD ELEVATION 6000 FEET...... 14 INCHES THE FOLLOWING ARE FINAL RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THE WEEKEND RAIN EVENT THROUGH 500 AM THIS MORNING. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN AVALON INLAND..................... 0.63 HAWTHORNE (KHHR).................. 1.10 LA AIRPORT(KLAX).................. 1.11 LA DOWNTOWN (CQT)................. 0.95 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 0.62 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 0.87 REDONDO BEACH..................... 1.68 TORRANCE.......................... 1.23 BEL AIR........................... 1.65 CULVER CITY....................... 0.90 GETTY CENTER...................... 1.83 UCLA.............................. 1.26 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 1.47 HOLLYWOOD RESERVOIR............... 2.01 HILLCREST COUNTY CLUB............. 1.49 VENICE............................ 1.24 MANHATTAN BEACH................... 1.21 INGLEWOOD......................... 1.38 ROLLING HILLS..................... 0.95 L.A. RIVER @ WARDLOW.............. 1.27 BELLFLOWER........................ 0.80 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 1.40 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 1.30 NORTHRIDGE........................ 1.91 WOODLAND HILLS.................... 2.02 AGOURA HILLS...................... 1.74 CHATSWORTH RESERVOIR.............. 1.56 CANOGA PARK....................... 1.61 PACOIMA DAM......................
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 72 January 1950 INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 11.PPACIFIC SLOPE BASINS IN CALIFORNIA TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1948 Prepared by San Francisco District UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director WASHINGTON, D. C. Free on application to the Director, Geological Survey, Washington 26, D. C. INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 11.PPACIFIC SLOPE BASINS IN CALIFORNIA TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1948 EXPLANATION The index lists the stream-flow ana reservoir stations in the Pacific Slope Basins in California for which records have been or are to be pub­ lished for periods prior to September 30, 1948. The stations are listed in downstream order. Tributary streams are indicated by indention. Station names are given in their most recently published forms. Paren­ theses around part of a station name indicate that the enclosed word or words were used in an earlier published name of the station or in a name under which records were published by some agency other than the Geological Survey. The drainage areas, in square miles, are the latest figures published or otherwise available at this time. Drainage areas that were obviously inconsistent with other drainage areas on the same stream have been omitted. Some drainage areas not published by the Geological Survey are listed with an appropriate footnote stating the published source of the figure of drainage area. Under "period of record" breaks of less than a 12-month period are not shown. A dash not followed immediately by a closing date shows that the station was in operation on September 30, 1948.
    [Show full text]
  • MASTER Projects List with Districts CR EQ.Xlsx
    Upcoming LA County Regional Infrastructure Projects Supporting Climate Resilience & Equity State State Congressional No. Project Name Location Project Type Assembly Senate District District District 1 Rosewood - Stanford Avenue, et al. Rosewood Road Construction 64 35 44 Cap Project - 2 Cogen Landfill Gas Mitigation Los Angeles 49 22 27 Buildings 3 East Los Angeles - Michigan Avenue, et al. East Los Angeles Road Maintenance 49, 51 22, 24 27, 40 Florence-Firestone - Compton Av at Nadeau 4 Firestone, Florence Traffic Design 64 35 44 St Hacienda Heights Community - Hacienda 5 Hacienda Heights Traffic Design 57 35 38, 39 Boulevard at Shadybend Drive Hacienda Heights-Garo St- Stimson 6 Hacienda Heights Traffic Design 57 35 38, 39 Av/Fieldgate Av 7 Willowbrook - Wadsworth Av at E 126th St Willowbrook Traffic Design 64 35 44 Cap Project - 8 Redondo Beach Yard Redondo Beach 66 26 33 Buildings 9 Altadena - Glenrose Ave, et al. Altadena Road Maintenance 41 25 27 10 Rowland Heights - Otterbein Avenue, et al. Rowland Heights Road Maintenance 55 29 39 Cap Project - 11 RB Maint Yard and Restroom DM Repair Redondo Beach 66 26 33 Buildings Cap Project - 12 Hansen Yard Sun Valley 39 18 29 Buildings Cap Project - 13 Imperial Yard 2 South Gate 63 33 44 Buildings South Whittier - Gunn and Du Page Avenue, et 14 South Whittier Road Maintenance 57 32 38 al. Cap Project - 15 LAC USC Parking Lot 12 Structure ADA Los Angeles 51 24 34 Buildings Cap Project - 16 East Yard Irwindale 48 22 32 Buildings Cap Project - 17 Rio Hondo Spreading Grounds Montebello 58 32
    [Show full text]
  • NWS Public Information Statement
    National Weather Service Page 1 of 3 Print This Page Fast Page Home Version: Current 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NOUS46 KLOX 250119 PNSLOX PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 619 PM PDT SAT MAY 24 2008 ...PRELIMINARY RAINFALL TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS RAIN EVENT THROUGH 600 PM THIS EVENING. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN AVALON............................ 0.01 HAWTHORNE (KHHR).................. 0.07 LOS ANGELES AP (KLAX)............. 0.10 DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES.............. 0.06 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 0.17 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 0.08 MONTE NIDO FS..................... 0.20 BIG ROCK MESA..................... 0.08 BEL AIR HOTEL..................... 0.12 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 0.18 HOLLYWOOD RSVR.................... 0.20 DOMINGUEZ WATER CO................ 0.12 LA HABRA HEIGHTS.................. 0.15 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 0.18 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 0.16 AGOURA............................ 0.04 SEPULVEDA CYN @ MULHL............. 0.08 PACOIMA DAM....................... 0.75 HANSEN DAM........................ 0.27 NEWHALL-SOLEDAD SCHL.............. 0.12 SAUGUS............................ 0.11 DEL VALLE......................... 0.03 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN GABRIEL VALLEY L.A. CITY COLLEGE................. 0.15 EAGLE ROCK RSRV................... 0.47 EATON WASH @ LOFTUS............... 0.12 SAN GABRIEL R @ VLY............... 1.50 EATON DAM......................... 0.86 WALNUT CK S.B..................... 1.06 SANTA FE DAM...................... 2.77 WHITTIER HILLS.................... 0.40 CLAREMONT......................... 1.63 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND FOOTHILLS MOUNT WILSON CBS.................. 1.98 W FK HELIPORT..................... 2.99 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/scripts/getprodplus.php?wfo=lox&print=yes&fastpage=yes&pil=pns&sid=l... 5/26/2008 National Weather Service Page 2 of 3 SANTA ANITA DAM..................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8: Safety Element Arcadia General Plan
    Chapter 8: Safety Element Arcadia General Plan 8 x Introduction Community safety issues influence many decisions people make, from big decisions such as where to live or spend leisure time, to small decisions, such as identifying the time of day they feel comfortable walking alone. When thinking about where to buy a home, people may consider whether a hillside location near a wildfire zone is of concern. In its budgeting decisions, elected bodies allocate funds to fire and law enforcement services commensurate with overall public safety objectives. Critical to these decision processes is knowing the hazards present in a community and establishing safety standards. By identifying threats to our safety, we can better guard against disasters and develop effective response plans. This Safety Element identifies, evaluates, and addresses local and regional safety issues, and establishes the goals, policies, and actions that will help reduce loss of life, injuries, property loss, environmental damage, and social and economic disruption from natural and human-caused disasters. These issues are addressed within the context of: Environmental Hazards Emergency Services Human-Caused Hazards Emergency Preparedness Threats to National Security Arcadia General Plan - November 2010 Safety | 8-1 The goals, policies, and programs in this element are shaped around three approaches that are integral to Arcadia’s plan for a safe community: 1) avoiding hazards and threats through careful planning, 2) being prepared to respond to any and all crisis situations to minimize injury or loss, 3) educating the public of best safety practices so that the community does its part to improve public safety. Achieving Our Vision Residents and businesses look to the City to protect the community from threats to public safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles Basin Study Summary Report
    Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. The mission of the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works is to provide public infrastructure and municipal services to protect and enrich the daily lives of over 10 million people in Los Angeles County. Cover Photo: Tujunga Dam, Los Angeles County, California. Summary Report Los Angeles Basin Study November 2016 Prepared by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Lower Colorado Region Southern California Area Office Jack Simes, Area Planning Officer County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Los Angeles County Flood Control District Watershed Management Division Lee Alexanderson, PE, Associate Civil Engineer Daniel Bradbury, PE, Senior Civil Engineering Assistant “Anyone who can solve the problems of water will be worthy of two Nobel prizes – one for peace and one for science.” John F. Kennedy Acknowledgements Effective water resources management practices are essential in Southern California to help the region sustain its water supply. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District is charged with effectively managing local stormwater to help supplement these vital natural resources. The LACFCD and its partners collaborated with the Bureau of Reclamation to complete this extensive Study. A great deal of time and energy over the past three years went into making the Los Angeles Basin Study a successful planning tool for the region to use in preparing for the challenges of climate change by capturing stormwater through enhanced conservation practices.
    [Show full text]
  • EARTHQUAKE RECORDINGS on and NEAR DAMS Paul Morrison, Richard Maley, Gerald Brady and Ronald Porcella USCOLD Committee on Earthq
    EARTHQUAKE RECORDINGS ON AND NEAR DAMS by Paul Morrison, Richard Maley, Gerald Brady and Ronald Porcella USCOLD Committee on Earthquakes Panel on Instrumental Recordings at Dams , } IV BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 11. Report No. 2 1 . SHEET 4'. Title and Subtitle 15. Report'"Uate"""" - - • Earthquake Recordings On Or Near Dams November 1977 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Rept. P. Morrison. R. Malev. G. Bradv. R. Porcella No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. United States Committee on Large Dams (USCOLD) California Institute of Technology 11. Conrract/Grant No. 1201 E. California Blvd. D::lC:;:\l1oY1ri fA Q11?t:; NSF ENV74-05163 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report & Period National Science Foundation Covered Washington, D.C. 20550 14. 15. Supplemenrary Notes 16. Abstracts This report presents data on earthquake recordings made on or near dams. The serious consequences of failure makes it imperative that dams in seismic regions be designed to resist earthquake shaking safely and economically. To achieve this, designers of dams must be provided with information about those dams that have been subjected to strong ground shaking, with or without damage. The most valuable of such information is provided by seismic recordings made on or near dams during strong shaking, as these show the nature of the earthquake shaking. Unfortunately there exist relatively few such recordings because only few dams are instrumented for this purpose. This report provides a collection of seismic records, ranging from very strong shaking to moderate shaking, which whould be informative to engineers who design dams.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Sierra Madre 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
    JULY 2021 FINAL DRAFT City of Sierra Madre 2020 Urban Water Management Plan JULY 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 ......................................................................................................................... 1-1 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ............................... 1-1 RECOMMENDED UWMP ORGANIZATION ....................................................................... 1-4 UWMPS IN RELATION TO OTHER EFFORTS ...................................................................... 1-5 UWMPS AND GRANT OR LOAN ELIGIBILITY ..................................................................... 1-5 DEMONSTRATION OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE DELTA PLAN FOR PARTICIPANTS IN COVERED ACTIONS ...................................................................................................... 1-6 TIPS FOR UWMP PREPARERS ........................................................................................... 1-7 CHAPTER 2 ......................................................................................................................... 2-1 PLAN PREPARATION ........................................................................................................... 2-1 PLAN PREPARATION ......................................................................................................... 2-2 BASIS FOR PREPARING A PLAN ........................................................................................ 2-2 PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Removal from the San Gabriel Mountains Mary C
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont Pitzer Senior Theses Pitzer Student Scholarship 2012 Sediment Removal from the San Gabriel Mountains Mary C. Ferguson Recommended Citation Ferguson, Mary C., "Sediment Removal from the San Gabriel Mountains" (2012). Pitzer Senior Theses. Paper 16. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/pitzer_theses/16 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Pitzer Student Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pitzer Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SEDIMENT REMOVAL FROM THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS Mary C. Ferguson In partial fulfillment of a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Environmental Analysis, 2011-12 academic year, Pitzer College, Claremont, California Readers: Professor Bowman Cutter, Pomona College Professor Char Miller, Pomona College 1 Acknowledgments I give my sincere thanks to both of my advisers for their patience and wonderful insights: Bowman Cutter you kept me on track and prevented me for wandering too far on various tangents. Char Miller, your eternal enthusiasm and amazing insights inspired me to forge ahead and just write already! Camron Stone: thank you sharing so much of your time, information and use of your photos. The walk through the “Arcadia Wastelands” post-removal, reminded me of why I wanted to write about this in the first place. Dianne Patrizzi for uploading countless hours of city council meetings and symposium highlights, as well as your passion for all things good. My mom, for her curiousity, encouragement and willingness to plunge headfirst into extremely rough drafts.
    [Show full text]
  • NWS Public Information Statement
    Page 1 of 4 PNSLOX Current Version Previous Version: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NOUS46 KLOX 260119 PNSLOX PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 451 PM PST FRI JAN 25 2008 ...FINAL RAINFALL TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS RAIN EVENT 4 P.M. MONDAY AFTERNOON THROUGH 400 PM THIS AFTERNOON. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES.............. 3.43 LOS ANGELES AP (KLAX)............. 2.17 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 2.85 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 2.71 MONTE NIDO FS..................... 2.44 BIG ROCK MESA..................... 0.04 BEL AIR HOTEL..................... 3.50 BALLONA CK @ SAWTELLE............. 2.16 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 4.32 HOLLYWOOD RSVR.................... 3.54 L.A. R @ FIRESTONE................ 2.05 DOMINGUEZ WATER CO................ 2.32 LA HABRA HEIGHTS.................. 1.81 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 4.10 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 3.28 AGOURA............................ 4.41 CHATSWORTH RSVR................... 4.13 SEPULVEDA CYN @ MULHL............. 4.57 PACOIMA DAM....................... 4.21 HANSEN DAM........................ 4.35 NEWHALL-SOLEDAD SCHL.............. 6.34 SAUGUS............................ 2.50 DEL VALLE......................... 2.68 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN GABRIEL VALLEY EAGLE ROCK RSRV................... 2.80 EATON WASH @ LOFTUS............... 2.68 SAN GABRIEL R @ VLY............... 1.89 WALNUT CK S.B..................... 2.01 SANTA FE DAM...................... 2.03 WHITTIER HILLS.................... 2.27 CLAREMONT......................... 2.15 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/total_forecast/getprod.php?wfo=lox&pil=PNS&sid=LOX&version=5&banner=... 1/26/2008 Page 2 of 4 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND FOOTHILLS W FK HELIPORT..................... 6.97 SANTA ANITA DAM................... 3.42 SAN GABRIEL DAM..................
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Impacts to Flood Control and Water Supply
    Sediment Impacts to Flood Control and Water Supply Southern California Chaparral Symposium June 9, 2015 Presentation By: Keith Lilley, P.E. Flood Control District • Formed in 1915 with Dual Mission • Reduce Flood Risk by Providing Flood Control Protection • Conserve Water for local supply Video Los Angeles River, 1914 Flood Control District Owns and operates complex flood protection and water conservation systems that includes: • 14 major dams • 162 debris basins • 500 miles of open channels • 27 Spreading Ground Facilities Stormwater Capture – Santa Anita Dam Valve Release – San Gabriel Dam Valve Release – San Gabriel Dam Spillway Flow - Big Tujunga Dam Water Conservation Process Cogswell Dam San Gabriel Dam Morris Dam San Gabriel Canyon Spreading Grounds Hansen Spreading Grounds Water Conservation • Stormwater capture recharges aquifers that provide 1/3 of our water supply • 2010-11 storm season : 600,000 ac-ft captured • 100% of stormwater at dams recharged What is an Acre-Foot of Water? .One Acre-Foot of Water is Sufficient to Serve Two Families of Four for an Entire Year. .There Are 325,852 Gallons in One Acre-Foot of Water. One Acre-Foot of Water Would Cover an Entire Football Field Approximately One- Foot Deep. Fire – Flood Sequence Major Debris Potential Burned Watershed Hydrophobic Soils Hydrophobic layer ½ to 3 inches beneath surface. DESIGN DEBRIS EVENT: Expected amount of sediment produced as a result of a 50 year design storm falling on a burned watershed after 4 years of watershed recovery. DESIGN DEBRIS EVENT (DDE) EXAMPLES:
    [Show full text]
  • Wild and Scenic Rivers
    Wild and Scenic Rivers Background and Study Process Wild and Scenic Rivers For reader convenience, all wild and scenic study documents are compiled here, including duplicate sections that are also found in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix E Wild and Scenic Rivers. Wild and Scenic Rivers Background and Study Process Summary of Wild and Scenic Wild and Scenic Rivers River Eligibility Inventory by Forest Wild and Scenic Rivers Background and Study Process Background Congress enacted the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA) in 1968 to preserve select river's free- flowing condition, water quality and outstandingly remarkable values. The most important provision of the WSRA is protecting rivers from the harmful effects of water resources projects. To protect free- flowing character, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (which licenses nonfederal hydropower projects) is not allowed to license construction of dams, water conduits, reservoirs, powerhouses, transmission lines, or other project works on or directly affecting wild and scenic rivers (WSRs). Other federal agencies may not assist by loan, grant, and license or otherwise any water resources project that would have a direct and adverse effect on the values for which a river was designated. The WSRA also directs that each river in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (National System) be administered in a manner to protect and enhance a river's outstanding natural and cultural values. It allows existing uses of a river to continue and future uses to be considered, so long as existing or proposed use does not conflict with protecting river values. The WSRA also directs building partnerships among landowners, river users, tribal nations, and all levels of government.
    [Show full text]