DEPABTMENT OF THE INTEEIOR

WATER-SUPPLY

IRRIGATION PAPERS

UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

]STo.

WASHIXGTOX

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1901
UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR

PflVWAI rHAR/\rTOTC!TIf\! flfl F1?P\I RIVER rniMtAL tnAMtlMlMlto W JvttilN ftlVM,

FJRANK H OLMSTED

RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA RIVER, CALIFORNIA

MA1STSO1ST

WASHINGTON

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1901
CONTENTS.

Page.

LETTER of TRANSMITTAL.. ........ ..-..........._.... .................. 9

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF KERN RIVER, CALIFORNIA, BY PRANK H.

OLMSTED_ .-_--.._._-._...._-. ..............................-...._ 11

Introduction.-----._-...-._. .. ............ ....^..................... 11

Physical features ...--.---.--..--.-..-.---..--.-....---.---.-.---.---, 13

Volume..-...--......-.--_....._..,........-..............-...---.... 16

Power possibilities..--- -----..-----.-......-............--..-------.. 25

RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA RIVER, CALIFORNIA, BY MARSDEN MANSON.... 39

Watershed....................... ....._........... ..,... ..--.... 39

Topography ,... ......^............................................... 41

Natural storage of water in Yttba River Basin _.,-.........._.-....... 42

Artificial storage possibilities .,__......... .......................... 43

Comparison of low-water discharge from a timbered area with that 

from a comparatively treeless area .......................'....... 46

Discharge measurements of Yuba River and its tributaries .-.-...-.... 47

INDEX......---.--.-........-... ................ .......-..-.--.._.-..---. 55

5
ILLUSTRATIONS.

Page* 

TLATE I. View of Kern River near Kernville-.-.--.-. .......... .......... 14

II. View of gaging station on North Fork of Kern River ........... 16

III. Map of upper Kern River... .-_.. .._-,-.....--.----...-i---... 18

IV. A, Head of South Fork of Yuba River and Lake Spaulding; B,

Yuba River in the foothills , _ ..-.-_.-_-.----..-..-.-..---.-..- 40

V. A, Canyon of Middle Fork of Yuba River; B, Middle Fork near

Freeman's crossing...._.-_.._.....-,----..----..--- --------- 42

VI. A, English reservoir site on Middle Fork of Yuba River; B, Small

dam of English reservoir ..................................... 44

VII. A, Browns Valley Irrigation District dam from above; B, Browns

Valley Irrigation District dam from below _.._..__..__....--- 46

VIII. A, Second-growth forest destroyed by fire; B, Head of South Yuba

Canal Company's ditch __--_...._-.._--._._...,...--.-----,---- 48 

FIG. 1. Map showing minor drainage basins of upper Kern River ...._..., 12

2. Profile of Kern River ...... ....-.. .._...........,.-......._.. 14

3. View of mountain valley in Kern River Basin_..-....--_--...-_--- 15

4. Profile of South Fork of Kern River ..._....................-..... 15

5. Map showing points of stream measurements ....---...-..--.--... 16

6. Diagram showing synchronous discharge and temperature observations at First Point of Measurement......,........--....-.,.---- 24

7. Plan of reservoir site of Kern River Company....,...-..---......_ 26

8. Cross section of proposed dam site of Kern River Company on '

Salmon Creek ....... ........................................... 29

9. Plan of reservoir site of Kern-Rand Electric Power Company ...... 30

10. Plan of dam site of Kern-Rand Electric Power Company .......... 31

11. Sectional elevation of dam proposed by Kern-Rand El ctric Power

Company--......-,....... ..........................._........ 32

12. Vertical section of tower for dam proposed by Kern-Rand Electric

Power Company, showing arrangement of gates................. 34

13. Sectional elevation and plan of gate tower for dam proposed by

Kern-Rand Electric Power Company............................ 35

14. Map of Yuba River, showing location of gaging stations .......... 40

15. Diagram showing depth of snow at Lake Fordyce...._--..-....._. 43

16. Curve showing relation of gage height to discharge of Yuba River- 47

17. Curve showing relation of gage height to discharge of North Fork

of Yuba River ............................................ .. ... 52

18. Curve showing relation of gage height to discharge of Middle Fork

of Yuba River................................................... 52

7
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,

DIVISION OF HYDROGRAPHY, 

Washington, D. C., March 6, 1901.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith two manuscripts for 

publication together in the series of papers upon water supply and 

irrigation.

The first manuscript is by Mr. Frank H. Olmsted, a civil engineer 

of southern California, and relates to the physical characteristics of 

the catchment area of Kern River, California. In this paper the 

author describes the drainage basin and estimates the amount of 

water coining from it and the power available from a complete utilization of the various portions of the stream. He also discusses the 

utilization of this power in pumping for irrigation.

The ultimate development of a considerable portion of the arid 

region depends not only upon complete storage and control of the 

streams, but upon the largest possible use of the power which may be 

generated in the upper or steeper portions of the channel and transmitted electrically out upon the plains, to be used in bringing to the 

surface the moisture which has sunk below the reach of the roots of the 

plants. By this means the area of cultivation can be greatly extended; 

and, as shown by Mr. Olmsted, the cost of pumping this water .and 

applying it to the soil may, under favorable conditions, be less than 

that of obtaining a supply by gravity.

In earlier pamphlets of this series of Water-Supply Papers the utilization of wind power for this purpose has been discussed, the 

efficiency of the windmill has been described, and the advantages due 

to the small cost and independent construction of each mill have 

been shown. Where, however, it is practicable to obtain electric 

power at small cost, pumping plants operated by electricity can be 

widely distributed and may have certain advantages over the windmill. It is therefore important, in any discussion of the method of 

utilizing the water resources, to bring to public attention the possible 

developments along this line.

The second manuscript presented herewith has been prepared by 

Dr. Marsden Manson, and relates to Yuba River, a tributary of the 

Sacramento. Dr. Manson discusses the physical conditions and storage possibilities of this stream, bringing out particularly the importance of preserving the forest cover on the upper catchment basin,
10 LETTER OF TKANSMITTAL.

and, if possible, increasing this by artificial means; and shows by 

estimates the possible increase of available water through complete 

afforestation of the area. The relation of forests to river flow is 

believed to be of great importance, and is a matter upon which precise data are needed. It is hoped that as the systematic river measurements continue it will be possible to state more and more definitely the precise relation which the forest cover bears to the behavior 

of the stream.

The protection of the forests by the creation of reservations and 

the conservation of the waters through reservoirs constructed within 

these various reservations are of such vital importance to the utilization of the arid lands of the West, both by direct irrigation and by 

the creation of power for pumping water, that afl matters pertaining 

to these subjects have interest to the citizens of the country as the 

great landowners.

It is for these reasons that these manuscripts are presented as contributions to a larger knowledge of the subject.

Very respectfully,

F. H. NEWELL, 

Hydrographer in Charge. 

Hon. CHARLES D. WALCOTT,

Director United States Geological Survey.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF KERN

RIVER, CALIFORNIA, WITH SPECIAL

REFERENCE TO ELECTRIC POWER

DEVELOPMENT.

By FRANK H. OLMSTED.

rNTRODTlCTIOISr.

The development of southern California has been retarded by 

three factors which are still operative: (1) Distance from the world's 

markets and commercial centers; (2) shortage of water; (3) lack of 

cheap fuel and power. Volumes might be written in regard to the 

relation which the development of water in southern California bears 

to the progress of the people, but broadly stated it may be said that 

the real development, of this section will be denned and limited by 

the amount of water available for irrigation from San Diego to Santa 

Barbara and from San Pedro to the desert on the east. Regarding 

cheap'fuel and power, neither Los Angeles, the commercial center of 

this section, nor any other place in southern California has had it, 

and even now, when it is reasonable to suppose that the local oil 

industry is at its best, the price of oil is approaching $1 a barrel 

of 42 gallons; or, expressed differently, the cost of oil as fuel is equal 

to bituminous coal at $4 a ton. During the last five years Los Angeles 

has had an industrial awakening corresponding to this decrease in the 

cost of fuel from $7 or $8 a ton to $4 a ton.

During the first year of its advent in the Los Angeles market the

cost of oil ranged between $0.40 and $1 a barrel. Most of the users of

coal at that time found it economical to change their grates to oil

burners, but since 1896 the tendency of the oil market has been

upward, until now the cost of oil is $0.75 to $1 a barrel. At $1.50 a

barrel oil as fuel is 110 cheaper than Gallup coal at $7 a ton, except

that usually the oil feeder is arranged so as not to require an attend1 ant, thus saving the wages of a stoker. In carload lots, the cost of

i Wellington bituminous coals is about $1 a ton more than the Eastern

lignites; and, limited as the output has been, at present it virtually

' 11
12 RECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVER, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 46.

controls the Los Angeles market. During at least half of the year 

the demand in Los Angeles is so near the greatest available supply 

that outside orders for coal are not sought. The oil supply has contributed to the industrial advancement of southern California, and 

there are many reasons for believing that with cheap electric power

FIG. 1. Map showing minor drainage basins of upper Kern River.

the manufactures and industries of southern California in general, 

and of the city of Los Angeles in particular, would quickly respond, 

and that their growth would be upon a safer foundation and a 

broader basis. The future outlook does not, however, warrant the 

hope for much better fuel rates, even with the construction of the
OLMSTED.] INTRODUCTION. 13

Salt Lake Railroad assured; but there is good reason to expect 

cheaper power, and if this expectation is realized, the greater part of 

the power must come from Kern River.

PHYSICAL FEATURES.

Kern River rises on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada, the 

greatest mountain range in the United States. For a distance of 100 

miles the average elevation of this crest line is more than 11,000 feet 

above the sea, and so great is the run-off that within the first 15 miles 

of its course the river receives 80 per cent of its total summer flow at 

tlie mouth of its canyon 100 miles away. The drainage area of the 

stream above the latter point is 2,349.3 square miles. Fig. 1 is a map 

showing the distribution of this drainage area, the minor drainage 

basins being outlined and their respective areas given. The following tables give the names and the respective areas of these minor 

drainage basins:

Areas of minor drainage basins of North Fork of Kern River.

Square miles.

Headwaters .--_...--------_- ..------_---------. __-.-..--, 318.5

Whitney Creek ............................ ................ 53.8

Small Creek. .............................................. 28.0

Ninemile Creek.....---_-.-.-....-.--------.....-...-....-.- 7.5

Menache Creek ........................................... . 25.0

Trout Meadow Creek _.______.___._._______..._....-._...._. 25.5

Harris Creek ...................... ......... .............. 57.5

Tibbetts Creek... _..... ____._......_._.. ................ 30.0

Brush Creek........ ....................................... 49.5

Salmon Creek ............. .... ..---...._.......--.......- 31.0

Corral and other creeks . .._--.--.-_....._...--...-. ... ... 75.0

Little Kern River....._.. ... . ..............'............. 142.5

Needles Creek ...._.......... ....... ...................... 17.5

Clark Creek.... ..... ................ ... .............. 26.0

Jackson Creek..,.------ ....... ....-...-.---..-,....... . 37.5

WadeCreek... _._.______._ .. ....................... . . 89.5

Tobias and other creeks------- _.,.._..-_.....^.. ....... .... 57.0

Bull Run Creek .... ............ .......................... 28.7

Tilly Creek.. ... ....... ................................... 30.0

Total to junction of South Fork..........._.......... 1,070.0

Areas of minor drainage basins of South Fork of Kern River.

Square miles.

Headwaters ....... .. ....--....--..-.-.-.-..._---....-.---- 165.0

Fish Creek ................................................. 51.8

Middle tributaries ....... ................................. 335.0

Lower tributaries from north ........-..-.--.-.__-,.--..-... 65.0

Lower tributaries from south.......--......-....._.......-. 388.0

Total to junction with North Fork.............. ...... 1,004.:
14 KECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN BIVER, CALIFOKNIA. [NO. 46.

Drainage areas of Kern River.

Square miles. 

North Fork_.......... ...............-.-...--..--.-.-.--.-- 1,070.0

South Fork.............. ....._ ...... .---..-- ---- 1,004.8

Tributaries from north side after junction ....-..-.-.--...-. 84. 5

Tributaries from south side after junction.....-.....--. .... 190.0

Total...-................-......-.-.....-..-..----.-- 2,349.3

The length of Kern River from King River summit, on its main 

fork, to the month of the canyon above Bakersfield is 118 miles. 

The channel is in granite, and, with the exception of a. few drops in 

the lower reaches of the stream, the grades are fairly uniform. In

IQ miles 20 50

60 miles 70 30 30 100 

FIG. 2. Profile of Kern River.

no

the 62 miles above Kernville the stream falls 5,600 feet, and in the 48 

miles below Kernville it falls about 2,100 feet. A view of the river 

near Kernville is shown in PI. I, and a profile of the stream in fig. 2. 

Fig. 3 is a view of a mountain valley in the basin of the river.

The South Fork of the stream-, which rises just south of Cirque 

Peak, is 83 miles long to its junction with the North (or main) Fork 

at Isabella. The main range of the Sierra Nevada drops off rapidly 

just south of Cirque Peak, which may account in a large measure for 

the comparatively small flow of the South Fork. This branch of 

Kern River possesses one decided advantage over the other branch,
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 46 PL. I

VIEW OF KERN RIVER NEAR KERNVILLE.
OLMSTED.] PHYSICAL FEATURES. 15

and over most California streams, in that it has a succession of particularly fine reservoir sites along a channel otherwise distinguished 

by reaches of rapid descent. A profile of the South Pork is shown 

in fig. 4.

The entire flow of Kern River is utilized for irrigation in the

FIG. 3. View of mountain valley in Kern River Basin.

southern end of San Joaquin Valley, and were it not for the great 

evaporation losses from the Buena Vista Lake reservoir the system 

could be called effective. The power of the stream, which, with one 

small exception, is available in large units, wastes itself upon the 

marbled bowlders and granite bed rock of the canyon, and suggests

30 WnOis JO "~~~ 60

FIG. 4. Profile of South Fork of Kern River.

an encouraging field for immediate investigation. The need of 

power in the agricultural valleys of California was never so apparent 

as now, after a series of dry years, when the ordinary flow of the 

streams has diminished to the extent of eliminating much hitherto 

valuable land, which of course precludes further development along
16 RECONNAISSANCE OF KERN RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

gravity lines. Power applied to the pumping of water from the 

gravel beds which underlie most of the California streams where they 

debouch from their canyons at once solves the difficulty; and where 

the water plane is not far below the surface this method of irrigation

FIG. 5. Map showing points of stream measurements.

is in many ways more convenient and perhaps not more expensive 

than the ordinary canal.

VOLUME.

From daily measurements continued through a series of years the 

run-off of Kern River Basin is well established, though the precipita-
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 4-6 PL. II

VIEW OF GAGING STATION ON NORTH FORK OF KERN RIVER.
OLMSTED.] VOLUME. 17,

tion and the local discharges in the watershed are still in question/- 

Mr. Henry Hawgood, Mem. Inst. of C. E., who has made a careful study 

of the physical conditions existing in the watershed of Kern River, 

more particularly in that of the North Fork, has estimated the annual 

precipitation for the North Fork above Isabella at 25.4 inches, with 

a run-off of 12.5 inches. This would give a mean annual flow of 

the North Fork of 982 second-feet. Mr. Hawgood estimates the rainfall of the entire basin at 23 inches, and the mean run-off at 7.8 

inches. On this last assumption the mean discharge of Kern River 

at its mouth would be 1,350 second-feet. As a fact, however, for the 

last five years (1895-1899) -a period of exceptional drought in the 

basin the stream has had a mean annual discharge at First Point of 

Measurement, near Bakersfield (see map, PL III), of 864 second-feet, 

or 64 per cent of the normal assumed by Mr. Hawgood.

In June, 1900, stream measurements made by the writer above 

Kern Lake, about 90 miles above First Point of Measurement, showed 

that, when considered with measurements made at the latter place 

and making a time allowance for the distance between, the discharge 

of the upper part of the stream was 99 per cent of that of the lower 

part. The loss in volume in the. passage of 939 second-feet of water 

(the amount flowing in the river just above Kern Lake on June 27, 

1900) from Kern Lake to Bakersfield can not be stated accurately, 

but in the lower reaches of the stream, from Isabella to Bakersfield, 

where the conditions are similar, the loss when the flow was 1,333 

second-feet was determined by the writer to be 3.21 second-feet to the 

mile. On this basis, on June 27, 1900, the flow of the North Fork just 

above Kern Lake was equal to 83 per cent of the flow of Kern River 

at First Point of Measurement. Fig. 5 is a map showing the points 

where stream measurements were made, and the following table gives 

the dates of the measurements and the discharge in second-feet, the 

numbers in the table corresponding to the numbers on the map.

Discharge measurement jf Kern River and tributaries at points shown on map

(fig. 5).

Location.

1.......

2

3.. 

4... 

5.......

6.......

7. ......

8.......

9.-.. 

10.......

11.......

12

13.......

U. ......

15.......

Date.

1900.

(First Point of Measurement.)

June 30 .....................

.....do ...................

June 33 ..................

.....do....................

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

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

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

June 34 ..................

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

June 35 ..................

.....do.... ........ ........

Discharge.

Sec.-ft.

1.31 

14.18 

1,333.17

s.yo

0.33 

3.45 

3 93

5.07 

5.74 

5.19 

4.36 

81.00 

1,154.90 

8.45

Location.

16........

17--.. 

18---. 

19........

30------ 

31

33.-- 

33

24.--- .

35--.- 

36.-. 

37

28--- 

39

30-. ......

Date.

1900.

June27--.. ----------- 

.....do. .... .......... 

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

June 38...... ------------

....do....... .... ......

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

June 30......... ..--.--..

July 3--... .. -------

July3-. ..................

.....do................ .

Discharge.

Sec.-ft.

3.87

a. 80

4.87 

939.60 

39.11

4 73 

3! 67

U

8

00 

. ti£

4.05 

3.38 

11.05 

1.96 

7.31

IRR 46 01-
18 RECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

Since September, 1893, the Kern County Land Company has made 

careful daily measurements of the flow of Kern River at First Point 

of Measurement. At Rio Bravo ranch, in sec. 11, T. 29 S., R. 29 E., 

M. D. M., 8^ miles above First Point of Measurement, the flow of the 

river has been measured for many years by the State engineer of California. It is estimated by Mr. James, chief engineer of the Kern 

County Land Company, that there is a loss of 50 second-feet between 

these gaging stations. The accompanying tables give the monthly 

discharge of the river at Rio Bravo ranch for the years 1878-1884, 

inclusive, and at First Point of Measurement for the years 1893-1900, 

inclusive. On page 22 is a comparative table of the estimated daily 

discharge of the river during 1900 at First Point of Measurement and 

just below Tobias Creek, which is 17 miles above the mouth of the 

South Fork of Kern River and about 2 miles above the mouth of Salmon Creek, and enters the North Fork from the east.

On pages 22 and 23 is a table of miscellaneous discharge measurements of Kern River and its tributaries, and on the latter page are 

tables of rainfall at three places in Kern River Basin.

Estimated monthly discharge of Kern River at Bio Bravo ranch.

Month.

1878.

1879.

April................ ...... ...

July.................... ......

1880.

April . - .. .--.-..

May ................. .........

July. ....... ...................

Discharge in second-feet.

Maximum.

686 

745 

659 

1,054 

1,231 

1,190 

865 

387 

174 

210

1,231

325 

650

410 

380 

385 

3,320 

3,560 

4,070 

3,140 

1,500 

846 

794

4,070

Minimum.

389 

466 

510 

661 

680 

812 

386 

168 

146 

145

145

184 

380

315 

315 

349 

395

1,615 

2,740 

1,550 

840 

710 

722

184

Mean.

400 

350

462 

591 

552 

764 

927 

971 

535 

266 

171 

182

514

261 

356

354 

370 

389 

1,557 

2,659 

3,317 

2,196 

1,060 

767 

758

1,169

Total in 

acre-feet.

23,802 

21,521

28,407 

32,823 

33,941 

45,461 

56,999 

57, 778 

32,8a5 

16,356 

10, 176 

11,191

371,350

15,531 

21,890

21,767 

21,282 

23,919 

92,648 

163, 496 

197,376 

135,027 

65, 177 

45,640 

46,608

850,361

Run-off.

Depth in 

inches.

0.19 

. 17

.23 

.26

.28 

.37 

.46 

.47 

.26 

.13 

.08 

.09

2.99

.12 

.17

.17 

.17 

.20 

.73 

1.31 

1.58 

1.08 

.52 

.37 

.37

6.79

Secondfeet per 

square 

mile.

0.17 

.15

.20 

.25

.24 

.33 

.40 

.42 

.23 

.11 

.07 

.08

.22

.11 

.15

.15 

.16 

.17 

.66 

1.14 

1.42 

.94 

.45 

.33 

.32

.50
U.S.GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 46 PLIII

To Mineral King 

ft E Fk.of KsweS

36 RESERVatlON I

' k MAP OF 

UPPER KERN RIVER
OLMSTED.] VOLUME. 19

Estimated monthly discharge of Kern River at Rio Bravo ranch Continued.

Month.

1880.

1881.

July __... _.......... -.. 

1882.

Am-il

1883.

July...... .................

1884.

April....----.-. ------ -

Discharge in second-feet.

Maxi- Minimum, mum.

830 

1,480

1,640 

2,970 

2,100 

2,613 

2,710 

2,390 

1,520 

1,200 

420 

360

2,970

360 

410

380 

510 

1,260 

1,670 

2,000 

1,990 

1,110

2,000

695

790

950 

1,430 

1,400 

2,100 

2,060 

1,475 

710 

420 

320 

310

310

300 

330

310 

360 

440 

920 

1,420 

900 

450

300

Mean.

767 

1,063

1,078 

1,073 

1,570 

2,288 

2,363 

1,890 

1,126 

637 

361 

333

1,263

337 

350

335 

395 

600 

1,174 

1,670 

1,306 

726 

330 

330 

330

655

280 

380

280 

350 

700 

1,170 

1,410 

1,170 

940 

470 

350 

280

638

200 

200

350 

470 

940 

1,980 

5,860 

9,380 

5,860 

2,350 

940 

470

2,423

Total in 

acre-feet.

45,640 

65,361

66,284 

98,471 

96,535 

136, 145 

145, 110 

112,463 

69,235 

38,552 

31,481 

20,475

915,751

20,053 

31,521

20,598 

21,937 

36,893 

69, 858 

103, 684 

77, 712 

44,640 

020,291 

019,636 

020,291

476, 114

016,661 

017,217

a 17, 217 

a 19, 438 

a 43, 041 

a 69, 620 

086,698 

a 69, 620 

057,798 

a28, 899 

020,836 

a 17, 217

464,253

a 11, 901 

a 12, 298

a 21, 521 

027,034 

a 57, 798 

0117,818 

a360,317 

0558,148 

a360,317 

a 144, 496 

055,934 

a38,899

a 1,756, 481

Run-off.

Depth in 

inches.

0.37 

.52

.52 

.79 

.77 

1.09 

1.16 

.90 

.55 

.31 

.17 

.16

7.31

.16

. 17

.16 

.18 

.30 

.56 

.82 

.62 

.36 

.16 

.16 

.16

3.81

.13 

.14

.14 

.16 

.35 

.56 

.69 

.56 

.46 

.23 

.17 

.14

3.73

.10 

.10

.17 

.22 

.46 

.89 

2.90 

4.46 

2.90 

1.15 

.45 

.33

14.03

Secondfeet per 

square 

mile.

0.33 

.45

.46 

.76 

.67 

.98 

1.01 

.81 

.48 

.27 

.15 

.14

.54

.14 

.15

.14 

.17 

.26 

.50 

.71 

.56 

.31 

.14 

.14 

.14

.28

12 

.12

.12 

.15 

.30 

.50 

.60 

.50 

.40 

.20 

.15 

.13

.27

.09 

.09

.15 

.20 

.40 

.80 

2.50 

4.00 

2.50 

1.00 

.40 

.20

1.03

a Estimated from fragmentary records by State engineer.
20 RECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVEE, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 46. 

Estimated monthly discharge of Kern River at First Point of Measurement.

[Drainage area used in previous reports, 2,345 square miles.]

Month.

1893.

1894.

April........... ................

July ............................

1895.

July ............................

1896.

July .............................

1897.

April...........................

Discharge in second-feet.

Maximum.

554 

559 

590

741 

1,114 

1,443 

1,892 

2,208 

1,719 

1,051 

549 

382 

363 

268 

805

2,308

1,616 

4,762 

3,004 

3,897 

5,384 

3,721 

2,063 

1,073 

676 

612 

436 

447

5,384

3,101 

798 

2,089 

1,263 

3.370 

3,611 

2,210 

741 

473 

435 

416 

426

3,611

832 

2,306 

2,044 

4,410 

5,342 

4,353 

1,536 

671 

363 

441 

477 

1,033

5,343

Minimum.

517 

467 

430

563 

604 

762 

1,209 

1,338 

871 

400 

256 

172 

334 

230 

234

172

473 

675 

987 

1,911 

3,100 

3,174 

867 

354 

390 

376 

308 

368

376

377 

559 

653 

766 

934 

1,344 

741 

353 

234 

333 

388 

313

333

305 

516 

688 

1,094 

4,054 

1,389 

644 

338 

260 

278 

389 

337

360

Mean.

534 

518 

516

661

717 

1,001 

1,495 

1,607 

1,085 

700 

335 

348 

279 

244 

470

737

809 

1,252 

1,374 

2,734 

4,369 

2,906 

1,482 

639 

344 

337 

346 

403

1,413

747 

617 

951 

972 

1,401 

2,456 

1,316 

486 

304 

367 

355 

347

854

373 

809 

923 

2,914 

4,580 

2,309 

1,006 

469 

295 

340 

355 

422

1,334

Total in 

acre-feet.

33,861 

30,837 

31,757

40,644 

39,817 

61,541 

88,952 

98, 798 

64,557 

43,036 

20,565 

14,756 

17,178 

14,500 

28,908

533,252

49,763 

69,536 

84,437 

162,076 

268,608 

172,919 

91, 113 

38,665 

20,469 

20,106 

30,588 

24,779

1,023,058

45,931 

35,489 

58,475 

57,838 

86,144 

146,142 

82,763 

29,883 

18,089 

16,417 

21,134 

21,336

' 619, 630

33,935 

44,930 

56,753 

173,395 

381,613 

137,395 

61,857 

28,838 

17,554 

30,908 

21,134 

25,948

893,248

Run-off.

Depth in 

laches.

0.26 

.34 

.35

.33 

.33 

.65 

.71

.79 

.51 

.34 

.16 

.12 

.14 

.11 

.23

4.40

.40 

.55 

.67 

1.29 

2.14 

1.37 

.73 

1.31 

.17 

.16 

.17 

.30

8.16

.37 

.38 

.47 

.46 

.69 

1.17 

.66 

.34 

.14 

.13 

.17 

.17

4.95

.18 

.36 

.45 

1.38 

2.25 

1.09 

.49 

.33 

.14 

.17 

.17 

.21

7 13

Secondfeet per 

square 

mile.

0.33 

.22

. (Wrt

.38 

.30 

.43 

.64 

.69 

.46 

.30 

.14 

.11 

.13 

.10 

.30

.31

.34 

.53

.59 

1.16 

1.86 

1.34 

.63 

.37 

.15 

.14 

.15 

.17

.60

.33

.36 

.41 

.41 

.60 

1.05 

.57 

.31 

.13 

.11 

.15 

.15

.36

.16 

.35 

.39 

1.24 

1.95 

.98 

.43 

.20 

.13 

.15 

.15 

.18

.53
OLMSTED.] VOLUME. 21

Estimated monthly discharge of Kern River at First Point of Measurement Cont'd.

Month.

1898.

April...........................

July ............................

1899.

April...........................

1900.

April ...........................

May ............................

Discharge in second-feet.

Maximum.

400 

923

485 

1,342 

980 

686 

416 

142 

294 

232 

188 

314

1,342

361 

365 

4,932 

1,167 

1,302 

2,230 

894 

240 

117 

229 

385 

781

4,932

1,048 

329 

502 

592 

1,969 

1,878 

850 

317 

270 

186 

1,339 

445

1,969

Minimum.

311 

316

304 

371 

560 

394 

127 

86 

80 

127 

136 

147

80

182 

258 

247 

593 

576 

809 

229 

99 

89 

86 

183 

182

86

266 

238 

307 

387 

449 

841 

202 

101 

106 

137 

161 

288

101

Mean.

363 

434 

388 

710 

735 

551 

244 

120 

116 

160 

166 

199

348

263

302 

590 

893 

835 

1,331 

489 

156 

105 

160 

221 

277

468

362 

280 

413 

472 

1,111 

1,283 

392 

144 

166 

160 

349 

373

459

Total in 

acre-feet.

22,320 

24,103

23,857 

42,247 

45,193 

32,786 

15,003 

7,378 

6,902 

9,838 

9,877 

12,236

251,743

16, 172 

16,772 

36,278 

53,138 

51,342 

79,200 

30,057 

9,592 

6,257 

9,838 

13, 151 

17,032

338,829

22,259 

15,550 

25,394 

28,086 

68,312 

76,344 

24,103 

8,854 

9,878 

9,838 

20, 767 

22,934

332,319

Run-off.

Depth in 

inches.

0.17 

.20 

.20 

.33 

.36 

.26 

.12 

.06 

.06 

.08 

.08 

.09

2.01

.13 

.14 

.29 

.43 

.41 

.63 

.24 

.08 

.05 

.08 

.10 

1.36

3.94

.17 

.13

.21 

22 

'.54 

.61 

.20 

.07 

.08 

.08 

.17 

.18

3.65

Secondfeet per 

square 

mile.

0.15 

.19 

.17 

.30 

.31 

.23 

.10 

.05 

.05 

.07 

.07 

.08

.15

.11 

.13 

.25 

.38 

.36 

.57 

.21 

.07 

.04 

.07 

.09 

1.18

.29

.15 

.13 

.18 

.20 

.47 

.55 

.17 

.06 

.07 

.07 

.15 

.16

.20

Thirteen-year mean of the discharge of Kern River, as compiled from the foregoing 

records of the State engineering department and the United States Geological 

Survey.

Season and year.

1878-1879...................................... .........................

1879-1880... .......................................................... ..

1880-1881-...................... .................... ..................

1881 1882............. ................................................

1883-1883 ............ ...... ....................... ......................

1883-1884....-.................:.........................................

1894................. ...................... ..............................

1895.. ...... ...... ..-.. . ...... . ......... ..-- .

1896..-........-..-.............. ................................... .

1897........... ................................................. .........

1898.... ............................ ....... ................. .............

1899.... ............ ................ ...._...-. ...-.... .. _..-.

1900. ............ ................. ............ .................. ......

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

514 

1,169 

1,363 

655 

638 

2,422 

737 

1,413 

854 

1,334 

348 

468 

459

936

Acre-feet. 

371,350 

850,361 

915, 751 

476,114 

464,252 

1,756,481 

533,252 

1,023,058 

619,630 

893, 348 

251,743 

338,829 

332,319

678,953
22 EECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVEE, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 

Estimated daily discharge of Kern River for 1900.

Day.

1... .... .....

2

3...--....-..

4............

5............

6............

8............

9............

10............

U...... ......

12............

13 .. .

14............

15............

16.......... .

17............

18... .........

19............

30. ........

31

22

23............

24

26............

27. ...........

38............

39............

30............

31............

July.

First 

Point of 

Measurement.

Sec.-ft.

..........

374.25 

269.00 

274.43 

283.59 

250.55 

329.73 

224.64 

216. 80 

213. 69 

319. 59 

222. 49

Just below 

Tobias 

Creek.

Sec.-ft.

352.58 

344.80 

340.30 

336.20 

337.72 

318.50 

308.18 

208.20 

291.34 

285.40 

282.06

August.

First 

Point of 

Measurement.

Sec.- ft. 

209.08 

190.64 

188.25 

193. 78 

195. 49 

188. 78 

178. 86 

169. 11 

178. 32 

171.89 

159. 38 

161. 24 

157. 67 

149. 18 

140.79 

130.41 

122.57 

116.84 

116. 75 

120.21 

120. 16 

120.38 

121.81 

114.33 

110.85 

109.43 

110. 70 

107.63 

103. 99 

106. 31 

103.18

144. 10

Just below 

Tobias 

Creek.

Sec.-ft. 

334.00 

338.00 

306.20 

253. 90 

244.38 

234.82 

230.62 

330.00 

238. 66 

228.66 

336.14 

226. 50 

236.00 

224. 34 

232.34 

232.34 

313.30 

205.80 

201.50 

198.44 

195. 36 

194. 30 

193. 90 

195.64 

195.00 

193.40 

194.08 

186.00 

187.30 

181.00 

178. 40

232.00

September.

First 

Point of 

Measurement.

Sec.-ft. 

108.31 

115.71 

131. 89 

147.24 

190.01 

159. 17 

156. 86 

241. 23 

221.09 

212. 66 

188.13 

175.33 

174. 77 

170. 70 

170.66 

165. 97 

157.06 

155.60 

151. 98 

146. 16 

138.63 

139.29 

142.05 

144.14 

139. 79 

141.31 

153.44 

155. 78 

151.31 

147.22

166.45

Just below 

Tobias 

Creek.

Sec.-ft. 

212. 80 

310.40 

308.00 

274.28 

256.00 

253.20 

246.40 

244.00 

244.00 

234.82 

232.06 

232.58 

230.44 

222.60 

220.30 

220.00 

213. 76 

214.90 

211. 14 

210. 84 

211.00 

206.58 

206.60 

207.32 

208.90 

208.40 

207. 54 

205.86 

205. 33 

207.10

October.

First 

Point of 

Measurement.

Sec.-ft. 

144.95 

142.44 

141.92 

147.92 

146.64 

154.68 

164. 04 

164.77 

157.39 

153.45 

153.30 

151.08 

153. 02 

156.04 

158.50 

156. 19

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

328.91

Just below 

Tobias 

Creek.

Sec.-ft. 

204.32 

205.20 

208.16 

304.12 

202.80 

202.80 

202.40 

200.80 

201.20 

203.14 

201.80 

201.66 

202.00 

201.20 

201.20 

200.40

Miscellaneous discharge measurements of Kern River and its tributaries.

Date.

1898. 

July 10.... ..

Do.......

Do.. 

Do.......

Do.......

July.........

Do.. .

Do....... 

Do.. 

Aug. 29......

1899. 

Sept.2-.-...

1900. 

Jnnel9. ..... 

June 20......

DoJune 21......

Do.......

Do.......

Do_......

June 23......

Stream.

R^ver. 

.... .do. .......... .....

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

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

River.

River.

River. 

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

.. do. .........

.....do. ............

Basin Creek ..... .... 

South Fork of Kern

South Needles Creek

Locality.

junction with 

South Fork.

tion with North 

Fork.

camp. 

Sec. 6,T.22S.,R.36E.

urement. 

.....do... . ..........

R a n k i n ' s ranch, 

Walkers Basin.

.... .do. ............ ....

.....do...... ...........

At Needles Peak .....

Hydrographer.

 ..do . 

. .do..........

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

... ..do......... .

..... do... ..... ..

.....do. ....

.... .do.... ...... 

.....do. ...... ...

... ..do. ...... ...

... ..do ...... .

..... do .- 

 do...... 

.....do......... .

... ..do... .......

.... .do ...... ....

.... .do..... .....

 ..do. . 

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

, do... .......

Elevation.

Feet.

.... .....

.........

3,200

4,550

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 17 on

199.00

107.00

8.00

13.00

330.00

18.00

10.00 

5.30

115.60

99.22

1.33 

14.18

1,333.17

2.30

2 93

.18

3.45

33

5.83
OLMSTED.] VOLUME. 23

Miscellaneous discharge measurements of Kern River and its tributaries Cont'd.

Date.

1900. 

June 23......

Do ......

Do.......

June 24......

Do.......

June 35......

Do.......

Do.......

Do.......

Do.......

June 27 _ ...

Do.......

Do.......

June 28......

June 29......

Do.......

Do.......

June 30......

Do.......

July 2. ......

Do.......

July3.......

Do.......

Stream.

Tibbetts Creek......

Harris Creek ...._.-.

Onemile Creek ......

North Fork of Kern

River.

.....do.... ............

Creek south of Bald

Mountain. 

North Fork of Kern

River. 

South Fork of Kern

River. 

Tibbetts Creek ......

North Fork of Brush

Creek.

North Fork of Kern?

River.

River.

Neils ditch ..........

Locality.

.....do.................

Kern River.

Lake.

tion with Little 

Kern River.

Lake.

tion 4,000 feet 

above junction with 

South Fork.

T OK Q TJ QK TJi

Kern River.

Hydrographer.

. ....do.. ...... ..

.....do... .......

.....do.... ......

-...-do..-.. _

.....do..........

... ..do.. ....... .

. ....do .......

... ..do.. ....... .

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

.... .do. ........ .

.....do..........

 ..do.. .. 

.....do..........

.....do..........

.....do..........

.....do..........

.... .do. ...... ...

.... .do ......

.... .do.. ........

Elevation.

Feet.

6,560

5,600

7 700

2

non

Discharge.

Sec.-ft.

K. Id

x* rti.

5.07

4.26

81.00

2.87

8.45

4.87

1,154.90

4 72

39.11

17.64

939. 60

3.67

1.80

1.04

8 22

825 25

4 05

11.05

2 38

1.96

7.31

Precipitation in Kern River Basin*

DAUNT. 

[Observer, Mountain Home sawmill.]

Year.

1895-96...........

1896-97. ......

Sept.

0.00

Oct.

0.60

Nov.

0.40

Dec.

1.95

Jan.

11.91

Feb.

0.83

Mar.

5.13

Apr.

11.01

......

May.

1.30

June.

2.70

July.

0.65

Aug.

0.50

KERNVILLE.

[Observer, Stephen Barton, Isabella.]

Season.

1895-96- .

1896-97 .

1897-98....

1898-99 

1899-00....

1900-01 

Sept.

"o.'oo"

0.15

0.04

0.00

0.79

Oct.

Tis

0.38

0.00

0.78

0.10

Nov.

"o.li"

0.00

0.00

0.85

5.09

Dec.

'6~85"

1.28

0.33

0.73

0.00

Jan.

3.52

3.40

0.58

1.95

0.80

......

Feb.

0.00

3.60

0.99

0.19

0.53

------

Mar.

1.54

2.57

0.58

1.89

0.58

......

Apr.

0.86

0.10

T.

0.28

0.52

......

May.

0.00

0.00

0.54

0.25

0.90

......

June.

0.20

0.00

0.00

0.45

0.00

......

July.

2.25

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

......

Aug.

0.05

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

------

Total.

~~I2.~68"~

4.50

5.38

5.69

---------

MOUNT BRECKENRIDGE.

[Observer, G. Otterman.]

Season.

1896-97.... .......

1897 98...........

1898 99...........

Sept.

0.00

Oct.

0.00

Nov.

2.20

Dec.

4.30

Jan.

2.00

1.67

Feb.

4.67

0.94

Mar.

7.72

Apr.

0.00

May.

0.40

June.

0.10

July.

0.00

Aug.

0.00
24 RECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

The rain gage at Daunt is at the Mountain Home sawmill, near the 

divide between Kern and Kaweah rivers, and at an elevation of 6,600 

feet. Kernville is at an elevation of 2,600 feet, and Mount Breckenridge at an elevation of 6,750 feet.

From the diagram (fig. 6) showing synchronous discharge and temperature observations at First Point of Measurement for the months 

of April, May, and June, 1897 the particular season of the year when 

the factor of snow enters prominently into the regimen of the river 

we gather, by connecting the peak points of flow and temperature, 

that ordinarily it requires about forty-seven hours for the stream 

waters to pass from the snow line, about 100 miles up the river, to

Degrees.

5,000 

4,500 

4,000 

3,500 

3,000 

8,500 

8,000 

1,500 

1,000

5,000 

4,500 

4.000 

3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000

5,000 

4,500 

4,000 

3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000

/

*S

i,

^

£

2

A

 .

.",

/

<r>

,A

3

A

/*

A;

J

<r

A

/

/}

y

5

A

, /

X

;''

u

,

W

"

6

:\

'

=t

J \

,.

r

7

(I

^

 ^.

r

j \

*

8

f

=/=

A

.'.

in

3

 .

f\

j \

*f

/I

J

if

10

A

J

*~*

f\

ft

//

n

u

=/°

f\

 \

a

4

!\

f.

V

/j

a

i '

s£

 \

i \

vf

/*

4>/ '

^

r>. "'

w

IS

AI

A

A

A

J

& 

t

/*

ri

j:

I \

 '

la

,';

H

in

 A

^

17

J '

i\

. ' ^

f

-s

/ ^1

e

AJ ^

L

^.

is

r

] 

,x-

-A

li

 ^

/\

Ji\

1

,-.

J ' 

20

r\

^

j '

(\

~

n

^>

*

/'

r^

22

A

_/

,

,/'

.

~

23

*-**

!\

f

J\

.- -'

24

i.

S*

/>

!\

t

21

W

l/

^

26

4

^/

r\ &

b

,*.

"'

Z7

(~

AV

/ 

r\

2ll

X1

/-.

-j\

L

a

Tt

\f

;'

,' '

X

u

A

i

;\

: '

31

^

A

150 

130 

110 

90 

70 

50 

30 

10

150 

130 

110 

90 

70 

50 

30 

10

150 

130 

110 

90 

70 

50 

30 

10

PIG. 6. Diagram showing synchronous discharge and temperature observations at First Point of Measurement. Dotted lines are temperature curves; 

heavy lines are discharge curves.

First Point of Measurement. Under ordinary circumstances the melting of snow below the 7,000-foot contour would accompany a low gage, 

and the mean velocity would of course be relatively slow compared 

with a larger stream. The run-off of the heavy snows would start 

certainly not lower than the 8,500-foot contour, and invariably would 

be accompanied by a general breaking up of winter in the higher 

mountains, resulting in a high gage throughout the entire stream; 

from which we may infer that there is no marked difference in the 

time required for the passage of snow water between points as much 

as 30 miles apart to the canyon mouth. When the spring rise begins 

the mean velocity of the stream waters from the snow line, 60 miles
OLMSTKD.] POWEE POSSIBILITIES. 25

up, to First Point of Measurement must be about 1.90 feet per second. 

When the snow line reaches the 8,500-foot contour, 100 miles upstream, 

the flood velocity is approximately 3.1 feet per second. This 1.2-footper-second play in velocity between high and low snow water gage in 

the stream represents the only data available 'for estimating, even 

crudely, the velocity-slope relations during the remainder of the year.

POWER POSSIBILITIES.

Elevations and distances have been and still are to a certain extent 

assumptions, and were it not that the data in some form is in demand, 

it certainly would be desirable to possess more basic information of 

Kern River Basin before undertaking to even outline the power 

possibilities of the stream. The flood period of the year is May and 

June; the minimum flow occurs in September and October. During 

extremely dry years the flow at First Point of Measurement drops to 

80 second-feet, with a probable mean for the month in which this 

occurs of, say, 100 second-feet.

In the reach between First Point of Measurement and Isabella the 

stream has been affected by losses from evaporation and seepage and 

by increment in flow due to the South Fork, Clear Creek, and other 

small tributaries. The net result of these plus and minus factors is 

estimated to be a loss between these points of 122 second-feet. Calling this loss 120 second-feet, and taking the minimum flow at First 

Point of Measurement (80 second-feet), we have, as the least flow of 

the river at the latter place, 200 second-feet. Between Isabella and 

First Point of Measurement the fall is about 1,900 feet, giving more 

than 42,000 theoretical horsepower. At Isabella the mean flow for 

the full year 1899 was 588 second-feet, for 1898 it was 469 second-feet, 

and for 1897 it was 1,353 second-feet. Below Isabella the topography 

on the right bank is not unfavorable for the construction of a large 

canal, but the immense bowlders which cover the southern and western sides of the Greenhorn Mountains, and which are constantly in 

transit down the slopes, are not an economical factor in canal construction.

Of the total flow of Kern River at First Point of Measurement 

80 per cent passes Funstons on the North Fork, or a point of equal 

elevation (7,050 feet) on the South Fork, which would be about midway between the lower end of Menache Meadows and the mouth of 

Fish Creek. The theoretical power possibilities of the stream below 

these places would be, then, about 500,000 horsepower, which, for a 

watershed of 2,349.3 square miles in an arid region, evidences the 

remarkable advantages of the stream, so far as grades and discharge 

are concerned, for electrical-power development.

The Kern River Company, which has been engaged for the last four 

years in securing rights of way (now approved by the Department of 

the Interior), and in arranging preliminaries incident to the construe-
26 EECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVEE, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 46.

tion of so large a plant, has as yet accomplished nothing in the way 

of actual building. A plan of the reservoir site of the company is 

shown in fig. 7. The diversion works of their power canal will be in

FIG. 7. Plan of reservoir site of Kern Eiver Company. Area, 1,121 acres; storage capacity, 

42,000 acre-feet; height of dam, 73 feet.

the lower end of the town of Kernville, where the river forks. The 

West Fork is to be deepened so that during low stages this branch 

will gather all of the water of the river, and a low training wall, over 

which floods of the river will pass, will be built. The head gate will
OLMSTED.] POWER POSSIBILITIES. 27

be 3,600 feet distant, on bed rock, and of solid masonry. The standard cross section of the canal for the first 10. miles is 25 feet wide at 

bottom, 7.5 feet depth of water, and on a grade of 1.058 feet to the 

mile. At a distance of 4£ miles from the head gate the only considerable structure on the line is encountered the bridge over Kern 

River. After passing that point the cross section of the canal is 

reduced and the grades are increased accordingly.

The plans of the company are based upon a minimum flow of Kern 

River past their diversion works of 400 second-feet. This, considering the storage proposed on Salmon Creek, which is described further 

on, is a conservative estimate for any ordinary series of years, but 

could not have been maintained in 1899-1900, although in nine out of 

ten years it easily could be increased to 500 second-feet. The plans 

are based on an available head at the wheels of 230 feet during 

extreme high water, with an additional head of 40 feet when the river 

is at its minimum stage. Mr. H. Hawgood, the chief engineer of the 

Kern River Company, has designed, as a generating unit, a water 

wheel of 1,500 horsepower; with an alternator of 1,030 kilowatts 

capacity. There are to be nine of these units eight for daily service 

and one to be held in reserve. For the additional 40-foot head possible during low water, there will be a 750-horsepower wheel and one 

550-kilowatt alternator. On this basis, at 110 time would there be 

supplied to the wheels less than 11,200 horsepower. The impulse 

type of wheel would give an efficiency of 80 per cent, the alternators 

an efficiency of 95 per cent, and the step-up transformers an efficiency 

of 98 per cent, thus delivering to the line 8,342 horsepower. Assuming 5 per cent average loss in transmission (a larger allowance than 

the 80-mile carriage of the Southern California Power Company's current indicates is necessary), there would be delivered at the Los Angeles 

power house 7,825 horsepower, and with 98 per cent efficiency in the 

step-down transformers there would be 5,720 kilowatts for daily distribution in the city. This delivery could be increased 50 per cent 

for an hour to take care of the maximum load, which occurs between 

the hours of 5 and 6 p. m. Speaking conservatively, and having in 

mind the ruling rates elsewhere on the Coast, this 7,668 horsepower 

should command 1^ cents per horsepower per hour. During the irrigating season of 1900 the nmnicipality of Los Angeles paid 2.2 cents 

per horsepower per -hour for power registered between the hours of 

11 p. m. and 5 p. m., and 4.4 cents per horsepower per hour for power 

registered between the hours of 5 p. m. and 11 p. m. In large plants 

working eighteen hours a day, and with good bituminous coal at $4 a 

ton, the cost of 1 horsepower per year would be $85, and in small 

plants, where the attendance factor is relatively greater, the cost 

would be $150. At the rate of 1-J- cents the cost of a horsepower per 

year of three hundred and thirteen working days is $75. At this rate 

the gross annual revenue of the plant would be $768,000.
28 RECONNAISSANCE OF KERN RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

The company's estimate of the cost of construction of the plant and 

lines for the transmission of the current to Los Angeles is, approximately, $1,333,000. Using direct-connected motor and centrifugal 

pumps, with 30 feet depth of wheel pit and 20 feet additional lift, and 

assuming the duty of water to be 8 acres per miners' inch, 1.42 horsepower would irrigate 100 acres at the rate of, say, $2.50 per acre per 

annum. This would be on the basis of a 50-foot lift and a rate of 2 

cents per horsepower per hour for the current. The efficiency of 

pumping plants ranges from 20 to 68 per cent frequently plants are 

condemned solely because of a lack of skillful assembling of the units.

Electric motive power possesses many advantages over either steam 

or gasoline plants for pumping water, and in actual cost of service it 

may be questioned whether it is not to be compared with many wellmanaged canal systems of the State. The Kern Land Company has 

twenty-five pumping plants in operation near Bakersfield, each delivering from 1,400 to 2,000 gallons a minute. These plants each consist 

of four wells in a line, sunk to a depth of 80 to 130 feet through strata 

of alluvial loam, clay, and water-bearing sand. The wells are cased 

with galvanized iron, 13 inches in diameter, No. 16 gage, perforated 

with vertical slits opened one-sixteenth of an inch. It was the practice of Mr. Lewis A. Hicks, the engineer in charge of this work, to 

land the casing in clay, and to perforate for all sand below a depth 

of 30 feet. Surface water was generally encountered at about 15 feet. 

In each plant the four wells are 6 feet apart on centers, and by experiment it was found that the flow from the four was generally a little 

more than double that from one. The total lift for most of these 

plants was about 35 feet.

After many experiments to determine the pump best suited to these 

conditions, a centrifugal pump, connected directly to the motor and 

working on a vertical rod, all thoroughly bolted to steel framework, 

was found to give the greatest efficiency and the least trouble in 

operation one attendant looks after ten plants, and there have been 

months when the plants were in operation 98 per cent of the time. 

The farmers under the Kern Land Company's water supply are taxed 

75 cents per acre-foot for irrigating water from these electrically 

driven pumping plants, and as the land requires 2 acre-feet annual 

irrigation the expense is $1.50 per acre per year. It is not probable 

that the rate of 1£ cents per horsepower per hour could be maintained 

in Antelope Valley or farther south in San Fernando Valley for irregular demand, but there is no good reason why a 2-cent rate could not 

be maintained by any of the Kern River companies.

The 68 per cent efficiency obtained in many of the Kern Land Company's plants deserves more than passing notice. In electrically 

driven pumping plants 55 per cent efficiency (reckoned from the 

meter consumption to the foot-pounds raised) is very good, but when 

this is raised to 68 per cent, the method employed to obtain this result
OLMSTED.] POWER POSSIBILITIES. 29

merits a detailed description. The following is quoted from one of 

Mr. Hicks's reports:

The pumps are of the Pit type, provided with 10-inch outlet, automatic balance, 

heavy shaft, and runners of special curvature adapted to the speed and height of 

lift, and a delivery of 5 to 6 cubic feet per second. The bearings are provided 

with sight-feed oil cups, and the feed on the upper bearing is upward against the 

water with which the stuffing-gland chamber is filled. The chamber is provided 

with a gage glass to enable the attendant to note any leak through the packing. 

The pump is bolted to cast-iron pedestal set on a wooden base, and the steel 

angles which support the motor are attached to the same pedestal. The assembling of the pumps and frame was accomplished in the shops, and the completed 

unit was hauled to its destination and lowered into place on the floor of the pit, 

only requiring to be guyed to a perpendicular position in the anchor frame to be 

ready to receive the motor. The adjustment of the thrust of the pump can be 

altered so as to carry the entire weight of the motor and shafting or such portion of 

it as may be desirable. It has been found preferable to separate them with 100 to 

200 pounds down thrust, as there is a tendency to bow out the shaft between 

bearings if it is thrown into compression with resulting vibration. The motor 

is provided with adjusting screws, so that its position in vertical or horizontal 

planes can be easily changed with a hand wrench. The pump, motor, and frame 

constitute a self-contained unit, so that any settlement of foundation does not

Feet. 

SO

^- ^

^

^x-^^

^^

^ 

 

s

^~ "" " ^^ spiS3

Feet. 0 M iuO 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

FIG. 8. Cross section of proposed dam site of Kern River Company on Salmon Creek.

alter the relative position of either machine, and can be quickly rectified, should it 

occur, by guying the frame back to a vertical position. The motors used for this 

installation are the ordinary type of 30-horsepower inductive motor, equipped with 

special end shields to adapt them for vertical use. The oiling is accomplished by 

means of centrifugal force, which is utilized to lift the oil from the inside periphery of a revolving cup to the top of the bearings, whence it returns to the oil cups 

through oil grooves along the shaft. The motors are woujid for a potential of 550 

volts, and as the transformers at these points can be connected up to 605 volts, the 

effective heating overload is greatly reduced.

The Kern River Company's transmission line from the power station 

at the mouth of Clear Creek to Los Angeles would be 105 miles long, 

map measurement, and 108 miles when the vertical departures are 

considered. The line begins at an elevation of 2,450 feet, and its 

southern terminal at Los Angeles is 350 feet above the sea. A number of mountain ranges would be crossed, but a large proportion of 

the line would be over good ground, and it is believed that the highest 

elevation reached (6,500 feet, at Tehachapi) will offer no serious 

obstacles to a daily inspection of the pole line.

A reservoir on Salmon Creek, a tributary of Kern River, is planned 

by the Kern River Company for the storage of 47,000 acre-feet of
30 EECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVEE, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 48.

Water. About 20,000 acres can be made tributary to this intake, and 

it is hoped that with this catchment basin and the precipitation from 

an elevation of 7,700 feet on this divide the resqrvoir will supplement the flow of Kern River to 400 second-feet during the particular season of any year when the normal flow is below that figure. 

Fig. 8 is a cross section -of the dam site on Salmon Creek. It is in a

FIG. 9. Plan of reservoir site of Kern-Rand Electric Power Company. Area, 3,562 acres; storage capacity,63,723 acre-feet; height of dam, 65 feet above stream bed.

granite canyon, with clean bed rock on bottom and sides. The width 

.at the bottom is 125 feet between walls; the top width at the 75-foot 

level would be 390 feet. A rock-fill dam is estimated to require 26,000 

.cubic yards of material and to cost $80,000. 1

The utilization of the higher reaches of Kern River for power 

purposes will certainly be accomplished in time, but for the present,

-1 Reservoirs for Irrigation, Water Power, and Domestic Water Supply, by «J. D. Schuyler.
OLMSTED.] POWER POSSIBILITIES 31

and with the disinclination of electrical engineers to recommend 

the transmission of power to distances greater than 100 miles, it is 

doubtful whether the market outside of Los Angeles will warrant 

the outlay; and the latter city is so far away from the upper river as

FIG. 10. Plan of dam site of Kern^Rand Electric Power Company.

to preclude, for the present at least, supplying it with power from 

that source.

The Kern-Rand Electric Power Company, of Los Angeles, purposes 

to construct a rock-fill dam on the South Fork of Kern River, at 

JMenache Meadows, and an initial power station near the upper end
32 BECOlSHSTAISSAlSrCE OF KEEN EIVEE, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

At

*s§§

<D $

& s 3 "- 

a a 

a o

60 4i

of South Fork Valley, about 35 miles farther down the stream.

cf,® some recent o"g logical time Menache Meadows 

must have been an 

immense mountain 

lake. A dam 65 

feet high would 

throw the water 

back 6 miles from 

the canyon mouth, 

in two arms 6 miles 

apart. A dam of 

that height would 

store 63,700 acrefeet of water at a 

mean depth of 18 

feet. There is no 

question that in 

an ordinary year 

the drainage area 

tributary to the 

South Fork and 

above the Meadows (165 square 

miles) would furnish ample storage water for this 

reservoir, a 1 - 

though it is probable that in a season like that of 

1899-1900 there 

would be a shortage. There is no 

reliable data for 

determining the 

minimum precipitation in Meiiache 

Meadows, for generally the snows 

lie so deep over 

the mountains 

surrounding the 

basin as to

_ make it impenetrable during at least the colder half of the year.

O ft fe «

o §

 H 0

IS £

fe ft

<M S

S

il 

5?
OLMSTED.] POWER POSSIBILITIES.

Capacity of Menache Meadows reservoir site.

33

Height above base of dam.

Feet. 

l<d .....................................

20... ...................................

SO.......................... ...........

4^. .................................. ...

50.......... ............................

60 ......................................

70......................................

80............... ....... .........

100. .....................................

Surface 

area.

Acres. 

22

146

812

1,865

2,599

3,254

3,814

4,420

5,830

Capacity.

Acre-feet. 

110

954

4,563

18,827

40,732

i9,885

105,236

146,419

248,852

Fig. 9 is a plan of the reservoir site of the Kern-Rand Electric 

Power Company in Menache Meadows, fig. 10 is a plan of the darn 

site, and figs. 11, 12, and 13 are details of the dam proposed. The 

material at the dam site is apparently hard granite, overlain with 

earth, sand, and gravel. The dam site is at an elevation of 8,200 feet 

above the sea, and consequently snow and frost prevail there during 

the winter months. There is no wagon road to the dam site, and the 

cost of making one would add very materially to the cost of the dam. 

The drainage area tributary to this reservoir being all above an elevation of 8,200 feet, naturally has the greater part of its precipitation in 

the form of snow. This makes the run-off an uncertain quantity, and 

leaves the proper height for the dam a difficult question to decMe.

Taking all of these considerations into account, the engineers of 

the company were led to select a loose rock-fill dam faced with earth 

as the most economical and serviceable for the locality. On account 

of the possible action of frost, flatter slopes were given the rock faces 

than are absolutely necessary to make the dam heavy enough to 

resist the water pressure. So far as possible, the material found in 

the immediate vicinity of the dam will be used in its construction, 

and the outlet, gates, and connections have been designed so that all 

of their parts can easily be transported on mules over a steep mountain trail. The crest of the dam was fixed at 65 feet above the natural surface of the ground at the dam site. This height can, however, 

be increased to 95 feet, if it is found that a larger reservoir capacity 

could be supplied, at a proportionate increase in cost. It is proposed 

to excavate all of the rock required in the construction of the dam on 

the north side, forming'a suitable wasteway in the solid rock, capable 

of discharging a stream of water 100 feet wide and 9 feet deep at a 

velocity of 6 feet per second a volume of 5,400 cubic feet per second, 

As each foot rise of water over the bottom of the wasteway represents about 5,000 acre-feet, 9 feet rise of water in the wasteway would 

increase the volume in the reservoir to 45,000 acre-feet. This, in 

addition to the water running through the wasteway and outlet, 

would make more than 50,000 acre-feet, which, if it all came in 

twenty-four hours, would represent a run-off of about 5^ inches. It

IRR 46 01 3
34 RECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVEB, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 46.

is believed that a wasteway of this size would make the dam absolutely safe against any possibility of the water ever flowing over the 

top. The capacity of the reservoir with a dam 65 feet high, as now

FIG. 12. Vertical section of tower for dam proposed by Kern-Rand Electric Power Company, showing arrangement of gates.

proposed, would be 63,700 acre-feet; and if the dam were raised hereafter to a height of 85 feet the capacity of the reservoir would be 

nearly trebled.
OLMSTED.] POWEB POSSIBILITIES. 35

It is proposed to take the water from the reservoir by means of a 

tunnel through the solid rock on the south side of the dam. The 

masonry or concrete tower (see figs. 11, 12, and 13) is designed as an 

inlet to this tunnel and to accommodate the placing of the gates in

FIG. 13. Sectional elevation and plan of gate tower for dam proposed by 

Kern-Rand Electric Power Company.

the most simple and economical manner. The gates are so simple 

and so easily opened and closed that it has not been considered necessary to provide for their repair under a full head of water in the 

reservoir. Fig. 12, however, shows a simple and economical way of
36 RECONNAISSANCE OF KERN RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

shutting off the water after it has fallen to an elevation of 8,260 feet, 

or 35 feet above the base of the dam. This would prevent the necessity of emptying the reservoir for the purpose of making repairs to 

the gates.

Following are the estimates for three sizes of the dam proposed :

Estimate of cost of a 75-foot dam with slopes 1 to 1 and f to 1.

Loose rock, 73,000 cubic yards; or 43,800 cubic yards solid

atfl.50 ......................................... ----- $65,700.00

Earth, 55,870 cubic yards at $0. 25 ........................ 13,967.50

Extra labor on 5,000 cubic yards laid by hand, at $1 ------- 5, 000. 00

Tunnel, 350 feet at $12 .._..____._._____.__.___.-.-_-...._. 4,200.00

Tower, gates, and connections -....- ......--....--....-. 15,000.00

Guide walls, etc., at wasteway. ................ .......... 15,000.00

118, 867. 50 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent. ....-.-...-..- 11, 886. 75

-..-..-..-.-.-....--...-.. .................. 130,754.25

Estimate of cost of 75-foot dam with slopes 1\ to 1 and £ to L

Loose rock, 91,000 cubic yards; or 54,600 cubic yards solid

at $1.50 ............................................... $81,900.00

Earth, 55,870 cubic yards at $0. 25 ........... ............ 13,967.50

Extra labor on 6,000 cubic yards laid by hand, at $1 ------- 6, 000. 00

Tunnel, 350 feet at $12 ....... .............. ...^.. ........ 4,200.00

Tower, gates, and connections ... .......--...---.-...-.. 15,000.00

Guide walls, etc. . at wasteway . -...........---....--..--. 15, 000. 00

136, 067. 50 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent ............... 13, 606. 75

Total.. ........................... _................. 149,674.25

Estimate of sost of 95- foot 'dam with slopes 1 to 1 and f to 1.

Loose rock, 110,000 cubic yards; or 66,000 cubic yards solid at 

$1.50.....-......-.-.-...............--....-..----...-.---- $99,000

Earth, 70, 000 cubic yards at $0.25.. ................... ----- 17,500

Extra labor on 7,000 cubic y ards, at $1.... .--..---- ......... 7,000

Tunnel, 350 feet at $12 ......................... ........... 4,200

Tower, gates, and connections, with bridge to tower. ........ 17, 000

Guide walls, etc., at wasteway .............. ........----.-.. 20, 000

164, 700 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent .......--.--..-... 16, 470

Total................................... -----.....--. 181,170

The foregoing estimates are based on the supposition that the rock 

will be hard enough to stand vertically around the tower and that the 

tunnel will not need lining.

The transmission line from the power plant in sec. 14, T. 25 S., R.
OLMSTED.] . POWEE POSSIBILITIES. 37

35 E., M. D. M., to Randsburg, 43 miles distant, would be over as fine 

a country for a pole line as can well be found easy slopes, virtually 

unimproved and without tree growth. With very few exceptions a 

wagon could be driven, without road work, along the transmission 

line from the power plant to Randsburg. The highest elevation 

reached on the pole line would be at Walkers Pass, 5,320 feet above 

sea level, and at that point the snow lasts only a few days and would 

never interfere with the regular patrol of the line.

The following is an approximate estimate of the cost of generating 

and transmitting electric current from the South Fork power house, 

for a delivery in Randsburg of 900 horsepower, with conduit and poleline capacity for 450 additional horsepower:

Estimate of cost of generating and transmitting electric current from South Fork 

power house to Randsburg.

Diversion in bed rock and 100 feet of rock channel..-,.....-. $4,000

Regulating gate ..-_..-.._......... .....................'... 1,000

Riveted-steel pipe, 8,000 feet of 30-inch, gage No. 12, at £.2.70. 21,600

Pipe work in canyon, 8,000 feet............................. . 10,000

Flume, 3,500 feet at $3..-. ........... ........................ 10,500

Tunnel, 1,300 feet at $10 .......................... ...._..... 13,000

Canal in earth, 3,000 feet, with concrete lining .............. 6,750

Canal in rock, 1,594 feet at $1.50 per foot run................ 2,391

Siphon, 1,000 feet at $3 ................ ..................... 3,000

Penstock, 4,000 feet at $4 ..............................._... 16,000

Water wheels .............................................. 6,000

Power houses, two, fireproof ......-,....-.......--._..-..-- 6,000

Wire for transmitting current, 900 horsepower, delivered 43

miles...... ..-....-...-. ................................. 13,000

Telephone.....-.._............._.-...................-....- 2,000

Line poles (43 miles, 40 to the mile), and placing same....... 20,000

Electric machinery .......................................... 30,000

Distribution of current at Randsburg .._.._.. _.___...-.-..-. 5,000

170,241 

Contingencies, 15 per cent........-.--.......-.....--.-..-.. 24, 536

Total................................................. 195,777

A landslide has blocked the canyon and created a lake of about 40 

acres area on the North Fork of Kern River just below the mouth of 

Whitney Creek and above the mouth of the Little Kern. This lake, 

known as Kern Lake, the California State engineering department, in 

its investigations of the Kern River drainage basin, has considered as a 

possible reservoir site. At the lower end of the lake the cliffs tower 

almost vertically above it to heights ranging from 2,000 to 3,000 feet, 

and estimates have been made for the blasting of large fragments into 

the dam site, forming a loose rock-fill dam. The capacity of the 

reservoir at the 220-foot level would be 46,000 acre-feet. The State
38 RECONNAISSANCE OF KEEN EIVEE, CALIFOENIA. LNO. 46.

engineering department considered the possibility of paving the mass 

of rock thus thrown down to a uniform surface and covering it with 

asphalt. The width of the canyon at the site is only 100 feet at the 

bottom and 400 feet at a height of 230 feet above the stream bed. 

There would be no question about the ability of the drainage basin 

to fill the reservoir annually, and if it is possible to construct such a 

dam at this place the site probably would be of value for replenishing the late summer flow for power and irrigation.
RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA RIVER, 

CALIFORNIA.

By MARSDEN MANSON.

WATERSHED.

Yuba River is a tributary of Feather River, which it enters at Marysville, 30 miles above its mouth. It drains about 1,357 square miles 

of the western slope of the Sierra Nevada, comprising portions of 

Sierra, Nevada, Plumas, and Yuba counties. The extreme length 

of the watershed is about 60 miles, the extreme width 36 miles. In 

addition to the length given there are about 11 miles of channel in 

the valley between the foothills and Feather River. In size Yuba 

River is fourth in the Sacramento Valley. Its extreme low-water discharge is about 360 cubic feet per second, 1 its mean winter discharge 

1,500 cubic feet per second, and its flood discharge 26,000 cubic 

feet per second. 2 For the lower 10 miles of its course in the foothills the river is greatly clogged with debris from hydraulic-mining 

camps (estimated at many million cubic yards), and is between levees 

which have been raised from year to year to meet the overflow caused 

by the filling up of the area between them. The channel of the river in 

the lower foothills has been filled with cobbles and gravel to a depth of 

more than 100 feet. (See PL IV, B. ) From the foothills to the mouth 

of the river at Marysville the channel is over a surface of gravel, 

sand, and clay, recently built up from the mines above. The channels are irregular and change from winter to winter and sometimes 

during the summer. It is therefore impracticable to establish lowwater gaging stations which would serve for more than one summer 

and fall and which would be suitable for winter or flood-stage gagings.

1 This is not as small as the natural discharge would be. The large mining companies the 

South Yuba Canal Company, the North Bloomfleld Gravel and Mining Company, the Milton 

Excelsior Water and Mining Company, the Eureka Lake and Yuba Canal Company, and others 

store large volumes of water during the winter and spring months for use during periods of low 

water in the late summer and the early autumn.

8 Extreme flood discharge estimated by Mr. Hubert Vischer, Asst. Engr., U. S. Engrs., at 

135,000 cubic feet per second. H. B. Doc. No. 431, Fifty-sixth Congress, second session, p. 12.

39
40 RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

The changes in the bottom and in the position of the channel are so 

great that the gagings at the flood stages of the river would be unsatisfactory, and if undertaken from boats would be highly dangerous, 

if not impossible.

The drainage basin is subdivided into five small basins, namely, 

North Fork, with a drainage area of 491.6 square miles; Middle Fork, 

with a drainage area of 218 square miles; South Fork, with a drainage area of 360 square miles; Deer Creek, with a drainage area of 

89.6 square miles; and Dry Creek, with a drainage area of 105.5 square 

miles. In addition to these an area of 92.5 square miles drains into 

the main stream above the 100-foot contour. Dry Creek joins Yuba 

River from the north just as it leaves the foothills. The other streams 

unite in the mountains. The forks are perennial in flow, but the

Gaging Stations:

I Yuba/fiver at farfts Bar Bridge 

Z Middle Fork at freeman's Bridge 

3 Worth for It above Yuba Power Cds Oan 

4- North For* at OoivnteviS/e

FIG. 14. Map of Yuba River, showing location of gaging stations.

discharge of the two creeks mentioned (Deer and Dry) becomes 

insignificant in the late summer and early autumn.

As they merge into the valley the Sierra foothills have an elevation 

of about 100 feet above tide. The watershed rises gently, in rounded 

and broken mountains, to the crest of the Sierra, which at the headwaters of the Yuba is at a mean elevation of about 8,200 feet, with 

peaks rising to a height of 9,100 feet. From Mount Lincoln a peak 

common to the watersheds of Yuba, American, and Truckee rivers 

to a point about 2| miles northeast of Mount Webber, the summit of 

the Sierra divides the watershed of Yuba River from that of Truckee 

River, which discharges into Humboldt Basin. Farther north from 

Mount Webber there is a secondary crest which divides the watersheds of Yuba and Feather rivers, the watershed of the latter stream 

reaching farther east, to a less elevated divide in which the passes 

are lower than those of the easterly crest.
U. S. GEOLO3ICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 46 PL. IV

A. HEAD OF SOUTH FORK OF YUBA RIVER AND LAKE SPAULUINli

B. YUBA RIVER IN THE FOOTHILLS
MANSON.] TOPOGRAPHY. 41

TOPOGRAPHY.

The western and lower portions of the drainage area are composed 

of slates and kindred rock, very much eroded and merging into the 

gravel and alluvial deposits of the great valley of California. The 

upper portions of the basin are composed principally of lavas and 

granites, all deeply eroded, particularly the lavas. Some idea of the 

magnitude of the erosion may be obtained when it is considered that 

it has required at least 4,000 (possibly 6,000) cubic miles of denuded 

materials to fill the great valley of California to its present level, and 

that most of this has come from the Sierra Nevada.

A stratum of serpentine traverses the watershed of Yuba River in 

a direction generally parallel with the crest of the Sierra. It is intersected by the North Fork at Goodyears Bar, by the Middle Fork 

near Moores Flat, and by the South Fork just east of Washington, 

and leaves the drainage basin of the Yuba, passing near Towle Station on the Central Pacific Railroad. This stratum is generally softer 

and more easily eroded than adjoining strata, and through it the canyons of the various forks are upon lighter grades than immediately 

above and below, and they generally are wider. This softer material 

also controls the loci of longer and more deeply eroded tributaries, 

which afford approaches to the main canyons for roads and trails. 

This stratum is of further interest because it is the dividing line 

between the auriferous strata in the watershed. To the west of it the 

mines are more extensive, the occurrences of gold-bearing rock to the 

east being irregular and difficult to trace.

The middle and upper portions of the watersheds of the three forks 

differ materially. The North Fork rises in lavas which vary much in 

composition and hardness, but which generally afford a deep soil for 

timber and shrub growth. The Middle Fork rises in similar lavas 

and in granite. The mean elevation of the crest of the Sierra at the 

head of these forks is about 8,200 feet. The main and tributary 

streams fall rapidly, and their canyons head well up in the mountains. 

The sides of these canyons are covered with timber and brush, which, 

with the deep soil, retain the moisture and feed numerous perennial springs. (See PL Y, A.) In the case of the North Fork this 

is particularly noticeable. The forests of its watershed make it a 

reliable and constant stream. The mean annual precipitation upon 

the watersheds of the North and Middle forks is about 54 inches. 

Warm rains on soft snow sometimes give a high flood run-off, but 

snow remains 011 the higher peaks until midsummer. Reservoir sites 

are not numerous; they will be mentioned later. The headwaters of 

the South Fork lie upon a broad granite surface, into which the streams 

have not cut deeply until the main stream reaches a point 16 miles 

from the summit, where it drops rapidly into a deeply eroded canyon. 

The eastern or upper edge of the drainage area has a mean elevation 

about the same as the other forks, but the 5,000-foot contour is about
42 KECONNAISSANCE OP YUBA KIVER, CALIFOENIA. FNO. 46.

20 miles to the westward. This broad surface has been denuded by 

glacial action, and the harder nature of the granite has not permitted 

a deep soil to form. The area is therefore less heavily timbered than 

the' drainage areas of the other two forks, and its accessibility has 

caused it to suffer more severely from the ax of the lumberman. 

This topography gives a broader and more gently sloping surface 

than characterizes the headwaters of other Sierra Nevada streams. 

The surface is marked by nearly 100 glacial lakelets and valleys, 

affording many excellent reservoir sites which have been or are being 

utilized. This elevated watershed receives a mean annual precipitation of 60 inches, most of which is in the form of snow. The slow 

melting of the snow maintains the discharge of tributaries until June 

or July, which, with the natural and artificial reservoirs, makes the 

South Fork of the Yuba a highly valuable and reliable source of 

water supply.

NATURAL STORAGE OF WATER IN YUBA RIVER BASIN.

Precipitation upon the drainage basin of Yuba River is dependent 

upon the southerly or winter extension of the north temperate rain 

belt. During the summer months the more northerly position of this 

belt leaves California in the comparatively rainless region between 

the north temperate and equatorial rain belts. The rains and snows, 

therefore, fall from October to April', with little or no rainfall of 

moment from May to September, so that during the latter months the 

streams depend upon either natural or artificial storage. Natural 

storage is by snow and the slow run-off of water retained in afforested 

and brush-covered soils. On the South Fork artificial storage has 

reached a very effective stage. The. precipitation ranges from 20 

inches at Marysville, in the valley, to 70 inches at the summit of the 

Sierra. 1

Snow storage of water is depended on during the latter part of April 

and into July, the run-off until June being superabundant for all purposes, but in July it begins to fall below the necessities of dependent 

industries, and it remains below until the autumnal rains occur. Snow 

storage has been made a subject of extended observation by Mr. 

W. F. Englebright, chief engineer of the South Yuba Canal Company, 

through whose courtesy the writer has been enabled to prepare a most 

instructive diagram of the accumulation, depth, and rate of melting of 

snow at"Lake Fordyce (fig. 15). This lake has an elevation of 6,500 

feet above tide level, and is in a region over which the annual precipitation in rain and melted snow is 70 inches. Snow begins to accumulate 

late in November, and reaches its maximum depth in packed snow in 

March. During the winter months the lower readings on the gage rod 

following higher readings generally indicate a packing of the snow.

1 These figures are taken from a, map prepared, under the writer's direction, for the California 

Water and Forest Association, showing the drainage areas, the mean annual rainfall, and the 

distribution of forests throughout the State.
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 46 PL. V

4. CANYON OF MIDDLE FORK OF YUBA RIVER

. MIDDLE FORK OF YUBA RIVER NEAR FREEMAN'S CROSSING
MANSON.] NATUEAL STOEAGE. 43

Melting begins in March and continues quite regularly until the middle of June or early July. Short storms during April and May cause 

offsets in the curve, which resumes a parallel line. A series of cold and 

heavy storms in April, 1896, caused the snow to last until July 5, while 

the clear, warm spring of 1897 caused it to disappear on June 7.

During the latter half of April, by means of daily reports by telephone-, Mr. Englebright is enabled, through diagrams upon a larger 

scale, to approximate to within a few days the duration of the snow 

supply and the beginning of the draft on the reservoirs. Data and 

studies of this kind are very valuable, and suggest the importance of 

stations above the snow line as a means of determining the volume of 

snow storage available at different seasons and the ratio between the 

volume stored by snow and that stored by reservoirs. The discharge 

of the streams is maintained by snow during the spring and for half of

A

FIG. 15. Diagram showing depth of snow at Lake Fordyce.

the summer months, and the volume and rate of the discharge can be 

foretold with reasonable accuracy by daily readings of gages properly 

located.

ARTIFICIAL STORAGE POSSIBILITIES.

The natural facilities for the storage of storm waters are particularly favorable in the upper third of the drainage basin of the South 

Fork. The demands for large volumes of water under high pressure 

to operate the mines in the middle and lower portions of that drainage basin and those on Bear and American rivers were met by the 

construction of large and expensive canals and storage reservoirs. 

Just above the great bend north of the head of Bear River and at the 

head of the steep cannon of the South Fork is a broad, flat, glacial 

valley which has been converted into a lake by the construction of a 

stone dam. This lake, known as Lake Spaulding and shown in PL 

IV, A, has a capacity of 270,000,000 cubic feet, and is the lower and 

controlling reservoir of a series embracing the available storage and
44 RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA EIVEE, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

supply above. This supply is derived from about 120 square miles, 

upon which the mean annual precipitation in rain and melted snow 

is about 5 feet. The following is a list of the storage reservoirs:

Storage reservoirs in Yuba River Basin.

Name of reservoir.

Stirling...................................

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

Elevation.

Feet. 

7,515

7,300

7 000

6^900

6,500

7 000

7 000

4,' 846

6,800

4,400

Area.

Acres. 

300

100

80

150

474

(«)

171

215

400

60

1,950

Capacity.

Oallons. 

1,275,000,000

340,000,000

235,000,000

1,275,000,000

5,950,000,000

85,000,000

1,030,000,000

2,135,000,000

1,938,816,000

145,411,200

614,409,337,200

Cost of 

dam.

$75.000

30,000

5.000

(a)

300 000

(a)

(a)

50,000

30,000

8,000

478,000

a Records lost. 61,931,230,393 cubic feet.

The aggregate area of these reservoirs is 3.05 square miles, and they 

are filled to an average depth of 22.5 feet, thus giving storage for 

about 12 per cent of the mean annual precipitation upon the tributary area, the remainder going to waste and to swell the floods which 

devastate the valley. It is possible, by raising the dams and enlarging the canals, to utilize a considerable additional portion of the precipitation. The conditions favorable to the conservation of water on 

the upper third of the drainage basin of the South Fork are far greater 

than in the lower two-thirds of that basin or in the basin of the other 

forks.

On the upper portion of Canyon Creek, a tributary of the South 

Fork, the Eureka Lake and Yuba Canal Company and the North 

Bloomfield Gravel and Mining Company have the following storage 

reservoirs:

Storage reservoirs on upper portion of Canyon Greek.

Name of reservoir.

Fall Creek......

Faucherie Lake

Eureka Lake - - -

Total......

Area.

Acres. 

500.0

80.6

26.2

48.8

11.2

10.3

8.1

20.0

90.0 

83.5

337.3

Height.

Feet. 

100.0

39.2

10.0

13.8

12.0

3.0

11.0

5.0

21.0 

21.8

68.2

Top 

length.

Feet. 

425

550

250

Barometric elevation.

Feet. 

5,450

5,780

6,410

6,690

6,460

6,510

6,590

6,690

5,410

6,060

6,480

Catchment 

area.

Acres. 

12,093

3,262

3,170

Capacity.

Cubic feet. 

930,000,000

2,000,000

3,423,816

23,037,558

2,395,800

1, 60(1, 000

2,906,630

15,000,000

58,000,000 

150, 000, 000

661,000,000

1,849,354,804

Cost.

$151,521

expended on

voirs, $246,000.

8,000

35,000

The drainage area tributary to these reservoirs is 28.4 square 

miles, and it receives a total precipitation during an average year of
U. B. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 46 PL. VI

A. ENGLISH RESERVOIR ON MIDDLE FORK OF YUBA RIVER.

SMALL DAM OF ENGLISH RESERVOIR.
MANSON.] ARTIFICIAL STORAGE POSSIBILITIES. 45

4,589,481,600 cubic feet, 1,849,354,804 cubic feet of which is stored, or 

between one-third and one-half of the mean annual precipitation.

On the Middle Fork there are no reservoirs storing water at the 

present time. The only site of any importance is that of the Ruyard 

or English reservoir (see PL VI), which has not been in use since 

the failure of the dam in June, 1883. This site has a capacity of 

650,000,000 cubic feet. Weaver Lake is on the watershed of the Middle Yuba, but its catchment area is not large enough to fill it, so it is 

supplied from the Eureka Lake and Yuba Canal Company's ditch 

from Canyon Creek, a tributary of the South Yuba, and is included 

in the foregoing list. At Milton there is a reservoir site with an estimated capacity of 28,000,000 cubic feet. The total storage capacity 

on the Middle Yuba may be considered to be 678,000,000 cubic feet.

On the North Fork are the dam and headworks of the Browns Valley Irrigation District. (See PL VII.) The dam is a well-built crib 

structure, about 167 feet long 011 the crest, with a maximum height of 

37 feet. The head gates are in concrete. For several miles above 

the dam the river bed is covered with gravel, sand, and cobbles on a 

grade slightly less than that of the original stream. This is a feature 

common to dams upon streams carrying mining debris. The dam 

thus acts as a retaining wall as well as an overflow weir. Leakage 

through the debris and dam is slight. The head gates open into a 

flume 5 feet by 7 feet, on a grade of 13 feet to the mile, and built to 

carry 300 second-feet of water. The greater portion of the water 

diverted is used to develop power at the Colgate and Browns Valley 

power stations of the Bay Counties Power Company, lessees of the 

Browns Valley Irrigation District rights. This power is transmitted 

to Marysville, Oroville, Wheatland, Nevada City, Grass Valley, and 

Sacramento. These plants are synchronized with one on the South 

Yuba, about 7 miles distant.

On the North Fork there are the following small lakes, which might 

be developed to an aggregate storage capacity of 500,000,000 cubic 

feet:

Reservoir sites on the North Fork.

Name of lake.

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

Area.

Acres. 

38.0

40.0

9.0

2.5

7.0

2.5

5.0

30.0

50.0

11.0

16.0

27.0

3.0

241.0
46 RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA EIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

Assuming that artificial storage on the North Fork and the Middle 

Fork could be developed to a capacity equal to that above the Lake 

Spaulding dam, there would then be in service an area of 6.8 square 

miles with water at an average depth of 26.4 feet, or 5,692,000,000 

cubic feet. The mean annual precipitation in the drainage basin of 

Yuba River is 170,829,000,000 cubic feet. The total ultimate artificial storage is less than 3.3 per cent of this precipitation, and could 

hardly be recognized in a gaging of the total run-off. Moreover, in 

the storage of water -for industrial purposes the uncertainty of the 

character of the seasonal rainfall makes it prudent and desirable to 

permit the reservoirs to fill during the earlier rains, and not leave the 

husbanding of a supply to possible succeeding rains. Hence it generally happens that when the heavy storms of the late winter and 

spring months occur the reservoirs are full and the flood wave passes 

down without being diminished by the reservoirs. This is also true 

to a limited extent of regions above the snow line, where the unmelted 

snow constitutes a reservoir of far greater capacity than ordinarily is 

obtained by building dams. It happens that when late warm rains or 

rapid melting of the snows occurs the reservoirs are already full, and 

consequently do not diminish the flood volume.

It would appear, therefore, that however useful artificial reservoirs 

are for domestic and industrial purposes they can not be relied upon, 

except under unusual conditions, to decrease the heights of late winter and spring floods, and we must look elsewhere for a solution of 

that problem.

COMPARISON OF LOW-WATER DISCHARGE FROM A TIMBERED AREA 

WITH THAT FROM A COMPARATIVELY TREELESS AREA.

On the south fork of the North Fork-- is a watershed area of 139 

square miles, which was gaged on September 19, 1900, after three successive seasons of deficient rainfall, and gave a minimum run-off of 

113 second-feet, or 0.8 second-foot per square mile. This area is 

well covered with timber and brush, and in 120 days it gives a minimum run-off of 1,441,152,000 cubic feet.

The drainage basin of the North Fork is more heavily timbered than 

the basins of the other forks, and consequently it has a deeper soil, 

and, although only one-tenth of the total drainage area, it furnishes 

75 per cent of the low-water flow of the entire drainage basin above 

Parks Bar.

On the south fork above Lake Spaulding there is a watershed of 

120 square miles, which has heretofore been described as comparatively barren of timber, the timbered areas which once existed having 

been denuded. (See PI. VIII, A.) The run-off of this area is practically nothing for 120 days of the year, due to the absence of forests and
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER HO. 46 PL. VII

A. BROWNS VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT DAM FROM ABOVE

B. BROWNS VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT DAM FROM BELOW
MANSON.] DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS. 47

brush. If this area were afforested and gave a minimum run-off of 

0.8 second-foot per square mile, the discharge would be 100 second-feet, 

equivalent to an effective storage capacity of 1,036,800,000 cubic feet. 

.This minimum low-water discharge of 100 second-feet for 120 days 

is equivalent to more than half the storage capacity of all the reservoirs above Lake Spaulding dam, which aggregate 1,375,000,000 cubic 

feet. As the basis of this estimate is extreme low-water discharge, 

it may be assumed that by afforesting the watershed this costly and 

extensive system of reservoirs could safely be drawn upon for double 

their present capacity. As what is true of portions of the watershed 

is true of the watershed as a whole, aggregating as it does 1,357 

square miles, the value of afforesting the area becomes apparent.

It appears to the writer that the solution of the problem of storage 

of flood waters is not the retention of a small percentage of the storm 

waters behind dams, but the application of storage over the entire 

watershed by the systematic protection and extension of forest-covered and brush-covered areas.

DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS OF YUBA RIVER A1STD ITS

TRIBUTARIES.

The accompanying tables of low-water discharge measurements of 

Yuba River and its forks are based upon observations and gagings

FIG. 16. Curve showing relation of gage height to discharge of Yuba River.

made by Mr. H. D. H. Connick, under the direction of the writer, 

during the months of June, July, August, September, and October, 

1900. The precipitation during the wet season preceding these gagings was about two-thirds to three-fourths of the mean annual rain-
48 EECOJSTNAISSANCE OF YUBA EIVEE, CALIFOENIA. [NO. 46.

fall. The precipitation during the two preceding wet seasons was 

still further below the normal.

The location of the gaging stations is shown on the map, fig. 14, 

page 40. The gagings were made with a large Price meter furnished 

by the United States Geological Survey. The usual method was pursued, namely, the cross section was divided into subsections of 5 feet 

each, and the velocities were observed for three minutes for each foot 

of depth. The integral of the discharges thus ascertained divided by 

the total cross-sectional area determined the mean velocity. The 

volumes thus determined for various stages were platted as a curve 

of discharge, using gage heights and discharges as ordinates, from 

which curve intermediate discharges were estimated to fill out the 

tables. For discharge curves, see figs. 16, 17, and 18.

Daily discharge of Yuba River at Parks Bar Bridge during the month of July,

1900.

Day.

1.... .........

2.............

3.............

4.............

5. ...... ...

6.............

7.............

8.............

9.............

10......... ...

11.............

12.............

13.............

14.............

15.............

16.............

17.............

18.............

19... ..........

20.. ...........

21

22

33.............

24.. ...........

25.............

26..... ........

37.............

28.............

29.............

30.............

31....... ......

Total...

Gage height.

6 a.m.

Feet. 

2.90 

2.90 

3.10 2.80' 

2.70 

2.60 

2.60 

2.70 

2.60 

2.60 

2.70 

2.70 

2.70 

2.60 

2.60 

2.50 

2.50 

2.50 

2.40 

2.40 

2.40 

2.40 

2.40 

3.50 

3.50 

8.40 

3.40 

3.40 

3.40 

3.30 

3.30

6 p.m.

Feet. 

2.80 

2.90 

2.90 

2.70 

2.80 

2.70 

2.80 

2.70 

2.60 

2.60 

2.60 

2.50 

2.50 

2.50 

2.50 

2.40 

2.40 

2.40 

2.40 

2.30 

2.30 

2.40 

2.50 

2.40 

2.40 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.40 

2.30

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.85 

2.90 

3.00 

2.75 

2.75 

2.65 

3.70 

2.70 

2.60 

2.60 

2.65 

2.60 

2.60 

2.55 

2.55 

2.45 

2.45 

2.45 

2.40 

2.35 

2.35 

2.40 

2.45 

2.45 

2.45 

2.35 

2.&5 

2.35 

2.35 

2.35 

2.30

Area of 

section.

Square 

feet.

181.5 

180.0 

171.1

163.6 

173.3 

169.3

Mean velocity.

Feet per 

second.

4.52 

4.50 

4.39

3.80 

3.91 

3.97

Discharge.

Secondfeet. 

970.0 

1,030.0 

1,100.0 

890.0 

890.0 

810.0 

850.0 

850.0 

775.0 

775.0 

820.8 

810.5 

773.8 

730.0 

730.0 

660.0 

660.0 

660.0 

620.0 

580.0 

580.0 

622.2 

685.8 

672.7 

660.0 

' 580.0 

580.0 

580.0 

580.0 

580.0 

545.0

Cubic feet per 

%U hours. 

83,808,000 

88,128,000 

95,040,000 

76,896,000 

76,896,000 

69,984,000 

73,440,000 

73,440,000 

66,960,000 

66,960,000 

70,917,120 

70,027,200 

66,856,320 

63,072,000 

63,073,000 

57,024,000 

57,024,000 

57,024,000 

53,568,000 

50,112,000 

50,112,000 

53,758,080 

59,253,130 

57,025,280 

57,024,000 

50,112,000 

50,112,000 

50,112,000 

50,112,000 

50,112,000 

47,088,000

1,955,059,000
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER NO. 46 PL. VIII

A. SECOND-GROWTH FOREST DESTROYED BY FIRE.

£ HEAD OF SOUTH YUBA CANAL COMPANY'S DITCH.
MANSON.] DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS. 49

Daily discharge of Yuba River at Parks Bar Bridge during the month of August, 1900.

Day.

1....... ......

2

3. 

4....... 

5. ............

6.............

7.............

8. .......... ..

9. ...... ......

10.............

11.. ......... ...

12.. ........ ...

13.. ......... ..

14..... ........

15.......... 

16.............

17.............

18-. - 

19 

20. . 

21 

22

23

24.. ...... .....

25. .........

26. .--

27

28.. ....... ....

29.. ....... ....

30.. ......... ...

31.. ...... .....

Total. ..

Gage height.

6 a.m.

Feet. 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.30 

3.20 

2.20 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.20 

2.20 

3.10 

3.20 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

3.30 

2.30 

2.40 

2.30 

2.30 

3.20 

2.10 

2.30 

3.10 

3.10 

3.20 

2.20

6p.m.

Feet. 

2.30 

2.30 

2.20 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.20 

2.20 

2.30 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.30 

2.30 

3.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

3.10 

2.10 

2.30 

2.10

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

3.30 

2.25 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.25 

2.35 

2.25 

2.15 

3.20 

2.15 

2.35 

2.25 

2.15 

2.20 

2.10 

2.15 

' 2.15 

2.35 

2.30 

3.35 

2.25 

2.25 

2.15 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.30 

3.15

Area of 

section.

Sq.ft.

151.8 

158.7

153.0

Mean velocity.

Ft. per sec.

3.54 

3.59

3.49

Discharge. .

Sec.-ft. 

545.0 

510.0 

480.0 

480.0 

480.0 

480.0 

536.8 

571.2 

510.0 

440.0 

480.0 

440.0 

510.0 

535.0 

440.0 

480.0 

400.0 

440.0 

440.0 

510.0 

545.0 

580.0 

510.0 

510.0 

440.0 

400.0 

400.0 

474.2 

400.0 

480.0 

440.0

Cu.ft.perftk 

hrs. 

47,088,000 

44,064,000 

41,472,000 

41,472,000 

41,472,000 

41,472,000 

46,379,520 

49,251,680 

44,064,000 

38,016,000 

41,472,000 

38,016,000 

44,064,000 

46,094,400 

38,016,000 

41,472,000 

34,560,000 

38,016,000 

38,016,000 

44,064,000 

47,088,000 

50,112,000 

44,064,000 

44,064,000 

38,016,000 

34,560,000 

34,560,000 

40,970,880 

34,560,000 

41,472,000 

38,016,000

1,286,151,520

Daily discharge of Yuba River at Parks Bar Bridge during the month of September,

1900.

Day.

1..... ........

2

^. . ...........

4..... ....

6.. ....... . 

1. ......... ...

8. .... ....

9.. . 

10 ... .

11.. ........

12

13.. ...........

14.. .. .........

15_. ...........

16. 

17.. ....... ....

18. ...... ..

19.. ....... ....

20.. ......

21

22... ......

23....... ......

24

25.... .........

26.. ....... 

27 ..........

28

39. ............

30.. .. 

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

3.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.40 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.60 

2.40 

2.40 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00

6 p. m.

Feet. 

2.10 

3.10 

2.10 

2.20 

2.40 

2.30 

3.20 

2.20 

2.10 

2.10 

2.20 

2.30 

2.50 

3.60 

3.40 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

3.10 

2.10 

' 2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.10 

2.00 

3.00 

3.00 

2.00

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

3.10 

3.10 

2.10 

2.15 

2.40 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.10 

2.35 

3.25 

3.40 

2.60 

2.40 

2.35 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.10 

2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

3.00

Area of 

section.

8q. ft.

178.5

Mean velocity.

Ft. per sec.

4.12

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

400.0 

400.0 

400.0 

440.0 

620.0 

545.0 

470.0 

470.0 

440.0 

400.0 

510.0 

510.0 

630.0 

735.6 

630.0 

580.0 

470.0 

470.0 

470.0 

440.0 

400.0 

400.0 

360.0 

360.0 

360.0 

400.0 

360.0 

360.0 

360.0 

360.0

Cu. ft. per Sit 

hrs. 

34,560,000 

34,560,000 

34,560,000 

38,016,000 

53,568,000 

47,088,000 

40,608,000 

40,608,000 

38,016,000 

34,560,000 

44,064,000 

44,064,000 

53,568,000 

63,555,840 

53,568,000 

50,113,000 

40,618,000 

40,618,000 

40,618,000 

38,016,000 

34,560,000 

34,560,000 

31,104,000 

31, 104, 000 

31,104,000 

34,560,000 

31,104,000 

31,104,000 

31,104,000 

31,104,000 '

1,158,249.840

IRR 46 01 4
50 RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

Daily discharge of Yuba River at Parks Bar Bridge during the month of October,

1900.

Day.

1...... ............................

2

3............. .... . .. ..

4..................................

5... ............................

6... ... ................ ......

7..................................

8............................... ..

9 .........

10........... .......................

11....... ...........................

12............................... ..

13..................................

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

 Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

2.00 

2.00 

2.80 

3.20 

4.60 

4.20 

3.70 

3.50 

3.50 

3.50 

3.40 

3.60 

3.40

6 p. m.

Feet. 

2.00 

2.00 

3.40 

4.90 

4.60 

4.00 

3.60 

3.50 

3.50 

3.40 

3.40 

3.40 

3.40

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.00 

2.00 

3.10 

4.05 

4.60 

4.10 

3.65 

3.50 

3.50 

3.45 

3.40 

3.50 

3.40

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

360 

360 

1,200 

2,140 

2,720 

2,200 

1,730 

1,595 

1,595 

1,540 

1,480 

1,595 

1,480

Cu. ft. per Sit 

hrs. 

31,104,000 

31,104,000 

103,680,000 

184,896,000 

235,008,000 

190,080,000 

149,472,000 

137,808,000 

137,808,000 

1*3,056,000 

127,872,000 

137,808,000 

137,872,000

1,727,568,000

NOTE. On the evening of October 4 gage No. 1 was washed out. All subsequent readings 

were made on gage No. 2. Equation: Gage No. 2+2.2=gage No. 1. Thus: 2.7+2.2=4.9, gage 

height.

Daily discharge of North Fork of Yuba River at Yuba Power Company's dam during

the month of July, 1900.

Day.

1. ............

3

3.. ...... .....

4.............

5. ........ ....

6.. ...... .....

7. ............

8. ............

9.. -.-. .

10.............

11. ........ ....

13.. ....... ....

13..............

14.............

15. ....... .....

16.............

17.. ...... .....

18. ............

19.............

20.. ...........

31.. ...........

22

23.............

24... ....... .

25

26.............

27

28

29.............

30_.... ........

31.............

Total. _ .

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

2.07 

2.06 

2.05 

2.05 

2.00 

1.95 

2.00 

1.95 

1.90 

1.85 

1.80 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.70 

1.70 

1.70 

1.65 

1.65 

1.65 

1.70 

1.70 

1.65 

1.65 

1.65 

1.60 

1.60 

1.60 

1.60

6 p. m.

Feet. 

2.07 

2.06 

3.05 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

1.95 

1.85 

1.80 

1.80 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.70 

1.70 

1.70 

1.65 

1.65 

1.70 

1.70 

1.65 

1.65 

1.65 

1.65 

1.60 

1.60 

1.60 

1.60

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.07 

2.06 

2.05 

2.03 

2.00 

1.98 

2.00 

1.95 

1.88 

1.83 

1.80 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.75 

1.70 

1.70 

1.70 

1.65 

1.65 

1.68 

1.70 

1.68 

1.65 

1.65 

1.65 

1.60 

1.60 

1.60 

1.60

Area of 

section.

8q. ft.

203.1

196.4

160.3 

157.0

158.5

159.2

159.1

Mean velocity.

Ft. per sec.

2.98

2.88

2.73 

2.66

2.31

2.33

2.28

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

630.0 

625.0 

606.0 

610.0 

595.0 

566.8 

595.0 

560.0 

520.0 

490.0 

470.0 

440.0 

440.0 

440.0 

440.0 

440.0 

437.7 

418.7 

410.0 

380.0 

380.0 

400.0 

410.0 

400.0 

380.0 

380.0 

366.1 

350.0 

371.4 

350.0 

363.9

Cu. ft. per Sit 

hrs. 

54,432,000 

54,000,000 

53,358,400 

52, 704, 000 

51,408,000 

48, 971, 520 

51,408,000 

48,384,000 

44,928,000 

42,336,000 

40,608,000 

38,016,000 

38,016,000 

38,016,000 

38,016,000 

38,016,000 

37,817,280 

36, 175, 680 

35,434,000 

32,832,000 

32.832,000 

34', 560, 000 

35,424,000 

34,560,000 

33,832,000 

32,832,000 

31,631,040 

30, 240, 000 

32,088,960 

30,240,000 

31,440,960

1,232,548,840
MANSON.] DISCHABGE MEASUREMENTS. 51

Daily discharge of North Fork of Yuba River at Yuba Power Company's dam 

during the month of August, 1900.

Day.

1. ............

Z.. ...........

3.. ........ ...

4.. ....... ....

5..... ....... .

6..... .... ... .

7..... ....... .

8. ........ ....

9.............

10.............

11.. ........ ...

12..............

13..... ........

14.. ......... ..

15-.. ....... ...

16..... ........

17..... ...... ..

18... ..........

19.... .........

20.............

21..... ........

22

23.. ........

24... ...... ....

25

26. .........

27. .........

28

29. ............

30.... .........

31- . ..

Total. .-

Gage height.

6 a.m.

Feet. 

1.60 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 i 55

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.49 

1.49 

1.48 

1.47 

1.47

6 p.m.

Feet. 

1.60 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.49 

1.48 

1.48 

1.47 

1.47

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

1.60 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.55 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.50 

1.49 

1.49 

1.48 

1.47 

1.47

Area of 

section.

Sq. ft.

155.4 

153.0

145.8 

142.7

Mean

velocity.

Ft. per sec.

2.11 

2.10

1.93 

1.99

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

350.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

328.4 

321.7 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

320.0 

300.0 

300.0 

300.0 

300.0 

300.0 

300.0 

300.0 

300.0 

295.0 

295.0 

282.1 

284.6 

280.0

Cu. ft. per $U 

hrs. 

30,240,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

28,373,760 

27,794,880 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648,000 

27,648.000 

27,648,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,488,000 

25,488,000 

24,373,440 

24,589,440 

24,192,000

814,971,520

Daily discharge of North Fork of Yuba River at Yuba Power Company's dam 

during the month of September, 1900.

Day.

1...... ............................

2.........,..-................. .

3... ...............................

4............ ......................

5... ............................

6.................. ................

7...... ......................

8... ................... ............

9................ ............ ......

10..................................

11. ............................. ....

12.. ................................

13..... ...... .................. ....

14...... ............................

15...... ............. ...............

16.... ..............................

17............................,...;.

18...... ............................

19.... ..............................

20....... ...........................

21. .................................

22

23

24............................ ......

25...... ............................

26..................................

27..................................

28. ...... ._............- . 

29........... .......................

30

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

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

1.46 

1.46 

1.46 

1.46 

1.48 

1.49 

1.50 

1.49 

1.49 

1.47 

1.47 

1.49 

1. 50

1.61 

1.55 

1.50 

1.49 

1.48 

1.47 

1.47 

1.46 

1.45 

1.44 

1.44 

1.45 

1.47 

1.47 

1.48 

1.47 

1.46

6 p. m.

Feet. 

1.46 

1.46 

1.45 

1.47 

1.49 

1.50 

1.50 

1.49 

1.48 

1.47 

1.48 

1.49 

1.56 

1.60 

1.50 

1.50 

1.49 

1.48 

1.47 

. 1.46 

1.46 

1.45 

1.43 

1.45 

1.46 

1.48 

1.48 

1.47 

1.47 

1.46

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

1.46 

1.46 

1.46 

1.47 

1.49 

1.50 

1.50 

1.49 

1.49 

1.47 

1.48 

1.49 

1.53 

1.61 

1.53 

1.50 

1.49 

1.48 

1.47 

1.47 

1.46 

1.45 

1.44 

1.45 

1.46 

1.48 

1.48 

1.48 

1.47

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

270 

270 

270 

280 

295 

300 

300 

295 

295 

280 

280 

295 

310 

355 

310 

300 

295 

280 

280 

280 

270 

266 

265 

266 

270 

280 

280 

280 

280

Ou.ft.perSlthrs. 

23,328,000 

23,328,000 

23,328,000 

24,192,000 

25,448,000 

25,920,000 

25,920,000 

25,488,000 

25,488,000 

24,192,000 

24,192,000 

25,488,000 

26,784,000 

30,672,000 

26,784,000 

25,920,000 

25,488,000 

24,192,000 

24,192,000 

24,192,000 

23,328,000 

22,982,400 

22,896,000 

22, 982, 400 

23,328,000 

24,192,000 

24,192,000 

24,192,000 

24,192,000

710,830,800
52 RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA EIVEE, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

FIG. 17. Curve showing relation of gage 

height to discharge of North Fork of 

Yuba River.

FIG. 18. Curve showing relation of 

gage height to discharge of Middle 

Fork of Yuba River.

Daily discharge of North Fork of Yuba River at Yuba Power Company's dam 

during the month of October, 1900.

Day.

1. ..............................

2

3

4^.... ......... .....................

5..........--..-.. ..............

6..................................

r.. ------- ........................

8............... ................... 9................:.................

10... .......................... ..... 11 ............................... la.................. ............ ....

13..................................

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

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

1.46 

1.48 

1.99 

1.93 

2.68 

2.12 

1.81 

1.70 

1.67 

. 1.64 

1.60 

1.64 

1.65

6 p. m.

Feet. 

1.47 

1.50 

2.40 

2.15 

2.70 

1.95 

1.80 

1.68 

1.75 

1.71 

1.70 

1.70 

1.68

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

1.47 

1.49 

2.19 

2.04 

2.69 

2.03 

1.80 

1.69 

1.71 

1.68 

1.65 

1.67 

1.67

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

280 

295 

720 

610 

1,080 

610 

470 

405 

410 

400 

350 

390 

390

Cu. ft. per 2U hrs. 

24,192,000 

25,488,000 

62, 208, 000 

52,704,000 

93,312,000 

52,704,000 

40,608,000 

34, 992, 000 

35,424,000 

34,560,000 

32,832,000 

33,696,000 

33,696,000

556,416,000
MANSON.] DISCHARGE MEASUKEMENTS. 53

Daily discharge of Middle Fork of Yuba River at Freeman's bridge during the

month of July, 1900.

Day.

1.. ...........

2

3....... ......

4.............

6.............

6. ... ...

8.............

9.............

10.............

11.............

13.............

13.............

14.............

15.............

16. ............

17.............

18.............

19.............

20

21.............

22

23.............

24. ............

25.............

26.............

27.............

28.............

29.............

30.............

31.............

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet.

2.45 

2.60 

2.60 

2.45 

2.45 

2.40 

2.40 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.45 

2.35 

2.35 

2.35 

2.35 

2.40 

2.35 

2.35 

2.35 

2.35 

2.30 

2.35 

2.20

6 p. m.

Feet.

2.60 

2.60 

2.45 

2.45 

2.40 

2.40 

2.40 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.40 

2.40 

2.35 

2.40 

2.35 

2.40 

2.40 

2.45 

2.35 

2.40 

2.35 

2.40 

2.34 

2.35 

2.30 

2.20

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.40 

. 2.38

2.35 

2.33

3.40

2.53 

2.60 

2.53 

2.45 

2.43 

3.40 

2.40 

2.30 

2.30 

2.30 

2.35 

2.35 

2.33 

2.43 

2.35 

2.38 

2.38 

2.40 

2.38 

2.38 

2.35 

2.38 

. 2.35 

2.33 

2.28 

2.20

Area of 

section.

Sq. ft. 

63.0

59.9 

58.1

62.6

49.6

Mean velocity.

Ft. per sec. 

3.03

3.00 

3.18

2.58

 2.20

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

190.8 

189.0 

179.9 

184.9 

190.0 

150.0 

161.7 

150.0 

130.0 

125.0 

120.0 

120.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

110.0 

110.0 

108.0 

125.0 

110.0 

119.0 

119.0 

120.0 

119.0 

119.0 

110.0 

119.0 

110.0 

109.2 

90.0 

80.0

Cu. ft. per Sit 

hrs. 

16,485,120 

15,329,600 

15,543,360 

15,975,360 

16,416,000 

12,960,000 

13,970,880 

12,960,000 

11,232,000 

10,810,000 

10,368,000 

10,368,000 

8,640,000 

8,640,000 

8,640,000 

9,504,000 

9,504,000 

9,331,200 

10,810,000 

9,504,000 

10,281,600 

10,281,600 

10,368,000 

10,281,600 

10,281,600 

9,504,000 

10,281,600 

9,504,000 

9,434,880 

7,776,000 

6,912,000

341,898,400

Daily discharge of Middle Fork of Yuba River at Freeman's bridge during the

month of August, 1900.

Day.

1.. ...........

2

3.............

4.......... ..

5. ............

6.............

7.. ....... ....

8.............

9.............

10.............

11.............

12. ...........

13.............

14.............

15...

16.............

18.............

19.............

20........... .

21.............

22........

23.............

24.............

25.............

26.............

27.............

28.............

29.............

30.............

31.............

Total...

Gage height.

6a.m.

Feet. 

2.20 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10

6p.m.

Feet. 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

3.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

3.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.20 

2.18 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

3.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10 

2.10

Area of 

section.

Sq.ft.

36.5 

36.7

31.2 

30.5

Mean velocity.

Ft. per sec.

2.17 

2.13

2.23 

2.22

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

80.0 

79.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

79.3 

78.1 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

75.0 

70.0 

70.0 

70.0 

70.0 

70.0 

69.36 

67.7

Cu. ft. per Sit 

hrs. 

6,912,000 

6,825,600 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,851,520 

6, 747, 840 

6,480,000 

6,480.000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

6,480,000 

e,'1 ,000 

6, ±8,000 

6,048,000 

6,048,000 

6,048,000 

6,048,000 

5,984,064 

5,849,280

192,530,304
54 RECONNAISSANCE OF YUBA RIVER, CALIFORNIA. [NO. 46.

Daily discharge of Middle Fork of Yuba River at Freeman's bridge during the 

month of September, 1900.

Day.

1.,. ..........

2

8_ . ......

4.. ........ ...

5.. ---------

6.. .. 

7.. ...... .....

8.. .......... .

9.............

10..... ...... ..

U- ............

12. ........ ..

13.. ...... .....

14.. ......... ..

15-. . 

16.-. 

17-.. - 

18.. -- -

1Q

20.. ...........

21

22

23

24.- -. 

25

26

27

28..-.-.-.---.

29 . 

30.- -..-.

Total...

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

2.10 

2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.05 

2.05 

2.05 

2.05 

2.05 

2.00 

2.00 

2.05 

2.15 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.10 

3.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00

6 p. HI.

Feet. 

2.10 

2.05 

2.00 

2.00 

2.05 

2.05 

2.10 

2.05 

2.05 

2.00 

2.05 

2.05 

2.35 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

2.10 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00

Mean 

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.10 

2.08 

2.00 

2.00 

2.05 

2.05 

2.08 

2.05 

2.05 

2.00 

2.03 

2.05 

2.25 

2.30 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.15 

2.15 

3.10 

3.00 

2.00 

3.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00

Area of 

section.

8q. ft.

27.4

'Mean velocity.

Ft. per sec.

2.34

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

70.0 

68.0 

60.0 

60.0 

65 0

68.0 

65.0 

65.0 

60.0 

63.0 

65.0 

90.0 

100.0 

80.0 

80.0 

75.0 

64.2 

75.0 

70.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0 

60.0

Cu. ft. per 2k 

hrs. 

6,048,000 

5,875,000 

5,184,000 

5,184,000 

5,616,000 

5,616,000 

5,875,000 

5,616,000 

5,616,000 

5,184,000 

5,356,800 

5,616,000 

7, 776, 000 

8,640,000 

6,912,000 

6,912,000 

6,480,000 

5,546,880 

6,480,000 

6,048,000 

5, 184, 000 

5,184,000 

5, 184, 000 

5,184,000 

5, 184, 000 

5, 184, 000 

5, 184, 000 

5,184,000 

5,184,000 

5,184,000

173,421,680

Discharge of Middle Fork of Yuba River at Freeman's bridge during the month of

October, 1900.

Day.

1... ....... .............. ..........

2

3-.. -.. ..........

4 - . ...................... .

5...... ...... ............... .......

6.-... ................ ...... ....

7 .................................

8.....-.. ._ .-........__

9....... ...........................

10.... ............. .................

11.. ........................ ....

12........ ......................

13. ... ......................_......

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

Gage height.

6 a. m.

Feet. 

2.00 

2.00 

2.45 

2.40 

3.00 

2.00 

2.45 

2.30 

2.20 

2.15 

2.00 

2.00 

2.00

6 p. m.

Feet. 

2.00 

2.00 

2.45 

2.50 

3.00 

2.50 

2.35 

2.20 

2.20 

2.20 

2.15 

2.15 

2.00

Mean

gage 

height.

Feet. 

2.00 

2.00 

2.45 

2.45 

3.00 

2.25 

2.40 

2.25 

2.20 

2.17 

2.08 

2.08 

2.00

Discharge.

Sec.-ft. 

60 

00 

130 

130 

360 

90 

120 

90 

80 

78 

68 

68 

60

Cu. ft. per %k hrs. 

5,184,000 

5,184,000 

' 11,232,000 

11,232,000 

21,104,000 

7,776,000 

10,368,000 

7,776,000 

6,912,000 

6, 739, 200 

5,875,000 

5,875,000 

5,184,000

110,441,200
INDEX.

Page.

Altitudes. See Elevations. 

Ant Creek, discharge measurement of... 23 

Bald Mountain, creek south of, discharge

measurement of.-------.--..-.__ 23

Barton, S., rainfall records kept by....... 23

Basin Creek, discharge measurement of.. 22 

Browns Valley Irrigation District, dam

of, views of........ ... ...... 46

reservoir and power plant of......_ 45

Brush Creek, discharge measurement of. 23 

drainage area of....................... 13

Bull Run Creek, discharge measurement

of.......................:.......... 23

drainage area of....................... 13

California, southern, development of... 9,11-13

Canyon Creek, storage reservoirs along. 44-45

Clark Creek, discharge measurement of. 23

drainage area of.------------_...... 13

Coal and oil industries, development of,

in southern California ............ 11-13

Connick.H.D.H.,work of................. 47

Corral Creek, discharge measurement of. 22 

drainage area of...._ ................ 13

Cost, electric power, generating and

transmitting.................... 27-28,37

irrigation by pumping....-.---....... 27,28

power plants proposed......._..._ 28

reservoir proposed on Salmon Creek. 30 

storage reservoirs in Kern River

Basin............................... 36

storage reservoirs in Yuba River

Basin..--..--....----.------..--... 44

Dam sites, Kern River, figures showing .................. _-..._ 29,31,32

Yuba River, figures showing......... 44,46

Daunt, elevation of..........._.---..._ 24

precipitation at.........._......_. 23

Deer Creek, drainage area of.....___. 40

Discharge and gage height, curves showing relation between, on Yuba 

River.-....-.-----............. 47,52

Discharge and temperature observations 

(synchronous), diagram showing, 

on Kern River.-..-.--------------- 24

features of............................. 24-25

Discharge measurements, Kern River and

tributaries.............-.. ...... 17-23

Yuba River and tributaries........... 47-54

Drainage basins, Kern River, areas of.... 13-14

Yuba River, areas of.............. .... 39,40

Dry Creek, drainage area of..........._ 40

Efficiency of pumping plants, discussion

of....... . -......... ......... 28-29

Page.

Electric power, advantages of.. . . 9-10,28 

cost of generating and transmitting. 37 

prices paid for... --.............. 27,28

Electric-power plants, cost of operating. 27 

Kern River Company's proposed.... 25-28,

29-37

Elevations, Kern River Basin. 13,24,25,29,30,37 

Yuba River Basin.................. 40,41,42

Englebright, W. F., acknowledgments to. 42 

investigations by, regarding snow

storage. -.-... . . __........ 42-43

English reservoir site, features of........ 45

views of. - .... -_..-.-.. .... 44

Erosion in Yuba River Basin, extent of.. 41 

Evaporation, Kern River............... . 25

First Point of Measurement, discharge 

and temperature observations 

(synchronous) at, diagram showing................---... ----- 24

discharge measurements at........... 17,22

volume of Kern River at..... 17,18,20-21,25

. Fish Creek, drainage area of..,.. ...... 13

Forest, second-growth, destroyed by fire,

view showing... .. .......... 48

Forest cover, extent and character of, in

Yuba River Basin ................. 41-42

value of,to stream flow ....... 9-10,41,46-47

Gage height and discharge, curves showing relation between, on Yuba 

River...........------------.-.--. 47,52

Gaging stations. Kern River, map showing location of .......... . _... 16

Yuba River, map showing location of. 40

Harris Creek, discharge measurement of. 23

drainage area of. .. - ..-...... 13

Hawgood, H., cited ......... . ... .-.... 17

water wheel and power plant designed by....... ------- __._ 27

Hicks, L. A., quoted, on pumping plants

designed by...--.__.............. 29

well-construction methods of..... _. 28

Hooper's mill ditch, discharge measure-

, ment of ............................ 23

Irrigation, cost of, by pumping........... 27,28

methods proposed ..-. ........-.. .. 9-10

need of. ............................. 9,15-16

Isabella, volume of Kern River at........ 23,25

Jackson Creek, discharge measurement

of.. --. .......-...... .. 23

drainage area of .............I......... 13

James, Mr., cited......... .............. 18

Kern Lake, water storage proposed in... 37-38 

Kern Land Company, pumping plants of. 28-29

55
56 INDEX.

Page.

Kern-Rand Electric Power Company, 

dam proposed by, figures showing..-.. ........................ 33,34,35

dam site of, plan of.. .............. 31

reservoir proposed by................. 31-37

reservoir site of, plan of .............. 30

Kern River, discharge and temperature 

observations (synchronous) on, 

diagram showing.................. 24

discharge measurements of........... 17-23

discharge measurements of, map

showing points of... ....... .. 16

drainage area of....................... 20

drainage basins of, areas of......__ 13-14

drainage basins of upper, map showing...... ............................ 12

evaporation of.......... ..-.-..--... 25

fall or slope of ...................... 14,15,25

flood period of ................. .... 25

gaging stations on, map showing location of..-..-----------. .......... 10

horsepower available along........ 25

irrigation along.....-.---------.-_.--.- 15-18

length of. -- --.--- ---.--- 14 

maps of ................................ 16,18

physical features of.......---..-...--- 13-16

power possibilities of ........... 15-16,25-38

profile of............................... 14

run-off in basin of ............... 13,17,18-21

seepage along-----......----...-...--.. 25

view of, near Kernville ..... ....... 14

volume of.-....------.--...---.-----.-. 1(5-25

Kern River, North Pork. See North Fork

of Kern River. 

Kern River. South Fork. See South Fork

of Kern River.

Kern River Basin, elevations in -..--..--. 13,

24,25,39,30,37 

mountain valley in, view of ....-.---- 15

precipitation in............... 16-17,23-25,32

run-off in......................... 13,17,18-21

Kern River Company, power projects of. 25-28,

29-37 

reservoir site of, plan of .-.-.......-.. 26

Kernville, elevation of -.--.------..-.---.- 24

precipitation at...-.-... ............ 23

Lake Fordyce,elevation of..---........... 42

snow storage at--.-..---.--.... ...... 42-43

snow storage at, diagram showing

depth of--------.----.--.-... . 43

Lak e Spaulding, vie w showing........... 40

water storage in-.................. 43-44

Little Kern River, discharge measurement of ............................ 23

drainage area of... . --........-. 13

Los Angeles, coal and oil industries at,

development of............... .. 11-13

electric power at, prices paid for..... 27

Marysville, precipitation at ............... 42

Menache Creek, drainage area of ........ 13

Menache Meadows, reservoir proposed

in. -. -. -- - - - - 31-37 

Middle Fork of Yuba River, discharge and 

gage height of, curve showing relation between.. -..--.. .-.--.- 52 

discharge measurements of.... .... 53-54

Page, 

Middle Fork of Yuba River Continued.

drainage area of........................ 40

physical features of.........__ ..._ 11

reservoir site on.....__-.. ......_ 45

views on......_............._..__ 42,44

Mount Breckenridge, elevation of ....... 24

precipitation at---..................... 23

Mountain Home sawmill, rainfall records

kept by............................. 23

Needles Creek, drainage area of _...._ 13

Neils ditch, discharge measurement of .. 23 

Newell, F. H., letter of transmittal by. - - 9-10 

Ninemile Creek, drainage area of ....__ 13

North Fork of Brush Creek, discharge

measurement of................... 23

North Fork of Kern River, discharge 

measurements of....._......_ 22,23

drainage basins of, areas of........... 13

gaging station on, vie w of.---...--.... 16

precipitation along...--.-.--.-........ 17

run-off in basin of-...-.---..__ ...... 17

volume of ....--.-..-.--...-.._....... 17

North Fork of Yuba River, discharge and 

gage height of, curve showing relation between. .................... 52

discharge measureme nts of........... 50-52

drainage area of-.------....---.-.-...- 40

physical features of. ----...--.-...... 41

reservoir sites on.. ...... ....... 45-46

run-off in basin of................__ 46

North Needles Creek, discharge measurement of.-..-....-.--...--........... 23

Oil and coal industries, development of,

in southern California ____.._. . 11-13

Onemile Creek, discharge measurement

of................................... 23

Otterman, G., rainfall records kept by.... 23

Physical features,Kern River......... 13-16,25

Yuba River .........---..-.......... 39-42

Power possibilities, Kern River .... 15-16,25-38

Yuba River ............................ 42-47

Power transmission,cost of...._..-- 27-28,37

distances recommended by engineers

for, limit of ......................... 31

Powers ditch, discharge measurement of- 23

Precipitation,Kern River Basin. 16-17,23-25,32

Yuba River Basin............... 41,43,44,46

Pumping plants, features and efficiency

of..... --- - - . 28-29

Rainfall. See Precipitation.

Reservoir sites,Kern River, views of .... 26,30

Yuba River, views of.................. 44

Reservoirs, Kern River Basin, cost, capacity, etc., of. -.-..-.-- .--- 36 

Reservoirs and reservoir sites, Yuba

River Basin, cost, capacity, etc., of 43-46 

Reservoirs proposed, Kern Lake... .... 37-38

Kern-Rand Electric Power Company

(MenacheMeadows)....... .... 31-37

Kern River Company .... . 25-27,29

Salmon Creek.......................... 29-30

Rio Bravo ranch, volume of Kern River

at... .- . - - . -.... 18-19

Run-off, Kern River Basin.......... 13,17,18-21

North Fork of Yuba River......-.-... 46

South Fork of Yuba River............ 46-47
INDEX. 57

Salmon Creek, discharge measurement of 22,23 

drainage area of...................... 13

reservoir proposed on..... .......--- 29-30

reservoir proposed on, cross section

of dam site of.-....-.--.,...-.. 29

Schuyler.J.D.,cited .............. ...... 30

Sierra Nevada, elevation of, average.... 13

Snow storage, depth of, at Lake Pordyce,

diagram showing...... ---..-..--.- 42

effect of, on stream flow ........ 24-25,41-43

South Fork of Kern River, discharge

measurements of . . 

drainage basins of, areas of . .. 

electric power from, cost of generating and transmitting..---..---.-.- 37 

physical features of....-.-. . .... 14-15

reservoir proposed on... ....... . 31-37

profile of ........-.-.-...--..---.-. 15

South Fork of Yuba River, drainage area

of... .......-.....--....-...--- 40

physical features of .- ..........-... 41-42

run-off in basin of.................-..- 46-47

view on ....._._ ... . .. .- 40

water storage on,artificial------------ 42

water storage on, possibilities of ..... 44

South Needles Creek, discharge measurement of ........................ 22

South Yuba Canal Company, ditch of,

view of head of . .._....- __ 48

Stream flow and forest cover, relation 

between ._ ..--- . ...... 9-10,

Tehachapi, elevation of . __ . . . 

Temperature and discharge observations

(synchronous), diagram showing. 24 

features of............. .-.....- ..._ 24-35

Tibbetts Creek, discharge measurements

of.......-- ..... .....-... 23

drainage area of . ._. ........_ - 13

TillyCreek, drainage area of............. 13

Tobias Creek, discharge measurement of. 23 

drainage area of.............. ...... 13

Trout Meadow Creek, drainage area of.. 13 

Vischer, H., cited ......................... 39

IRK 40 01 5

Page. 

Volume, Kern River ........... ........ 18-25

snow storage as a factor of...... 24-25,41-43

Yuba River...-..--.-.-..-..----.-- 39,47-50

Wade Creek, discharge measurement of. 23 

drainage area of....................... 13

Walkers Pass, elevation of................ 37

Water storage, Kern River Basin........ 25-38

artificial, in Ynba River Basin.. .... 43-47

natural, in Yuba River Basin...... 39,42-43

Well construction, methods of, employed

byL.A.Hicks . ...... . .. 28

Whitney Creek, discharge measurements

of....... ... -.. --. 23

drainage area of....... ........... ................ 13

Yuba River, discharge and gage height 

of, curve showing relation between . ... ......... ....._ 47

discharge measurements of ..._.... 47-54

drainage areas of........ ............. 39,40

foothills of, view in . ..._........ _.. 40

forks of. See Middle, North, and

South, 

gaging stations on, map showing locationof...................-..--.. 40

power possibilities of .. ........... 42-47

volumeof.. . ..-..- ....... 39.47-50

watershed of - ... ._ . . 39-40 

water storage in basin of ........ 39,43-47

Yuba River, Middle Fork. See Middle

Fork of Yuba River. 

Yuba River, North Fork. See North

Fork of Yuba River. 

Yuba River, South Fork. See South

Fork of Yuba River. 

Yuba River Basin, elevations in....... 40,41,42

erosion in ........ .......... ...... 41

forest cover in................... .. 41-42

precipitation in,. .... ......-.. 41,42,44,46

storage reservoirs and reservoir sites

in........... ---.._........ .. 43-46

topography of .-.... ....... ...... 41-42

water storage in, artificial..... ...... 43-47

water storage in, natural. .......... 42-43

o