UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Harold L. Ickes, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. C. Mendenhall, Director

Water-Supply Paper 680

DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

BY

JOHN C.

UNITED STATES

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON : 1936

i'For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. Price 20 cents
CONTENTS

Page

Introduction ________ _________-_--_____-_-__---___-__________ 1

Droughts of 1930 and 1931_____._______________________ 5

Causes_____________________________________________________ 6

Precipitation. ____________________________________________ 6

Temperature ____________-_----_--_-_---___-_-_-_-_---_-_- 11

Wind.._.. _ 11

Effect on ground and surface water____________________________ 11

General effect___________________________________________ 11

Ground water___________________________ _ _____________ _ 22

Surface water___________________________________________ 26

Damage___ _-___---_-_------------__---------___-----_----_ 32

Vegetation.____________________________________________ 32

Domestic and industrial water supplies_____________________ 36

Health____-_--___________--_-_---_-----_-----_-_-_--_.__- 37

Power.______________________________________________ 38

Navigation._-_-----_-_____-_-_-_-_--__--_------_____--___ 39

Recreation and wild life--___--_---__--_-------------_--_-__ 41

Relief - ---- . 41

Drought of 1934__ 46

Causes_ _ ___________________________________________________ 46

Precipitation.____________________________________________ 47

Temperature._____________---_-___----_________-_________ 50

Wind_____________________________________________ 60

Effect on ground and surface water____________________________ 53

General effect-_____-__________----_----__-_-_-______-_____ 53

Ground water___-____-__---_--______-_-______-___-_____ 53

Surface water_______________-__-_-__----__________________ 54

Damage. __ _ _ _ ____--------__ ________ _______ 56

Vegetation.______________________________________________ 56

Domestic and industrial water supplies_____________________ 59

Health__________________________________________ 60

Power.-__--__-_-_---_____---_---_-----_---_- _---________ 61

Navigation.______________________________________________ 61

Recreation and wild life__________________________________ 61

Relief_________________________-__ ___.._______ 62

Comparison of droughts during period 1881 to 1934_________________ 65

Drought and low-water stream flow_________________________________ 69

Carry-over effect as related to drought______________.________________ 70

Alleviation of drought damage._____________________________________ 71

Precipitation diagrams._ _ _______________________________________ 75

Index___________________-___-___-_-_-___--______.______ 105

m
ILLUSTRATIONS

Page 

PLATE 1. Precipitation by States for major drought years._____________ 6

FIGURE 1. Drought years, 1881 to 1934__.______________.__ 3

2. Accumulated departures from the mean of the monthly precipitation for the periods of 31 months including the 3 years of 

lowest precipitation in Virginia_______________________ 10

3. Temperatures, 1930________________________________ 12

4. Temperatures, 1931______:___________________.__ 12

5. Diagrammatic section showing different kinds of discharge of

subsurface water.____________________________________ 13

6. Gage-height graph of South Fork of Mills River at The Pink 

Beds, N. C., showing diurnal and seasonal effect of evaporation and transpiration_______________________________ 19

7. Gage-height graph of Owens Creek at Lantz, Md., June 1-5, 

1932, showing effect of transpiration and evaporation on 

stream flow_---_____________-__--_-______-____---_- 20

8. Discharge graph of Piney Run near Sykesville, Md., showing 

effect of transpiration, evaporation, and altitude of water 

table on stream flow_--_--___-_.______________________ 21

9. Fluctuation of water surface of Ross well, Arlington, Va., and

precipitation at Washington, D. C., 1928-34_______ 23

10. Fluctuation of water surface of a well, run-off, and precipitation on South Branch of Moose River in New York, 1928- 

34______________________.___________________________ 25

11. Rainfall and run-off for combined drainage basins of Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers, by months, showing variation 

between wet and dry years__-__-___-_____-_--_-------- 28

12. Accumulated departures from the average of the monthly 

discharge of Potomac River at Point of Rocks, Md., and 

of the precipitation recorded at Westernport and Frederick, 

Md____--._______________________________ 31

13. Total precipitation for June, July, and August and composite 

yields of crops per acre, expressed as percentage of average 

yields, 1930____________ w ____________---- 33

14. Total precipitation for June, July, and August and composite 

yields of crops per acre, expressed as percentage of average 

yields, 1931________________.________----- 33

15. Relation of composite yields of crops per acre in 1930 and 1931 

to total precipitation in June, July, and August for the 36 

humid and semiarid States_--_--__--_-_--------------- 34

16. Areas where Red Cross gave drought relief, August 1930 to

June 1931___.._____-________________-___-.-__ 43

' 17. Temperatures, 1934__________________________________ 51

18. Total precipitation for June, July, and August and composite 

yields of crops per acre expressed as percentage of average 

yields, 1934______________________._____ 57

19. Percentage of area having deficiencies in precipitation of 15

percent or more, 1881-1934__________----- 67
ILLUSTRATIONS V

Page

FIGURE 20. Location of river-measurement stations used to show the relation of drought and stream flow______________________ 70

21. Annual precipitation in Maine, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 ___-__-_--__-_-_-_ 75

22. Annual precipitation in New Hampshire, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931.__--__- 75

23. Annual precipitation in Vermont, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 193 !__.__. ____________ 76

24. Annual precipitation in Massachusetts, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931_._--__- 76

25. Annual precipitation in Rhode Island, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931__._-_ 77 

' 26. Annual precipitation in Connecticut, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 ______-_-_-__- 77

27. Annual precipitation in New York, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 _______.__.__ 78

28. Annual precipitation in New Jersey, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931__._.----------- 78

29. Annual precipitation in Pennsylvania, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 ______--_-_-___ 79

30. Annual precipitation in Maryland-Delaware, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 ________ 79

31. Annual precipitation in Virginia, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 ____-_-_-___---..-- 80

32. Annual precipitation in North Carolina, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931._--_- __ 80

33. Annual precipitation in South Carolina, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December J.931._-__- 81

34. Annual precipitation in Tennessee, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931-___--_--_--_-_ 81

35. Annual precipitation in Kentucky, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931---_-_--_------- 82

36. Annual precipitation in West Virginia, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931_-____-- 82

37. Annual precipitation in Ohio, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931------------------ 83

38. Annual precipitation in Michigan, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931__._____-__---_- 83

39. Annual precipitation in Indiana, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931----------------- 84

40. Annual precipitation in Illinois, 1878-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 _______-__----- 84

41. Annual precipitation in Arkansas, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931-.________.__- 85

42. Annual precipitation in Missouri, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931_____--__--_--_ 85

43. Annual precipitation in Iowa, 1873-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931----------_----- 86

44. Annual precipitation in Wis.. nsin, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 _____-__---_--- 86

45. Annual precipitation in Minnesota, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931______________ 87
VI ILLUSTRATIONS

Page 

FIGURE 46. Annual precipitation in Florida, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 _______________ 87

47. Annual precipitation in Georgia, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 -___--____-___-___ 88

48. Annual precipitation in Alabama, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931__-_---_____--____ 89

49. Annual precipitation in Mississippi, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931-__-_______-..__ 90

50. Annual precipitation in Louisiana, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931-________--__-_ 91

51. Annual precipitation in Oklahoma, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 _______________ 92

52. Annual precipitation in Kansas, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931__---___-_____- 92

53. Annual precipitation in Nebraska, 1876-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931____-_-____----_ 93

54. Annual precipitation in South Dakota, 1881-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931_.______ 93

55. Annual precipitation in North Dakota, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931-__-___-----_-_ 94

56. Annual precipitation in Texas, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 __________________ 94

57. Annual precipitation in New Mexico, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931 _______________ 95

58. Annual precipitation in Colorado, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 __________________ 95

59. Annual precipitation in Wyoming, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931____-___---____ 96

60. Annual precipitation in Montana, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931._______-___--__ 96

61. Annual precipitation in Idaho, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929to December 1931_____-__________ 97

62. Annual .precipitation in Nevada, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 __________________ 97

63. Annual precipitation in Utah, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 __________________ 98

64. Annual precipitation in Arizona, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931 __________________ 98

65. Annual precipitation in California, 1881-1934, and monthly

precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931_____________ 99

66. Annual precipitation in eastern Oregon, 1890-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December 1931________ 100

67. Annual precipitation in western Oregon, 1890-1934, and

, monthly, precipitation, June 1929to December 1931________ 101

68. Annual precipitation in eastern Washington, 1890-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 193!____-_-_ 102

69. Annual precipitation in western Washington, 1890-1934, and

monthly precipitation, June 1929to December 1931________ 103
TABLES

Page

1. Annual precipitation, in inches, by States, 1881-1934. _____________ 4

2. Precipitation and composite yields of crops per acre, 1929-34, by

States________________________________.___ 8

3. Losses between precipitation and run-off prior to 1906 for the winter

and summer months_______-_____-_____-_-_____-_-___________ 16

4. Daily discharge, in second-feet, of Potomac River at Shepherdstown,

W. Va., June 1 to December 31, 1930__.________________ 27

5. Monthly and yearly discharge, in second-feet, of Potomac River at

Point of Rocks, Md., 1895-1931___________ ___-_____________ 29

'6. Deficiency table for Potomac River at Point of Rocks, Md., 1897-1931 _ 30

7. Composite yields of crops per acre and precipitation in North Carolina,

Missouri, and Illinois, 1930___________________________________ 35

8. Percentage change in production of electricity for public use in the

humid and semiarid sections of the United States, 1929-31 _________ 39

9. American National Red Cross drought relief, financial statement.- _ - _ _ 44

10. American National Red Cross drought relief, character and extent of

aid________________________________________________________ 45

11. Precipitation, temperature, and crop yields in 1934, by States. ________ 48

12. Effect of the drought of 1934 on stream flow_____.-___----_--. 54

13. Water in storage in 24 reservoirs of the United States Bureau of

Reclamation, 1929-34____.__.________________________________ 56

14. Annual precipitation, in percent of mean, by States, 1881-1934_ ______ 66

15. Number of years when precipitation did not exceed 85, 80, 75, or 70 percent of mean and the precipitation for the 6 years in which the precipitation was lowest, for the period 1881 to 1934, by States.----- 66

16. Years when large areas of the humid and semiarid States had deficiency

in precipitation of 15 percent or more- __________________________ 66

17. Minimum discharge, in second-feet, at selected river-measurement stations for periods of record ending September 30,1934.______ _ __ 70

vn
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

By JOHN C. HOTT

INTRODUCTION

During the 5-year period 1930-34 a serious drought occurred over 

:some broad region of the United States in each year except 1932. 

'The humid States were seriously affected in 1930 and to a lesser extent 

in 1931 and 1934. The semiarid States underwent minor droughts in 

1931 and 1933, which added to the catastrophe of 1934. Drought 

^conditions during these years are of more than academic interest. 

They stand out as a limiting basis in the availability of surface and 

>ground waters in works involving many millions of capital outlay. 

If future water supplies are to be uiifailing, sufficient storage must be 

^provided to withstand the recurrence of similar shortages at any time.

This report summarizes, as an aid to the more detailed analyses 

that will arise in the consideration of specific projects, some of the 

»more outstanding questions related to droughts, both physical and 

'economic. It outlines the nature and extent of the droughts of 

1930-34; compares them with past dry periods in terms of precipitation, run-off, ground water, evaporation, and transpiration; and

 sketches the effects of droughts on water supplies as related to a 

variety of human purposes, including agriculture, domestic and industrial uses, health, power, navigation, and recreation and wild life; it 

;also touches upon the relief, political, and economic elements.

This report is based on information collected in the various States 

under the direction of the 36 district engineers of the United States 

»Geological Survey, supplemented by data made available through the 

United States Weather Bureau, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, 

JBureau of Public Health Service, Office of the Chief of Engineers, 

Bureau of Reclamation, Emergency Relief Administration, American 

National Red Cross, and various State agencies. The assistance and 

.suggestions of Geological Survey engineers and geologists and of the 

personnel of the other organizations listed above is hereby acknowledged. In the arrangement and preparation of the tables and graphs 

special assistance has been given by Iloyd L. Harrold,. Francis M. 

Bell, and Arthur H. Frazier, assistant engineers, United States Geological Survey. The suggestions of J. B. Kincer, chief of the Division

*of Climate and Crop Weather, United States Weather Bureau;

1
2 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

Edward T. Kotok, director California Forest and Range Experiment 

Station, United States Forest Service; and Guy C. Stevens, hydraulic engineer, United States Geological Survey, have been especially 

helpful.

When in an area that is ordinarily classed as humid natural vegetation becomes desiccated or defoliates unseasonably and crops fail to 

mature owing to lack of precipitation, or when precipitation is insufficient to meet the needs of established human activities, drought conditions may be said to prevail. Although water for irrigation or other 

uses in arid areas is always limited, special shortages in such areas are 

also regarded as droughts. Unsatisfactory distribution of precipitation 

throughout the year may be as effective a factor in causing a drought 

as a shortage in the total amount. Temperature and wind may alsoplay an important part, especially in relation to the damage done.

As interest in droughts may relate either to their physical characteristics, as determined by the phenomena that cause them, or to their 

economic effects, as reflected by damage, they may be considered either 

as a natural phenomenon or as an economic phenomenon usually 

both and it is therefore essential to take into account in drought 

studies not only physical data but also information as to the extent 

and nature of human activities in the area affected.

Although a deficiency in precipitation is the prime cause of droughtsit is not possible to. set for any region an exact limit of the total 

annual precipitation above which a drought does not exist and below 

which a drought may be produced. In general, however, in the 

humid and semiarid States serious drought effects do not result 

unless the annual precipitation is as low as 85 percent of the mean 

that is, an annual deficiency of 15 percent or more. This limit ishere used in defining a drought year and will serve for many drought 

studies. Although no definite limit can be set for the arid States 

on account of the wide variations in distribution of precipitation within these States, the same criterion has been used for certain comparisons in this report.

Under the definition given above there have been 38 droughts in 

the humid States during the period 1881-1934, and in 12 of these 

droughts over 23 percent of the area of the States was affected. In> 

the semiarid States there were 28 droughts during the same period, 

and in 11 of these droughts over 44 percent of the area was affected. 

The years in which these droughts occurred are shown by the black 

portions of the squares on figure 1. Each square represents a year. 

The one in the upper left corner represents the year 1880; the next to 

the right is 1881, then 1882, etc. The horizontal dimension of the 

black portion of a square indicates the percentage of the area in which 

there was a drought. If the entire width of the square is black 100 

percent of the area was affected. The vertical dimension indicates the 

deficiency in precipitation, expressed in percentage of the mean annual.
INTRODUCTION

Records of precipitation and stream flow give an index for studying 

droughts and generally will serve to answer questions relative to the 

area covered, the severity, the frequency, and the duration. Additional facts, however, are needed in considering the nature and extent

CO o

>- 

O

o

I860

1890

1900

1

1920

1

1881

1

1911 

I

1931

1882 1883

1

1884

1

1

1934

1885

1

1886

1

1887 

I

1888 1889

1899

1909

1919

1929

_L

HUMID STATES

10 ________

5 SEMI ARID STATES 

(North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma)

FIGURE 1. Drought years, 1881-1934.

of resulting damages. Press statements relative to droughts that 

appear before full physical and other information have been made 

available and analyzed are generally exaggerated and should be used 

with caution.
4 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

The records of precipitation and stream flow used in this study were 

made available through the United States Weather Bureau and the 

United States Geological Survey. Unfortunately, neither of these 

sets of records extends over a period long enough to enable adequate 

consideration of drought conditions. Precipitation data are incomplete and scattering for years prior to 1889, and records of monthly 

precipitation by States were not generally made until about 1890. 

The annual precipitation for each State 1 has been compiled by the 

Weather Bureau on a comparable basis, beginning with 1881, and is 

given in table 1. In the years prior to 1895 the number and distribution of precipitation stations in many States were inadequate, 

and as a result it was necessary to make adjustments in order to bring 

the records on a comparable basis. The annual precipitation for 

each State is indicated graphically in figures 21 to 69 (pp. 75-103), 

which show also the monthly precipitation for each State from June 

1929 to December 1931. Records of annual precipitation are indicative only of general drought conditions: to be of value for detailed 

drought studies they must be supplemented by monthly records, and 

even then care must be taken in their use. Systematic records of 

stream flow on a country-wide basis were started in 1895, and there 

are but few continuous records that began prior to that date.

The climatic character of an area that is, whether it is humid, 

arid, or semiarid is a major factor in determining the effects of 

droughts. The one hundredth meridian is commonly considered the 

approximate border line between the humid and arid sections of the 

United States. There is, however, no well-defined line, as a wide 

belt extending on both sides of this meridian may be either humid or 

arid, depending upon the weather conditions in any particular year. 

This belt, which includes North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, 

Kansas, Oklahoma, and western Texas, is sometimes called the 

"Great Plains" and is the principal semiarid section of the country. 

The 31 States east of this belt and eastern Texas can all be classed 

as humid, and the 11 States to the west can be classed in the main 

as arid with the exception of the Pacific Northwest, which is humid.

Agricultural and many other activities are conducted so differently 

in these three groups of States that for the consideration of droughts 

on a comparable basis each group must be treated separately. The 

precipitation, stream flow, and other data used in this report are 

included for all three groups. The discussion based on these data, 

however, applies primarily to the humid and semiarid States unless 

otherwise stated.

There are alternating periods in which precipitation and resulting 

ground and surface water supplies are successively above or below

1 This report follows the Weather Bureau publications in treating Delaware and Maryland as a unit.
TABLE 1. Annual precipitation, in inches, by States, 1881-1934

[Figures in parentheses are estimates]

State

Humid States:

New Hampshire 

New York.. ____ ...

Maryland-Delaware _

West Virginia ____

Ohio _ ________

Michigan _______

Wisconsin _______

Minnesota ______

Floiida._.________ _____

Georgia _______________

Alabama. _____________

Louisiana

Semlarid States: 

Oklahoma ______

Kansas. ______________

Nebraska. ___ ___

South Dakota _.____

North Dakota _________

Texas _____ . _______

Arid States: 

New Mexico __________

Colorado. _____________

Idaho _________________

Nevada _______________

Utah _____ _ __ ._

Arizona ________

California _____________

Eastern Washington ___ Western Washington--

Mean 0

41.20

39.52 

37.03

42.39

4407

44.96

39.01

45.89

42 47

41.89 

42.18

50.44

48.21

50.30

45.81

43.83

38.44

31.29

40.17

37.26

48.97

40.17

31.48

31.63

25.91

52.94

50.48

53.11

53.32

55.64

32.63

27.48

23.50

20.77

17.70

30.84

1449

16.79

14.05

15. 21

17.17

9.01

12.67

13.10

23.53

13.81

64.22

16.89

56.98

1881

46.22

57.46 

32.54

41.80

52.12

45.92

35.44

44.10

39.29

41.68 

35.40

(50. 00)

50.35

41.56

49.10

52.53

40.04

44.98

43.71

42.32

39.28

*44. 16

46.38

33.52

55.76

52.88

57.09

(56. 00)

60.39

(30. 00)

33.16

*30. 91

23.62

18.73

32.23

22.57

22.61

11.88

16.00

17.44

7.21

9.57

11.68

21.46

1882

42.12

45.58 

29.67

39.57

51.30

43.65

35.48

54.75

45.45

42.26 

45.88

59.73

(52.00)

65.77

61.97

(60.00)

45.03

38.69

51.72

47.98

72.97

39.96

33.40

37.15

28.35

56.57

53.45

60.95

66.99

61.70

(50. 00)

25.35

23.51

20.56

21.12

30.76

12.57

15.21

(12. 00)

12.54

16.15

10.39

9.67

11.75

20.22

1883

40.69

40.40 

3480

35.77

41.22

38.62

35.33

43.80

43.57

42.24 

41.24

58.23

43.54

56.32

55.48

61.53

*4498

39.68

51.78

47.24

59.41

41.63

34.54

35.38

26 11

45.17

47.21

49.74

55.75

58.90

(35.00)

31.71

30.74

2490

16.76

28.78

11.30

16.43

19.24

13.50

17.88

9.77

7.72

11.49

16.60

1884

63.43

49.25 

35.81

45.74

56.08

48.51

35.23

46.63

45.94

42.84 

40.54

5442

49.94

*55.57

50.18

48.85

36.19

36.68

42.42

43.09

62.05

40.45

35.59

40.86

29.48

52.41

49.82

*52.58

6401

66.26

38.39

32.39

24.00

19.93

20.91

34.63

15.23

14.66

15.54

17.87

19.87

13.66

15.15

16.66

36.61

1885

47.02

47.05 

38.80

42.58

38.23

4498

37.89

 37.87

40.98

39.91 

38.66

53.73

52.04

4436

40.08

37.23

38.06

35.00

38.47

39.41

37.55

39.94

32.23

34.48

23.18

63.48

58.50

63.07

48.59

57.39

36.36

32.03

25.98

22.00

17.50

29.95

12.43

16.84

16.12

1415

16.64

7.81

13.00

7.12

19.52

1886

47.72

46.73 

37.73

45.04

54. 52

42.63

37.47

46.54

42.63

49.20 

54.09

53.06

46.27

51.75

43.54

39.80

36.71

31.96

39.79

34.48

42.98

38.91

24.71

33.74

26.02

57.07

48.08

55.33

49.60

51.36

(25.00)

25.11

23.71

22.12

16.49

26.25

16.56

17.38

7.16

11.98

1427

10.88

13.48

12. S3

19. 63

1887

47.66

47.03 

44.63

46.50

47.63

49.79

36.28

47.66

43.10

37.68 

45.38

*52.09

*43.43

44.97

43.25

35.33

33.63

29.81

*36. 12

32.38

41.89

32.77

26.31

32.66

*23. 70

51.04

49.48

47.55

44.57

51.41

27.29

*23.37

22,99

23.46

19.57

29.71

13.48

15.22

8. SO

15.98

16.21

5.18

6.55

12.20

14.63

1888

53.69

49.24 

50.78

57.51

51.86

57.86

43.88

52.20

*45.91

4492 

47.44

54.98

54.63

48.29

44.96

50. 84

39.64

*28. 68

39.79

37.80

48.94

*41. 22

31.44

31.02

25.10

54.42

58.07

57.42

50.82

55.10

23.40

23.43

22.86

17.61

16.40

 42.30

17.97

12.00

15.22

15.03

10.08

5.76

13.62

*13. 18

18.51

1889

43. 57

41.60

46.48

49.80

49.34

56.41

47.57

63.33

52.67

59.77 

59.59

50.76

46.76

45.50

*35. 97

42.19

33.41

26.86

36.02

35.55

45.78

37.91

24.95

27.04

19.08

50.21

53.90

43.30

*38.31

40.25

30.24

29.44

22.64

19.85

11.30

38.06

10.74

13.73

10.81

9.24

12.05

10.17

10.41

14.04

30.89

1890

50.65

48.03 

47.88

51.15

47.33

50.32

*49. 74

49.34

51.28

45.62 

41.62

46.49

42.29

57.60

58.82

57.53

50.33

34.23

49.58

38.65

65.33

35.71

29.48

37.04

25.01

51.65

49.78

49.99

56.23

55.43

38.42

21.16

17.18

*16.43

17.12

3462

13.10

11.97

12.76

10.78

17.96

"12.88

9.00

17.73

22.49

*11. 99

*45. 25

H2.00

*43. 17

1891

4477

38.28 

38.58

46.00

49.23

49.45

38.45

47.98

45. 65

50.20 

*47.94

54.55

47.52

52.80

49.69

*45. 96

38.61

30.65

40.05

3401

*4449

38.04

32.90

*26. 12

2452

48.14

49.63

52.85

56.24

*51. 55

22.31

31.14

30.62

20.05

22.25

30.45

14.84

19.88

14.90

18.03

16.29

14.06

14.36

9.81

20.22

18.14

54.80

15.34

56.56

1892

38.87

38.50 

38.81

40.63

38.17

38.77

42. 60

42.04

41.30

39.39 

39.45

47.04

47.36

54.17

44.25

38.33

37.16

33.69

41.83

41.37

57.75

42.76

36.58

34.98

28.38

*47. 99

*51. 12

56.81

57.47

61.67

35.79

29.02

24.12

24.41

*18. 34

29.40

*9.51

15.56

*11.92

14.32

17.51

10.54

*9.50

9.85

23.60

13.38

44.25

14.44

48.82

1893

39.58

38.40 

37.92

45.40

48.28

49.10

42.11

47.90

4426

38.76 

46. 22

52.66

63.68

45.56

44.71

39.82

39.63

3455

41. 54

3409

47.91

38.19

27.59

29.80

2445

53.01

40.29

50.11

51.54

49.90

 25.49

20.25

16.80

17.93

15.91

20.47

12.40

12.89

10.67

13.88

19.98

9.22

11.01

11.60

21.28

16.41

59.17

20.68

59.37

1894

35.16

31.38 

32.14

36.89

41.18

38.01

38.54

47.37

43.69

38.24 

35.76

46.57

50.49

42.65

3481

3452

29.75

28.00

32.21

28.89

49.05

33.18

21.94

27.96

21.63

52.51

49. 75

47.42

47.60

60.85

25.57

20.72

13.30

15.30

15.64

27.65

10.47

1437

11.87

15.28

*19. 52

10.80

11.43

10.77

25.78

19.14

62.70

16.91

61.81

1895

37.02

39.11 

34.68

41.47

49.10

43.34

33.89

37.29

33.51

*34.47 

38.23

50.23

48.99

43.10

38.47

32.82

28.46

26.90

30.99

*31. 89

44.69

39.30

26.77

22.45

22.68

45.50

49.57

49.92

47.69

54.52

35.08

28.08

18.75

16.05

17.30

32.92

15.36

18.33

16.90

*12. 97

13.63

7.90

10.66

12.34

1485

11.39

56.22

12.92

51.49

1896

36.97

3437

28.78

38.51

37.25

40.01

39.07

42.51

41.95

37.11 

42.64

47-54

44.95

47.09

44.68

43.49

39.58

31.74

40.62

36.59

37.72

44.63

37.23

32.21

31.02

49.62

45.15

45.25

43.13

46.56

23.78

28.72

26.19

2414

23.57

27.41

13.23

15.07

15.00

17.50

20.02

10.61

12.20

13.47

30.91

17.76

67.68

19. 35

64.61

1897

30.60

32.33 

31.18

32.43

34.60

37.50

40.15

51.72

42.73

4497 

39.19

46.06

46.40

50.89

46.72

41.59

38.59

31.23

40.44

35.85

46.13

38.82

26.98

27.77

27.23

56.69

49.23

47.30

46.62

61.60

30.61

24.45

23.54

21.09

15.88

27.32

16.62

19.46

12.26

15.71

17.91

9.79

14.56

11.93

*18.99

15.69

57.91

20.87

59.03

1898

45.48

44.19 

42.56

54.16

63.15

55.16

43.56

52.35

45.49

42.11 

44.71

50.04

49.26

50.45

52.38

47.61

43.78

32.29

45.71

46.64

56.82

53.67

31.34

28.04

24.21

48.36

53.14

49.09

54.58

63.49

39.45

31.79

20.70

16.50

16.15

28.43

14.03

15.61

12.50

16.82

1422

6.49

10.61

.2.77

10.35

9.72

45.96

12.02

48.11

1899

35.64

31.66 

3409

38.43

45.63

41.08

34.18

45.84

40.93

40.84 

42.20

52.08

46.76

47.97

46.38

40.97

34.32

28.35

3497

33.02

41.49

37.32

28.68

30.54

30.14

53.93

44.20

47.84

44.52

42.35

36.07

26.26

19.61

20.16

17.67

28.70

10.98

14.67

13.58

15.28

17.87

9.12

12.10

8.70

22.47

15.23

66.70

18.97

67.87

1900

50.91

44.39 

39.67

46.94

41.47

46.12

38.03

42.71

37.31

36.66 

39.52

48.40

49.79

51.43

44.40

37.62

32.82

32.31

37.83

35.38

49.03

38.34

35.05

35.07

29.79

61.19

57.33

66.16

66.54

66.45

32.51

27.96

24.46

23.05

19.06

42.17

13.52

14.43

10.95

33.34

16.12

8.25

8.38

8.17

19.84

11.94

52.97

15.20

59.06

1901

47.11

43.39 

38.01

49.98

49.36

58.99

43.30

51.80

45. 54

45.08 

49.99

62.66

54.98

46.96

35.65

4478

32.36

28.06

30.56

25.72

35.27

25.28

2441

26.34

24.26

58.47

67.58

55.61

50.16

60.24

22.78

21.35

22.75

22.76

19.48

22.23

1450

14.14

12.14

15.08

15.40

13.20

10.05

10.46

22.12

11.29

55.04

14.49

53.59

1902

46.91

46.57 

42.22

4403

4436

51.63

42.95

59.44

47.29

49.20 

40.67

44.46

46.43

49.42

44.35

42.19

37.58

32.53

40.06

41.88

51.70

44.96

43.82

32.59

29.46

51.24

49.99

49.27

48.07

46.77

40.54

34.42

29.10

19.92

19.34

33.92

9.97

13.88

9.81

15.26

16.51

7.25

9.17

9.80

24.22

12.60

68.76

17.69

62.98

1903

37.81

37.40 

35.54

43.86

47.65

50.24

43.27

56.25

46.27

46.94 

44.09

50.13

50.87

47.23

41.16

40.55

36.85

32.72

36.73

34.94

44.62

40.15

35.39

35.81

32.85

55.79

53.84

49.96

46.59

48.95

29.41

31.35

27.27

22.92

19.25

33.03

11.25

13.80

12.87

15.03

16.60

7.06

10.21

8.43

20.69

12.61

52.80

13.89

52.36

1904

39.17

36.30 

34.85

42.20

43.17

43.73

38.63

43.78

40.44

36.49 

36.11

43.27

40.98

40.74

35.10

33.33

36.19

29.73

38.22

37.59

43.45

41.68

28.51

31.55

29.65

48.15

37.17

39.21

41.48

43.83

29.79

31.01

23.37

18.46

19.02

30.02

1441

16.30

1429

11.04

14.70

10.62

11.43

9.24

30.39

14.69

71.01

*4. 24

54.02

1905

33.23

37.04 

36.29

39.02

38.38

40. 00

39.02

42.06

43.34

43.84 

43.27

51.94

45.10

50.85

47.68

45.53

39.08

33.32

43.18

36.71

62. 17

45.41

36.56

35.10

33.10

61.43

51.03

55.03

65.43

75.57

39.76

30.77

31.64

26.68

19.96

41.73

20.95

18.09

16.03

14.38

15.68

8.32

13.58

26.42

21.59

10.80

44.11

15.35

46.18

1906

41.75

37.67 

34.03

44.67

44.82

46.33

37.48

46.38

42.78

48.01 

50.03

59.53

54.81

53.86

48.84

44.36

36.88

31.41

39.62

37.26

55.99

37.09

31.60

3420

31.66

53.76

64.60

55.93

5435

48.59

36.88

28.58

27.00

27.95

19.72

31.51

15.89

19.71

17.82

18.47

20.69

15.87

18.34

15.91

38.70

Ifi. 49

58.79

17.45

58.62

1907

43.21

35.19 

37.99

43.96

42.84

47.74

38.45

51.65

45.45

4S.86 

44.41

48.64

47.79

49.14

47.76

52.15

42.85

30.67

44.83

40.65

49. 73

41.87

31.61

30.14

24.03

49.15

48.73

64.98

5412

68.21

33.85

26.46

20.52

18.92

1441

33.86

16.13

16.33

14.63

17.00

20.47

13.06

16.07

15.40

32.49

17.89

65.19

16. 55

51.21

1908

34.73

30.76 

30.24

36.04

39.68

41.44

33.54

42.58

39.58

40.01 

46.17

57.79

53.33

45.59

41.94

40.47

34.10

29.64

34.30

35.34

48.88

43.56

35.09

29.36

29.49

48.54

50.03

48.01

5476

58.54

47.23

32.30

26.95

25.10

18.64

32.91

12.68

17.09

17.28

20.09

16.46

6.34

14.82

15.15

18.78

9.32

46.97

13.61

53.53

1909

43.65

34.36 

35.68

41.50

41.13

42.70

36.03

40.86

37.38

37.47 

38.02

47.78

4-1.61

50.63

51.41

43.02

42.66

32.43

48.32

43.11

44.05

45.16

40.01

31.43

29.27

49.52

48.31

58.32

57.97

53.28

27.01

31.15

25.55

23.69

17.73

23.45

12.83

20.96

16.33

19.57

22.18

11.03

19.31

13.19

42.13

17.00

69.31

17.40

58.75

1910

34.51

33.41 

31.93

34.96

37.66

38.33

37.26

39.73

38.99

37.42 

41.37

48.42

45.31

45.17

50.67

38.60

36.03

25.69

37.53

32.09

45.21

37.91

19.87

21.41

14.73

50.88

43.60

45.20

47.12

49.65

18.92

19.67

17.03

15.49

12.19

21.46

9.46

14.35

12.12

15.99

17.08

5.53

11.25

9.36

16.77

1459

5481

19.99

88.02

1911

35.63

34.80 

30.54

40.46

43.70

43.76

36.61

50.36

45.52

43.61 

41.00

42.65

39.80

53.11

46.77

47.13

42.63

34.26

39.85

38.95

49.54

38.94

31.37

37.00

29.10

47.40

48.23

52.54

69.47

61.68

28.93

24.53

21.69

19.18

19.40

29.13

17.92

19.24

13.98

18.50

17.68

7.84

13.02

15.33

29.39

11.85

47.33

16.47

46.81

1912

43.69

39.06 

40.71

40.71

45.00

43.75

38. 34

46.61

44.13

43.42

40.88

47.27

54.32

54.40

47.93

43.83

37.82

32.34

40.69

35.55

45.83

saes

28.65

32.51

22.45

64.88

63.02

66.45

66.32

65.58

28.40

26.69

21.81

18.50

20.35

26.12

13.92

18.84

18.40

17.39

21.62

6.99

1415

12.74

22.27

17.81

65.53

22.25

57.00

1913

38.46

3446 

36.40

41.18

42.07

46.07

39.66

46.99

43.25

38.98 

42.33

52.37

47.57

47.42

47.46

48.29

44.75

29.79

44.20

35.40

54.01

37.47

29.95

32.81

25.49

48.02

46.47

52. 06

57.29

65.57

33.05

23.02

21.97

17.89

1469

36.05

15.36

17.78

15.88

15.28

19.88

10.99

12.88

12.02

25.20

16.61

52.79

18.23

53.53

1914

32.98

32.58 

30.16

36.92

37.58

38.44

36.39

39.23

38.24

35.97 

36.66

47.09

43.39

43.97

41.80

39.71

35.41

30.02

31.54

28.99

42.85

34.72

31.93

32.30

28.46

49.08

45.58

4490

46.59

53.35

25.97

23.08

20.77

21.57

19.16

37.88

19.45

19.26

12.69

15.08

16.20

9.43

13.60

16.86

31.13

12.74

56.54

17.70

57. 85

1915

38.45

39.73 

36.06

42.72

40.03

45.04

40.91

47.37

44.26

43.58 

40.03

50.09

48. 89

54.18

51.92

44.14

40.83

30.75

41.77

41.90

53.08

49.88

39.53

32.79

28.42

56.30

49.63

53.75

53.94

63.05

45.42

40.77

35.59

28.54

19.42

32.01

17.64

19.44

19.42

18.71

19.09

7.97

13.33

15.62

33.82

14.21

52.80

20.18

56.61

1916

42.87

41.73 

35.62

41.45

41.76

41.32

38.03

38.17

40.98

40.47 

38.94

50.91

43.91

50.79

45.49

45. 52

37.24

33.97

40.69

37.17

42.18

41.45

28.90

33.79

28.27

47.10

43.50

53.21

51.49

50.62

29.18

23.84

19.02

20.90

20.50

24.59

15.95

18.70

12.70

18.72

20.63

9.76

15.93

17.06

34.84

15.17

58.96

20.37

57.11

1917

45.04

35.91 

33.95

39.56

38.32

40.79

38.73

40.80

41.71

40.65 

40.11

49.85

43.49

51.51

46.01

43.56

36.51

27.21

36.82

32.54

40.72

32.06

27.81

27.35

20.99

41.36

47.41

53.74

45 16

40.27

22.39

19.60

20.73

16.77

10.92

16.21

9.49

14.74

It 7H

14.44

20.29

6.72

11.88

12.83

16.48

]9 43

51.09

in on

57.38

1918

41.57

37.71

38.64

37.31

36.57

40.78

38.23

37.65

41.06

37.96 

43. 48

50.98

46.48

47.30

40.64

45.28

36. 54

29.47

40.83

37.94

44.64

37.06

32.78

29.69

24.98

50.09

48.73

56.22

49.73

tiA 79

33.56

22.36

21.91

16.02

28.90

15.08

18.75

16.05

13.78

15.98

9.28

Id 19

1474

24.47

10.53

43.28

16 99

CO AQ

1919

37.54

38.20 

36.84

44.84

51.05

49.88

39.69

52.10

46.86

47.62 

41.65

48.80

46.79

57.65

52.13

47.89

40.33

30.23

37.56

54.52

40.14

36.76

33.22

97 *ifl

57.35

54.91

65 14

69 24

69.66

34.41

25.65

25.46

20.06

15.76

45 64

20.95

17.14

10.46

11.14

Ifi &.A.

7.08

n

CQ

1O S3

1<? 4.^

1:7 no

1R 99

52.08

1920

49.70

46.84 

43.54

48.26

47.62

55.99

40.57

51.87

40.63

44.95 

45.91

56.67

52.24

56.46

46.90

42.04

37.49

29.10

36.97

32.80

54.28

37.17

31.75

29.99

25.25

57.79

59.73

64.20

62.85

62.68

36.35

26.65

24.93

27.44

15.34

34 24

14.87

17.75

14.88

14.59

17.77

8.89

16.57

13.25

26.71

14 co

52. 77

19 14

58.20

1921

33.55

35.60 

33.55

41.71

38.46

42.18

35.41

38.16

41.80

37.72 

34.94

42.92

42.83

49.94

49.42

45,46

42.97

31.84

45. 80

40.74

47.46

43.77

32.03

30.73

<yy nn

45.24

45.34

AQ OK

47.54

30.02

o/i in

20.48

18.83

19.59

28.64

16.46

19.37

12.58

14 64

18.34

8.30

18.51

13.95

25.89

14. 7*\

55.42

20.76

64.08

1922

41.04

41.96 

37.82

44.70

46.99

45.45

39.53

41.57

34.88

40.15 

tf\ in

56.88

58.17

54.35

44.43

41.30

37.04

32.10

38.76

34.15

Afi tin

29.98

31.42

OO QR

57.63

55.38

68.78

en 40

65.57

33.89

29.01

20.61

21.61

19.75

OO Qf

10.86

15.60

14.16

15.12

15.45

Q VI

14.83

12.76

9S OR

12.55

49.52

10 07

43.02

1923

39.06

38.09 

37.15

39.98

4408

46.71

35.46

40.38

39.17

40.27 

An on

45.11

46.60

57.63

53.92

45.04

39.02

28.80

42.86

37.99

59.85

41.53

26.39

1Q ft1

50.17

52.76

60.87

71.03

72 19

44.98

01 CO

28.03

22.17

17.76

40 34

19.46

21.23

19.31

18.12

18.07

8.70

13 fin

16.95

14.13

 IO fit

44 89

to no

47.25

1924

34.37

35.60 

35.33

36.08

37.46

34.84

36.98

44.17

43.13

46.26 

47.34

54.57

56.99

46.20

47.21

37.34

29.79

37.73

35.81

37.03

39.73

31.39

33.06

24 77

61.62

54.27

47.23

40.06

38.34

27.86

24.23

21.05

18.47

17-85

23.50

10.65

13.75

12.69

11 71

12.46

8.49

10.57

8.68

17.05

10.42

A 7 OQ

14.05

51.31

1925

41.98

39.49 

41.47

42.15

37.20

43.72

41.41

42.15

27.86

34.91 

32.53

37.33

35.82

40.50

41.11

40.57

34.11

25.51

34.59

32.83

42.19

39.06

28.24

27.62

23.93

52.64

41.00

45.20

_.Q 94

52.19

28.31

25.08

20.89

15.90

16.81

oc 7A

13.86

16.96

15.62

16.34

18.86

10.16

14.50

12.77

21.13

13.93

14.56

48.13

1926

38.79

36.41 

36.94

40.23

42.09

43.05

40.19

44.41

43.11

43.90 

41.41

43.33

42.63

5469

49.95

49.60

43.69

33.03

43.73

42.94

49.24

43.07

33.07

35.05

2468

59.58

60.44

60.79

65.98

39.04

2480

21.07

17.73

15.70

36.33

17.44

16.98

14.58

13.79

16.37

6.39

12.43

16.48

27.06

12.97

53.69

17.49

52.78

1927

42.79

40.82 

42.50

47.17

48.46

50.90

45.50

49.68

47.30

40.37 

41.64

42.16

55.98

53.45

49.14

43.01

31.52

49.19

49.38

55.06

29.35

30.94

24.44

40.71

40.65

45.48

69.51

39.55

32.40

23.50

23.21

21.82

27.77

13.94

20.32

18.18

20.63

22.88

7.84

16.68

15.68

27.50

17.59

61.58

22.09

71.94

1928

39.84

38.48 

36.77

42.65

42.13

43.04

39.03

46.22

42.06

45.09 

43.07

56.21

61.66

53.13

45.61

43.29

3489

33.33

36.78

37.40

50.50

45.59

35.96

33.09

25.56

60.12

59.92

55.51

51.27

56.04

36.48

33.40

22.31

17.81

18.40

29.03

18.09

17.05

14.23

13.06

13.60

487

10.70

9.67

18.64

11.21

47.66

1436

68.80

1929

37.05

37.88 

39.46

40.90

43.32

41.89

43.02

42.96

4421

42.46 

46.31

62.09

66.13

59.78

48.46

46.77

45.83

31.22

47.04

41.94

46.10

46.61

30.20

28.09

20.56

59.04

69.83

76.48

60.03

63.65

35.39

27.96

23.05

20.93

1432

31.17

16.48

18.16

15.06

13.08

13.06

5.83

13.60

11.14

15.00

11.58

38.66

10.19

4401

1930

35.66

33.59 

32.88

33.84

32.83

32.02

32.18

35.28

28.82

23.78 

24.99

38.04

40.15

39.80

27.86

25.43

27.00

22.62

29.70

27.89

46.62

31.27

26.10

25.08

22.59

60.24

46.13

46.17

47.32

5S.01

30.70

26.87

25.73

18.10

14.90

29.67

1464

17.32

14.70

12.38

18.35

9.77

15.14

15.21

1&38

11.27

37.11

12.12

48.60

1931

*40. 32

*39. 01 

*39.87

*43.54

*39. 95

*40.73

38.08

37.07

37.36

38.68 

38.00

43.57

37.17

43.24

41.98

42.36

37.59

29.80

38.36

37.88

46.98

40.27

35.37

29.68

22.53

43.97

36.75

42.78

52.39

52.90

31.59

25.90

19.65

1466

14.99

29.26

18.32

14.03

11.57

10.09

14.30

7.98

10.06

19.30

24.37

12.19

52.29

18.29

78.00

1932

39.87

41.57 

39.78

45.98

52.00

48.53

42.19

46.80

39.02

47.15

M 78

52.38

54.08

44.19

43.86

36.62

33.13

42.82

36.56

51. 11

37.79

32.28

25.37

21.68

52.56

56.80

63.76

67.71

62.79

33.99

23.76

20.98

19.16

17.11

3406

16.20

14.17

13.31

16.17

19.22

8.24

13.36

13.43

15.60

1463

63.76

18.07

83.40

1933

41.08

43.62 

39.36

49.46

45.26

AK fin

37.53

49.80

45.43

49.30

on A A

on OQ

35.95

51.08

50.61

48.65

37.39

30.30

40.74

34.89

49.08

36.21

2494

27.11

20.97

65.87

41.91

48.27

50.33

5496

30.56

22.18

20.11

15.31

13.34

26.96

12.83

15.16

12.16

15.69

17.28

6.67

10.57

11.46

20.18

13.94

60.13

21.12

84.51

1934

39.76

41.23 

38.73

44.97

39.24

52.75

34.97

45.34

39.34

46.43

45.58

53.70

45. 7»

47.53

37.00

37.56

26.60

25.46

29.70

33.12

42.42

34.19

26.90

30.34

20.30

53.38

47.36

65.22

53.40

59.11

27.54

19.92

14.40

13.18

9.49

26.78

9.96

10.93

10.94

11.25

15.34

8.06

9.49

10.11

17.98

14.07

53.53

17.17

89.97

0 For 50-year period 1881-1930, except for eastern and western Oregon and Washington, which are for period of record.

NOTE. Beginning with the years that are noted by the asterisks, the figures are taken from Climatological data for the United States, by sections, vol. 20. no. 13, U. S. Weather Bureau. 1933. Figures for previous years are taken from U. S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook, 1932, table 486, pp. 920-922. 142748 36. (Face p. 4.)
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 O

normal. The records, however, do not disclose at least on the 

basis of present interpretation that these periods conform to fixed 

cycles or that their occurrence is affected by any acts of man. Man's 

relation to drought has to do with damages and not causes. In the 

main, droughts result from climatic conditions immediately before 

or during the drought period, and the only effect of climatic conditions of previous years relates to any excess of precipitation that 

may have accrued to surface- and ground-water storage. Such accretion aids in alleviating damages during drought years, especially 

in the arid sections.

Attention has usually been drawn to droughts by their economic, 

social, and political aspects, as related to human activities, and not 

by their physical side. In earlier years they were judged largely by 

the extent of their damage to vegetation, especially agricultural 

crops. In recent years, however, as demands and uses of water have 

increased, more consideration is directed to the effect of droughts on 

surface and ground water supplies as related to normal activities. 

Therefore, in determining the damages and losses caused by a drought 

in a given area many factors must be considered. Among these are 

the climatic conditions, geology, topography, character and extent of 

agriculture and other activities, and facilities for the conservation 

and storage of water. The whole drought problem is so complex that 

it is difficult to compare those that occur in different areas or in 

different years. A drought in a certain locality may be detrimental 

to vegetation and not to water supply, or vice versa.

Water-supply conditions for the 5-year period 1930-34 fully indicate that we have now reached a point in the development of the 

country when serious consequences will result unless much more 

careful consideration is given to droughts than has been given in the 

past. Modern needs and uses for water are rapidly exceeding the 

limits of free natural supplies. Cities and industries are not only 

undertaking the full utilization of local supplies but are seeking 

remote sources. Provision of adequate supplies during low-water 

periods is becoming more and more of a problem. The economic 

losses that will result from interruption of service, on the one hand, 

or from overdevelopment, on the other, can be reduced only through 

accurate knowledge of frequency, duration, and quantity of minimum, 

surface-water flows and ground-water yields during periods of drought..

DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931

Unfavorable crop reports and low stream flow early in the summer 

of 1930 first called attention to the approaching seriousness of the 

drought. These were followed by reports from many localities of the 

shortage of water supplies for domestic and other uses. The principal 

drought area was in the north Atlantic, Ohio River, and Great Lakes
U DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

drainage basins. By the middle of the summer the effects of the 

drought were receiving general attention by the press of the country, 

and the situation was referred to as "the great drought of 1930." 

At the end of the summer it became evident that in many localities 

relief measures would be necessary, and steps were taken by both 

private and governmental agencies to meet needs as they arose. 

Differences of opinion as to methods of providing the relief created 

marked political issues and resulted in much emotional publicity, in 

which great emphasis was given to conditions in certain localities 

where the effects of the drought were most severe. All this tended 

to magnify the unfavorable aspects of the situation.

CAUSES

The climatic conditions deficient and poorly distributed precipitation, high temperatures, and hot winds which are the basic cause of 

all droughts, have been summarized from Weather Bureau statistics 

in table 2 and on plate 1 and figures 3, 4, 13, and 14. These tables 

and figures, with graphs on figures 21 to 69, provide a basis for studying the progress of the droughts of 1930 and 1931 in each State and 

for making comparisons between other States. During 1928-29 the 

annual precipitation was generally in excess of normal, and although 

deficiency in monthly precipitation appeared in later months of 1929 

the records indicate that at the beginning of 1930 water conditions 

were practically normal and that the droughts of 1930 and 1931 cannot in any large measure be attributed to conditions that occurred in 

preceding years.

PRECEPITATIQN

During 1930 precipitation was 85 percent of the mean or less in 

27 States. This deficiency was rather uniformly distributed throughout the year, as indicated on the monthly graphs in figures 21 to 69, 

and was accompanied by excessive heat and warm winds, which 

resulted in wide-spread droughts varying in severity in different 

localities.

The precipitation in 1930 exceeded 85 percent of the mean in 

only 9 of the 31 humid States. It was above normal in only 1, 

Florida, and in 12 it was the lowest on record. These 12 States 

were in the North Atlantic, Ohio River, and Great Lakes drainage 

basins, and the deficiency was greatest in Maryland and Delaware, 

West Virginia, Virginia, and Kentucky, where the precipitation 

ranged from 57 to 61 percent of the mean. In the 6 semiarid States 

precipitation was below 94 percent of the mean in only 2 North 

Dakota, 84 percent; South Dakota, 87 percent and no previous 

records of minima were broken. In the 11 arid States the precipitation was above normal except in Montana, Idaho, Washington,
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER PLATE 1

A «\.

SPH*»"^W I®^/* 89 V-^i

* r~n >- >r' us ^,_... 

I so L i 133 S~r"\ \ei

\ w lv--^^:-

N I l \ llfi V "V" 115 4:-.

/ "5 i 90 L i i33/--r-"\ \e

~^ ! """""-H MOS! 94\ 99 Xm-^-Jj-r-J Moo^',-1 J

\\\ > ._ ' . 4-lTi^^x1

i-- -- ,_,

'OS / '~T ----, 109 / "9 / ,03 r 

I 04 ' 

101 ; L 94 i 95

PRECIPITATION BY STATES

FOR 

MAJOR DROUGHT YEARS

AH figures indicate percentage of mean. 

Large figures indicate minimum recorded. 

When annual precipitation falls to 85 percent of the mean, a deficiency of 15 percent, 

a drought may be said to exist. Shaded 

areas show the States having droughts under this definition.' The percentages are for 

the calendar year, and in the arid States precipitation on that basis is not a true index 

.of the water supply available for vegetation
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 7

Oregon, and California, and in these 5 States it was below 85 percent except in Idaho (95 percent). In western Oregon it was only 

38 percent of the mean, breaking all records of previous lows.

Deficiencies in precipitation continued during the first 10 months 

of 1931, but they were not as great or wide-spread as during the

 corresponding period in 1930, arid the distribution of precipitation 

was much better. November and December 1931 were months of 

Mgh precipitation, which made up for the deficiencies earlier in the 

year and brought the annual precipitation to more than 85 percent 

of the mean in 35 States.

In 1931 the precipitation was 85 percent 01 less in only 5 of the 

liumid States Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and 

New Jersey. It was lowest in Georgia, with 73 percent, which 

broke all records of previous lows. There were only 2 semiarid 

States in which the precipitation was below 85 percent Nebraska, 

S4 percent, and South Dakota, 71 percent, the latter breaking previous records. Precipitation in all the arid States was 82 percent or 

more, except Montana, 66 percent, and Utah, 79 percent, and no 

previous records were broken, but there were areas where water 

supplies for irrigation were short, owing largely to unfavorable

 distribution of precipitation and inadequate storage. An example 

is California, where, although the annual precipitation was 104 percent of the mean, agriculture was seriously affected by water 

shortages.

Although in 1931 deficiency in the precipitation was not extreme 

in most States, it was sufficient, with the possible carry-over effects 

from the drought of 1930, to cause many localities to suffer from 

shortages in both surface-water and ground-water supplies. Vegetation, however, was not materially affected, as there was ample 

precipitation during the growing season to supply both natural 

growth and agricultural crops.

A comparison of the 1930-31 drought with other droughts is given 

on pages 65-69.
TABLE 2. Precipitation and composite yields of crops per acr

[Yields are expressed as percentage of average for 10-year period

State

Humid States:

New Hampshire ____

Maryland-Delaware ......

Virginia..- ..............

Nprth Carolina. .. ....

West Virginia......----

0hio- __ -----_-----.-.

Illinois..... ..............

Arkansas.. _______

W|sconsin.- __ . __ ..

^?

1

a 

9 

X

41.20 

39.52 

37-03 

42.39 

44.07 

44.96

39.01 

45.89 

42.47 

41.89 

42.18 

50,44

48.21 

50.30 

45.81 

43.83 

38.44 

31.29

40.17 

37.26 

48.97 

40.17 

31.48 

31.63

1929

Precipitation

a

a

 s

H

J> 

P<

90 

96 

107 

96 

98 

93

110 

94 

104 

101 

110 

123

137 

119 

106 

107 

119 

100

117 

113 

94 

116 

96 

89

1

|I 

1

6 

5 

5 

6 

5 

6

4 

5 

4 

3 

4 

3

2 

2 

4 

5 

1 

4

3 

3 

6

4 

4

7

3^ 

 <"§ 

* §

"3 H

fl 

| M

7.8 

9.4 

9.5 

6.2 

6.2 

6.3

9.4 

7.3 

8.9 

9.2 

12.0 

15.9

13.3 

11.4

io.i

10.9 

11.6 

7.4

11.4 

11.8 

8.0 

12.4 

9.8 

9.1

1'R 

a

a

I

fe

115.5 

112.0 

110.5 

98.0 

104.3 

102.5

91.8 

92.9 

93.3 

98.8 

105.2 

92.4

103,4 

105.2 

97.8 

94.8 

97.4 

8$. 3

95.2 

99.2 

102.2 

88.0 

103.8 

105.0

1930

Precipitation

"3

(5

87 

85 

89 

80 

74 

71

82 

77 

68 

57 

59 

75

83 

79 

61 

58 

70 

72

74 

7S 

95 

78 

83 

79

1

3

5 s

a 

o

S

9 

8 

7 

9 

11 

9

8 

10 

10 

12 

12 

10

8 

9 

10 

12 

10 

9

10 

9 

6 

9 

9 

10

 *''? 

*§ 

3 H

1-5

9.8 

11.0 

10.4 

9.3

7.8 

9.2

9.7 

11.5 

7.9 

6.0 

6.8 

11.1

11.6 

6.4 

5.2 

7.0 

6.2 

5.5,

6.5 

6i4 

4.2 

6.8 

9.7 

8.9

 3 

 3

 R 

P.

a 

8

£ P<

102.9 

125.4 

110.7 

116.6 

121.8 

114.8

102.2 

110.0 

88.7 

80.9 

72.7 

100.3

119.3 

74.4 

63.9 

57.0 

77.3 

84.4

84.9 

83.6 

62.0 

67.1 

91.7 

101.0

1931

Precipitation

| 

"3

£ P<

98 

99 

108 

103 

91 

91

98 

81 

88 

92 

90 

86

77 

86 

92 

97 

Q8 

95

96 

102 

96 

100 

112 

94

1

saa 

o

a

6 

6 

6

7 

6 

8

7 

9 

10 

8 

8 

7

9 

9 

8 

6

7 

7

7 

6 

7 

6 

8 

8

g

^

*s

nH

*.+> Gj w

§

3

^

12.9 

13.3 

13.6 

14.8 

13.8 

13.9

11.9 

14.2 

13.0 

15.5 

15.2 

16.1

12.4 

11.4 

12.0 

14i4 

12.3 

>.0

11.1 

10.0 

13.3 

10.9 

9.8 

9.4

I 

i

a

Ifu

104.6 

112.3 

118.5 

101.5 

112.8 

104.1

110.8 

117.3 

115.7 

117.8 

120.6 

109.1

128.0 

120.0 

113.8 

115.3 

129.3 

100.3

116.5 

109.4 

140.0 

111.0 

85.4 

84.2

1

Precipita

a

a

a 5

1 P<

97 

105 

107 

108 

118 

108

108 

102 

92 

113 

106 

104

112 

118 

96 

100 

95 

1Q6

107

98 

104 

94 

103 

80

1 

 "9

§ 

S

6 

5 

5 

6 

5 

5

6

7 

7 

6 

6 

7

7 

4 

4 

5

5?

5 

6 

6

7 

7 

7
Minnesota... ____ ....

Florida. ...

Georgia ___ .. ____ .

Semiarid States: 

Oklahoma

Kansas. .- _____ . ....

South Dakota... ... .....

North Dakota.. .-_---.._

Texas....................

Arid States:

Wyoming ________ .

Montana.. __ . ___ ...

NevadaUtah

California _ . ___

Eastern Washington _ . 

Western Washington. ...

25.91

52.94

50.48

CQ 1 1

53.32

32.63

27.48

23.50

20.77

17.70

Qfl QA

14.49

16.79

14.05

15.21

17.17

9.01

12.67

13.10

23.53

13.81

54.22

16.89 

56.98

79

11?

138

 tAA

108

10?

98

101

81

101

114

108

107

86

7fi

65

107

85

64

84

71

60

77

fi

3

4

4

?

5

6

5

5

4

4

....

6.6

99 R.

13.1

11.1

10.1

19 ft

7.0

9 7

0 A

5.9

3

K

5.0

7.5

6.8

3 9

3.1

9 fi

1.6

5.6

1.5

9 1

4.6

1.6 

5.1

102.9

83.8

116.6

11Q A

123.0

117.3

85.9

90.6

101.3

90 7

Q1 K

84.3

116.6

Qfi 7

o*> e

72.1

103.0

Of fi

102 9

109.6

QQ Q

}l01. 9

[ 94.5

87

114

91

87

89

95

QA.

98

109

fi7

QA

QA

101

lAO

105

fil

95

108

11Q

116

7fi

f on

I 68

( 72 

\ 85

8

9

6

6

8

9

8

7

Q

Q

6

6

11

 -

7.5

19 4

11.9

9 5

6

i>

9 n

6.6

ft 7

a &

6.4

5.6

4.7

6.8

7.1

5.5

3.5

9 fi

1 9

4 2

K Q

.2

Q

1 9

1.4 

2.6

101.9

Qfi 1

126.5

114.2

90 6

103.7

70.0

86.8

104.5

QA Q

93 9

84 6

QQ 9

113.4

Qfi 9

67.0

114.6

106.3

117.1

109.0

llll.l

| 97.1

87

8

9

73

si

98

QK

97

94

84

71

8

C

QR

12ft

84

fi9

66

00

89

7Q

147

1AJ

f QQ

\ 96

J'108 

\137

9

8

11

9

9

8

9

8

10

Q

10

7

& i

14.3

11.6

19 n

15.0

10 9

7.8

7.7

6 

A

7.5

7.1

6.4

4.0

O O

3.5

1.1

1.5

1

C

7.0

1.0

1.5

4.1

1.8 

7.2

81 fi

no A

124. 2

125.9

117.7

m l

111.2

115.3

78.5

38 3

CO ft

1 1Q 1

130.7

on n

"7K 1

55.6

97 0

70.5

77.4

1 1Q 9

90 7

} 93.2

| 92.5

84

99

1OA

127

113

104

86

so

92

97

110

112

Hi

Q.fc

106

112

91

105

103

66

I 99

(107 

\146

8

6

5

8

9

9

8

5

5

6

5

11

 

: For 50-year period 1881-1930, except for eastern and western Washington and Oregon, which are for p
10 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

The mean precipitation for each. State for the years 1881-1930 is 

given in table 2. The table also gives for the years 1929-34 the 

precipitation expressed in percent of the 50-year mean, the number of 

months for each year when the average precipitation was below the 

mean for the respective months, the total precipitation for the growing months, June, July, and August, and the crop yields in percent 

of normal. In most States the deficiency in monthly precipitation 

started in the later months of 1929 and persisted throughout 1930 

and the first 10 months of 1931, as shown in figures 21 to 69. During 

this 31-month period the number of months when the precipitation 

was below the mean ranged in the various humid and semiarid 

States from 16 to 25.

-20 -20

+ 5

1930,1925,1921

FIGURE 2. Accumulated departures from the mean of the monthly precipitation for the periods of 31 

months including the 3 years of lowest precipitation in Virginia.

In Virginia the three most severe drought years of record were 

1921, 1925, and 1930. The graphs in figure 2 indicate the accumulated departures from the mean of the monthly precipitation for 

three 31-month periods that include these three droughts, thus 

affording a means of comparing them.

The intensity of each drought is revealed by the steepness of its 

graph, the duration by the length of time the deficiencies continued 

to accumulate, and the severity by a combination of the two. For 

example^ the graph from February to September 1925 is almost as
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 11

steep as that for the corresponding period in 1930, indicating that 

the intensity of the drought was nearly the same for that period 

during both years. In the drought of 1930, however, the deficiencies 

in precipitation continued to accumulate for 6 months longer, and 

for that reason this drought is classed as the most severe experienced 

in Virginia.

Records of stream flow (see pp. 26-32 and table 17) give an even 

better picture of the drought of 1930-31 and also another means for 

comparing it with other major droughts.

TEMPERATURE

During 1930 and 1931 temperatures in the drought area were 

unusually high, as indicated in figures 3 and 4. In 1930 previous 

recorded maxima were broken in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, 

Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi, and they were equaled in Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and New 

Mexico. In July 1931 previous maxima were broken only in Florida 

and Idaho and equaled only in Georgia and South Dakota.

WIND

Warm winds, both in 1930 and in 1931, contributed in a large 

measure to the effects of the drought on vegetation. In many 

areas warm winds persisted both night and day and in a large measure 

may have accounted for low humidity, high evaporation, and absence

-of the usual dews, which are of great benefit to vegetation.

EFFECT ON GROUND AND SURFACE WATER 

GENERAL EFFECT

The quantity and distribution of both surface and subsurface 

water, and also their relation to each other, are determined by a combination of factors, including climate, vegetation, topography, geology, 

geographic location, and the works of man.

The relation between droughts and water supplies and between 

water supplies and vegetation depends upon the basic principles of 

hydrology, and these three subjects are so closely related that it is

-difficult to consider or discuss any one of them independently of the

-others..

Of the water that reaches the earth by precipitation, a part is 

promptly returned to the atmosphere by evaporation; another part 

remains on the surface, either as snow or impounded water, or in 

flowing streams, as surface water; and the remainder enters the 

ground and becomes subsurface water.

With respect to the occurrence of subsurface water 2 the earth's

-crust may be divided into the zone of saturation and the zone of

» See Meinzer, O. E., Occurrence of ground water in the United States: TI. S. Qeol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 489,1923; Outline of ground-water hydrology: IT. S. Qeol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 494,1923.
12 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

\ 'IS i .59 /

FTTzl Highest of record

108 Equal to previous h

"~ ^

FIGURE 3. Temperatures, 1930. Upper figure, number of days with maximum of 100° F. or more. Lower 

figure, maximum temperature during June, July, and August. In areas indicated by heavy outline the 

precipitation in 1930 was lowest of record.

I 16

, 27

3? / S "O i/s ;> /j^>"\~"-.

*>--L. / 3, [ijl ! .^Jbe/lftgV',,, _ .

' ' , '"~" ' ^-£H 32 ^J..r-^\-^ '* 

I lQ-3 , ---,---_ j. 6P . 106 ' ' ' " (0 /

\"91 ni i ar"L--i-- i--

F«\ / / MO ! ^9 \ 50'^°;'^-^0r^^3 

'6 \ r--_,'_ __ ! 113 j HO k -, .h- \06^-':^- -^ 

V" ' ". "~:-":- - L--f -*$.'

> ,'f| ' 63 ! fi'o 1 39 ;--10 "

 _i "9 108 i K- ! 107 / : ., ' ! -~--"~i-, i ^S I 4-t

"" i-'~""\""~" 98 \35/; ' 

, , *\ 109 /lOS"^-

S V v- 7"\

Highest of record VI 

Equal to previous high Q V^

FIGURE 4. Temperatures, 1931. Upper figure, number of days with maximum of 100° F. or more. Lower 

figure, maximum temperature during June, July, and August. In areas indicated by heavy outline 

the precipitation in 1931 was lowest of record.
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 13

aeration, as indicated in figure 5. In the zone of saturation the interstices are filled with water under hydrostatic pressure. This zone

 constitutes the great reservoir from which stream flow is maintained 

And deep-rooted plants are, in part, fed during the periods of slight 

rainfall. The water in this zone is commonly called "ground water." 

In the zone of aeration the interstices are largely filled with air. Many 

of the interstices in this zone contain water, and at times some of 

them may be completely filled. This water is not, except temporarily, 

under hydrostatic pressure and is, for the most part, held by molecular 

attraction. This zone acts as a distributing reservoir, and its water

 content is subject to rapid fluctuations.

The depth to the water table or upper surface of the zone of saturation varies in different localities, depending on topography and the 

.geologic formation. It also has seasonal variations, which depend on 

the differences in the rate at which water enters and leaves the zone of

FIGXTBE 5. Diagrammatic section showing different kinds of discharge of subsurface water. A, Groundwater or phreatic-water discharge: Al-a, spring; Al-b, well; AZ-a, phreatophyte; AS-b, soil which is acting 

like the wick of a lamp in drawing water from the zone of saturation. B, Vadose»water discharge: B-l, 

ordinary plant, the roots of which do not extend to the capillary fringe; £-£, soil above the capillary fringe, 

which is losing moisture by evaporation. (After Meinzer.)

saturation. These variations indicate and determine the gradient of 

the water table. This gradient is important, because its fluctuations 

 correspond to the amount of water that is released from the zone of 

saturation.

The zone of aeration may be divided, as indicated in figure 5, with 

respect to the occurrence and circulation of its water, into the belt of 

soil water, the capillary fringe, and the intermediate belt.

The belt of soil water is the part of the earth's crust immediately 

below the surface, from which water is discharged into the atmosphere 

in perceptible quantities by evaporation from the soil or transpiration 

from plants. Its thickness is limited by the character of the vegetation 

and the texture of the soil. It is essentially the same as the so-called 

"root zone." The capillary fringe is the belt that overlies the zone of 

saturation and contains interstices, some or all of which contain water
14 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

that is continuous with the zone of saturation but is held above that 

zone by capillary action against gravity. Its thickness is determined 

by the texture of the material in which it occurs.

The intermediate belt is the residual part of the zone of aeration. 

It varies in thickness and will be missing entirely when the belt of 

soil moisture joins the capillary fringe. In general, the intermediate 

belt is of but little importance in connection with water supplies.

The precipitation that passes below the surface first enters the belt 

of soil water, from which it is discharged in four ways (1) to the 

atmosphere by evaporation directly from the soil; (2) to plants, which 

return a large portion of it to the atmosphere by transpiration; (3) tothe surface water by shallow subsurface flow; (4) to the intermediate 

belt, through which it percolates and ultimately reaches the water 

table, where it enters the zone of saturation.

Where the water table meets the earth's surface, springs occur and; 

water flows from the zone of saturation upon the land surface or into a, 

body of surface water. Where the water table is near the surface,, 

water may be withdrawn from the zone of saturation by evaporation 

directly through the soil or by plants, mostly by transpiration. 

Water is also withdrawn from the zone of saturation through wells,, 

filtration ditches, and tunnels.

The precipitation reaches the surface streams either directly byflow over the surface of the ground or indirectly through the ground,, 

either as suspended water or as ground water. Low-water flows are^ 

derived largely from ground water; when this is supplemented by 

water from the zone of aeration, medium flows exist; and if there is a; 

large contribution from the surface, flood flows are produced.

The relation between vegetation and water is not fully understood,, 

it is not readily susceptible of laboratory study, and there are varyingopinions relative to the many phases that enter into it. Certains 

principles, however, have been usually agreed to by many students of 

the subject. Plants draw their moisture through their root systems: 

from the earth's zone in which they are embedded and give it off bytranspiration through their leaves. Root systems are particularly 

susceptible to the influence of changes in soil texture and moistureand are more or less modified by environment. There are wide variations in their character. Some penetrate deeply into the soil; otherslie near the surface. The root systems reach out and take the water 

which is most readily available. Their principal source of supply is 

the belt of soil water, and not the zone of saturation, for with theexception of certain trees, the roots of most plants do not extend
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 15

deeply into the ground and, in general, do not reach the water table. 

Hence, there appears to be but little direct relation between most 

vegetation, other than deep-rooted trees, and the ground-water table. 

The principal draft on the zone of saturation by vegetation is that 

from growth on lands adjacent to watercourses.

During the average growing season practically all the precipitation 

is lost through evaporation or utilized in plant growth, so that stream 

flow during the growing period is largely dependent upon ground 

water. Low flows, therefore, generally prevail except when the 

precipitation is intense or excessive.

Water in the belt of soil water fluctuates in quantity with precipitation and is continually being lost either by evaporation and transpiration or by percolation laterally to the surface or downward to the 

zone of saturation. The capacity of the belt of soil water for holding 

water is comparatively small; therefore the quantity of water available in it is not greatly affected by long-time carry-over derived from 

previous precipitation. In general this belt contains sufficient water 

to supply vegetation for only a few weeks, and during the growing 

season of June, July, and August ample replenishment is required or 

most plant life will suffer. Crop-yield statistics for the humid and 

semiarid sections (see pp. 32-35) indicate that, in general, after 

germination, from 7 to 8 inches of favorably distributed precipitation 

is the minimum requirement for the production of average yields, 

unless temperatures are abnormally low or high, or there are excessively hot winds.

A comparison of available records of precipitation and run-off in 

the northeastern United States prior to 1906 3 as given in table 3 indicates that in the humid areas during the growing period evaporation 

and plant growth will consume as much as 3K inches of precipitation 

a month. Therefore, unless the monthly precipitation during the 

growing season exceeds that amount or comes so rapidly that it cannot all be consumed, there will be little water available for replenishing either the surface or the ground water.

*See Hoyt, J. C., Comparison between rainfall and .run-off in northeastern United States; Am. Soc. Civil 

Bug. Trans., vol. 59, paper 1061,1907.
16 DEOTJGHTS OF 1930-34

TABLE 3. Losses between precipitation and run-off prior to 1906 for the -winter

and summer months

Station

Connecticut River at Orford, N. H- - 

Housatonic River at GaySusquehanna River at HarSusquehanna River at

Susquehanna River at

Ohio River at Wheeling, 

W Va

Potomac River at Point of

Sneriandoah River at Millville, W. Va .... .

James River at CartersJames River at BuchNorth Fork of James River

Appomattox River at MatRoanoke River at Roan-

' Roanoke River at RanDecember to April

Precipitation 

(inches)

12.89 

17.80 

14.48 

14.47 

15.48 

16.23 

14.14 

14.38 

16.95 

15.99 

15.89 

16.87 

16.50 

17.53

Run-off

Inches

11.19 

17.12 

13.58 

16.48 

14.76 

15.16 

9.14 

7.72 

10.76 

10.37 

9.57 

9.89 

9.84 

9.53

Percent of precipitation

87 

96 

94 

114 

95 

93 

65 

54 

63 

65 

60 

59 

60 

54

Loss 

(inches)

1.70 

.68 

.90 

-2.01 

.72 

1.07 

5.00 

6.66 

6.19 

5.62 

6.32 

6.98 

6.66 

8.00

June, July, August

Precipitation 

(inches)

12.00 

16.02 

12.25 

14.00 

12.87 

12.61 

11.80 

12.60 

13.69 

12.87 

12.69 

14.36 

13.48 

14.60

Run-off

Inches

3.87 

5.12 

2.85 

2.74 

3.30 

3.12 

2.44 

2.80 

3.51 

2.97 

2.98 

3.05 

3.63 

4.62

Percent of precipitation

32 

32 

23 

20 

26 

25 

21 

22 

26 

23 

23 

21 

27 

32

Loss 

(inches)

8.13 

10.90 

9.40 

11.26 

9.57 

9.49 

9.36 

9.80 

10.18 

9.90 

9.71 

11.31 

9.85 

9.98

Total 

yearly 

loss 

(inches)

15.10 

18.43 

18.29 

16.66 

17.76 

19.02 

22.64 

24.69 

24.77 

24.26 

24.77 

26.50 

24.99 

25.14

Surface and subsurface water supplies are usually at a minimum at 

the end of the growing season, which for most sections of the United 

States is about October 1. From that time until the beginning of the 

next growing season, about April 1, the losses through evaporation 

and plant life are comparatively small, and the precipitation is mostly 

available for replenishing surface and subsurface waters. For this 

reason October 1 may be used as the beginning of the water year in 

presenting stream-flow records. The major part of stream flow 

depends on the precipitation during the nongrowing season.

In the humid areas, where cultivated crops depend wholly on rain, 

there will obviously be a drought when an absence of rain occurs in 

the growing season. In the semiarid regions dependence on rain also 

makes a dry period a drought period. In the true arid country, 

however, where crops depend for their moisture largely on impounded 

water, a drought is not caused by absence of precipitation during the 

growing season but rather by absence of precipitation during the 

nongrowing seasons, as precipitation during these seasons furnishes a 

larger part of the water for storage.

The demand for water for natural vegetation is different from that 

for cultivated crops. Through the centuries the natural vegetation
DEOUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 17

has adapted itself to its environment, so that it can withstand to a 

large degree absence of moisture for long periods, extremes in 

temperatures, and high desiccating winds. Ecologists state that this 

is a part of the process of "edaphic adaptation." Therefore, in a 

sense, natural vegetation, including arborescent flora, can survive 

droughts that would affect cultivated crops. The effect of a drought 

on such vegetation, however, may consist in lessening cellulose 

produced, reducing the growing season, and as a corollary increasing 

the dormant season.

As related to agriculture, a drought depends largely on the extent 

to which man has entered into the picture.

In ordinary years the humid areas have adequate precipitation to 

supply the needs of vegetation. Nevertheless, there may be in any 

year small areas in which vegetation is affected by shortages of water, 

and at intervals ranging from 15 to 20 years there may be major 

shortages that may seriously affect vegetation over large areas. 

The correction of these effects is largely outside the control of man, 

and to be successful, agricultural activities in the humid section 

should be so planned as to provide for carrying over these lean years.

The precipitation in the semiarid sections of the country is so small 

that vegetation is affected in a large measure not only by fluctuations 

in the total annual precipitation but also by unsatisfactory distribution throughout the year. These areas, which may be for alternate 

years either humid or arid, according to the precipitation, were 

originally natural range and produced, in the main, only vegetation 

for stock raising, which was successfully carried on for many years. 

In 1873 the Director of the United States Geological Survey, in 

testifying before a congressional committee on public lands, indicated 

that most of the country lying west of Minnesota was an arid region 

and in the main could not be used for agriculture except by irrigation. 

Five years later he reiterated this statement before another committee. 

While irrigation has been successfully carried on hi the arid sections, 

unfortunately it has not been found economically feasible in most 

semiarid sections. The United States Weather Bureau has repeatedly 

expressed cautions against any great extension of agriculture in the 

semiarid States.

The reason for the failure to heed these warnings is shown in 

figures 1 and 19, which indicate that since 1880 drought years in the 

semiarid States have been more or less bunched, with several years of 

no drought between each group. The periods of no drought were 

1880 to 1885, 1902 to 1906, and 1918 to 1923. With adequate precipitation, these semiarid areas are especially adapted to the growing 

of wheat, and during nondrought years large areas were converted 

from range to wheat culture. It was this section that suffered so 

greatly during the drought period 1930-34, which again called attention to the ever-present danger to many types of agriculture that
18 DKOUGHTS OF 1930-34

have been undertaken in the semiarid regions and have not fully 

succeeded. If the future is to be judged by the past, there is no 

indication that such activities can be continued in these areas with 

any assurance of success under the present methods of farming.

In the arid regions vegetation is limited both in character and in 

extent, except in subinigated bottom lands and artificially irrigated 

areas. Successful irrigation depends primarily upon the way in which 

available water supplies are developed, the character of the land, and 

the methods of distribution and appb'cation of water. Detrimental 

effects of droughts on agriculture in these regions depend largely on 

the character and extent of farming activities.

In most irrigated areas ample water is usually available to meet 

present requirements if it is wisely developed and. used. This fact 

was clearly shown during the period 1930-34, when on projects that 

had been properly developed and were scientifically operated losses 

due to inadequate water were generally not serious.

The marked effect that vegetation has on surface and ground water 

was clearly shown during the droughts of 1930 and 1931, as after light 

precipitation there was a noticeable increase in the flow of springs and 

small streams, even though no great amount of water could have been 

contributed. This effect was also indicated on cloudy days and during 

nights, when there was a slowing up of plant growth. At the end of 

the growing season the flow of springs and small streams increased, 

even though there was no precipitation, and water appeared in many 

springs and small streams that had been dry during the growing season.

Examples of the effect of the consumptive use of water by vegetation on water supplies in Maryland and Virginia are given in the 

Monthly Weather Review for October 1930. Among these observations were those of the flow of a small stream at Cabin John, Md., a 

suburb of Washington. The behavior of this stream, which has a 

drainage area of only a few acres and is in effect a spring, was typical 

of that of numerous other springs and small streams in Maryland and 

Virginia. During the summer there was a diurnal fluctuation in which 

the low flow was at times only one-sixth of the high flow. In September the stream became intermittent each day, but in October, although 

there had been no appreciable precipitation, the flow became continuous again, with diurnal fluctuations similar to those that existed 

before the intermittent period.

The gage-height graph (fig. 6) of the South Fork of the Mills 

River at The Pink Beds, N. C., which has a drainage area of 9.87 

square miles, mostly wooded, indicates how diurnal fluctuations in 

stream flow due to transpiration and evaporation vary throughout 

the year. In the winter the flow is steady, the graph being almost 

a straight line. Through the growing season the graph shows regular 

diurnal fluctuations as transpiration takes its share of the supply
DROUGHTS OP 1930 AND 1931 19

Jan. 4 10

Mar. 30 31 Apr. 1

Apr. 29 30 May 1

Aug.l

Sept. 1

Oct. 1

Oct. 30 31 Nov. 1

Dec. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

FIOUEE 6. Gage-height graph of South Fork of Mills River at The Pink Beds, N. O., showing diurnal 

and seasonal effect of evaporation and transpiration.
20 DKOUGHTS OF 1930-34

during daylight and diminishes during the night, with a lag before 

the effect appears in stream flow. Translated into flow, the daily 

variations are as large as 30 percent.

The magnitude of losses through transpiration and evaporation is 

illustrated by variations of flow for Owens Creek at Lantz, Md. 

This stream has a drainage area of 5.99 square miles, located in a 

wooded mountain region at an .altitude of about 1,500 feet. Figure 

7 shows the diurnal fluctuations in the gage height of this stream 

from June 1 to 5,1932. These fluctuations, as indicated on the graph, 

correspond to a daily variation of flow that averages over 20 percent 

and aggregates about 820,000 gallons a day, enough to furnish an 

average municipal supply for 8,000 people.

1.4

1.3

1.2

/&59 seco id-feet

5.32 second-feet

Difference 1.27 second-feet or 

19.2% reduction

,5.32 second-feet

4.05 second-feet-*

Difference 1.27second-feet or 

23.8% reduction

JUNE 1234 5

FIGURE 7. Gage-height graph of Owens Creek at Lantz, Md., June 1-5, 1932, showing effect of transpiration and evaporation on stream flow.

Diurnal fluctuations in low-water flow of streams caused by daily 

evaporation and transpiration apparently vary inversely as the depth 

to the water table, as indicated in figure 8, a graph of hourly discharge over a weir on Piney Run near Sykesville, Md. (drainage area, 

11 square miles), for two similar 2-day periods, both of which are 

representative of the low-water flow for their respective years. Prior 

to each 2-day period there had been no rainfall for a considerable 

length of time, so that all of the direct surface run-off from the last 

rains had passed out of the basin, and the stream flow as shown in the 

figure was derived mostly from the ground-water reservoir and therefore gives a fair indication of the depth of the water table in this small 

basin. The graphs indicate a marked fluctuation in flow, the high 

flow resulting from hours of little or no evaporation and transpiration, 

and the minimum flow showing the effects of the hours when transpiration and evaporation are greatest. The difference between the 

high and low rate of discharge for the day indicates the maximum rate 

at which evaporation and transpiration were depriving the stream.
DBOUGHTS OP 1930 AND 1931 21

The areas in figure 8 which are enclosed between the dashed line and 

the graph provide a measure of the daily loss to the stream, which 

has been computed, as shown in the figure, in million gallons a day. 

No records of ground-water levels are available, but it was observed 

that the precipitation in 1933 was ample to maintain a higher groundwater table than in 1932, when there was less precipitation. In 1933, 

a year of ample rainfall and correspondingly high ground water, the 

low flow was about 150 percent greater on June 3 and 4 than for the 

same 2 days in 1932, which was a year of low rainfall and correspondingly low ground water. The estimated evaporation and transpiraJune 3 June 4

0.264m. 

^__

Maximumrate

id. !os 

of loss 0.8 cfs

u

CO 

Q

o I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

1932

FIQUBE 8. Discharge graph of Piney Run near Sykesville, Md., showing effect of transpiration, evaporation, and altitude of water table on stream flow.

tion losses producing diurnal fluctuations in the low stream flow were 

about 90 percent greater in 1933 than in 1932. The indications are 

that this difference was largely due to the fact that less evaporation 

and transpiration from ground water takes place when the water 

table is at a greater depth.

Evaporation from surfaces of impounded water and of flowing 

streams is an important factor in connection with the effect of drought 

on both surface and ground water. During the summer of 1930 

measurements of flow of the Potomac River at Point of Rodks, Md., 

indicated less discharge than the combined flow as recorded at river-
22 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

measurement stations at Shepherdstown, Millville, and other points 

on tributary streams above Harpers Ferry. The distance between 

Point of Rocks and the upper measurement stations is about 28% 

miles. The area of water surface in this stretch of the river is about 

5.75 square miles. An evaporation of 0.01 foot for 24 hours from this 

area of water surface would be equivalent to a flow of 18.6 second-feet.. 

There were many days during the summer of 1930 when the humidity 

was extremely low, with brisk winds, on which the evaporation probably approached 0.1 foot a day. The loss dud to this evaporation wassufficient to account for apparent discrepancies in the discharge as 

measured at Point of Rocks, where the minimum daily flow in 1930 

was 594 second-feet, and at points on tributary streams above.

GROUND WATER

Comparatively few systematic records of fluctuations of groundwater levels have been collected, and most of these cover only short 

periods. "OFkerefore &D.J statement relative to the effect of the drought, 

on ground water is more qualitative than quantitative. In general,, 

however, it is known that during 1930 and 1931 there were marked 

lowerings of ground-water levels, which severely affected many communities that depend on ground water for domestic and other uses,, 

and in many localities flowing springs and wells either became intermittent or ceased to flow until the end of the drought.

An example of the effect of the drought on the ground-water tableis indicated in figure 9, which shows the precipitation at Washington t 

D. C., and corresponding fluctuations of the water surface of the Ross 

well, in nearby Virginia.4 This graph, produced by a water-stage* 

recorder, shows that in the winter of 1928-29 replenishment of theground-water supply began late in January, and in the winter of 1929- 

30 it began about the middle of January, whereas in the winter of 

1930-31 it did not begin until near the end of March. In the winter 

of 1931-32 it began about the first of January. The winter replenishment raised the ground-water table somewhat over 2 feet in 1928-29- 

and in 1929-30, over 4 feet in 1931-32, and over 6 feet in 1932-33, but 

less than 1 foot in 1930-31.

On account of the great draw-down caused by the drought of 1930,, 

the water table at the site of the Ross well dropped to an extreme low 

stage and reached its greatest depression in March 1931. The summer of 1931 was unusually favorable for replenishment, however, anoL 

hence at the well site there was a small net rise in the water table,, 

which was in striking contrast to the decline of about 3 feet in thesummer and autumn of 1930. A rise of nearly half a foot was produced by the heavy rains that occurred at the end of May and the be-

. 4 Cady, R. C., Investigations of the fluctuations of water levels in observation wells in Virginia: Aim. 

Geophys. Union Trans., 1932, pp. 370-373.
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 23

J.33J Nl aSO-VM QJ. H-Ld3Q S3HDNI Nl NOUVJ-IdOBdd
24 DROUGHTS OP 1930-34

ginning of June 1931, and a further rise of about the same amount was 

produced by the combined effect of heavy rains in July and August. 

Later in the season the water level declined about to the July level. 

The most notable summer replenishments within the period of record 

occurred in August 1928, August 1933, and September 1934; in August 1928 the precipitation amounted to 14.4 inches, and the water 

table rose about 2 feet; in August 1933 the precipitation amounted to 

9.91 inches, and the water table rose about the same amount; in 

September 1934, however, the precipitation was 17.45 inches, and the 

water table rose 5 feet.

It should be explained that in the summer of 1931 there was more 

replenishment at this observation well than at several other wells in 

Arlington and Fairfax Counties, in which measurements of the water 

level were made. For example, in one of these other wells the water 

level dropped slightly more than 1 foot from August 22 to December 

26, whereas during this period the water level in the observation well 

first rose and then fell, with almost no net change. This was probably due to geologic conditions that were favorable to percolation.

Comparison of the Ross well records with the barograph observations at Washington indicates that the ground-water table fluctuates 

in response to variations in atmospheric pressure. These fluctuations have only a small range. They can, however, readily be distinguished from any rise produced by replenishment. Apparently 

when the soil is dry changes in atmospheric pressure are transmitted 

through the air-filled interstices in the soil almost as easily as through 

the air column in the well. Hence the changes in pressure on the 

water table are essentially equal to the changes in pressure on the 

water surface in the well. On the other hand, when the pore spaces 

in the soil contain more water, the barometric changes cannot be 

transmitted so readily to the water table as to the water surface in the 

well, and hence the water surface is depressed when the barometer 

rises and recovers when the barometer falls. In some wells that extend into water-bearing formations overlain by impervious confining 

beds the barometric fluctuations have been found to be nearly 100 

percent of the fluctuations of a water barometer. As the locality of 

the observation well near Washington has a water table without any 

competent confining bed, the barometric fluctuations are much smaller. 

Thus they amounted to only about 15 percent from April 27 to May 

4, 1930, when the soil moisture was fully replenished, and to a much 

smaller percentage from November 22 to 29, 1930, when the soil was 

very dry.5

* Meinzer, O. E., Methods of estimating ground-water supplies: U. S. Qeol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 

638, pp. 140-142.1932.
FT. IN WATER TO. £ DEPT INCHES IN RUN-OFF INCHES IN PRECIPITATION 

wAtnoN.fc.oooo

Dec. 

Jan. 

Feb. 

Mar: 

Apr. 

May 

June 

July 

Aug. 

'Se]*. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec; 

Jan. 

Feb. 

Mar.

June 

July 

Aug. 

Sept 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 

Jan. 

Feb. 

Mar. 

Apr. 

May 

June 

July 

Aug.

I 

I

0861 aNV 1861 32 
26 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

Ground-water levels recorded at White Lake Corners, Oneida 

County, N. Y., since 1928, are shown in figure 10.6 The same 

diagram also shows the run-off from the South Branch of the Moose 

River, a nearby stream with a drainage area of 216 square miles, and 

the average rainfall over this area as obtained from rain gages at 

McKeever, North Lake, and Raquette Lake. These records, like 

others, show that in the main the fluctuation of both ground water 

and stream flow follow closely the precipitation, and there is no 

indication of large carry-over effects from either high or low precipitation.

The general trend of the ground-water fluctuations starting with 

the end of the growing season is a rise in level until January or February, when, apparently owing to frost conditions, the level falls 

until the spring break-up; then it rises again until the beginning of 

the growing season; and then, owing to the demands for water by 

vegetation, it drops until the end of the growing season.

Prior to the beginning of the drought of 1930 the precipitation and 

corresponding ground-water level and also the stream flow were 

average or above. In spite of the severity of the drought both the 

stream flow and the ground-water levels responded almost immediately to the increased precipitation late in 1931, and continued on an 

upward trend until the beginning of the growing season of 1932, when 

they were not materially lower than at the corresponding dates in 

1928 and 1929.

SURFACE WATER

Surface waters in lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and flowing streams 

were severely depleted as a result of the droughts of 1930 and 1931. 

There was a material lowering of the surface of bodies of impounded 

water. Many reservoirs were drained entirely, the surfaces of 

larger lakes and ponds were materially lowered, and many of the 

smaller ones practically dried up. Many new minima for the flow 

of streams were established during the calendar years 1930 and 1931. 

In general, however, the minimum daily flows did not fall much 

below those previously recorded. On the other hand, the weekly 

and monthly flows for many streams reached new minima, and many 

records of long-continued low flows were broken.

During 1930 minimum flows for the period of record were reached on 

many streams as early as July, and the flow did not go much lower 

while the drought lasted. The drought continued long enough in 

most drainage basins to test available ground-water supplies thoroughly, and the records indicated that the available ground-water 

supply for some basins may be so great that it is adequate to maintain the stream flow above a fixed minimum for a considerable length 

of time and probably through most droughts.

 Unpublished data furnished by Edwin S. Callings, member Am. Soc. Civil Eng., Watertown, N. Y.
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 27

The records of stream flow indicate that the small variations in 

flow during low-water periods, caused by occasional rains, are of 

short duration, as shown in table 4, which gives the daily flow of the 

Potomac River at Shepherdstown, W. Va., during the last 7 monthsof 1930. The effect of the drought on stream flow started late in 

June, was well established by July 11, and continued until December 

27. A minimum flow of 300 second-feet was recorded on one dayeach in July and August. In September the flow was between 330* 

and 340 second-feet on several days, in October it was 307 secondfeet on 4 days, in November it was 325 second-feet on 2 days, and in 

December it was 371 second-feet on 3 days.

TABLE 4. Daily discharge, in second-feet, of Potomac River at Shepherdstown? 

W. Va., June 1 to Dec. 31, 1930

[Drainage area, 5,970 square miles]

Day

2 ___

3... _ 

4.. . _ 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9.. . _ _ . 

10... __ . . __ ..........

11 ...... ...... . . ............

12 .

13 1 .

14 . ....

15.. . _ _ _ .....

16- . ..

17 _

18 

19 

20 

21 ... _ . .. .............

22.

23 __ _ 

24 .. __ 

25 

26 

97

28 _ 

29 .

30...- _ __

31 

June

1,080

1,000

1,000

1,000

931

931

1,040

821

917

931

945

1,320

3,750

2,870

2,160

1,760

1,730

1,730

1,690

1,630

1,540

1,120

1,210

1,090

1,100

1,360

1,530

973

987

1,310

1,380

July

1,130

1,050

918

780

780

825

825

825

580

855

489

489

384

463

594

692

594

489

439

351

594

608

594

706

300

340

502

567

515

528

624

Aug.

554

384

320

450

825

855

636

541

463

406

373

362

362

351

330

300

310

310

310

330

384

384

362

406

439

450

439

428

417

406

417

429

Sept.

428

489

428

450

417

406

395

395

384

373

* 351

340

340

340

340

340

351

330

340

351

351

362

450

401

371

371

352

352

361

371

378

Oct.

371

371

371

381

371

381

381

391

381

371

371

371

371

371

371

352

352

343

343

334

343

361

334

316

307

316

307

307

307

316

325

351

Nov.

325

334

334

343

343

361

381

381

381

381

381

391

401

421

421

451

821

644

431

411

381

343

325

343

334

361

352

352

361

361

395

Dec.

40*

381

371

371

371

391

431

834

391

65$

692

889-

903-

808

58*

743-

494

472

717

717

48$

692

644

527

431

483

959>

931

80*

861

808

621

The combined flow from the Tennessee and Cumberland River 

drainage basins 7 as compared with the precipitation in the same area 

for the 30-year period 1900-29 is shown in figure 11. For this 30-year 

period the average run-off was 45 percent of the precipitation. In 

wet years it exceeded 50 percent, and in dry years it dropped to 35 

percent or less, indicating that the losses through evaporation and

* See King, W. R., Surface waters of Tennessee: Tennessee Dept. Education Bull. 40, p. 56,1931.
28 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

transpiration do not vary materially between wet and dry years as 

long as there is sufficient precipitation to satisfy the evaporation and 

transpiration demands, and that deficiency in rainfall may mean a 

relatively greater deficiency in stream flow. This is important in 

planning municipal water supplies.

A wide variation in the unit run-off of different areas is found, 

«ven in areas adjacent to each other. Observations in 1930 showed 

that some streams became dry while others of comparable size in 

adjacent basins continued through the drought with a fair discharge. 

As conditions in different drainage basins vary, estimates of low flow

SOLID AREAS RUN-OFF 

TOTAL AREAS RAINFALL

FIGURE 11. Rainfall and run-off for combined drainage basins of Tennessee and Oumberland Rivers, by 

months, showing variation between wet and dry years. Ratio of run-off to rainfall is indicated in percent 

on diagram.

based on comparison with adjacent areas or on precipitation data 

cannot be made with any degree of certainty. Records of flow on 

the stream that is to be utilized afford the only safe basis for making 

studies in connection with a given development. Records of daily 

flow are essential for detailed studies, but for general comparative 

studies records of mean monthly flow and deficiency tables will serve 

many needs. Such data for the Potomac River at Point of Rocks, 

Md., are presented in tables 5 and 6 as typical records showing the 

general effect of the droughts of 1930 and 1931 on stream flow.
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 29

TABLE 5. Monthly and yearly discharge, in second-feet, of Potomac River at Poin t

of Rocks, Md.t 1895-1931

[Drainage area, 9,650 square miles]

Year

1895 

1896.............

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

1898. ... ......

1899. .........

1900.... _ . __

1901. 

1902.............

1903.... __ .....

1904.............

1905.. __ ... ....

1906.. 

1907.............

1908.. ___ ....-

1909.. _ ........

1910. __ ........

1911 .............

1912. ... ..

1913 _____ ....

1914.............

1915.. _ ........

1916. ___ ......

1917. _____ ...

1918 ______ ..

1919. 

1920. 

1921...... _ ....

1922........ .....

1923. _ . .....

1924 _ . _ . _ ..

1925... ....

1926.............

1927 ____ . ___

1928 

1929.. ___ .....

1930. ..

1931........ _ ..

Minimum year..

Jan.

5,257 

4,284 

14,660 

18,680

8,166 

4,950 

17, 520 

17,200 

7,287

8,626 

14,990 

27,000 

25,400 

6,950

11,700 

12,200 

9,450 

11,700 

20,000

28,600 

12, 500 

9,170 

2,500 

14,800

10,800 

6,360 

8,110 

6,780 

18, 700

10, 400 

9,210 

10,700 

6,100 

4,620

6,880 

2,370

2,370 

1931

Feb.

10, 470 

42,660 

8,339 

28, 130

13, 340 

3,649 

32, 520 

22, 190 

17,480

5,625 

5,116 

9,560 

24,100 

11,300

13,800 

11,300 

16,400 

5,890 

15,900

27,000 

15,600 

7,630 

28, 300 

5,980

18,200 

6,170 

17, 500 

12,500 

8,170

23,600 

23,000 

21,600 

10, 700 

8,030

8,970 

2,930

2,930 

1931

Mar.

24,560

20,850 

15,330 

35,240

18, 470 

13,800 

54,260 

26,730 

11, 170

23,480 

15,900 

30, 500 

28,600 

8,700

9,960 

9,670 

28,700 

18,200 

19,300

8,230 

24,700 

38, 400 

13,600 

12,700

32,300 

12,900 

21,600 

10, 700 

33,800

9,680 

10,800 

14,500 

14,200 

24,600

10, 900 

5,400

5,400 

1931

Apr.

14,500

10,830 

15, 970 

11, 750

9,295 

39,750 

28, 760 

28,900 

7,406

6,581 

22,440 

14,900 

10,200 

16,700

10, 100 

15,100 

14,900 

16, 100 

20,900

4,370 

19,800 

10, 700 

39,800 

8,860

14,500 

4,940 

9,120 

10,300 

21, 000

5,990 

11,500 

23,200 

21,200 

27,400

7,530 

14,200

4,370 

1915

May

12,540

22,950 

18,060 

11,600

4,466 

26,920 

5,973 

6,212 

9,362

4,493 

5,538 

11,100 

32,100 

8,660

5,520 

4,330 

19,800 

13,600 

9,600

6,900 

7,950 

5,590 

5,990 

18,300

8,700 

20,700 

9,710 

5,420 

42,000

11, 300 

4,550 

14,000 

21,600 

14,700

3,280 

14,200

3,280 

1930

June

3,910 

5,429 

5,997 

4,178 

5,314

8,394 

19, 180 

3,186 

17, 970 

10,160

6,979 

7,007 

23,200 

7,250 

11,000

26,400 

3,690 

5,280 

10,400 

3,190

20,400 

14, (KM) 

7,870 

3,310 

7,130

8,550 

4,150 

6,660 

2,510 

14,400

2,710 

2,640 

9,420 

16, 100 

7,070

2,230 

5,610

2,230 

1930

July

4,462 

9,283 

5,315 

2,418 

2,519

3,008 

10,720 

3,086 

12,760 

4,510

10, 190 

4.381 

6,010 

4,470 

2,700

6,500 

2,160 

8,550 

4,490 

3,020

2,670 

7,170 

3,890 

3,360 

7,220

3,790 

4,260 

4,400 

1,560 

8,960

2,420 

2,650 

3,210 

9,560 

3,920

1,100 

5,520

1,100 

1930

Aug.

1,997 

3,449 

4,092 

22,140 

2,335

1,917 

8,337 

2,464 

4,826 

2,394

5,830 

15,200 

3,710 

3,880 

2,110

2,000 

2,440 

3,460 

3,010 

1,750

6,760 

3,600 

2,620 

2,910 

3,130

7,150 

3,910 

2,080 

2,860 

3,120

1,580 

9,600 

3,110 

6,240 

1,500

771 

3,630

771 

1930

Sept.

1,565 

2,185 

2,337 

2,497 

2,346

1,344 

7,636 

1,490 

4,669 

1,592

3,205 

4,275 

6,430 

2,500 

1,780

1,740 

12, 600 

6,360 

1,770 

1,270

5,350 

2,330 

1,380 

3,940 

1,720

4,960 

3,650 

1,760 

3,770 

2,680

952 

8,200 

1,540 

5,770 

1,500

834 

2,060

834 

1930

Oct.

1,163 

12,490 

1,968 

13,670 

1,663

1,333 

4,303 

2,767 

3,212 

1,164

2,888 

16, 310 

3,550 

2,780 

2,190

1,560 

8,510 

3,090 

6,850 

1,400

6,730 

2,190 

4,770 

1,710 

2,420

2,720 

1,750 

1,270 

1,040 

7,100

2,760 

6,570 

12,400 

2,750 

15, 200

706 

1,240

 706 

1930

Nov.

1,333 

6,928 

2,096 

8,557 

3,171

4,670 

4,648 

2,837 

2,175 

1,340

2,267 

6,341 

7,850 

2,670 

1,850

1,440 

5,970 

3,270 

13,500 

1,540

3,590 

1,550 

3,830 

5,610 

4,620

4.780 

4,400 

989 

2,030 

3,810

6,820 

18, 100 

8,400 

1,930 

13,000

840 

944

840 

1930

Dec.

2,259 

4,723 

6,579 

16, 330 

4,068

6,218 

25, 610 

18,590 

2,926 

2,201

10,640 

11,100 

17,800 

2,440 

3,130

2,090 

10, 200 

3,390 

8,120 

6,000

6,650 

3,250 

2,550 

13, 000 

6,880

9,500 

11,300 

2,340 

6,880 

4,680

5,290 

12,900 

11,800 

4,600 

7,430

1,420 

2,330

1,420 

1930

Yearly

average

10,800 

11,800 

10,600

6,710 

14, 100 

14,500 

12,500 

6,340

7,570 

10,700 

13,500 

12,200 

6,420

7,650

8,180 

10,200 

9,470 

8,660

10,500 

9,550 

8,200 

10,300 

7,810

10,500 

7,040 

7,130 

5,530 

14,000

6,960 

9,980 

11,100 

10,100 

10,700

3,790 

5,040

3,790 

1930

NOTE. Minimum monthly discharge for all months except April occurred in the 11 consecutive months 

May 1930 to March 1931.

The conditions on the Potomac River apply in general to the areas 

which were most severely affected by the droughts of 1930 and 1931. 

At Point of Rocks, Md., the drainage area is 9,650 square miles, and 

the mean flow for the calendar years 1897 to 1931 was 9,350 secondfeet. The mean flow for 1930 was 3,790 second-feet, or only 69 

percent of the previous lowest annual flow, which was 5,530 secondfeet, in 1923.

Prior to 1930 there were only 2 months when the mean flow was 

below 1,000 second-feet September 1925, 952 second-feet, and 

November 1922, 989 second-feet. During the calendar year 1930 the 

mean flow was below 1,000 second-feet for 4 months August, 771; 

September, 834; October, 706; November, 840. The minimum 

daily flow for 1930 was 594 second-feet. Previous minima below 

700 second-feet were recorded in 1911,1914, 1917, and 1923. In 1923
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

the flow was below 1,000 second-feet consecutively for 18 days, in 

1925 for 15 days, and in 1930 for 116 days except on 2 days when it 

did not exceed 1,100 second-feet. During the period of record the 

minimum monthly discharge for all months except April occurred 

in the 11 consecutive months, May 1930 to March 1931.

TABLE 6. Deficiency table for Potomac River at Point of Rocks, Md., 1897-1931

Calendar 

year

1897 

1898 

U899 

1900 

1901 

1902........

1903 

1904........

1905 

1906 

i907 . -

1908 

1909- 

S910 

ft911 

1912.. __ ..

1913 

1914 

1915 

1916 

1917 

1918 

1919 

1920 

1921. .......

1923 

1924.. .-.

1925 

1927 

1928 

1929 

1930 

1Q91

Number of days with discharge, in second-feet, less than 

550

1

610

1

1

700

1

4

1

1

19

800

1

1 

12

2

3 

12

75

1,000

6

1 

1

1

28

2 

6

43 

23

21

5

141 

33

1,300

39

12

58

7 

16

4 

63 

1 

13

24 

6 

9

6

67 

38

42

15

16 

163 

65

1,600

9 

6 

23 

161

25

86

5 

25 

64 

24

17 

83 

3 

30

45 

15 

26 

4 

25

78 

68 

3 

63

7

32

6 

40 

178 

88

2,000

29 

8 

50 

110 

2

51 

52 

107 

14

15 

112 

121 

40

8 

29 

110 

6 

65

67 

27 

48 

33

47

110 

102 

17 

89 

20

39 

25 

62 

198 

122

2,500

73 

46 

115 

129 

15

97 

60 

132 

37

2 

58 

132 

147 

51

42 

42 

133 

22 

92

94 

47 

59 

45 

64

131

121 

32 

111 

43

48 

47 

77 

208 

149

3,100

107 

71 

152 

152 

60

124 

86 

150 

62 

17

15 

110 

163 

175 

83

91 

69 

166 

72 

134

126 

144 

87 

75 

96

156 

153 

78 

159 

94

82 

64 

85 

225 

186

3,800

137 

95 

172 

173

S3

162 

113 

196 

130 

59

57 

150 

178 

198 

109

121 

107 

191 

99

148

167 

183 

113 

94 

116

182 

178 

108 

182 

127

107 

93 

102 

236

218

A typical illustration of the persistence in trend of deficient stream 

flow after a trend of excess precipitation has begun is presented in 

figure 12, which gives for the period 1922 to 1931 the accumulated 

departures from the average (1897-1932) of the monthly discharge 

of the Potomac River at Point of Rocks, Md., and the precipitation 

recorded at two representative stations, Westernport and Frederick, 

Md., within this drainage basin. The deficiency of precipitation 

during 1922 and 1923 was followed by 6 months of excessive precipita-
DKOTTGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 31

tion. The discharge graph shows a corresponding general trend, but 

the stream flow did not increase materially until nearly 4 months 

after the precipitation had begun to exceed the normal. An example

93HON! Ml QNV J.33J-QNOO3S

jo saisivsnoHi. NI S3dnj_dvd3a a3ivnnwnoov

of this lag or carry-over is shown by the downward trend of the discharge graph that persisted 17 months after general excesses of precipitation began, in March 1931. The recovery of the stream flow
32 DKOUGHTS OF 1930-34

undoubtedly depends to a considerable degree on the way in which 

the precipitation occurs that is, if moderate and well-distributed 

excesses in precipitation occur during the growing season, vegetation 

utilizes so much of the supply that there is little left to feed the 

streams. On the other hand, streams usually respond promptly 

to deficiencies in precipitation, for the run-off is the residual of the 

available supply remaining after the deduction of that consumed by 

transpiration and evaporation. Figure 12 shows several periods that 

illustrate this condition.

DAMAGE

Drought damages may be considered as affecting vegetation, domestic and industrial water supplies, health, power, navigation, and recreation and wild life. The droughts of 1930 and 1931 greatly interfered 

with many activities under each head, and the resulting losses in 1930 

were probably greater than those sustained during any previous 

drought, owing partly to the fact that the uses and demands for 

water have vastly increased, even in the past few years.

VEQETATION

A general discussion of the relation of water supplies to vegetation 

is given on pages 14-21. The crop reports of the United States Bureau 

of Agricultural Economics afford a means for studying and comparing the effects of droughts on vegetation as related to agriculture. 

No systematic statistical information, however, is available in regard 

to the effects of droughts on natural vegetation, and the only bases 

for a statement relative to such effects are miscellaneous reports 

based upon personal observation.

During 1930 the detrimental effect of the drought on vegetation, 

both natural and cultivated, was marked. In 1931, however, the 

precipitation was adequate and sufficiently well distributed to supply 

the needs of vegetation in most parts of the country, and no detrimental effects of the drought appeared, except in a few localities, 

principally in North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and adjacent 

areas in Minnesota, Nebraska, and Wyoming. In fact, it was observed that in most parts of the country vegetation was especially 

vigorous in 1931. This may have been due to the lessened demands 

on the fertility of the soil that had been made by the stunted vegetation in 1930.

Although in 1930 the drought undoubtedly caused much damage to 

natural growth, no definite data are available to show its extent. Its 

effect on agriculture is indicated in table 2 and figures 13 and 14, which 

give for each State the composite yields of crops and the total precipitation during the principal growing months. The reports concerning the effect of the drought on crops indicate that as the yields
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 33

for the country as a whole do not indicate conditions in individual 

States, neither do the yields for individual States indicate the extreme conditions that prevailed in certain localities.

I 62 - r i

FIGTJBE 13. Total precipitation for June, July, and August, in inches (upper figure), and composite yields 

of crops per acre, expressed as percentage of average yields (lower figure), 1930. In areas indicated by 

heavy outline the precipitation in 1930 was the lowest of record.

FIGUBE 14. Total precipitation for June, July, and August, in inches (upper figure), and composite yields 

of crops per acre, expressed as percentage of average yields (lower figure), 1931. In areas indicated by 

heavy outline the precipitation in 1931 was the lowest of record.

In humid sections of the country the growth of crops depends primarily on the quantity and distribution of rainfall during the grow-
34 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ing period. Temperature, humidity, and wind also have a marked 

effect. During the growing months of 1930 not only was the precipitation low but temperatures were unusually high, as indicated in 

figure 3, and hot winds prevailed. The humidity was low, the evaporation was high, and the usual dews were lacking. Plant growth 

was unable to withstand this combination of unfavorable climatic 

conditions.

Comparison of the precipitation for June, July, and August with 

the composite yields of crops in the humid and semiarid States for 

1930 and 1931 as given in table 2 and shown in figure 15 indicates 

that in States where the rainfall during the three growing months, 

was 7K inches or more the yields were nearly average or above and

f8 

16

14

UJ

X

o

ZI2

1

_J

L_

Z

75 

6

4

x 1931 

 1930

'.

9

x

X

x

9

 I

*

0 x

*

X

X

 *

 * 

*

X 

X

" x

* x ;

X

X *

 .

X X

X

X

*x

* .

'

IS 

IS.

14- 

12' 

10'

8 

7.5.

6 

4

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

CROP YIELD (PERCENT OF AVERAGE)

FIGURE 15. Relation of composite yields of crops per acre in 1930 and 1931 to total precipitation in June, 

July, and August for the 36 humid and semiarid States.

that in States where the rainfall during those months was less than 

7K inches the yields were below average. Most of the exceptions to 

this general rule can be explained by the character of the vegetal 

growth, the distribution of precipitation, abnormally low or high 

temperature, or excessively hot winds.

The data on composite yields of crops and precipitation for 1930 

show that the annual rainfall may not always be an indication of 

yields. The precipitation in Arkansas in 1930 was 95 percent of the 

mean, but the crop yields per acre were only 62 percent of the 10-year 

average, owing to the fact that conditions were not favorable for germination and that there was only 4.2 inches of rain during the 3 

growing months. On the other hand, in New York the precipitation
DBOUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 35

was only 82 percent of the normal, but the crop yield was 102 percent, as conditions were favorable for germination and there was adequate precipitation during the growing season. In Rhode Island, 

Connecticut, and New Jersey the precipitation in 1930 was also lower 

than in any other year of record, yet yields of crops for all these 

States were above normal.

Care must be taken in using precipitation records expressed as percentage of the mean to show the effect of droughts on agriculture or 

other activities, as a certain percentage of deficiency may not have 

the same effect in an area of high precipitation as it will in an area 

of low precipitation. This is illustrated by the data given in table 7-

TABLE 7. Composite yields of crops per acre and precipitation in North Carolina, 

Missouri, and Illinois, 1980

Yields... 

Precipitation: 

Annual:

1930 

June, July, and August:

ICMn

(. _ .do 

 \percentof mean..

L _____ do. _

 \perceut of mean--

North 

Carolina

100

50.44

38.04

75 

16.2

11.1

69

Missouri

67

40.17

31.27

78 

12.7

6.8

54

Illinois

84

37.26-

27.89-

75 

10. ft

6.4

60

In North Carolina a deficiency of 50 percent in the growing months 

would still leave over 8 inches of rainfall, which is adequate for the 

needs of vegetation, but in Missouri or Illinois a similar percentage of 

deficiency would reduce the precipitation to less than 7 inches, which 

is insufficient for the normal needs of vegetation.

The effect of the drought in the irrigated sections of the country 

was reduced to a minimum in both 1930 and 1931, because stored 

water was available to make up for deficiencies in the current supply, 

and also because it was possible to limit crop acreage to conform to 

the probable available water supply, as indicated by water in storage, 

snow surveys, and other information. The importance of adequate 

storage systems in connection with all irrigation projects as insurance 

against loss during years of low water was fully emphasized during 

1930 and 1931. As indicated in table 13, in 24 reservoirs of the 

United States Bureau of Reclamation having a total capacity of 

12,000,000 acre-feet there was a net reduction in storage of 710,000 

acre-feet in 1930 and of 1,500,000 acre-feet in 1931.
36 DKOTJGHTS OF 1930-34

DOMESTIC AND INDUSTRIAL WATER STJPPIJES

In most States in 1930 there were marked and long-continued 

deficiencies in the flow of streams and the yields from ground water. 

These deficiencies persisted in many areas through 1931 and in some 

areas into 1932, resulting in a shortage of water for both domestic 

and industrial uses. The localities supplied by the natural flow of 

medium and small streams or by shallow wells were most seriously 

affected. In localities where facilities were available for storage, the 

total stream flow for the year was in general ample for usual activities. 

Communities that obtained their supplies from deeper wells that 

tapped productive water-bearing formations were also not much 

-affected by the drought.

indications of scarcity of water appeared early in the summer of 

1^30. In many localities usual supplies failed, so that for several 

months, especially in the larger towns and cities where municipal 

supplies were not provided with adequate reserves, it was necessary 

to curtail use and to provide additional supplies by drilling wells, 

laying temporary pipe lines, or hauling water in tank cars.

The effect of the drought on domestic water supplies, both rural 

and urban, in New York, Ohio, and Kentucky is indicative of conditions that prevailed in other major drought areas.

In New York the State department of health reported that 65 

municipalities were seriously affected in 1930. Of these, 29 derived 

their supplies from surface-water sources and 36 from ground-water 

sources. In 1931 the effect of the drought continued in 32 of these 

municipalities, and in addition 3 others were affected. In 13 others 

that had been affected in 1930 shortage was averted in 1931 by the 

development of additional supplies. Hundreds of private wells and 

springs failed, and it became common practice for farmers to haul 

water several miles for stock and domestic purposes.

In Ohio the State department of health made surveys of 115 public 

water supplies, of which 94 depended on wells and 21 on surface sources. 

Considerable difficulty in respect to both quantity and quality was 

experienced in cities supplied from surface water, but little in cities 

served by wells, as their supplies had been adequately developed to 

provide for the contingency. In a few cities it was necessary to drill 

to deeper levels. Private wells in the southern part of the State 

failed almost entirely, and hauling water for many miles was necessary. In April 1931 the State legislature appropriated funds for use 

by the department of health to drill and install pumps in so-called 

"seal of safety" wells in southern and southeastern Ohio. The result 

was 48 successful wells out of 69 that were attempted.

In Kentucky the State board of health investigated 110 public 

water supplies and found that 33 cities had been on water rations. 

Conditions in Lexington, with a water-consuming population of about
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 37

60,000, supplied from four reservoirs with a small tributary drainage 

area, illustrate the seriousness of the situation. Kestriction in the 

use of water became necessary in September 1930, and in October the 

city began the construction of a pumping plant with a 20-inch pipe 

line to a point 8 miles away on the Kentucky Kiver. This supplementary supply was made available in December and relieved the 

shortage. There were noticeable shortages in most rural sections.

Many industries were handicapped by an inadequate supply of 

water for process use and for the disposal of wastes. In numerous 

localities the provision of enough water for cooling and condensing 

in steam-power plants was a serious problem.

The rainfall during 1931 was greater and better distributed than that 

of 1930, and many localities that had suffered from shortage of water 

during 1930 had enlarged their systems of supply. As a result comparatively few localities experienced any serious difficulty in 1931 

from shortage of water for either domestic or industrial use.

TTRiAT/TTT

In addition to shortage of water for municipal and industrial uses, 

considerable difficulty was encountered in many localities owing tothe effect of the drought on the quality of the water, in regard to both 

mineral content and pollution. During the drought period the 

streams were almost wholly supplied from ground water, which 

normally has a higher mineral content than surface run-off. The 

lack of diluting run-off caused considerable difficulty and necessitated 

modifications in treatment at many filter plants. The serving of 

water of excessive hardness led to many complaints, both on account 

of trouble in the use of the water and on account of deposits in heaters 

and in pipe lines, where no difficulty had been experienced with the 

water normally supplied. A menace to health was created in many 

localities because the streams fell so low that they were unable to 

carry sewage and other wastes.

Owing to the efforts and watchfulness of the health, water, and 

sanitation authorities, no widespread epidemic of communicable 

diseases occurred during the drought and there was comparatively 

little illness. Although a few cases of diphtheria, smallpox, scarlet 

fever, measles, and typhoid were reported by health officers in different 

sections, they were limited to small areas and were not a seriousmenace.

Pellagra, a disease due to certain deficiencies in diet and usually" 

present in many Southern sections, caused the most concern. Its 

remedy lies in foods that supply these deficiencies, and such foods 

were issued to pellagra sufferers in addition to the staple rations. 

These foods consisted of milk, canned salmon, canned tomatoes, 

fresh fruit and vegetables, and powdered yeast. In the drought
38 DEOUGHTS OF 1930-34

period prior to June 30, 1931, more than 30 tons of powdered yeast 

had been distributed to 18,302 persons in the drought area. The 

generous donations of hundreds of carloads of citrus fruits and fresh 

vegetables, especially from Florida and California, and of potatoes, 

cabbage, and other vegetables and foodstuffs from northern, central, 

western, and other States aided materially in maintaining standards 

of health.

School lunches were served for a period to more than 3,500 schools, 

attended by over 184,000 children. These no doubt aided considerably in maintaining satisfactory health conditions.

As an aid to the situation Congress provided, by an act approved 

February 6, 1931, $2,000,000, to be administered through the United 

States Bureau of Public Health Service, to aid local health departments in the drought-affected areas. The Public Health Service 

reports as follows 8 relative to the effect of drought on health conditions:

The years 1930 and 1931 were among the best years of which records have been 

kept, so far as the general health of the people is shown by mortality statistics 

and by reports of the prevalence of notifiable diseases.

The effect of the drought on the health of the people of the United States 

cannot at this time be measured with any degree of acccuracy. This does not 

mean that it has not had an effect, but merely that, whatever the effects may 

have been, they cannot be segregated from the many other factors which, taken 

together, cause high or low sickness and death rates in the population as a whole.

Serious outbreaks of such diseases as dysentery and typhoid fever, which might 

have resulted from interference with the usual water supplies in many places, 

have been avoided by scientific examination and treatment of the supplies. 

Epidemics of some other diseases have been prevented by immunization campaigns and other means. It may be, if food supplies have been deficient, that 

the consequent weakening effects will result in increases in the causes of illness 

and in the death rates in subsequent years. This cannot be definitely predicted, 

however.

POWER 9

Practically all important hydroelectric power plants generating 

electricity for public use are interconnected with steam plants in 

large systems. Water power and steam power are thus no longer 

competitors but have become partners, united to produce electric 

power as economically as possible. As the cost of operating a waterpower plant is considerably less than that of operating a steam plant, 

water-power plants are kept in operation as long as water is available 

that is, the supply of water instead of the demand for power is in 

general the controlling factor in the utilization of water-power plants.

The effect of the drought on hydroelectric power plants in the 

humid and semiarid States during 1930 and 1931 is probably best 

indicated by a comparison of the changes in the production of elec8 Personal communication.

* Statement by A. H. Horton, chief, division of power resources, U. S. Geological Survey.
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 39

tricity by the use of water power from 1929 to 1930 and from 1930 to 

1931 with the corresponding changes in the total production of electricity. The business depression lessened the demand for electricity 

during these periods, and this factor tends to disguise the effect of the 

drought on the production of electricity at hydroelectric plants. 

However, a comparison of the change in total production of electricity 

in the humid and semiarid States with the change in output by water 

power will indicate in a general way the effect of the drought on 

water-power plants, because a decrease in the production of electricity 

by the use of water power, especially if the change is relatively greater 

than that in the total production of electricity, will indicate a lack of 

water for the generation of power.

Table 8 shows that in 1930 the production of electricity by waterpower plants in all sections of the humid and semiarid portions of the 

United States was reduced as a result of the drought, and also that 

in 1931 the output by water power was reduced by the same cause in 

all sections except New England. There was no extended drought in 

New England in 1931.

TABLE 8. Percentage change in production of electricity for public use in the humid 

and semiarid sections of the United Statest 1929 31

Division

Middle Atlantic -

West North Central.. ___ ... .. ... __ . _ . __ .. ....

1029 to 1930

Total - 

output

m _ o

-5 

+6 -8 

+6

Output 

by water 

power °

-20 

-10 

-15 

-10 

-29 

-3

1930 to 1931

Total 

output

+1

Output, 

by water 

power «

+16 -9 

-19 

-33 

-13

0 Figures for output by water power are adjusted for increase in capacity of water-power plants.

NAVIGATION

The Chief of Engineers, United States Army, 10 reports on the 

effect of the drought on navigation on the inland-waterway system 

of the Mississippi Valley as follows:

The more important components of the inland-waterway system of the Mississippi Valley are the lower Mississippi, below the mouth of the Ohio, where a 

depth of 9 feet is maintained by dredging through the river bars; the Ohio River, 

where a depth of 9 feet is secured by locks and dams; feeder tributaries of the 

Ohio, including the Monongahela, the Allegheny, the Kanawha, the Cumberland, 

the Tennessee, and others, the most used of which are also improved by locks 

and dams; the middle Mississippi to above St. Louis, where a depth of 9 feet is 

to be provided by contraction works and dredging; the upper Mississippi from 

St. Louis to St. Paul and Minneapolis, the immediate status of which is a project 

for a 6-foot channel obtained principally by contraction works and by dredging

10 Personal communication.
40 DKOUGHTS OF 1930-34

but where a 9-foot channel is to be provided by locks and dams; the Missouri, in 

process of improvement by contraction works to afford a depth of 6 feet; and the 

Illinois, in course of improvement to afford a 9-foot connection with the Great 

Lakes.

The 1930 drought brought about a prolonged low-water season on these rivers, 

the effect of which was mitigated to some extent by the stabilized condition of 

low water. On the more important parts of the system navigation was kept in 

motion without serious interruption. Channel dredges had to be kept in operation for a much longer period than normal. On the upper reaches of some of the 

tributaries of the Ohio, with limited drainage areas, the evaporation, leakage, 

and lockage losses at the navigation dams exceeded the inflow, and the pool 

depths could not be maintained; but by using special effort in preventing leakage 

at the dams throughout the system, supplemented by channel dredging, the 

navigable capacity of the Ohio and its most important feeders was well maintained. Despite heavy drafts on the reservoirs at the headwaters of the Mississippi, the deficient flow in the upper Mississippi reduced the limiting channel 

depth to about 4^ feet.

In summary, the effect of the 1930 drought was felt by navigation, but the 

consequences were not highly serious as far as navigation was concerned.

In the lower Mississippi River the maintenance of the 9-foot channel was rather 

less difficult in 1931 than in 1930, even though lower river stages were reached. 

On this river bars occasionally form which delay navigation until they can be 

reached by the dredges and a channel provided. The time lost from this cause 

during 1931 did not exceed that occurring during an average year, and the 

amount of material dredged in channel maintenance during 1931 was 12 percent 

less than in 1930. The prolonged and continuous low stages resulted in a condition of stability favorable to channel maintenance.

On the Ohio River the project depth of 9 feet was maintained throughout the 

year. The shortage of water to fill the pools on the Monongahela River, which 

had been experienced in 1930, was relieved by rainfall in December 1930, and 

navigation on that stream experienced no difficulties from water shortage in 1931. 

The water supply on the other tributaries of the Ohio was also adequate for 

navigation purposes.

On the middle Mississippi, from the mouth of the Ohio to the mouth of the 

Illinois, above St. Louis, the extremely low stages reached in 1931 required the 

execution of intensive maintenance dredging, but satisfactory navigation conditions were maintained on this reach, as well as up the completed portion of 

the Illinois.

Serious effects of the drought were experienced in 1931 in the upper Mississippi 

between the mouth of the Illinois and St. Paul and Minneapolis. The storage 

reservoirs on the headwaters of this stream were depleted by the preceding 

deficient run-off, and their supply was completely exhausted at the end of 1930. 

The storage recovered in the winter and spring of 1931 was too small to be utilized 

in increasing the low-water flow below St. Paul. New low-water stages were 

attained, and the navigation depth was reduced to as little as 4 feet. Navigation 

was seriously impaired. The construction of the locks and dams provided in 

the project now authorized for the improvement of this reach, when completed, 

will make this section of the river independent of drought conditions.

Since the Missouri River was not completed to an extent sufficient for commercial navigation, the low-water conditions had no serious effect. They produced a favorable situation for the prosecution of the regulating works. Since, 

however, these works become effective in correcting the channel through their 

influence on high flows, the lack of high water deferred the completion of the 

project.
DROUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 41

The drought in the South Atlantic States in 1931 had an injurious effect upon 

the navigation of some of the upper reaches of streams still used for that purpose. 

The packet-boat service on the Savannah River between Augusta and Savannah 

began carrying partial loads in the latter part of May 1931 and suspended operations from the latter part of August to the middle of December because of low 

stages resulting from the drought. Navigation was also suspended for a period 

of about 6 weeks on the Alabama River. In general, however, the lack of high 

flows during the year materially reduced the sediment deposits in the lower reaches 

of the stream, to the advantage of navigation conditions, and with a reduction 

in necessary maintenance dredging.

In general, while drought conditions in 1931, as in 1930, called for increased 

activities of the department in the maintenance of navigable channels on nontidal rivers, the consequences were not serious so far as navigation is concerned.

RECREATION AND WILDLIFE

During the last few years the use of water for recreation has greatly 

increased, and this use is recognized as a factor in the consideration 

of questions relating to water supply. The low water during 1930-31 

interfered with fishing, bathing, and boating, both on account of 

inadequate water supply and on account of increased pollution. 

Water supplies of many refuges and breeding grounds were so reduced 

that adequate feed was not available for migratory birds.

RELIEF

In many rural localities the droughts of 1930 and 1931 caused 

hardship through the failure of food, forage, and cash crops and 

through scarcity of water for both human beings and stock. The 

effect throughout the country, however, was not severe enough to 

prevent the building up of heavy surpluses of almost every agricultural product. The resultant low price levels, already beaten down 

by the economic depression, greatly reduced the ability of those in 

the drought areas to meet the situation adequately without outside 

relief. Such relief was provided by Federal appropriations and by 

gifts through the American Red Cross. Because the drought effects 

were spotty, varying widely even between adjacent counties, it is 

difficult to generalize. Without question, however, the drought 

caused much hardship, with corresponding needs for relief, especially 

among the "marginal" farmers, who are none too well off in the most 

prosperous times.

In its effect on water supplies the drought made haulage of water, 

sometimes in tank cars over long distances, necessary to keep stock 

alive. Transportation of fodder was also necessary, with the alternative of moving stock out of the area or else selling at a heavy loss.

Failure and low price of cash products, whether in cotton, cattle, 

wheat, or corn, was a principal cause for need of drought relief. 

Many families dependent on cash crops, with no vegetable gardens 

whereby they might live directly off the land, found that low prices

142748 86 ft
42 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

and depleted yields left them without sufficient means to buy the 

bare necessities.

Enough relief needs were traceable to the drought to bring the 

American National Red Cross into action under its policy of functioning 

to prevent suffering due to an "act of God." Relief measures'were 

started in several States late in the summer of 1930 by local Red Cross 

chapters, and early in the fall it became evident that outside help 

would be needed. Accordingly, the Red Cross took up the work and 

appropriated $5,000,000 from its reserve. In addition, $10,589,780.19 

was raised by a special campaign for the period ending June 30, 1931. 

Notwithstanding this, many believed that the situation was so serious 

that it could be adequately handled only by aid from the Federal 

Government. As a result Congress passed four measures for drought 

relief.

Federal aid to drought sufferers was first made in the fall of 1930 

from the balance in a loan fund which Congress had provided in the 

preceding March under the Department of Agriculture for aid in 

certain States that had suffered from storms and other causes. From 

this fund $230,350 was distributed in small loans for sowing pasturage 

crops in Alabama, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Virginia. The terms 

under which this fund was made available prohibited its use in other 

States, and to meet the situation Congress made available $67,000,000, 

to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture, for loans and advances to drought sufferers, by the acts of December 20, 1930 ($45,- 

000,000), February 14, 1931 ($20,000,000), and February 23, 1931 

($2,000,000). In addition $2,000,000, to be administered by the 

United States Public Health Service, was made available by the act of 

February 6, 1931.

The areas that suffered the most are shown in figure 16, which 

indicates where relief measures under the Red Cross were necessary.

From August 1930 through June 1931 direct expenditures for relief 

amounted to $10,894,835.62, and aid was given to 614,504-families, 

aggregating 2,765,000 persons 11 in 1,057 counties in 23 States. In 

addition to the direct expenditures, food, clothing, etc., having an 

estimated value of $990,000 were distributed. The services of relief 

agents were in the main contributed. The peak of the relief was 

reached the last of February 1931, when assistance was being given 

to 460,240 families aggregating 2,081,000 persons.

Conditions improved so greatly during the spring and early summer 

of 1931 that after June 30 the only States in which extensive drought 

relief was necessary were Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Montana, and Washington. An additional expenditure of 

$2,266,860.73 was required to cover the needs of these States after 

June 30, 1931, and aid was given to 243,368 persons.

» The total number of persons receiving aid was arrived at by using an esimate of 4.^ persons to the 

average family, and no family that received several types of assistance was counted more than once.
DKOUGHTS OF 1930 AND 1931 43

In all the counties where drought relief was given, the recipients of 

aid were strongly urged to plant the garden seeds being given to them, 

as a further safeguard to the health of their families. Reports during 

1931 from various States indicate that the garden-planting plan was 

generally followed in the area's that had suffered during 1930. This 

was a large factor in eliminating food shortage in 1931. During 1931, 

611,000 seed collections were distributed. The seeds in each of these 

collections were sufficient to plant about a one-fourth-acre garden plot 

and included from 13 to 18 varieties of vegetables selected by the 

United States Department of Agriculture with respect to their suitability to the areas in which they were to be used. An important

FIGURE 16. Areas where Red Cross gave drought relief, August 1930 to June 1931.

indirect benefit from the drought has been that it has taught people 

in the areas affected to grow sufficient food crops for family needs. 

It is estimated that the retail money value of vegetables produced from 

Bed Cross garden seeds in 1931 amounted to $20,000,000.

More than 600 freight carloads of foodstuffs were donated to the 

Red Cross for the drought sufferers. These were distributed in the 

most severly affected regions. Quantities of clothing for children were 

made by Red Cross women volunteers, and used clothing was reconditioned for adults. School attendance everywhere in the drought 

sections was materially improved by the Red Cross school-lunch 

program and by the distribution of warm clothing to the children.

One type of relief given extensively by the Red Cross was stock feed. 

Feed was given to 61,841 families in all but 4 of the 23 affected States. 

Reports indicated that thousands of cattle, horses, mules, hogs, and
44 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

chickens were saved through this feed. In Arkansas alone 34,018 

famiKes received free feed for livestock from the Ked Cross.

This huge relief task was conducted by 1,225 chapter-paid and 517 

nationally paid workers with the aid of 37,762 volunteers. The areas 

in which Ked Cross relief was necessary were in general those of marginal production and lack of diversification, both in agriculture and in 

other activities. This largely accounted for the inability of the people 

to handle the situation locally. There were other areas where the 

drought was fully as severe in which outside relief was not necessary.

Tables 9 and 10, from a report entitled "Kelief work in the drought 

of 1930-31 ", indicate the extent and type of the aid given by the Ked 

Cross from August 1, 1930, to June 30, 1931.

TABLE 9. American National Red Cross drought relief, financial statement June SO,

1981

Available funds:

American National Red Cross. ___ ___ __-___--_ _____ $5, 000, 000. 00

Contributions to drought relief f und. _ ._ ___ _____ ___ _ 10, 589, 780. 19

15, 589, 780. 19 

Expenditures:

Food _ _____.-.__.._._____ _ _ _ _____ $7, 229, 104. 79

Clothing ____ _________ _ _ ____ _ __ 488, 668. 85

School lunches _____ ______ _ _____ _ 165, 599. 52

Feed for livestock __ _____ _________ 346, 415. 60

1930 garden and pasturage seed__ _ ______ 276, 122. 51

1931 garden seed ___ ___ _____ _ __ _ 492, 119. 52

Yeast for pellagra control. __ _ ______ _ __ 15, 903. 06

Other medical aid _______ ____ _____ 91, 906. 95

Family service-. _ ______ _ ___ ___ _ 109, 052. 30

Field supervision, accounting, and other

field expenses... _____ . ________ 835, 095. 72 

Cash grants to chapters, final distribution of

which was not reported by June 30, 1931. 582, 130. 96 

Provision for chapter continuation of service

and relief ___ _______________ 146, 979. 04 

Other relief expenditures including fuel,

bedding, miscellaneous supplies, etc_____ 115, 736. 80

 10, 894, 835. 62

Balance available for completion of drought relief program 4, 694, 944. 57
TABLE 10. American National Red Cross drought relief, character and extent of aid, 

State

Illinois.... .................

Ohio _ .-

Total 

expenditures

$299,265.73 

3,140,946.51 

32,345.40 

112, 821. 06 

108,185.54

1, 134. 63 

1,490,353.72 

955, 453. 65 

22,995.80 

483,006.81

498,291.20 

57, 550. 34 

522.54 

54, 310. 34 

24,067.04

228, 623. 20 

1,385,879.50 

10, 827. 62 

435.82 

389,073.97

623, 126. 32 

268, 904. 38 

184, 768. 58 

521, fl45. 92

10, 894, 835. 62

Number of families receiving 

Pasturage seed 

1930

20,828

15, 502 

13, 121

2,972

5,929

58,352

Garden seed

1930

4,234

14,928 

6,522

915

822

73

27, 494

1931

58,574 

123,018 

9,896 

7,548 

9,100

24 

78,846 

53,200 

2,410 

77, 100

18,088 

1,572

9,075 

696

19,580 

25,000 

8,596 

750 

33,171

24,986 

22,640 

21, 552

605,422

Food

29,972 

172,634 

2,153 

5,212 

4,279

62 

58,260 

71,860 

940 

45,848

26,766 

883 

11 

3,743 

469

10, 153 

65,790 

530

26, 146

35, 132 

12, 718 

11,631

585, 192

Clothing

2,862 

37,967 

122 

1,393 

1,262

22 

9,240 

10,960 

483 

5,078

9,307 

517

916 

185

4,295 

6,562 

388

5,131

8,187 

5,421 

2,216

112, 514

Fuel

42 

1,224 

7 

322

75

2 

1, 192 

144 

47 

329

1,976 

92

39

1,102 

2,671 

50

424

2,432 

178 

109

12, 457

Feed

203 

34,018

390 

931

10 

13,185 

6 

320 

497

2,409 

136

457 

27

359 

1,931

1,757

1,522 

1,851 

1,842

61, 851
46 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34 

DROUGHT OF 1934

During much of 1934 for most sections of the country the major 

weather phenomena precipitation, temperature, and wind movements were in some respects abnormal. As a result, noticeable 

drought conditions in varying degrees of severity prevailed, as indicated on plate 1, in all the arid States except Washington, Oregon, 

California, Nevada, northern Idaho, and western Montana; in all 

the semiarid States except most of Texas; and in portions of the 

humid States in the upper Mississippi, Ohio Kiver, and Great Lakes 

drainage basins. Drought conditions were most severe in the semiarid States, especially in the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Kansas, and in 

the adjoining States on both the east and the west, and it was in 

this area that the damage effect of the drought was the greatest. In 

California, although the annual precipitation was only 76 percent of 

the mean, it was so well distributed during the rainy season that 

with the available storage agriculture did not suffer seriously except 

in Imperial Valley, which obtains its water supply from the Colorado 

Kiver. The extremely low run-off of the Colorado Kiver was due to 

drought conditions in the upper basin States.

In 1931 the annual precipitation in California was 104 percent of 

the mean, but its distribution during the rainy season was so 

unfavorable that the irrigation supply, including storage, was insufficient to meet the needs of agriculture. As a result there were 

severe economic effects due to deficient water supply. Conditions 

in California during 1931 and 1934 illustrate the errors that are 

liable to enter into any conclusions as to droughts in the arid and 

semiarid States based upon annual records of precipitation.

CAUSES

Although in certain areas climatic conditions in previous years 

contributed in some degree, the drought of 1934 resulted primarily from deficient and unfavorably distributed precipitation, 

excessive heat, and warm winds, which in general prevailed in that 

year in all States except those bordering on the Atlantic seaboard, 

eastern Gulf of Mexico, and northern Pacific coast. These climatic 

conditions are indicated in table 11, plate 1, and figures 17 and 18, 

and are summarized in general on pages 47-52.
DROUGHT OP 1934 47

PRECIPITATION

. In 7 of the 31 humid States the precipitation for 1934 was 85 percent 

of the mean or less. These 7 States were in the Ohio River, Great 

Lakes, and upper Mississippi River drainage basins. In Ohio precipitation was 69 percent of the mean, breaking the previous record. 

In Indiana it was 74 percent of the mean, which equaled the low point 

of 1930. Precipitation in all the semiarid States except Texas was 

below 85 percent of the mean. Previous minima were broken in North 

Dakota, with 54 percent, and South Dakota, with 63 percent. In all the 

arid States it was below 85 percent of the mean, except in Washington 

and Oregon, where it was above the mean, and in Idaho and Nevada, 

where it was 89 percent of the mean. In the remaining arid States 

Wyoming had the least deficiency, with the precipitation 78 percent 

of the mean. Colorado broke previous records with 65 percent.

The serious effects of the drought resulted as much from unfavorable distribution of precipitation as from the deficiency for the year. 

During the 3 winter months, starting with December 1933, 25 States 

had noticeable deficiencies in precipitation, receiving less than 85 

percent of the normal. These included all the humid States except 

Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, Maryland and Delaware, New 

York, and the New England States. In the semiarid region the 

shortage was limited to the Dakotas; in the arid region, to Wyoming, 

Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. The States where major shortages occurred were in the Missouri, upper Mississippi, Ohio, and 

Great Lakes drainage basins.

During the spring (March through May) shortages in precipitation 

were greater and more widespread than during the winter, 27 States 

having noticeable deficiencies. These included the humid States in 

the upper Mississippi, Ohio, and Great Lakes drainage basins, all 

the arid States except Washington, and all the semiarid States except 

Texas. In these areas there were only 5 States in which the precipitation was as great as 70 percent of the normal, and in 9 States it was 

less than 50 percent. In the critical areas, especially in the Dakotas, 

Nebraska, Minnesota, and Iowa, the total precipitation ranged from 

only 29 to 44 percent of normal. Conditions were better in the southern and eastern humid regions, where precipitation was almost normal 

or above in all the Atlantic coast and Gulf States and in Arkansas and 

Tennessee.

During the summer (June through August) major shortages in 

precipitation disappeared in all but 17 States those in the semiarid 

region and the States bordering it on the east and west except Louisiana, also New York, Washington, Idaho, and Utah. In no State, 

however, was the deficiency as great as during the two preceding 

quarters, and the effects would probably not have been especially 

seriqus if it had not been for the shortage in the winter and spring.
TABLE 11. Precipitation, temperature, and crop yields in 

State

Humid States:

Virginia... -

West Virginia -

Ohio 

Wisconsin...--..- _ - -

Precipitation

Mean 0 

(inches)

41.20 

39.52 

37.03 

42.39 

44.07 

44.96

39.01 

45.89 

42.47 

41.89 

42.18 

50.44

48.21 

50.30 

45.81 

43.83 

38.44 

31.29

40.17 

37.26 

48.97 

40.17 

31.48 

31.63

1934

Inches

39.75 

41.23 

38.73 

44.97 

39.24 

52.75

34.97 

45.34 

39.34 

46.43 

45.58 

53.70

45.79 

47.53 

37.00 

37.56 

26.60 

25.46

29.70 

33.12 

42.42 

34.19 

26.90 

30.34

Percent 

of mean

96 

104 

105 

106 

89 

117

90 

99 

93 

111 

108 

106

95 

94 

81 

86 

69 

81

74 

89 

87 

85 

85 

96

Seasonal, December 1933 to November 1934

December, January, February

Inches

9.55 

8.55 

7.95 

10.69 

11.58 

10.52

7.36 

8.51 

6.73

8.43 

7.69 

7.86

7.10 

11.26 

9.04 

8.71 

5.33 

3.72

4.49 

3.53 

10.27 

4.33 

2.35 

2.43

Percent 

of mean

99 

98 

102 

300 

101 

94

86 

79 

72 

89 

82 

68

62 

83 

77 

87 

63 

66

53

52 

87 

69 

70 

66

March, April, 

May

Inches

8.62 

10.36 

9.35 

11.18 

11.49 

14.20

8.40 

11.83 

8.53 

11.95 

12.05 

14.08

12.89 

13.29 

8.64 

8.92 

5.85 

5.15

5.77 

5.21 

13.40 

6.66 

3.18 

4.93

Percent 

of mean

88 

110 

106 

104 

100 

124

88 

107 

79 

116 

113 

118

122 

95 

69 

78 

57 

65

52 

49 

92 

57 

37 

62

June, July, 

August

Inches

10.40 

10.14 

10.30 

9.83 

6.33 

10.41

8.80 

14.40 

12.59 

11.65 

13.03 

17.15

14.40 

14.52 

13.68 

13.38 

10.36 

6.11

10.65 

10.09 

7.29 

7.86 

10.19 

9.63

Percent 

of mean

104 

94 

95 

93 

65 

92

77 

142 

100 

93 

100 

107

88 

114 

115 

103 

95 

71

101 

94 

63 

62 

85 

89

Septem

Octob

Novem

Inches

11.55 

11.99 

10.98 

13.71 

10.03 

17.38

10.69 

10.94 

11.77 

14.23 

12.81 

13.55

9.90 

10.83 

8.65 

8.50 

6.33 

10.99

9.07 

14.00 

13.09 

15.47 

11.56 

13.46

o
Louisiana ... ._---_._ -.-

Semiarid States:

Texas. _ ....__----......

Arid States:

Utah........ .. -

Western Washington.....

25.91

52.94

50.48

53.11

53.32

55.64

32.63

27.48

23.50

20.77

17.70

30.84

14.49

16.79

14.05

15.21

17.17

12.67

13.10

23.53

13.81

54.22

16.89

56.98

20.30

53.38

47.35

55.22

53.40

59.11

27.64

19.92

14.40

13.18

9.49

26.78

9.96

10.93

10.94

11.25

15.34

8.06

9.49

10.11

17.98

14.07

53.53

17.17

69.97

78

101

94

104

100

106

84

72

61

63

54

87

69

65

78

74

89

89

75

77

76

102

99

102

123

1.87

5.94

8.64

11.66

12.54

16.56

4.54

2.85

2.31

.98

1.14

7.27

1.05

3.01

1.83

3.05

7.62

2.46

3.35

1.38

11.60

5.07

26.02

10.18

39.97

83

69

64

77

82

112

100

112

117

58

77

125

53

114

79

124

132

77

96

39

91

102

110

153

193

2.82

14.32

14.75

13.69

11.99

14.74

7.04

4.79

2.32

2.15

1.28

8.37

2.12

2.77

2.74

2.43

3.31

1.25

1.18

1.36

2.05

2.92

9.95

3.07

10.54

44

144

126

97

80

106

68

62

33

34

29

94

76

56

56

56

69

48

31

75

33

79

78

83

102

8.33

22.92

14.91

17.35

14.32

15.24

5.66

5.18

5.85

6.55

5.41

4.04

4.43

3.64

3.61

4.06

1.92

1.41

2.15

4.61

.90

2.07

1.65

1.17

2.30

78

110

97

122

106

96

57

49

59

77

68

49

70

125

89

78

76

102

85

98

188

122

58

62

56

7.37

9.75

8.64

12.35

13.64

13.76

11.08

8.05

4.66

3.84

2.25

7.22

2.27

2.04

2.53

2.77

4.91

2.15

2.78

1.53

6.16

4.59

20.81

6.88

24.91

; For 50-year period 1881-1930, except for eastern and western Washington and Oregon, which are for period of rec

'Also in other years.
50 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

During the fall (September through November) precipitation was 

normal or above in 34 States. It was less than 85 percent of normal in 

only 8 States New Jersey 82 percent, Ohio 76, Florida 73, North 

Dakota 68, Colorado 62, Arizona 54, New Mexico 66, Montana 82.

TEMPERATURE

During 1934, especially in the first 8 months, unusual temperatures 

were noticeable in most sections of the country. The winter in the 

Northeastern States was much colder than usual, and in February 

most previous records as to both severity and duration were broken 

in this area as far south as Virginia. On the other hand, States west 

of the Mississippi River had a mild winter. The spring, in general, 

was late in the Northeastern States and early in the Northwestern 

States.

The summer was unusually warm hi all parts of the country, and 

the year's accumulated temperatures in practically all sections were 

above normal, as indicated in table 11 and by the lines on figure 17. 

The number of days during June, July, and August in each State on 

which temperatures of 100° or more were recorded and the maximum 

temperature for the same months are also indicated in figure 17. 

Previously recorded maxima were equaled or exceeded in 10 States. 

Temperatures of 100° or more occurred in 7 States on 75 days or 

more, and in 14 States on 50 days or more. Kansas City, Mo., had 

temperatures of over 100° on 14 consecutive days. All States west 

of the Mississippi had maximum temperatures of 112° or more except 

Louisiana, Oregon, and Wyoming, where the maxima were 109°, 110°, 

and 111°, respectively. East of the Mississippi, and exclusive of 

New England, there were only 3 States in which maximum temperatures did not exceed 102°, and in 3 States 110° was exceeded.

The fall and early winter temperatures were generally above normal 

except for a short cold spell in December in the Southeastern States.

WIND

Except for their warmth and accompanying dust, wind conditions 

were not unusual during 1934. Dust storms were so frequent during 

the period November 1933 to May 1934 that the Weather Bureau 

circularized its stations east of the Rocky Mountains for reports 

relative to their character. A summary of these reports 12 indicates 

that there were five major storms, considering only those that overspread a considerable section of the country. In addition to these 

major storms, there were many others confined to portions of the 

Great Plains and adjacent sections.

» Mattice, W. A., Dust storms, November 1933 to May 1934; Monthly Weather Rev., February 1935, 

pp. 53.
DROUGHT OF 1934 51

The principal causes of the disastrous soil blowing in 1933 and 1934 

were continuous high winds, intensive cultivation, the practices of 

burning stubble, low rainfall, and lack of organic matter and soil 

moisture to hold the soil in place. At the beginning of the plowing and 

planting season of 1934 there was a marked shortage of soil moisture. 

This, combined with deficient precipitation during the spring, resulted 

in the ground becoming too dry to withstand wind action.

The surface material over large areas of the country, especially in 

the arid and semiarid regions, consists in part of loess that is, 

wind-blown material that has been deposited throughout the ages 

and has always been more or less subject to movement by winds 

when it becomes dry. The close cropping of vegetation due to overgrazing, the unwise breaking up of lands that are valuable chiefly for

[1181 Highest of record

LL5 Equal to previous high 

_________f \ \____

FIGUBE 17. Temperatures, 1934. Upper figure, number of days with maximum of 100° F. or more. Lower 

figure, maximum temperature during June, July, and August. In areas indicated by heavy outline the 

precipitation in 1934 was lowest of record. Lines denote variation in average temperature from normal.

grazing, and the drying of the surface, especially in years of drought, 

have greatly reduced the ability of this material to resist movement 

by the winds. Although the effects have been serious in many 

localities, they were probably not as bad as would be indicated by the 

photographs and descriptions that appeared in press statements.

The great mantle of wind-blown silt that covers a large part of the 

interior of the country indicates that dust storms have been a common 

occurrence in the geologic past. Although we are now chiefly concerned with the damage done by wind erosion in the recent dust 

storms, it is interesting to note that to these ancient silt deposits, 

called loess, is largely due the productivity of the great farming regions
52 DEOUGHTS OF 1930-34

included in the Mississippi Valley, and there are many who believe 

that though the effects in the areas in which the dust originates may 

be detrimental, there may be counterbalancing benefits in areas in 

which it is deposited.

Of the major dust storms that of May 9-12, 1934, created much 

widespread interest as to both its extent and its intensity. Following are reports from various weather bureau stations in regard to 

this and other storms:

Bismarck, N. Dak.: Although frequent dust storms have visited North Dakota 

this spring, those on 11 days warrant special mention. The most severe of these 

storms occurred on April 21 and 22. The velocity of the wind was greater on the 

21st, but the volume and density of the dust were greater on the 22d. The 

latter storm caused the most comment, because of the fact that the 22d fell upon 

a Sunday, and travel by both automobile and by plane was hazardous and 

difficult. Several aviators have reported that dust was encountered at all levels 

up to 14,000 feet. A report on the storm of April 22 follows: A severe dust storm 

began 11 a. m. and continued all day, ending the night following. Visibility at 

the station was as low as 200 yards at various times. * * * This was the 

most severe dust storm experienced at the Bismarck station during the 28 years 

that I have been in charge.

Milwaukee, Wis.: Dust reported on about 19 dates previous to May. The 

storm on May 9-10, the worst dust storm of which there is any recollection in 

Wisconsin, covered the entire State. There were fresh to strong winds, which 

drifted the soil in the fields and in places uncovered newly sown grams. By the 

morning of the 10th dense dust clouds covered the sky, and this condition continued all day.

Cincinnati, Ohio: First evidence of the western dust storm reached Cincinnati 

shortly after noon on May 10. It was first observed on the hilltops at about 12:15 

p. m. and at the Lunken Airport at 12:30 p. m. Visibility was greatly reduced, 

being only 3.4 miles from 2:30 p. m. to after 3 p. m.

Pittsburgh, Pa.: The dust storm that was reported at several western stations 

on the morning of May 10, 1934, was first observed in the vicinity of Pittsburgh 

as a peculiar pale-yellow haze in the upper air about 6:15 p. m. of the 10th. At 

the airport station the dust was most dense at the 6 and 7 a. m. observations on 

the llth, when the visibility was reduced to 1 mile.

Boston, Mass.: A veil of dust appeared in the air shortly after daybreak on 

May 11 in New England and undoubtedly moved eastward over the ocean during 

that day. The dust was so fine that it appeared much as a high haze and was 

at an altitude of some 500 feet or more, where visibility was reduced to a fraction 

of a mile, whereas visibility on the ground was up to 2 miles.

Baltimore, Md.: The dust was in the lower and upper atmosphere, within 2 to 

3 miles of the earth's surface. In the lower atmosphere the density thickened 

after 8 a. m. May 11, at which time visibility was between 6 and 8 miles, decreasing 

to 1 and 2 miles between 10:30 a. m. and 2:30 p. m.

Charleston, S. C.: Southerly winds on May 10 and 11 prevented the dust in the 

air over the central sections of the country from reaching this station, but on the 

12th there was a sudden shift to northerly at 4:20 a. m. By 5:45 a. m. our airport 

station was reporting dust, and dustiness increased until 7:40 a. m., when the 

visibility had decreased to 4 miles.

Vicksburg, Miss.: May 11, sunset yellow due to dust. Visibility 2}£ miles in 

the west. Continued until 9 a. m. of the 13th.
DROUGHT OF 1934 53

EFFECT ON GROUND AND SURFACE WATER 

GENERAL EFFECT

A brief discussion of the general effect of droughts on ground and 

surface water is given on pages 11-22 and may be summarized as 

follows: That part of the precipitation which is not taken up directly 

by plant growth or by evaporation passes as surface flow into streams 

and lakes or goes to make up soil moisture and to replenish the ground 

water. In an ordinary year the ground-water table reaches its low 

point at the end of the growing season and is built up during the 

winter and early spring, following closely the precipitation. It 

recedes during the late spring, summer, and fall, unless there is excessive precipitation. Both medium and high stream flow result, 

in the main, from surface run-off following soon after precipitation. 

Low stream flow and also the flow in springs and wells largely result 

from seepage from ground water. Reductions in ground-water yield 

occur in the main when the ground-water table approaches closer 

and closer to the level at which the water from it enters a stream, 

spring, or well. In areas where the topography has a pronounced 

relief the volume of the terrane above a plane through the outlet 

affords storage capacity for a considerable supply of water, and the 

water table in the higher tracts may attain a considerable altitude 

above the point of outlet. Therefore, in many areas the reductions 

in ground-water yield over long periods of drought may be comparatively small, as discussed on page 27 with reference to the Potomac 

River at Shepherdstown, W. Va.

Unfortunately, there are comparatively few long-time records of 

fluctuations of the water table, and most statements in regard to 

ground water in hydraulic studies are based more on generalized 

impressions than on observed data. False impressions of depletion 

may be gained by the necessity of deepening wells in periods of 

drought, by increased needs for water which require additional or 

deeper wells, and by leakage from casings, clogging of intakes, or 

filling of old wells.

In many sections of the country during the last few years precipitation and water-supply trends have been downward. Similar 

downward trends in the past have been followed by upward trends, 

and there is nothing to indicate that this will not apply to the present 

downward trend.

GROUND WATER

Owing to the deficiency in precipitation during the replenishment 

period of 1934 there was little or no recharge in the main drought 

areas, so that the available ground water was in a large measure 

that carried over from the preceding year. Consequently in large 

areas the ground-water table fell below the outlets of springs and
54 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

the bottoms .of streams and wells, thus materially cutting off its 

contribution to surface waters and to springs and wells.

Adequate data to indicate the extent to which the ground-water 

table was lowered in 1934 or whether there has been a progressive 

lowering during the past few years are not available, and any statements in this regard are largely conjecture. Although there may 

have been a progressive fall in some areas, there are no records to 

indicate that this is true to any great extent except where there has 

been heavy pumping for municipal or industrial supplies or for irrigation. The ground-water table in humid areas in general responds 

very quickly to fluctuations in rainfall (see pp. 22-26), and in most 

years there is enough rainfall to supply the normal recharge. The 

lowering of the ground-water table and the shortage in precipitation 

in the drought areas resulted in a noticeable lowering effect on stream 

flow, lakes, ponds, and reservoirs.

SURFACE WATER

The effect of the drought on stream flow was most noticeable in the 

upper Mississippi, Hudson Bay, Missouri, Colorado, and Great 

Basin drainage areas. In these areas many previous records of minimum flow were broken, both as to total annual flow and as to flow for 

shorter periods. Shortages in flow were also noticeable in the Great 

Lakes drainage basin, the Ohio River tributaries from the north, and 

the lower Mississippi River tributaries from the west, but comparatively few previous minima on these streams were exceeded. In the 

Atlantic coast and Gulf of Mexico drainage basins and also in the 

Pacific coast basins with the exception of portions of the Snake River, 

stream flow was in general normal. A few examples showing the 

effect of the drought of 1934 on stream flow in the principal drought 

areas are given in table 12.

TABLE 12. Effect of the drought of 1934 °n stream flow in the principal drought

areas

Stream and station

West Fork of White Eiver, Noblesville, 

Ind.- 

Gasconade Eiver, Waynesville, Mo. __

Drainage area 

(square 

miles)

2,510 

944

800 

9,010 

1,980

3,790 

661 

3,190 

10,300 

1,680

Period of 

record 

(years)

21 

19

15 

20 

20

21

20 

20 

20 

20

Discharge for year ending Sept. 30

Mean 

for 

period 

(secondfeet)

2,350 

988

855 

5,650 

1,390

3,140 

426 

1,860 

8,550 

1,400

1934

Secondfeet

789 

445

271 

1,800 

400

2,110 

126 

593 

4,450 

502

Percent 

of mean

33.6 

45.0

31.7 

31.9 

28.7

67.2 

29.6 

31.8 

52.1 

35.9

Minimum prior 

to 1934

Secondfeet

744 

465

254 

2,110 

123

1,640 

123 

603 

4,440 

550

Year

1931 

1925

1931 

1931 

1931

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1917
DROUGHT OP 1934 55

TABLE 12. Effect of the of 1934 on stream flow in the principal drought 

areas C ontinued

Stream and station

Minnesota River, Montevideo, Minn ....

Colorado River, Glenwood Springs, Colo.

Weber River, Oakley, Utah. _______

Humboldt River, Palisade, Nev _____

Drainage area 

(square 

miles)

2,250 

208,700 

505, 700 

6,300 

14,600

14,500 

36,800 

88,600 

6,420 

25,500

2,880 

645 

1,320 

692 

4,560

107,900 

163 

5,010

Period of 

record 

(years)

13 

6 

9 

25 

31

19 

42 

61 

32 

52

27 

21 

45 

33 

35

40 

28 

26

Discharge for year ending Sept. 30

Mean 

for 

period 

(secondfeet)

1,110 

19,500 

58,000 

514 

2,320

4,270 

9,210 

48,200 

468 

2,260

1,330 

248 

978 

933 

3,070

20,000 

246 

334

1934

Secondfeet

117 

13,700 

23,730 

4.4 

136

1,450 

1,940 

18,900 

17.5 

244

330 

50.8 

468 

345 

1,423

6,050

82.7 

34.8

Percent 

of mean

10.4 

70.2 

40.9 

.9

5.9

33.9 

21.1 

39.2 

3.7 

10.8

248 

20.5 

47.9 

37.0 

46.4

30.2 

33.6 

10.4

Minimum prior 

to 1934

Secondfeet

360 

13,000 

31,800 

32.7 

291

2,160 

3,190 

24,400 

41.7 

351

662 

105 

353 

402 

1,720

8,600 

108 

51.1

Year

1931 

1931 

1931 

1933 

1931

1933 

1931 

1931 

1933 

1931

1931 

1931 

1902 

1931 

1931

1931 

1931 

1931

As Missouri was one of the States in which drought conditions in 

1934 were severe, a summary of low-water conditions in this State is 

indicative of conditions in other major drought areas. At 9 of the 24 

river-measurement stations maintained in that section of the State 

lying north of the Missouri River the flow ceased entirely for the first 

timesince the beginning of records in 1921. New low-water records were 

established at 10 other stations. In the area south of the Missouri 

River conditions were not so critical, as the streams are largely springfed. Nevertheless, of the 43 stations in this area, 3 became dry, 23 

established new minimum records, and at only 17 did the flow remain 

above the previous minimum.

In Idaho the year 1934 was characterized by the lowest run-off 

ever recorded on the Snake River. At Heise, above the upper-valley 

canals, the river run-off was 54 percent of normal, and at Neeley, 

below the American Falls Reservoir, it was 43 percent of normal. 

During 1931, when the next lowest flow on record occurred, the runoff was 58 percent of normal at Heise and 55 percent of normal at 

Neeley. Jackson Lake bottom storage rights were 52.6 percent 

filled, and American Falls rights 51.5 percent filled exclusive of holdovers from the previous year and stored normal flow.

Great Salt Lake reached an altitude of 4,194.85 feet on September 

30, 1934, the lowest recorded since observations were begun in 1851. 

The next lowest level was recorded in 1902 and 1905, when the lake 

stood at 4,195.7 feet. The maximum recorded stage was 4,212.5 

feet in 1868.
56 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

In the arid and semiarid parts of the country the lowering of lakes, 

ponds, and reservoirs was so great that in many localities they dried 

up entirely or were exhausted by excessive demands for irrigation and 

other uses. During the year 1934 the net reduction in storage in 24 

reservoirs of the United States Bureau of Reclamation with an 

aggregate capacity of 12,000,000 acre-feet was 2,170,000 acre-feet, as 

indicated in table 13. (

TABLE 13. Water in storage in 24 reservoirs of U. S. Bureau of Reclamation on

Dec. 31, 1929-S4

1929.. _________

1910

1931. ____ ...........

Acre-feet 

in storage

4,590,000

3,880,000

2,380,000

Change from 

previous year

-710,000

_1 uyt flfifl

1932............ 

1933 

1934 

Acre-feet 

in storage

5, 160, 000

4,640,000

2, 470, 000

Change from 

previous year

+2,780,000

-620,000

-2, 170, 000

DAMAGE

The drought of 1934 covered one of the principal agricultural areas 

of the country, and in the main the damage it caused relates to agriculture. In the area in which the drought was most severe, precipitation and resulting water supplies are meager, and therefore shortages 

are much more noticeable and their effects more serious than in the 

humid areas. Much of the drought damage would not have resulted 

if there had been a proper coordination between available supplies 

and the activities that depend upon water. Complete information in 

regard to damages is not available, but the following paragraphs 

give a general idea of their extent.

VEGETATION

Miscellaneous reports based on personal observation indicate that 

during 1934 in the major drought area most types of natural vegetation, especially trees that have deep roots and draw their water from 

levels near the ground-water table, suffered in varying degrees. It 

was also observed in the semiarid sections that natural perennial 

grasses, which were the basis for stock raising in the early days, were 

in considerable measure drought-resistant. This emphasizes the 

fact that natural vegetation adjusts itself through the centuries to 

extremes of climate.

The effects of the drought of 1934 on cultivated vegetation were 

widespread and in many areas were serious.

In the humid areas the sections affected were limited, in the main, 

to States in the upper Mississippi, Ohio, and Great Lakes drainage 

basins, and to Arkansas. The effects were very spotted and were 

most severe in Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas. 

In many sections there was sufficient precipitation to mature lateplanted forage crops, which greatly relieved the shortage of 

stock feed.
DBOUGHT OF 1034 57.

The effects of the drought were most serious in the semiarid States, 

where all known conditions unfavorable to vegetable growth existed 

deficient total precipitation with unfavorable distribution, extremes 

in temperature, and hot winds. As indicated in table 11, precipita* 

tion during the first two quarters of the year was deficient. As a 

result the growing season started with too little soil moisture for 

proper crop germination. This was followed in many areas by deficient precipitation during the growing season, which, combined with 

excessive temperature and hot winds, was disastrous to much vegetation, especially in the Dakotas.

FIGUEE 18. Total precipitation for June, July, and August (upper figures) and composite yields of crops 

per acre expressed as percentage of average yields flower figures), 1934. In areas indicated by heavy 

outline the .precipitation in 1934 was the lowest of record.

The conditions that prevailed in the arid sections during 1934 

are described in the November report of the Bureau of Reclamation 

as follows:

The crop results have been surprisingly favorable in view of the widespread 

shortage of water and the early predictions of crop losses. Well-organized plans 

of conservation have in a great measure alleviated the threatened losses on projects with limited supplies on hand. On the Carlsbad project, in New Mexico, 

and in the Imperial Valley, Calif., however, heavy crop losses were experienced 

by lack of water. Moderate crop losses occurred on the Truckee division of the 

Newlands project in Nevada, the Strawberry project in Utah, the Minidoka and 

Boise projects in Idaho, and the North Platte project in Wyoming, where the 

storage during the past year was very J0w and summer flows were far below 

normal. Except on those projects mentioned above, where water has been 

extremely deficient, crop returns have been excellent.

These results were duplicated on many non-Federal projects and 

illustrate what can be accomplished with adequate storage and wise

142748 36 5
58 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

use of water. Many smaller projects that had, ipufficient storage or 

did not reduce their acreage or irrigate under the demand system 

suffered severely in 1934. The areas most affected were in the Great 

Basin and in areas supplied by water from the Colorado River 

drainage basin.

Although it is difficult to differentiate the relative magnitude of 

the effects of the many complex factors entering into the status of 

agriculture of which drought is only one, crop statistics give an 

indication of drought effect. The United States general crop report 

of December 1934 estimated the combined yield per acre of 33 important crops as 81.2 percent of the 10-year average yield (1921-30).

The crop yields by States and the precipitation for the growing 

months, June, July, and August, are indicated in table 11 and figure 

18. The lower numbers in figure 18 show that in 17 States the yield 

per acre was more than 100 percent of the 10-year average, in 9 

between 90 and 100 percent, in 7 between 80 and 90 percent, and 

in 15 below 80 percent. These figures do not reflect the total loss 

due to the drought, because acreage entirely abandoned is not included in the computation. Except in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Illinois there were no serious effects on yields in the humid States east 

of the Mississippi River. Noticeable shortages occurred in the 

humid States west of the Mississippi except Louisiana and Arkansas 

and in all the arid and semiarid States except New Mexico, Arizona, 

Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California. The lowest yields were 

in the semiarid States, except Texas, and in Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, and Illinois on the east, and Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, 

Utah, and Nevada on the west. The drought area included much 

of the corn belt, and the yield of corn for the country as a whole 

was only 60.5 percent of the 10-year average. The other staple 

crops most affected were small grains and hay. The yield of winter 

wheat was 83.7 percent of the average, and of spring wheat 79.1 percent, but for cotton, potatoes, and tobacco, three other important 

money crops, yields were above normal. These figures represent 

the yields per acre and not the total crop production, which for the 

more staple crops was unusually low for the country as a whole. 

The low total production resulted bo,th from low yields due to unfavorable growing conditions and from reduction in acreage, which 

was about 20 percent less than in 1932 and 12 percent less than in 

1933. The shortages, however, were not great enough to have a serious effect on the country's total food supply, and the total returns for 

crops were the highest since 1929, being estimated at $4,764,507,000, 

or about 70 percent more than in 1932 and 19 percent more than in 

1933.

Attention has been called by the Division of Grazing, Department 

of the Interior, to the importance of the grass crop hi the land eco-
DROUGHT OF 1934 59

.nornics of the country. The value of this crop is not included in the 

statistics given above, except as a very small percentage is allowed for 

dry and harvested hay. Reports indicate that in the United States 

1,055,000,000 acres, or 55 percent of the entire country, is in grass 

land. Grass produces half of all the feed for all livestock and is the 

greatest single crop in area, value, and tonnage. More than half of 

the above-stated acreage of pasture land is in the arid and semiarid 

States. Only one-tenth of our pasture land is arable, but that onetenth has a carrying capacity five times as great as the natural pasture. 

The effect of drought on pasture land is threefold to the grass, to 

the stock, and to the land itself. Less precipitation means less feed, 

but as the number of stock is more or less constant, overgrazing is the 

result and may be carried to a point where the vegetable species most 

palatable to stock are either partly or wholly destroyed. The drying 

up of water supplies used by stock means a decreased area of grazing 

and results in intensified grazing adjacent to the remaining water 

supplies. This aggravates damage to stock, vegetation, and land.

DOMESTIC AND INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLIES

The experience gained during the drought of 1930 and 1931 led to 

a material extension throughout the country of facilities for conserving 

and providing water. As a result, the shortages of water for domestic 

and industrial uses during the drought of 1934 were in most areas 

much less than during previous droughts.

In the humid regions there were practically no serious shortages 

except in States bordering on the Mississippi River especially Missouri and Iowa. The shortages were primarily in the rural section 

and smaller towns, as most cities and larger towns are now provided 

with adequate water supplies. In most sections the situation was 

helped by deepening wells and clearing streams, but in some sections 

hauling of water was necessary.

In the early stages of the drought the State geologist of Missouri 

foresaw the possibility of water shortages in the rural sections and 

directed the necessary geologic surveys for determining the possibilities of the development of underground water throughout the State. 

These surveys indicated the most favorable locations for wells, and as 

a result additional supplies were provided throughout the State, so 

that serious shortages were, in the main, averted. The surveys will 

also be of great value in the development of adequate water supplies 

for the future, and they indicate what can be done in other sections.

In the rural portions of the semiarid regions serious shortages were 

experienced on account of the failure of shallow wells and the drying 

up of ponds, lakes, and small streams. The urban supplies of 

these regions, which in the main come from deep wells and the larger 

streams, were adequate in most localities, although in some areas it
60 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

was necessary to curtail consumption and develop additional supplies. 

Shortages were especially noticeable in the Red River drainage basin 

of Minnesota and North Dakota.

In the irrigated areas of the arid regions water supplies for domestic, 

stock, and industrial uses are often developed in connection with irrigation systems. During 1934 shortages of suitable water for tiaese 

uses were common and caused coosid<emble isesaaveoioaice, especially 

on the smaller irrigation projects. In many localities it was necessary 

to curtail the use of the water and in some sections to develop supplementary supplies. On most of the larger irrigation projects there were 

no serious shortages for nonirrigation uses, although supplying the 

requirements for such uses necessitated an uneconomical operation of 

the ditches and thus resulted in considerable waste.

The shortage of irrigation water on the Snake River in southern 

Idaho during 1934 has resulted in a study, now under way, for eliminating winter diversions of water for domestic purposes in that area. 

It is suggested that wells be drilled to furnish domestic water under 

all canals, at a cost of $2,250,000. This expenditure will result'in 

adding about 450,000 acre-feet annually to the winter supply available for storage in existing reservoirs that do not fill in the dry years.

Curtailment of the use of water was necessary in most of the larger 

towns of the arid regions. In some towns deficiencies were overcome 

by the development of additional supplies. In Salt Lake City, which 

has a normal summer demand of about 60 second-feet, shortages 

developed early in the summer. A detailed ground-water investigation under way by the United States Geological Survey in cooperation 

with the city was utilized to determine the possibilities of obtaining 

an additional supply, and as a result wells were drilled which yielded 

52 second-feet of water. These wells were pumped as needed to take 

care of exchange agreements by the city and to furnish a direct supply 

to city consumers. As a result of careful use the city constimp^ioii 

during September amounted to only 44 second-feet, of which 26 

second-feet was well water.

HHAI/TH

According to the following statement of the Surgeon General of the 

Bureau of Public Health Service,13 the drought during 1934 had no 

large effect upon general health.

It may be that the drought had an effect on the health of persons who were 

subjected to unusual conditions, but figures that will prove or disprove this are 

not now available. Even when detailed figures for all States have been compiled 

it will probably be impossible to separate the effect of the drought from the 

results of numerous other causes = which affect health. Data on deaths* for the 

year 1934 have not yet been collected.

11 Personal communication.
DROUGHT OP 1934 61

During the summer of 1934 there was an increase in the reported prevalence of 

typhoid fever in some of the drought-stricken States. It is probable that some 

of the increase shown is due to contamination of water supplies, but in some 

States the apparent increase in number of cases may have been the result of 

efforts to secure more nearly complete reporting of cases, which have been carried 

on for several years.

POWER

A comparison of the amount of electricity produced in 1933 and 

1934 for public use in the West North Central States. (Minnesota, 

Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Missouri) indicates that the drought of 1934 had considerable effect on the production of electricity by the use of water power in that area. Although 

there was an increase of 4 percent in the total production of electricity 

from 1933 to 1934 in these States, the amount of electricity produced 

by water power decreased 21 percent.

NAVIGATION

The Chief of Engineers, United States Army,14 has furnished the 

following statement in regard to the effect of the drought on navigation:

It would be extremely difficult to evaluate the additional expenditures necessitated by the low-water conditions during the season of 1934, although it is 

certain that there was some increased dredging necessary in maintaining project 

depths in the affected region. The low water was particularly felt in the movement of traffic on the upper Mississippi River, as it made it impossible to maintain 

the project depth of 6 feet at Horse Island, even by release of an additional water 

supply from pool 15, at Rock Island, 111.

As a result of the low-water conditions on the upper Mississippi River, the 

Inland Waterways Corporation, on August 31, 1934, issued an embargo against 

all freight to and from or via points located on the Mississippi River north of the 

mouth of the Illinois River, except on cement destined to Guttenberg, Iowa, via 

Dubuque, Iowa. This embargo was maintained until improved flow conditions 

permitted its lifting on Qetober 4.

RECREATION AND WILD UDFE

Recreational activities in the drought States were much interfered 

with during 1934 by the drying up of both natural and artificial lakes. 

This also had a detrimental effect on wild life, and as a relief measure 

many lakes ranging in size from about 80 to 10,000 acres were developed in the drought States for recreational use and for bird refuges. 

The bird refuges were developed on public land entirely at public 

expense. In the development of the recreational lakes the local 

people contributed by furnishing the site and all or part of the material 

and equipment required for the work. Work of this type not only 

provided effective relief but appealed especially to residents of the 

semiarid States, where there are few if any bodies of water available 

for recreational use or for migratory birds.

11 Personal communication.
62 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

BELIEF

For several years there have been demands for relief in many areas 

due to unfavorable agricultural and other conditions; therefore it is 

difficult to differentiate the part of the demands in 1934 that were 

directly traceable to the drought.

In June 1934 Congress made available to the Federal Emergency 

Relief Administration the sum of $525,000,000 to be expended on 

drought relief in areas designated by the United States Department 

of Agriculture as suffering from drought, the funds to remain available 

until March 31,1935. The Federal Emergency Relief Administration 

allotted these funds to the various State emergency relief administrations in the drought area, to be expended by these agencies under 

general policies established by the Federal Administration.

The program as carried out has included all types of relief, such as 

direct payment of funds to distressed families, the purchase of livestock that could not be maintained in the drought area because of 

shortage of feed and water, the furnishing of seed for late forage crops, 

etc., and work projects, such as the processing and canning of meats 

for distribution to people on relief rolls and the development of water 

supplies in the drought areas.

That part of the drought relief program which relates to the development of water supplies included the following items:

Cleaning of springs

Wells for domestic use

Wells for stock water

Wells for municipal water supply

Pumping for stock or domestic use

Pumping for irrigation

Dam for stock water

Dam for irrigation water

Dam for recreational lake

The work under these items is described in a paper by Lewis A. 

Jones, staff engineer, F. E. R. A., presented at the meeting of the 

Engineering Institute of Canada, Toronto, February 7, 1935, in part* 

as follows:

Because of the comparatively short time the drought relief funds would be 

available and the urgent need in many areas for immediate water supplies, it 

was decided in planning the water program to limit the work to projects that 

would promptly make water available'and that could be completed within .the 

limited time during which drought funds would be available. In other words, 

the object was to meet the existing drought situation rather than to start on a 

long-time water-conservation program.

On the national-forest ranges and public grazing land the work has been 

confined largely to the cleaning out and improvement of springs, the digging of 

wells, the furnishing of windmills and tanks, and the construction of dams to 

form stock water holes. The improvements are more or less of a permanent 

nature, and the increased carrying capacity of the range resulting from the 

work will ultimately pay the cost.

Dam for wild-life refuge 

Maintenance ditches 

Reservoir outlet 

Reservoir repair work 

Tapping or lowering a lake 

Draining a slough, etc. 

Hauling water for stock 

Hauling water for domestic use
DROUGHT OF 1934 63

On privately owned land, both in the range and dry-farming areas, the same 

types of projects have been carried on, but in every case, before construction 

work has been started, the landowner has been required to sign an easement 

granting the general public access to the water developed during periods of 

drought.

In the irrigated areas ditches have been cleaned out and lined to reduce seepage 

losses, reservoirs and other irrigation structures have been repaired, small reservoirs have been constructed, and pumping from streams has been carried on to 

furnish supplemental water for crops. This work has resulted in the saving of 

large areas of crops that would have otherwise been killed by the drought and 

has enabled the landowners to take care of themselves during this winter instead 

of being dependent upon the relief rolls. The cost of carrying the benefited 

people over the winter on the relief rolls would have in most cases exceeded very 

materially the cost of the work, and the landowners have been able to maintain 

their self-respect.

In some instances the water supplies for towns and villages have been supplemented by the digging of wells, the improvement of reservoirs, the construction 

of pipe lines, and the pumping of water from nearby streams, etc. In practically 

all oases where assistance has been rendered to incorporated towns the local 

communities have been required to furnish most of the materials required for 

the work, and the drought funds have been expended in the employment of labor 

that would otherwise have been on the relief rolls.

In a few of the drought States bird refuges and recreational lakes have been 

developed as a phase of the relief work, the size of the lakes varying in area 

from about 80 to 10,000 acres. The bird refuges have been developed on public 

lands and entirely at public expense. In developing the recreational lakes the 

local people have been required to furnish the lake site and all or part of the 

materials and equipment required for the work. The relief funds have been 

devoted primarily to the employment of labor from the relief rolls. In visiting 

the field the writer has been impressed with the popularity of such developments. 

They appeal especially to the residents of the semiarid States, where bodies of 

water for recreational uses are nonexistent. :

In addition to the construction projects outlined above a number of the State 

relief administrations have conducted ground- and surface-water surveys to 

determine the extent of such resources. Such projects have furnished employment to engineers and geologists in need, and the results obtained will be of 

great value in planning long-tune programs of water conservation. Several of 

the States have established water-conservation boards, and the State relief 

administrations have cooperated with these boards by furnishing technical 

personnel to assist in developing State-wide plans for water development. If a 

general public-works program should be undertaken the plans that have been 

prepared will be of great value in expediting the work.

In Montana the water program has been limited primarily to the development 

of water supplies on the range lands. Numerous springs have been cleaned out 

and equipped with suitable water troughs; wells have been dug; and small dams 

constructed to form stock water ponds. As a result of the work it has been 

possible to retain a large amount of livestock in the State that would otherwise 

had to have been sacrificed. In some instances supplemental water has been 

made available to irrigated lands and repairs made to irrigation systems to reduce 

seepage losses. Assistance has also been rendered to the State Conservation 

Board by furnishing employment to technical employees engaged in developing 

a long-time plan of water development and conservation for the State.

In North Dakota work in the rural region has been limited primarily to $he 

construction of dams for stock water ponds. It is expected that more than 400
64 DBOUGHTS OF 1030-34

such dams will be completed before the end of next March. In addition to the 

stock water ponds a considerable number of small recreational lakes and municipal 

reservoirs have been completed ranging in size from 30 to 40 acres up to 600 or 

700 acres. Five large bird refuges are also under construction covering a total 

of more than 150,000 acres. The refuges on the Des Lacs Lakes and the Souris 

River, located north of Minot, are expected, when completed, to be the most 

valuable wildlife refuges in the United States. In localities where municipalities 

and rural communities have suffered from shortage of water, wells have been 

dug to relieve the situation.

The State has organized a water conservation board, and the Emergency 

Relief Administration has cooperated with the board by furnishing technical 

personnel from the unemployed lists to conduct a State-wide survey of groundwater conditions which will be of value in planning a water-development program 

for the State.

The Federal Emergency Relief Administration feels that the water development and conservation projects carried on under the drought-relief program 

have not only been of great value in relieving the immediate drought situation 

but that much of the work is of such permanent character that benefits will 

continue to be derived for years to come. The value of the crops and livestock 

saved during the past season have enabled large numbers of farmers to maintain 

themselves who otherwise would have had to appeal for relief during the present 

winter. The reduction thus obtained in the relief load will go a long way toward 

paying the cost of the work. The program has also provided an opportunity for 

work to large numbers on the relief rolls, thus enabling them to maintain their 

self-respect by working instead of accepting a dole.

Several projects were undertaken in Idaho by drought-relief 

agencies set up by the Government. About 17,000 acre-feet of water 

was made available by the draining of several lakes and by pumping 

and was distributed by a local committee to water users on Henrys 

Fork and its tributaries. A section of an old power dam near Woodville was torn out, reducing the size of a ponded area and decreasing 

losses that were occurring. Several wells were drilled by droughtrelief funds in the Blackfoot-Aberdeen section and furnished small 

supplies for local irrigation. Money from the same source was used 

to drill wells and build cisterns in the Jerome-Twin Falls area, to 

assist in providing domestic water, so that use of winter water from 

irrigation ditches may eventually be abandoned in that area. The 

Utah Power & Light Co. made available to Henrys Fork canals, 

without cost, 1,000 acre-feet of water by reducing the operating head 

in the forebay at its Ashton plant.

The funds allocated to the various States from the $525,000,000 

authorized by Congress through March 19, 1935, are indicated 

below. These amounts include the allocations to the Federal Surplus 

Relief Corporation for activities in connection with the drought, and 

in some States they extend to nondrought areas. They do not, 

however, include allotments to the Farm Credit Association, Civilian 

Conservation Corps, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, or 

land purchase program for their activities as related to the drought.
COMPARISON OF DROUGHTS, 1881 TO 1934

Alabama... _ $951,250

Arizona,. _ __ 2,069,000

Arkansas. . _ 4,633,000

California .- 6,800,000

Colorado.________ 8,660,126

Connecticut_ - ___ __ 225,000

Delaware_ _ 27,923

District of Columbia- 50,000

Florida._._._______ 2,285,376

Georgia.-.. _.__ 1,715,600

Idaho- _-, -.-- 3, 982, 269

Illinois__________ 6,160,000'

Indiana...________ 2,025,000

Iowa____-______ 4,651,750

Kansas_______.:_. 13,820,000

Kentucky_.______ 1,061,900

Louisiana_______ 1,208,365

Maine____..____ 838,152

Maryland_...____. 1,438,000

Massachusetts ____ _. 850,000

Michigan _______ 2,110, 000

Minnesota______.-_ 10, 774,192

Mississippi..._ _____ 1,150, 000

Missouri________. 11,487,450

Montana._______. 7,.,286,424

Nebraska________. 6,860,000

Nevada____-___ 1,401,000

New Hampshire_ __ _ 79, 300

New Jersey____-_- $1,354,428

New Mexico___.___ 5,847,000

New York. . 4, 460,000

North Carolina ___ 3,050,000

North Dakota.._____ 13, 711, 046

Ohio__ - 1,880, 030

Oklahoma________ 8, 576,600

Oregon ------ 615,000

Pennsylvania_______ 1, 516, 592

Rhode Island____.. 108,200

South Carolina_____ . 3,030, 502

South Dakota.______ 15, 240, 675

Tennessee-.-___._.._ 1,255,750

Texas___. ._ 28,014,200

Utah.. 6,388,250

Vermont_________ 20,000

Virginia. - 1,271,354

Washington..______ 650,00$

West Virginia- __ _- 699, 975

Wisconsin..________ 5,925,000.

Wyoming_________ 3,589,424

Puerto Rico _______ 400,000

Virgin Islands.___ . _ 15, 000

Federal allotment.

212. 220,103

1, 000, 000

213. 220, 103

COMPARISON OF DROUGHTS DURING PERIOD 1881

TO 1934

Records of precipitation and stream flow give an index for comparing droughts in their physical aspects and will generally serve to 

answer questions relative to frequency, duration, extent of area 

covered, and severity. Additional facts, however, which are usually 

lacking, are needed in considering the nature and extent of the 

economic effects.

Precipitation records of the United States Weather Bureau, which 

are on a comparable basis by States since 1880, are given in tables 1 

and 14.

They indicate that in the humid States annual fluctuations are 

relatively large in amount but comparatively small in percentage of 

the mean, seldom exceeding 15 percent. In the semiarid and arid 

States, however, fluctuations in percent of mean are wider and annual 

deficiencies ranging from 20 to 45 percent are not unusual. Any 

comparisons based on State annuals for the arid States may be misleading, because of the wide range of precipitation in various parts 

of the individual States. In the humid and semiarid States, except 

Texas, the State distribution is more uniform.
DKOUGHTS OF 1930-34

The number of years in the period 1881 to 1934 when the precipitation did not exceed 85, 80, 75 and 70 percent of the mean that is, a 

deficiency of 15, 20, 25, and 30 percent or more are given for each 

State in table 15, which also gives the precipitation for the 6 years 

during the same period when it was lowest hi each State, arranged in 

order of magnitude of deficiency from lowest to highest. In a few 

States there were less than 6 years hi which precipitation was as 

low as 85 percent.

Under the criterion that a drought exists when the precipitation 

falls to 85 percent of the mean, since 1880 there have been 38 drought 

years in the humid States and 28 in the semiarid States, as indicated 

in figure 19 and table 14, which also give for the various years in both 

groups of States the percentage of the area in which there was this 

deficiency, and the precipitation in percentage of the mean for that 

area. Table 16 lists for both the humid and semiafid States the 14 

worst drought years, arranged both according to magnitude of area 

affected and chronologically. Plate 1 indicates the States that were 

affected during the 7 worst drought years for the humid and semiarid 

States. In some years droughts were common for both groups of 

States, and in other years only one group was affected.

TABLE 16. Years when large areas of the humid and semiarid States had deficiency 

in precipitation of 15 percent or more

Humid States

No.

1 __________ . _____ . _____

2

3 ____________ - __ . _ ... .........

* ._ .- . -.--.-. .__ 

1:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

7. - . -- . - ...........

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

» ........

10 . ... . ..-. .............. ....

11....... ........... ........ __ ......

12 _______ . ...... ...... .. ..........

13 ___ ......... ...

14 .... .... 

In order of extent

Year

1930 

1894 

1901 

1934 

1889 

1910 

1917 

1921 

1925 

1904 

1895 

1933 

1896 

1931

Area 

affected 

(percent)

63 

45 

34 

32 

32 

30 

30 

30 

30 

29 

27 

24 

18 

18

Precipitation in are a 

of deficiency 

(percent 

of mean)

74 

80 

75, st

77 

72 

80 

84 

80 

78 

77 

80 

82 

79

In chronological order

Year

1889 

1894

1901 

1904 

1910 

1917 

1921 

1925 

1930 

1931 

1933 

1934

Interval 

between 

deficiency 

(years)

5 

1 

1 

5 

3 

6 

7 

4 

4 

5 

1 

2 

1

Order of 

extent 

of area 

affected

5 

2 

11 

13 

3 

10 

6 

7 

8 

9 

1 

14 

12 

4

Semiarid States*

1 _______________ . __ ...

2 _______ . ____________ . .......

3 __ ... .... ........ .

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

5. - - . .

6 __ . _ . ________________ . _ ..

7 ____________________ __ ...

8 ___ - _ - ____ ......... ______ . 

9 

10 _ .. ...

11 _ . ____ ... _______ ..... ___ ..

12. __________ . ____ .... ...........

13 __ ....

14 

1934

1910

1894

1917

1890

1933

1931

1888

1893

1895

1913

1887

1901

1914

100

100

80

78

68

66

65

57

57

45

44

35

35

35

65

71

70

71

76

77

80

82

74

78

84

85

75

83

1887

1888

1890

1893

1894

1895 idfti

1910

1913

1914

1917

1931

1933

1934

1

2

3

1

1

6

9

,3

1

3

14

2

1

12

8

5

»

3

10

13

2

11

14

4

7

6

1

 North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas? and Oklahoma.
pSjSfSp

{

OMtOQOCO

OOCOM£

OOtOOlOOOtOOICO

O M MOO cnOMtOCnOOOOMOl

OOMOBtO

MMtOCOOOMMMCOC

MMtOCncOONWC*MOtOWOSt*-OOM*M

M

MN^OS

toec^osMOMM^tO

ONO.^E

MtO.^5

M

M MCOOtO

M M

MtOittCeCn

M toentoca

OOMO.W

Otoco-qtoOMMODcn

OtOCO-IOlMCOCnOOCO*.o»o!ScoOCn-^ItOOOto Cn CO tooMCJICO tOCO*.C7.eno5

MM

_MMM 

C7t tO tO tO CO

MCO.MMeotvooSlS

MM

M to co co to co

MMMfcj

W«MS8

MMM(3 CnMCOCno

M MMMg

totoenow

M

H.rf.O.MS

M 

OOCOtOM

jI

1 1\\ \

j j

i!

a.

1

J

0

g

11i'

B"

Is,

g1

i<3a 5*I Ie

**

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ill!! i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i§8S8 23§<°2g g£g!8£ BSSil 8§ggS° £S£g° 2S8KS £23o2§ §£§£§ 8g§5S KgSgS

O H- O *O OOCO O O O O O^O O O i * O CO O O O <*> CO ?O 00 GDOO^JOOO O «O CO h-« h-* V-* 00 h-« 00 00 CC <1 !Q O O tO O to h- K-* V-* bO O * rf* 

t*k> O Oi O <5tt OJ **! C*3 tO OOClOiO *O *4 CK I-*- C-v V *ft ^ O CO d * $ Qd co O* rf^tOCKQQ© W SO tO t* ~s( CQ SB ^ "si "*J t*G Cn C>\ CQ GO *G Cn M C/t CJlOOOO GCOCOi O I-*OOOO h- tOOOO O 00 O I-* OR CO tO 00 S <O O O O h- O OOh-0»«* OOOOOO tO tOCO tOO O CO O 00 00 cSos-^00 O --3 <£> Ot O tO On O tO I-* 00 O ^ tO Ol *q N* 00 O * » Ol O> JO 55 tO 00 kU OS rf* CO -*| K3 Cn H*. 00 rf* -4 fcO Cn t£" CO 0: -J ! tO Ci^tfr-OOOgsii 88828 S82S8 KgSSS 22S5§?g S823°.g S8SS5 P2§32 §235SS E2^SS8 8§SSS§1S2 ssggg ee§§q §S895 sesis B8 8 *§ sssgge siSs^ Bgg^B §gg§S Q^sgg51i2 SgiSg ^222 i1B22g §5§39 KSSil 835SS §Sg88 S8§85 E^iBg §g^g

8§SS SSgtSS Il°222 28S8S gSS§2 SSSSi SSPSS 25SGS8 23SSSS S^Ggg ^S22S

SSS2 322|g 8§8g2c? SKSSS S^gSS 23§S52 SSl^gS ggKGS SSggg gg§K22 SggSg

S3S88 sigBi 888SS S55Sg I8g°§ SSSig 85§§S sl^l Bi§28 §ig§S

MiSg S2lii S5§§8 §S2^ ogsli 88SQg SsgSS 83§§8 8S8SS §g§§B Sg22S

00 ^ S O WOfcOOOO «fclfcO~kJ"^lW CD ^> CO Cn K) Cn^O"1*!"1*! OCO5OWCO WOSCnOlO tf^OOSW^^ MClO^^ *Oi-^tOOOOO r ' C5 00 © *»O*JOOO ^ZtOH^OOOO **OOOh^GC ^COOSOO COCOOOOD OCOh^OM P^^S?^^ OO5OOO OOOOOO ^OOOOO OOi-^i-^OCn 071 frO** SO M OT "^1 OO £*00*>4h^tD OO M Ol O H^ MOOOCCQ J^. CO H^ CO rf^ rf^ On Ol O rf^ CO *-4 tO Ol CO to Cn H^ 00 O OO J CO O Ol 00 4^ O 00 rf*-

SgSS? S5gC8 SgEnSS G5;gg2 gSSggg 822S3 22SS8 gS§2S SiSSig S§§§S SSE^g25S8 8§§Q§ SSg^S 1^88 52Sl§ Bggil S3833 3gE§8 8883g SsgSg 3gSi2Oih-«O^5 QD*5(OtOCC CO 00 CO ri3* i^ OScOCOOrfk h^h^OOOO CO 00 tO tO H^ *t*O>COOStO OsCOcoCnCO ftiCO 1-^ fc*)m (-^dOSH*h^ Oth^OMtO

S COCOcO ^juueOH^h^ OOCOOOf^ CO O O O O O CO »-* O H* <O H^ 00 h^ <O OSO^O^OOD QDOO»-*OO »^**OOO WOOOOOCO COCOh-«h-«COs^gg aliii sggsg sggsss sgsss sssss gggss sssgs gssss sgggg ts^^ii2i°g ^sil ss§3E s^ggi 2S52S sgegs §ssia s 3 £gg as§g§ issss §iii5OOeoeOO *Jh^OCOH^ OOOOOO COOOOOO v-**3OOO GCh^OOO OOO»-*OB ^oOOfcOOO CO *J CO H-* O OOOOOO OH^ tOlOp^ CO rfi 00 S dWOWCJI OOOSfcOtOO OOH^tO^O tOOOCnCncn O Ol Cn CD O cOp^tf»tO^O CnCOoiOOO OlQDh^h^h^ rf»- Cn h^ J CO OTOl"-JCOM^8°S S£i£2 gSKS^ BB2SS l8igg2 g88S£ 58SS3 §8SS4 28§g2 gg8§8i 3^i§

^8S8 9gg§§ S8i§8 S8SS8 i§Sg^ sSHig Sgggs 88S3B 88SSS 8Sg&3 S2S8S

OC»i O H^ OOOH*eOO COOOOO O^-'OOOO tOOOOO CitCh^OO h^cOi CO*? MCOOOOi-* OJO^JOOh^O CO*JO(X>*J O^^Orf1*§§SS SglcSB SSgggg g!S2§?° Sg^Stj ggggg PgSSg P^cSSg SSSPig tj^SSS SSE=J^

3SKQ Q3S88 ggSSS ^Si2l ggs^g sSSsB iSSBs £c=Sgi 88Sg8 5^28 sBglS2g§s SGKSS gssl^ issss sssSs §sgss ssg^s sgsgs §§822 ss§ss gs^gg

ZSS3 2ig£i BgggB gg^CS S§sii 888*3 is§8K 5sg§§ §SS§§ sgfiSS g8SggS2g£ SSfcgcSK S§5B^ SSg28 28S88 iS58ig SS^Sg gggS^ 2§2°§ gg§§! 8S2S3

ig§g ssssi ssi^§ SS883 2235^5 8§isgg Ssssss sssgsss ss^gg gssgs 2gggg

!§£§ sBIIS *8gge ggsas siSSB §§gl^ gases ssBs^ sssSs s^sss H5gB§^S25 Q88g8 Bisss Ssisse ssssS B28is gEgfti Issss gsa» B£§gg

JC^^Olt^OOtOtOOOO^* oOOS*OO"l^^OH* fc*jGO>»*i^ifc*J C« w*- OOCJito^^£ 9S S 2 S S § S O O O O OO M OS OO Cn OO *^ H^ OO CO CO tO JC CO Cn --J CJI Cn O Ol rf^ M >^CQOOOh^ A^if^COO CC O5 M 00 ^* H-« tO ^^ O tO8888 32*^ 98§gs S^gaS §ic?§S aSEsg S^S B^gS 388g3 3S8gg g§gsBSSSS! 222SS S88GB SSS2S5 slsss SSgSE B^sls S82SSS SSSgcl ^SSPS 8SL55g

Q«g8 S228S 8«S§8 BggiSS gg&S 38§gg S3§ga §8588 §8§S§ ggg S 8 55S81Ce^DfcoSH^t^^CSOOSWt^Cnt^COCn^O OS

M>H->M>M>H-> MI H- H^ h-H-«Mi H-« H-*V-*>-iH-«H* H-IH-* H-« h- eOf»f»«i WiWieO^'cO *"* f» CO*^ ^^ ^^ ^^

S5gs il2gi Bs^Is i^Bss SsSSI ssSSS £gsss a38Q§ g^eg 2 3 gss gggeegggS S§§|2 9S£8§ SSI210 S i§8KS S§K5S JSSS8S ggPcIs ^8225 SS§gS StJ§SS

_-Mt-* » ^» »» S «e C *1 S CO O OO«D^-«tO H-«eDl-*tOO COfcO«Ol-*tO OOOO5OO ^POOOOh- «*h-h-OO O^JCnOOO Oh-OOO SSfocS SSS wS OWSiO^l CoCftWOOO M^OiaiCO Sc5c»«OH- h-Oi^OsO rf^^Wi^M W^OitOCn diOWf^CO MClrfi.tfr.tO

8S2g S8*Q8 ss^gg ssi^i sISs^ sisSs sgasS S°sl5 sBgqg SggsS QgggsSSeogo g^SSco Keo^^o McotJSos g^SGS §§85"cn 5SSSS SaSSIcn SoSSwco SS5Sg SoSSS

^m SS^ii S§i5i 2MSSi ggS45 sigSS §8888 SS528 S8888 g§§8S R§888g§§I sssSS sssii £s§a5 5B§sS xz%%z sSsis cstsg sssls sSsss egsss

h- H* M 

_ __ ._ , K (ft S<lSeOO OtO^JCOM O CO tO bO 00 O tO CS CO M <1 O CO CO 00 CO ** *J I-* bO OOCOh^COCO 001 III 1 1 1 1 I SSgSo iS2*"S SSS23 cnoesoo coBotScn osioaooco QBOJMMIB ^ioo*-t5 WCOCO^IM ^i i j | | | ; | |

111! 1 ! i ! !

8SSS S288KS 2S3SS2g 5gg28 SS3S^ 2is3gg ££25i32 §S^5S 2SSS2 8j | ! | | ! | ! !

^^ ^M M M M MM MM ! i ! i i i ' ' '

SwSSo MOWM2 SS5SS COWMC^M ogStoS OOWMOOW M ^ *5 Cn O> O tO M K Cn .1 0 S CO M M , I 1 , I I j , j

iMtt i i 41 4 MM t « t * M M MMMM I-4M III! Illll t « t 4 h^ H^ ^jKKco aocooo*jM ococooo Socpooo ootocoo oo co co i co o * oo o M coooooco <ii i i i i i i i i

M MO»flO O-JtOMOO OOtOO»M *O OOOOCO OOCnOO MOOOMOO MifkOCBOi COCOMOM O-JOi*kM coOtOMM

CnCOOW MMOOM MMOOO 000*-M ONiMOO CnMOMO O O O O to OMMOM to*.COOM CO M CO to M OOOOO

 jioiocx I*O»~»OM ocOMtoO OCOMCOO OOOMO enOi^OO Mcooicn** I^NICBMO cncoto*»M 4k.cn*.*.*. toocococo

00 So ""' ta S-qOCOO SSMCoS OO S O^JoO-J OOOOOO fOOOOjt^*. COCOOCn^I ^CnCnOi*' O fO O C6 (&. ^IOCn. CO'^kOOOOCn 01 'M CO es^-OOW^ OOCO^I CO CO Ol M COCO MM *.tO CS-4 O*>.O ^ M tn-4 tO C900C1

§§S3 2SJ 3j §SSS2 ! 1 888 ! B! i S a! H 1 2S! SS S2J SS ^§§1 8 ! ^! 83 g| S§2

§SoS oSooto SSooo OOOMW o5£j£oo ^tlopo ooooS ototoop ^jg^op SpSSSSp ooooo

* * [fcrfkio <! Ofl OM OfcO^- O Wtto-fcOMOSfcOfcOrffctfr-tOOfcO O Cn M. t^ t^ M* » »

1 ''A* .« I-M i i * iii*aQO I OO OO t 1 *«J 00 1 OC I I I 1 t *J 1 00 M i M *^ ~*l »4 ' O> ~*l OS 00 00 M lliii C&^llOO 00001*00 3 S i 1 1 |IIMM> i CC £. * 1 ^COlh^l IlllCn t CO O I CO OOO^'OO O5 rf*- tO Cn M Illll

K

Maine, 41.20

New Hampshire, 39.52

Massachusetts, 42.39Rhode Island, 44.07

Connecticut, 44.96

New York, 39.01New Jersey, 45.89

Pennsylvania, 42.47Maryland Delaware, 41.S9Virginia, 42.18

Kentucky, 45.81

West Virginia, 43.83

Ohio, 38.44

Michigan, 31.29Indiana, 40.17Illinois, 37.26Arkansas, 48.97

Missouri, 40.17

Iowa, 31.48

Wisconsin, 31.63Minnesota, 25.91

Florida, 52.94

Georgia, 50.48

Alabama, 53.11

Mississippi, 53.32

Louisiana, 55.64Oklahoma, 32.63

Kansas, 27.48

Nebraska, 23.50

South Dakota, 20.77North Dakota, 17.70

Texas, 30.84

New Mexico, 14.49Colorado, 16.79

Wyoming, 14.05

Montana, 15.21Idaho, 17.17

Nevada, 9.01Utah, 12.67

Arizona, 13.10California, 23.53Eastern Oregon, 13.81

Western Oregon, 54.22

Eastern Washington, 16.89

Western Washington, 56.89

Humid

Semiarid 

Arid*Percent of area in 

which precipitation

mean or less

Precipitation in area of deficiency in per- cent of mean

which precipitation 

was 85 percent of 

mean or less

Precipitation in area of deficiency in per- cent of mean 

f

W

CD1S"oJGO

1ta

frS

pen

O ^ COw P3 H ^ ^

" "O 5-' O a* 

o * e <i 2

O t*3

S'® || *! |i

CO* ff^

g B ^ 04

"i" ^
TABLE 15. Number of years when precipitation did not exceed 85, 80, 75, or 70 percent of mean and the precipitation for the 6 years in which the precipitation wo* lowest, for

the period 1881 to 1934, by States

State

Humid States:

New Hampshire ..........

New York ... ... .

Virginia... 

West Virginia 

Ohio 

Indiana ___ - - _ . _ -

Florida. 

Semiarid States:

Kansas __ -- - _ .

Texas.. ___ ........

.Arid States:

 Utah... 

60-year mean," 

1881-1930 

(inches)

41.20 

39.52 

37.03 

42.39 

44.07 

44.96

39.01 

45.89 

42.47 

41.89 

42.18 

50.44

48.21 

50.30 

45.81 

43.83 

38.44 

31.29

40.17 

37.26 

48.97 

40.17 

31.48 

31.63

25.91 

52.94 

50.48 

53.11 

53.32 

55.64

32.63

27.48 

23.50 

20.77 

17.70 

30.84

14.49 

16.79 

14.05 

15.21 

17.17 

9.01

12.67 

13.10 

23.53 

13.81 

54.22 

16.89 

56.98

1

Date

1897 

1908 

1896 

1897 

1930 

1930

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1925

1925 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1934 

1930

1934 

1901 

1901 

1901 

1910 

1910

1910 

1927 

1931 

1904 

1889 

1924

1910 

1917 

1894 

1934 

1934 

1917

1910 

1934

1886 

1889 

1888 

1928

1887 

1885 

1898 

1908 

1930 

1929 

1922

Precipitation

Inches

30.60 

30.76 

28.78 

32.43 

32.83 

32.02

32.18 

35.28 

28.82 

23.78 

24.99 

37.33

35.82 

39.80 

27.86 

25.43 

26.60 

22.62

29.70 

25.72 

35.27 

25.28 

19.87 

21.41

14.73 

4Q.71 

36.75 

39.21 

38.31 

38.34

18.92 

19.60 

13.30 

13.18 

9.49 

16.21

9.46 

10.93 

7.16 

9.24 

10.08 

4.87

6.55 

7.12 

10.35 

9.32 

37.11 

10.19 

43.02

Percent 

of mean

74 

78 

78 

77 

74 

71

82

77 

68 

57 

59

74

74 

79 

61 

58 

69 

72

74 

69 

72 

63 

63 

63

67 

77 

73 

74 

72 

69

58 

71 

57 

63 

54 

53

65 

65 

51 

61 

59 

54

52 

54 

44 

68 

68 

60 

76

2

Date

1914 

1894 

1882 

1930 

1897 

1924

1908 

1931 

1895 

1895 

1925 

1930

1933 

1925 

1894 

1895 

1930 

1934

1930 

1930 

1924 

1930 

1894 

1895

1889 

1917 

1904 

1931 

1924 

1889

1891 

1910 

1934 

1931 

1917 

1893

1917 

1890 

1887 

1931 

1889 

1887

1883 

1900 

1923 

1898 

1929 

1890 

1890

Precipitation

Inches

32.98 

31.38 

29.67 

33.84 

34.60 

34.84

33.54 

37.07 

33.51 

3447 

32.53 

38.04

35.95 

40.50 

34.81 

32.82 

27.00 

25.46

29.70 

27.89 

37.03 

31.27 

21.94 

22.45

19.08 

41.36 

37.17 

42.78 

40.06 

40.25

22.31 

19.67 

14.40 

14.66 

10.92 

20.47

9.49 

11.97 

8.80 

10.09 

12.05 

5.18

7.72 

8.17 

14.13 

9.72 

38.66 

12.00 

43.17

Percent 

of mean

80 

79 

80 

80 

79 

77

86 

81 

79 

82

77 

75

76 

81 

76 

75 

70 

81

74 

75 

76 

78 

70 

71

74 

78 

74 

81 

75 

72

68 

72 

61 

71 

62 

67

65 

71 

62 

66 

70 

57

61 

62 

60 

70 

71 

71 

76

3

Date

1906 

1899 

1914 

1910 

1918 

1897

1896 

1895 

1922 

1925 

1921 

1933

1931 

1904 

1904 

1904 

1895 

1925

1901

1894 

1885 

1917 

1901 

1930

1923 

1931 

1893 

1889 

1904 

1917

1917 

1934 

1893 

1894 

1889 

1910

1892 

1888 

1902 

1890 

1924 

1924

1900 

1903

1887 

1924 

1918 

1898 

1929

Precipitation

Inches

33.23 

31.66 

30.16 

34.96 

36.57 

37.50

33.89 

37.29 

34.88 

34.91 

34.94 

39.28

37.17 

40.74 

35.10 

33.33

28.46 

25.51

30.56 

28.88 

37.55 

32.08 

24.41 

25.08

19.81 

43.97 

40.29 

43.30 

41.48 

40.27

22.39 

19.92 

16.80 

15.30 

11.30 

21.46

9.51 

12.00 

9.81 

10.78 

12.46 

5.49

8.38 

8.43 

14.63 

10.42 

43.28 

12.02 

44.01

Percent 

of mean

81 

80 

81 

82 

83 

83

87 

81 

82 

83 

83 

73

77 

81 

77 

76 

74 

82

76 

78 

77 

80 

78 

79

76 

83 

80 

82 

78 

72

69

72 

71 

74 

64 

70

66 

71 

70 

71 

73 

61

66 

64 

62 

76 

80 

71 

77

4

Date

1921 

1897 

1908 

1883 

1925 

1894

1899 

1918 

1900 

1914 

1881 

1911

1911 

1894 

1901 

1894 

1894 

1910

1895 

1914 

1896 

18S7 

18S6 

1932

1934 

1883 

1927 

1914 

1896 

1899

1901 

1893 

1910 

1833 

1910 

1901

1934 

1893 

1919 

1904 

1929 

1910

1890 

1924 

1895 

1918 

1905 

1930 

1905

Precipitation

Inches

33.55 

32.33 

30.24 

35.77 

37.20 

38.01

34.18 

37.65 

37.31 

35.97 

35.40 

42.65

39.80 

42.65 

35.65

34.52 

29.75 

25.69

30.99 

28.99 

37.72 

32.77

24.71 

25.37

20.30

45.17 

40.65 

44.90 

43.13 

42.35

22.78 

20.25 

17.03 

15.31 

12.19 

22.23

9.96 

12.89 

10.46 

11.04 

13.06 

5.53

9.00 

8.68 

14.85 

10.53 

44.11 

12.12 

46.18

Percent 

of mean

81 

82 

82

84 

84 

85

88 

82 

88 

86 

84 

85

82

85 

78 

79 

77 

82

77 

78 

77 

82 

78 

80

78 

85 

81 

85 

81 

76

70

74 

72 

74 

69

72

69 

77 

74 

73 

76 

61

71 

66 

63

76

81 

72 

81

5

Date

1924 

1914 

1911 

1908 

1896 

1910

1934 

1885 

1931 

1904 

1894 

1921

1930 

1895 

1889 

1887 

1901 

1889

1914 

1895 

1917 

1894 

1933 

1891

1929 

1921 

1921 

1925 

1899 

1904

1888 

1894 

1890 

1910 

1933 

1909

1902 

1889 

1893 

1919 

1928 

1888

1902 

1899 

1929 

1905 

1892 

1895 

1911

Precipitation

Inches

34.37 

32.58 

30.54 

36.04 

37.25 

38.33

34.97 

37.87 

37.36 

36.49 

35.76 

42.92

40.15 

43.10 

35.97 

35.33 

32.36 

26.86

31.54 

31.89 

40.72 

33.18 

24.94 

26.12

20.56 

45.24 

40.94 

45.20 

44.52 

43.83

23.40

20.72 

17.18 

15.49 

13.34 

23.45

9.97 

13.73 

10.67 

11.14 

13.60 

5.76

9.17 

8.70 

15.00 

10.80 

44.25 

12.92 

46.81

Percent 

of mean

83

82 

82

85 

85 

85

90

83 

88 

87 

85 

85

83 

86 

79 

81 

84 

86

79 

86 

83 

83 

79 

83

79 

85 

81 

85 

83 

79

72 

75 

73 

75 

75 

76

69

82 

76 

73 

79 

64

72 

66 

64 

78 

82 

77 

82

6

Date

1910 

1910 

1897 

1924 

1924 

1914

1884 

1921 

1909 

1900 

1904 

1904

1904 

1931 

1934

1885 

1900 

1895

1894 

1910 

1899 

1934 

1889 

1901

1933

1895 

1925 

1910 

1887 

1896

1896 

1890 

1895 

1925 

1929 

1924

1894 

1924 

1889 

1934 

1895 

1929

1934 

1904 

1932 

1928 

1923 

1922 

1923

Precipitation

Inches

34.51 

33.41 

31.18 

36.08 

37.46 

38.44

35.23 

38.16 

37.38 

36.66 

36.11 

43.27

40.98 

43.24 

37.00 

37.23 

32.82 

26.90

32.21 

32.09 

41.49 

34.19 

24.95 

26.34

20.97 

45.50 

41.00 

45.20

44.57 

46.56

23.78 

21.16 

18.75 

15.90 

14.32 

23.50

10.47 

13.75 

10.81 

11.25 

13.63 

5.83

9.49 

9.24 

15.60 

11.21 

44.89 

13.37 

47.25

Percent 

of mean

84

85 

84 

85 

85 

85

90

83 

88 

88 

86 

86

85 

86 

81 

85 

85 

86

80 

86 

85 

85 

79 

83

81 

86

81 

85 

84 

84

73

77 

80 

77 

81 

76

72 

82 

77 

74 

79 

65

75 

71 

66 

81 

83 

79 

83

Number of years when 

precipitation did not 

exceed the following 

percentage of mean

85

8 

7 

6 

6 

8 

5

1 

8 

3 

3 

5 

5

6 

4 

7 

6 

6 

4

7 

4 

6 

6 

10 

8

9 

5

7 

8 

7 

8

14 

12 

9 

12 

10 

11

12 

12 

13 

10 

9 

16

18 

15 

19 

10 

9 

11 

9

80

2 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2

0 

1 

2 

1 

2 

3

3 

1 

5 

4 

4 

1

5 

4 

4 

3 

6 

4

6 

2 

3 

1 

3 

5

10

7 

6 

9 

5

7

12 

4 

8 

7 

6 

16

11 

13 

15 

5 

3 

6 

3

76

1 

0 

0 

0

1 1

0 

0

1 1 1

2

2 

0 

1 

2 

3 

1

2 

2 

1 

1 

2 

2

2 

0 

2 

1 

2 

3

6 

5 

5 

5 

5 

4

9 

3 

4

6 

3 

11

6 

11 

10 

2 

2 

4 

0

70

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

0

0 

0

1 1

2 

0

0 

1 

0 

1 

2 

1

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1

4

0 

2 

1 

4 

3

6 

1 

3 

2 

2 

7

3

5 

7 

2 

1 

1 

0

' Means for Oregon and Washington are for period of record, 1890-1934. 142748 36. (Face p. 66 No. 2.)
COMPABISON OF DROUGHTS, 1881 TO 1934 67

In the 31 humid States the time interval between specially noticeable droughts has ranged from 3 to 7 years. During the 7 most 

severe drought years the area affected ranged from 30 to 63 percent 

of the total. Deficiencies in precipitation were as high as 28 percent. 

In extent of the area affected and deficiency of precipitation, 1930 

was the most severe drought year of record. The next 2 were 

1894 and 1901.

In 5 semiarid States (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, 

Kansas, and Oklahoma) the time interval between droughts has

<60

u 

a 

<

L. 40

O

h

Z

Ul 20 

O

a

llJ 

0.

Interval betw 

years of 

deficiency

If I I. If 84

1 1

82

79 I

fll

79

1!

1880 1685 1890 1695 19OO 1905 1910 1915 1920 19ZS 1930 1935

HUMID STATES

Interval between 

years of . 

deficiency

85

<

U 

a

<< 

u. 

o

§ 

o

a bj

Q-zo

1680 1SS5 189 1685 1900 1805 1910 1915 1820 1925 I93O 1935

5 SE1MIAR1D STATES 

(North Dakota,South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma)

FIGURE 19. Percentage of area having deficiencies in precipitation of 15 percent or more, 1881-1034, for 31 

humid States and 5 semiarid States. Small figures on graph indicate precipitation in percent of mean 

in the area of deficiency.

ranged from 2 to 8 years. During each of the 7 most severe 

drought years over 64 percent of their area was affected, and there 

were 2 years, 1910 and 1934, when the deficiency in precipitation 

over the whole area was 29 and 35 percent, respectively. In extent 

of the area affected and deficiency of precipitation, therefore, 1934 

was the most severe drought year of record in these States. The 

next 2 were 1894 and 1910. In general, drought damages in the 

semiarid States have been more severe than in the humid States.
68 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

Although definite data as to damage are not available, 1930 probably 

ranks highest in humid States, and 1934 in semiarid States. 

In 1906 the United States Weather Bureau reported u that

The greatest drought this country has experienced in the last 100 years, both 

as to intensity and extent of territory covered, culminated in the middle Mississippi and Missouri Valleys in 1894 and in the Lake region and Atlantic coast 

districts in 1895. * * *

The next serious drought was in 1881. It affected practically the whole of the 

country east of the Mississippi and lasted from July to September. * * * 

The most striking characteristic of this drought was its duration and attendant 

high temperatures. Vegetation and staple crops were seriously damaged, and 

in the latter stages of the drought there was a scarcity of water for domestic -use 

.and for manufacturing purposes. In many places scores of shops and factories 

were obliged to shut down for lack of water.

Later Weather Bureau reports briefly referred to marked drought 

conditions during 1910.

The drought of 1881 was evidently of short duration and slight 

extent. There were but few localities where records indicated precipitation below the mean for more than 2 consecutive months, and 

these low months,were either preceded or followed by months of 

excessive precipitation, so that for most States the average precipitation for the year was almost equal to or above the mean. In 

fact, out of the 36 nonarid States, precipitation for the year was below 

the mean in only 11. In none of these States was the precipitation 

below 84 percent of the mean. In the Ohio Valley, July and August 

were extremely deficient in precipitation, but the Lake region had 

normal rainfall. Western New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia as a whole had only 1 summer month of major 

deficiency in precipitation. These deficient months, accompanied by 

high temperatures that severely affected vegetation, probably led to 

the classification of the drought of 1881, although short in duration, 

with the major drought period of 1894-95.

An indication of drought conditions since 1769 in southern California is given in the following summaryJ6 of precipitation treads, taken 

from statements in letters and reports of the mission padres:

1. There has been no material change in the mean climatic conditions of 

southern California in the past 162 years.

2. There have been earlier fluctuations from average rainfall conditions, however, both excesses and-deficiencies, of ^greater'magnifeude than any^wMeh-Aave 

occurred in the past 40 years.

3. The 28-year period of rainfall deficiency which ended in 1810 was about as 

severe as has been the present one to date, and much more protracted.

4. The period of rainfall surplus from 1810 to 1821 was more intense than 

anything in the past 40 years. It seems to have been about as intense as was 

that between 1883 and 1893.

« Henry, A. J., Climatology of the United States; U. S. Weather Bur., Bull. Q, p. 51,1906. 

" Lynch, H. B., Rainfall and stream run-off in southern California since 1769, Metropolitan Water 

District of southern California, August 1931.
DROUGHT AND LOW-WATER STREAM FLOW 69

5. The period of rainfall deficiency which lasted from about 1822 to 1832 was 

more severe than has been any occurring since.

6. The period of rainfall deficiency which commenced in 1842 and lasted 

until 1883 was much longer than any other of which we have record. It was not 

so acute, however, as some others, both earlier and later. It was broken by a 

period of normal rainfall but was without any period of excess rainfall to balance 

the deficiency.

7. In comparison with several periods of rainfall shortage which have occurred 

in past years, the present rainfall deficiency to date cannot be considered a 

major shortage.

8. For all practical purposes the useful water yield of the areas under consideration closely approximates the run-off from the principal streams of these 

areas, except in times of heavy floods.

9. The run-off from southern California streams has in general shown fluctuations from the normal similar in character to those of the rainfall, but larger in 

relative percentage.

10. By reason of these fluctuations, the useful water yield has at various times 

been reduced from the average by considerably more than one-half for a period 

of 10 years, and by 30 percent for a period of 28 years.

DROUGHT AND LOW-WATER STREAM FLOW

Figure 20 shows the location of 47 river-measurement stations that 

have been selected to indicate the relation of droughts to stream flow 

in various sections of the country. No stations have been included 

for streams where the regimen appears to have been changed by 

diversion or storage works. Minimum discharges and other data for 

these selected stations are given in table 17.

The minimum flows for the various months as determined from the 

records available indicate that similar low flows may be expected in 

t]be'future and their combination may be assumed to represent a possible composite (built up) low-water year. A year having even lower 

flow must also be considered a possibility. For example, such a 

composite year for the Potomac River at Point of Rocks, Md., indicates that a minimum annual flow of 2,1§0 second-feet or less is 

possible and even probable. For the period of record the consecutive 12 months of minimum flow started with April 1930, and during 

these 12 months the mean flow was 2,450 second-feet, or only 290 

second-feet greater than in the composite minimum year. With the 

exception of February and April, the minimum discharge for all 

months occurred in the 12-month period beginning May 1930. The 

minimum for February occurred in 1934; for April, in 1915.

The minimum monthly discharge of many streams for most of the 

months occurred during the drought periods of 1930-34. The probability of other sequences of so many months of minimum flow is 

remote, and therefore for the drought areas of 1930-34 these figures 

will probably serve for some time as a basis for estimating low-water 

flows. Records of daily and monthly flow in connection with
70 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

deficiency tables as given for the Potomac River on pages 29-30 are 

necessary to determine the frequency of the effects of drought on 

low-water flows.

CARRY-OVER EFFECT AS RELATED TO DROUGHT

The carry-over effect of water supplies as related to drought periods 

may pertain to vegetation, to surface water, to soil moisture, and to 

ground water. On account of the counterbalancing influences that 

follow drought periods the subject is not readily understood, and a 

study of available information indicates that some phases of the carry' 

over effects have probably been overemphasized in hydraulic studies.

In the humid and semiarid States vegetation depends primarily 

upon the accumulated soil moisture at the tune of planting and a

; i V * i

FIGURE 20. Location of river-measurement stations used to show the relation of drought and stream flow.

favorably distributed precipitation during the growing season. 

Therefore, the principal carry-over effect on vegetation is in connection with soil moisture. In the arid regions successful agriculture 

depends in a large measure on stored water. Therefore, if adequate 

storage facilities are available, shortages of water due to drought may 

in a large measure be overcome from accumulations in storage of 

excesses in supplies during previous years.

It has been noted that the vegetable growth in years following 

droughts is especially vigorous. This may perhaps be accounted for 

by the fact that during the excessive drought years the land is dormant on account of lack of sufficient moisture to sustain vegetable 

growth. There is nothing to indicate any large detrimental carry-over 

effect on vegetation due to drought during the period 1930-34.
TABLE 17. Minimum discharge, in second-feet, at selected river-measurement stations for periods of record ending Sept. SO, 1984

 M - 

Drainage area .sq. milesPeriod of record 

Piscataquis River near 

Foxcroft, Maine

286

1904-34

Merrimack River at 

Lawrence, Mass.

4,460

1880-1934

Susquehanna River at 

Harrisburg, Pa.

24,100

1890-1934

Potomac River at Point 

of Rocks, Md.

9,650

1897-1934

James River at Cartersville, Va.

6,240

1899-1934

Roanoke River at Old 

Gaston, N. C.

8,410

1912-34

Santee River at 

Ferguson, S. C.

14,800

1908-34

Chattahoochee River at 

West Point, Ga.

3,550

1897-1910; 1912-34

Coosa River at Childersburg, Ala.

8,390

1917-34

Allegheny River at 

Franklin, Pa.

5,980

1918-34

Hocking River at 

Athens, Ohio

944

1916-34

Kanawha River at 

Kanawha Falls, W. Va.

8,300

1877-1934

Miami River at Hamilton, Ohio

3,640

1910-34

Kentucky River at 

Lock 10, Winchester, 

Ky.

3,990

1909-34

Cumberland River at 

Burnside, Ky.

4,890

1915-34

Tennessee River at 

Chattanooga, Tenn.

22,000

1875-1934

Wolf River at New 

London, Wis.

2,240

1913-34

West Branch of Oswegatchie River near 

Harrisville, N. Y.

258

1917-34

St. Croix River at St. 

Croix Falls, Wis.

5,930

1910-34

Red River at Grand 

Forks, N. Dak.

25,500

1882-1934

Mississippi River at 

Le Claire, Iowa

88,600

1874-1934

Rock River at Lyndon,

m.

9,010

1915-34

Kaskaskia River at 

Vandalia, 111.

1,980

1915-34

Minimum monthly discharge

 - 

Yellowstone River at 

Corwin Springs, Mont.

2,630

1910-34

Month

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

July -- 

December. 

__ - 

Year

1918 

1920 

1926 

1926 

1921 

1921 

1921 

1924 

1923 

1910 

1910 

1929

Discharge

61.6 

52.3 

141 

940 

442 

68.8 

47.9 

36.8 

23.9 

41.5 

39.0 

60.6

Year

1925 

1931 

1885 

1915 

1903 

1915 

1911 

1913 

1883 

1910 

1908 

1910

Discharge

1,590 

2,130 

3,370 

7,960 

4,360 

2,180 

1,180 

1,360 

1,220 

1,340 

1,580 

1,490

Year

1931 

1931 

1931 

1925 

1890 

1934 

1934 

1932 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930

Discharge

3,880 

9,120 

32,200 

27,800 

13, 100 

10, 100 

5,140 

2,500 

3,400 

2,360 

2,300 

3,830

Year

1931 

1934 

1931 

1915 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930

Discharge

2,370 

2,600 

5,400 

4,370 

3,280 

2,230 

1,100 

771 

834 

706 

840 

1,420

Year

1931 

1934 

1931 

1925 

1930 

1925 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930

Discharge

2,440 

2,040 

4,910 

3,780 

2,710 

1,990 

967 

652 

661 

628 

924 

1,340

Year

1934 

1931 

1931 

1925 

1926 

1926 

1932 

1930 

1932 

1930 

1931 

1917

Discharge

2,940 

3,150 

5,870 

5,370 

3,340 

2,320 

1,900 

1,500 

1,020 

940 

1,500 

2,190

Year

1934 

1934 

1911 

1927 

1927 

1911 

1911 

1925 

1925 

1925 

1931 

1917

Discharge

8,670 

9,200 

10, 100 

10,400 

6,470 

5,900 

6,280 

4,920 

3,430 

4,560 

4,320 

6,880

Year

1934 

1898 

1898 

1905 

1914 

1898 

1925 

1925 

1925 

1931 

1931 

1933

Discharge

3,000 

2,320 

2,780 

2,930 

2,150 

1,490 

1,700 

578 

333 

360 

1,110 

2,100

Year

1934 

1934 

1918 

1934 

1925 

1925 

1925 

1925 

1925 

1931 

1931 

1933

Discharge

10, 500 

9,080 

7,080 

7,870 

4,910 

3,070 

3,230 

1,990 

1,400 

1,610 

2,230 

3,320

Year

1931 

1934 

1932 

1925 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930

Discharge

2,590 

3,050 

12,000 

9,500 

2,840 

1,110 

555 

414 

435 

515 

771 

4,320

Year

1931 

1934 

1931 

1925 

1934 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930

Discharge

75.5 

144 

262 

385 

174 

77.8 

62.2 

39.6 

44.8 

36.1 

50.5 

64.5

Year

1931 

1934 

1925 

1915 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1925 

1930 

1930 

1922 

1930

Discharge

5,600 

3,180 

10,200 

8,150 

4,800 

2,550 

1,290 

1,390 

1,310 

1,130 

1,510 

2,690

Year

1931 

1931, 1934 

1931 

1915 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1910 

1934 

1923 

1930 

1930

Discharge

580 

778 

1,510 

1,210 

602 

445 

482 

376 

357 

441 

457 

509

Year

1931 

1931 

1910 

1915 

1934 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930 

1930

Discharge

543 

2,030 

3,270 

1,720 

1,340 

234 

48.8 

34.2 

15.8 

15.0 

44.0 

107

Year

1931 

1931 

1915 

1915 

1934 

1930 

1930 

1925 

1925 

1927 

1931 

1930

Discharge

3,010 

5,580 

7,390 

3,010 

2,080 

689 

326 

149 

84 

160 

292 

1,460

Year

1914 

1934 

1931 

1925 

1896 

1925 

1879 

1925 

1925 

1904 

1931 

1917

Discharge

18, 400 

15,000 

24,500 

22,100 

17,800 

10,800 

8,300 

4,760 

3,990 

5,510 

7,040 

10,300

Year

1926 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1934 

1933 

1933 

1933 

1933 

1933 

1933

Discharge

601 

546 

949 

1.160 

901 

861 

664 

443 

429 

556 

617 

555

Year

1918 

1920 

1932 

1927 

1921 

1920 

1933 

1934 

1921 

1922 

1930 

1922

Discharge

105 

130 

312 

495 

256 

120 

71.2 

36.9 

614 

105 

165 

145

Year

1926 

1913 

1912 

1930 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1930 

1933 

1925 

1925

Discharge

1,170 

1,260 

1,540 

3,250 

2,430 

1,480 

1,010 

839 

1,320 

1,540 

1,460 

1,350

Year

1933 

1933 

1913 

1913 

1934 

1934 

1933 

1934 

1934 

1933 

1933 

1933

Minimum period discharge

Discharge

38.6 

33.6 

282 

1,090 

373 

151 

116 

30.6 

20.7 

31.7 

79.0 

52.5

Year

1890 

1893 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1934 

1910 

1934 

1933 

1933 

1933 

1933

Discharge

11,400 

14,000 

17,900 

26,000 

23, 800 

16,400 

19,800 

13,200 

13,800 

13,800 

14,100 

11, 300

Year

1931 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1934 

1925 

1918 

1932 

1933

Discharge

2,120 

1,740 

1,990 

2,850 

1,490 

1,240 

1,340 

870 

1,210 

1,400 

1,800 

1,740

Year

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1930 

1922 

1932 

1930 

1930

Discharge

25.3 

37.4 

97.9 

240 

184 

122 

104 

25.1 

25.4 

25.2 

21.1 

35.1

Year

1932 

1932 

1932 

1920 

1912 

1934 

1919 

1919 

1934 

1932 

1932 

1932

Discharge

646 

641 

747 

954 

2,580 

4,245 

2,030 

1,320 

1,020 

934 

851 

673

 . 

Period

7 days. 

1 month. 

2 months 

3 months 

6 months 

9 months 

12 months . 

Beginning

Sept. 26, 1923 

Sept. 1,1923 

Aug. 1,1914 

__ do 

July 1, 1914 

July 1, 1910 

Oct. 1, 1910

Discharge

15.0

23.9 

38.0 

40.3 

71.0 

120 

363

Beginning

July 18,1911

July 1, 1911

.... .do.. - 

 do 

July 1,1910 

June 1,1910 

Sept. 1,1910

Discharge

847

1,180 

1,320 

1,530 

1,740 

2,240 

3,480

Beginning

Sept. 23, 1932

Nov. 1,1930 

Oct. 1, 1930 

Sept. 1,1930 

Aug. 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

1,980

2,300 

2,300 

2,690 

3,110 

6,460 

13,500

Beginning

Oct. 4, 1930 

Oct. 1, 1930 

Sept. 1,1930 

Aug. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

661

706 

770 

770 

945 

1,470 

2,450

Beginning

Oct. 1, 1930

 do 

Sept. 1,1930 

Aug. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

394

528 

644 

580 

829 

1,310 

2,070

Beginning

S<ept. 19, 1932

O'ct. 1, 1930 

S«ept. 1,1930 

A.ug. 1,1930 

July 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

A.pr. 1, 1930

Discharge

521

940 

1,000 

1,170 

1,940 

2,680 

3,410

Beginning

Sept. 5,1925 

Sept. 1,1925 

__ do ___ -. 

Aug. 1,1925 

June 1,1925 

Apr. 1, 1925 

June 1,1926

Discharge

3,120

3,430 

4,000 

4,300 

5,710 

7,310 

9,420

Beginning

Aug. 29,1925

Sept. 1,1925 

Aug. 1, 1925 

Sept. 1,1931 

June 1,1931 

Apr. 1, 1925 

Dec. 1,1930

Discharge

248

333 

456 

700 

1,270 

2,290 

2,810

Beginning

Sept. 25, 1925

Sept. 1, 1925 

Aug. 1, 1925 

Sept. 1,1931 

June 1, 1931 

Apr. 1, 1925 

Dec. 1, 1930

Discharge

1,830

1,400 

1,700 

2,140 

2,880 

5,240 

7,180

Beginning

Aug. 17,1930

Aug. 1, 1930 

.....do. ___ 

. .do _ 

June 1, 1930 

May 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

351 

414 

424 

455 

1,040 

2,200 

4,700

Beginning

Oct. 11,1931

Oct. 1, 1930 

Sept. 1,1930 

Aug. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

May 1,1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

24

36.1 

40.4 

40.2 

48.0 

68.9 

165

Beginning

Oct. 7, 1930

Oct. 1, 1930 

Sept. 1,1930 

Aug. 1,1930 

June 1, 1930 

May 1,1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

984

1,130 

1,220 

1,320 

1,590 

2,510 

4,300

Beginning

Aug. 3, 1934

Sept. 1,1934 

July 1, 1930 

Oct. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

214

357 

475 

488 

501 

579 

853

Beginning

Sept. 18, 1930

Oct. 1, 1930 

Sept. 1,1930 

Aug. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

10.1

15.0 

15.4 

21.7 

44.2 

325 

1,050

Beginning

Sept.6,21,1925

Sept. 1,1925 

Aug. 1, 1925 

Aug. 1, 1930 

June 1, 1930 

May 1, 1930 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

65 

84 

116 

236 

348 

1,240 

2,460

Beginning

Sept. 9,1925

Sept. 1,1925 

Aug. 1, 1925 

July 1, 1925 

June 1, 1930 

... -do... 

Apr. 1, 1930

Discharge

3,480

3,990 

4,380 

6,040 

10,800 

14.700 

18,300

Beginning

Sept. 3,1933

Sept. 1,1933 

Aug. 1,1933 

- do....... 

July 1, 1933 

. __ do... . . 

Sept. 1,1930

Discharge

337

429 

436 

477 

544 

609 

857

Beginning

Aug. 28,1934 

Aug. 1, 1934 

- do.. 

July 1, 1934 

June 1, 1933 

June 1, 1930 

Sept. 1,1930

Discharge:

33.0

36.9 

44.2 

57.1 

120 

185 

344

Beginning

Aug. 11,1934 

Aug. 1, 1934 

July 1, 1934 

June 1, 1934 

July 1, 1934 

July 1, 1933 

Sept. 1,1933

Discharge

754

839 

926 

1,010 

1,320 

1,420 

1,730

Beginning

Sept. 14, 1934

Sept. 1,1934 

Aug. 1, 1934 

Aug. 1, 1933 

 do.. ..... 

July 1, 1933 

Oct. 1, 1933

Discharge

17.3

20.7 

25.6 

34.9 

45.9 

96 

245

Beginning

Dec. 24,1933

Dec. 1, 1933 

Dec. 1, 1889 

Oct. 1, 1933 

Aug. 1, 1933 

July 1, 1933 

Sept. 1,1923

Discharge

7,430

11, 300 

12,400 

13, 000 

14,000 

16,200 

19,200

Beginning

Aug. 27,1934 

Aug. 1, 1934 

 do... . 

July 1, 1934 

Apr. 1, 1934 

Jan. 1, 1934 

Oct. 1, 1933

Discharge for year ending September 30

Discharge

687

870 

1,050 

1,250 

1,620 

1,790 

1,810

Beginning

Sept. 30, 1930 

Nov. 1, 1930 

Oct. 1, 1930 

Nov. 1, 1930 

Aug. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

Aug. 1, 1930

Discharge

15.3 

21.1 

24.0 

27.2 

28.4 

50.8 

95.1

Beginning

Feb. 12,1932

Feb. 1, 1932 

Jan. 1, 1932 

Dec. 1, 1931 

Oct. 1, 1931 

Aug. 1, 1931 

Indetermi

Discharge

696

641 

644 

653 

749 

902 

nate

 

Maximum. 

Minimum.. 

Mean 

__ - " - -

Year

1908 

1911

Discharge

1.000 

363 

656 

163

Year

1928 

1911

Discharge

10,300 

3,500 

6,610

2,480

Year

1891 

1931

Discharge

52,600 

20,200 

34,600 

9,640

Year

1902 

1931

Discharge

15,210 

4,920 

9,350 

2,160

Year

1903 

1931

Discharge

11,300 

3, 590 

7,100 

1,900

Year

1923 

1931

Discharge

10,900 

5,230 

8,040 

2,670.

Year

1912 

1927

Discharge

26, 900 

9,780 

18,710 

6,750

Year

1920 

1914

Discharge

10,300 

2,880 

5,860 

1,740

Year

1920 

1925

Discharge

23,600 

8,200 

14,300 

4,690

Year

1928 

1931

Discharge

13, 600 

6,480 

9,580 

3,170

Year

1927 

1934

Discharge

1,600 

445 

988 

117

Year

1901 

1904

Discharge

21, 100 

7,590 

13,000 

3,650

Year

1927 

1931

Discharge

5,880 

1,070 

3,720 

646

Year

1927 

1931

Discharge

8,930 

2,210 

5,110 

776

Year

1927 

1931

Discharge

11,900 

3,700 

7,840 

2,020

Year

1882 

1904

Discharge

58,500 

21,900 

38.40C 

12,400

Year

1929 

1931

Discharge

2,720 

869 

1,797 

690

Year

1928 

1931

Discharge

736 

345 

526 

166

Year

1916 

1934

Discharge

6,040 

1,754 

3,140 

1,550

Year

1916 

1934

Discharge

5,580 

244 

2,264 

192

Year

1882 

1934

Discharge

94,400 

18, 900 

48, 200 

16,300

Year

1929 

1934

Discharge

9,590 

1,800 

5,650 

1,650

Year

1927 

1931

Discharge

3,610 

123 

1,390 

78.6

Year

1918 

1931 

Not deten

Discharge

3,960 

2,050 

lined

1 **Qfl

Drainage area... «l- miles

Period of record - 

Smoky Hill River near

18,700

1905-21

Gasconade River at

1,680

1915-34

Current River at Van 

Buren, Mo.

1,640

1913-34

Neosho River near lola, 

Kans.

3,800

1918-34

Brazos Eiver at Waco, 

Tex.

28,500

1898-1911; 1914-34

Llano River near Junction, Tex.

1,760

1915-34

Verde River near 

McDowell, Ariz.

6,240

1898-99; 1904-34

Colorado River at Glenwood Springs, Colo.

4,560

1900-34

Beaver River near 

Beaver, Utah

82

1914-34

Big Cottonwood Creek 

near Salt Lake City, 

Utah

48.5

1904-34

Mi

West Walker River near 

Coleville, Calif.

245

1902-08; 1915-34

niitium monthly discharge

Humboldt River at 

Palisade, Nev.

5.010

1902-06; 1911-34

Silvies River near 

Burns, Oreg.

940

19C3-34

Sacramento River near 

Red Blufi, Calif.

9,300

1895-1934

Arroyo Seco near 

Soledad, Calif.

238

1901-34

Kings River at Piedra, 

Calif.

1,700

1895-1934

Skagit River at Newhalera, Wash.

1,160

1908-34

Columbia River at 

Trinidad, Wash.

89,700

1913-34

Spokane River at 

Spokane, Wash.

4,350

1891-1934

Snake River near 

Moran, Wyo.

820

1904-34

Payette River near

2,230

1907-15; 1920-34

Clearwater River at

4,850

1911-34

Willamette River at

Albany, Oreg.

4,840

1882-1934

Month

January 

February - 

March April 

May 

July ._ -

August 

September 

October.. 

November 

December 

Year

1912 

1913 

1917 

1913 

1907 

1933 

1913 

1913 

1913 

1913 

1913 

1912

Discharge

35 

40 

107 

87 

109 

162 

89 

18 

44 

46 

22 

50

Year

1918 

1917 

1917 

1930 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1930 

1922 

1917 

1917 

1916

Discharge

224 

184 

417 

539 

275 

177 

84.8 

120 

105 

107 

105 

186

Year

1918 

1934 

1918 

1919 

1913 

1934 

1934 

1913 

1913 

1932 

1933 

1912

Discharge

700 

658 

720 

769 

800 

666 

584 

600 

600 

649 

726 

690

Year

1922 

1934 

1918 

1923 

1920 

1933 

1934 

1934 

1918 

1931 

1921 

1921

Discharge

28 

30 

74 

173 

312 

126 

27 

6 

26 

36 

16 

21

Year

1911 

1909 

1918 

1909 

1911 

1911 

1934 

1918 

1899 

1928 

1917 

1917

Discharge

12.3 

22.0 

21.0 

26.9 

187 

33.3 

16.6 

2.7 

90.1 

83.6 

41.7 

52.3

Year

1918 

1918 

1918 

1932 

1917 

1917 

1918 

1918 

1934 

1917 

1917 

1917

Discharge

42.0 

42.4 

43.8 

50.7 

52.8 

34.0 

23.7 

20.0 

30.2 

38.1 

41.2 

41.8

Year

1931 

1904 

1904 

1904 

1934 

1904 

1913 

1924 

1901 

1901 

1898 

1903

Discharge

229 

226 

184 

119 

120 

62.9 

119 

105 

93 

134 

195 

227

Year

1932 

1932 

1932 

1933 

1908 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1931

Discharge

469 

531 

715 

1,230 

3,880 

2,760 

930 

921 

714 

824 

647 

490

Year

1932 

1920 

1933 

1933 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1931

Discharge

12 

15.4 

15.2 

21.8 

48.9 

24.1 

18.5 

14.1 

11.1 

16.6 

13.6 

13.0

Year

1934 

1934 

1931 

1333 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1933

Discharge

16.8 

176 

24.6 

66.2 

79.6 

26.6 

14.2 

13.3 

11.6 

20.5 

19.5 

17.6

Year

1930 

1929 

1933 

1929 

1933 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1931 

1928

Discharge

26.9 

32 

42.1 

125 

316 

106 

26.9 

17.4 

16.1 

25.5 

29.7 

28.8

Year

1932 

1932 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931

Discharge

10.0 

30.1 

104 

29.9 

11.3 

6.3 

5.7 

3.7 

6.C 

10.3 

10.3 

10.0

Year

1932 

1932, 1933 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1931 

1931 

1931

Discharge

10.0 

20.0 

30.0 

11.7 

5.62 

2.24 

.45 

0 

.84 

3.88 

5.17 

10.0

Year

1924 

1920 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1931 

1931 

1934 

1932 

1933 

1930

Discharge

4,750 

4,780 

4,430 

4,010 

3,250 

2,970 

2,620 

2,500 

2,550 

2,850 

3,360 

3,690

Year

1904 

1924 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1924 

1924 

Several 

Several 

Several 

1929 

1930

Discharge

18

26.3 

37.0 

15.0 

5.4 

.66 

0 

0 

0 

0 

.20 

10.3

Year

1904 

1924 

1924 

1912 

1934 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1924 

1934 

1929 

1929

Discharge

183 

290 

338 

1,230 

2,320 

523 

211 

105 

76 

108 

112 

135

Year

1930 

1929 

1922 

1920 

1915 

1915 

1926 

1931 

1926 

192f 

1929 

1929

Discharge

675 

598 

809 

1,850 

4,790 

4,040 

3,500 

2,310 

1,460 

863 

627 

836

Year

1930 

1929 

1929 

1929 

1929 

1926 

1926 

1926 

1927 

1931 

1929 

1929

Discharge

23,300 

25, 300 

28,200 

40,300 

122,000 

149,000 

149,000 

96,300 

75,300 

46,000 

34,600 

27,600

Year

1930 

1929 

1917 

1905 

1926 

1926 

1931 

1931 

1930 

1931 

1929 

1930

Discharge

1,060 

1,230 

2,480 

7,770 

6.810 

2,120 

972 

625 

911 

1,060 

1,070 

1,110

Year

1931 

1931 

1924 

1922 

1905 

1934 

1931 

1924 

1934 

1932 

1929 

1911

Discharge

328 

297 

322 

422 

1,270 

1,380 

780 

355 

276 

320 

240 

280

Year

1932 

1932 

1933 

1924 

1931 

1924 

1924 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1931 

1932

Discharge

650 

686 

1,000 

2,600 

5,140 

1,770 

907 

536 

471 

607 

635 

632

Year

1930 

1929 

1917 

1929 

1915 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1934 

1922 

1922 and 1929 

1919

 - ~ " ~ Minimum period discharge

Discharge

1,040 

1,160 

1,820 

7,110 

15,200 

6,400 

1,920 

853 

806 

1,040 

1,110 

713

Year

1930 

1931 

1924 

1926 

1934 

1926 

1926 

1931 

1931 

1929 

1929 

1930

Discharge

9,260 

8,500 

9,940 

7,070 

5,970 

3,320 

2,500 

2,300 

2,150 

2,460 

2,340 

6,580

Period

7 days 

1 month.. 

2 months 

3 months 

6 months 

12 months 

Beginning

Aug. 14,1913

Aug. 1,1913 

__ do. 

 .doOct. 1, 1916 

Aug. 1,1916 

Dec. 1, 1912

Discharge

10.4

18 

31 

36 

69 

102 

160

Beginning

Aug. 9,1934

July 1, 1934 

Oct. 1, 1917 

Aug. 1, 1922 

July 1, 1922 

July 1, 1916 

Aug. 1, 1933

Discharge

62.1

84.8 

106 

124 

J70 

300 

438

Beginning

Aug. 5,1934

July 1, 1934 

Aug. 1,1913 

July 1, 1913 

May 1,1913 

 __-do. _ ..- 

Feb. 1, 1913

Discharge

556

584 

600 

633 

731 

784 

1,030

Beginning

Aug. 18. 1934 

Aug. 1,1934 

July 1, 1934 

June 1, 1934 

Sept. 1,1919 

Aug. 1,1919 

July 1, 1919

Discharge

0.9

1.8 

7 

24 

46 

127 

179

Beginning

Aiug. 16,1918

Aiug. 1,1918 

Juily 1, 1934 

Fffib. 1, 1909 

O»ct. 1, 1917 

Juily 1, 1921 

Juily 1, 1910

Discharge

0.19

2.7 

16.1 

26.9 

60.1 

262 

270

Beginning

Aug. 27,1918

Aug. 1, 1918 

July 1, 1918 

June 1, 1917

 do . 

 ..doApr. 1, 1917

Discharge

13.6

20.0 

21.8 

28.6 

35.4 

37.6 

40.9

Beginning

July 14,1904

June 1,1904 

May 1,1904 

Apr. 1,1904 

Jan. 1, 1904 

Oct. 1,1903 

Aug. 1,1933

Discharge

35.9

62.9 

94.4 

103 

159 

190 

204

Beginning

Dec. 13,1931

Jan. 1, 1932 

Dec. 1, 1931 

 do. 

Oct. 1, 1931 

July 1, 1931 

Oct. 1, 1933

Discharge

413

469 

479 

496 

613 

846 

1,420

Beginning

Sept. 1,1934 

 do. 

Dec. 1, 1931 

Nov. 1,1931 

Aug. 1, 1931 

July 1, 1931 

Oct. 1, 1933

Discharge

10.1

11.1 

12.5 

12.9 

13.8 

14.2 

22.8

Beginning

Sept. 16, 1934

Sept. 1,1934 

Aug. 1, 1934 

July 1, 1934 

Sept. 1,1933 

Aug. 1, 1933 

Oct. 1, 1933

Discharge

10.6

11.6 

12.4 

13.0 

20.1

27.5 

27.9

Beginning

Sept. 1,1924

 do 

Aug. 1, 1924 

__ do ___ - 

July 1, 1924 

June 1, 1924 

Feb. 1, 1924

Discharge

14.0

15.1 

16.8 

19.7 

25.7 

35.3 

84.9

Beginning

Aug. 23,1931

Aug. 1, 1931 

July 1, 1931 

June 1, 1931 

 do. 

.... . do-- 

Oct. 1, 1933

.». i<\

Discharge

2.4

3.7 

4.7 

5.2 

7.1 

10.3 

34.8

Beginning

July 19,1934

Aug. 1,1934 

July 1, 1934 

__ do .......

June 1, 1931 

July 1, 1931 

Oct. 1, 1933

Discharge

0

0 

.22 

.43 

3.41 

6.72 

15.0

Beginning

Aug. 10,1931 

Aug. 1, 1931

 do 

July 1, 1931 

May 1, 1931 

Mar. 1,1931 

Nov. 1.1923

Discharge

2,470

2,500 

2,540 

2,570 

2,900 

3,640 

4,090

Beginning

~iune"I,~193T 

Mar. 1, 1931 

Dec. 1, 1930

Discharge

0

0 

0 

0 

.43 

6.66 

16.3

Beginning

Sept. 27, 1924

Sept. 1,1924 

Aug. 1, 1924 

 do...... 

Aug. 1, 1930 

July 1, 1930 

Nov. 1, 1923

Discharge

68

76 

90 

102 

101 

311 

519

Beginning

Indeterm

Feb. 1, 1929 

Jan. 1, 1929 

Nov. 1, 1929 

Aug 1, 1916 

Aug. 1, 1928 

Oct. 1, 1925

Discharge

nate

598 

684 

713 

1,240 

1,660 

2,650

Beginning

Indeterm

Jan. 1, 1930 

_..-. do. 

:Dec. 1, 1929 

<Oct. 1, 1929 

-Aug. 1, 1929 

(Oct. 1, 1925

Discharge

nate

23,300 

24,400 

25.500 

31,600 

51,000 

80,200

Beginning

Indeterm

Aug. 1, 1931 

July 1, 1931 

 do 

 do. ... 

June 1, 1930 

Mar. 1,1930

Discharge

nate

625 

798 

858 

1,100 

1,700 

3,250

Beginning

Sept. 15, 1934

Nov. 1,1929 

Oct. 1, 1929 

Dec. 1, 1930 

Oct. 1, 1933 

Aug. 1, 1931 

Dec. 1, 1«!30

Discharge

176

239 

302 

318

388 

432

758

Beginning

(Sept. 11, 1931 

\Sept. 2,1934 

Sept. 1,1931 

Aug. 1, 1931 

.. do _...... 

. do... . 

July 1, 1931 

Mar. 1,1931

Discharge

} 420

471 

504 

538 

594 

775 

1,400

Beginning

Nov. 30, 1919

Dec. 1, 1919 

Aug. 1,1934 

Aug. 1,1931 

 ..do _ 

July 1, 1931 

Mar. 1,1931

Discharge

500

713 

830 

1,090 

1,200 

1,950 

4,980

Beginning

Sept. 21, 1879

Sept. 1,1931 

Aug. 1, 1931 

Sept. 1,1929 

May 1, 1926 

Apr. 1, 1930 

Mar. 1,1930

Discharge

1,870

2,160 

2,220 

2,400 

3,390 

5,200 

6,420

I

Minimum 

Mean. Composite -- 

Year

1915

1913

...............

Discharge

2,380

214

070

67

Year

1927

1917

 

Discharge

3,520

663

1 AAf\

210

Year

1927

1932

 - - 

Discharge

3,640

1,050 

1,870

680

Year

1927

1918

 

Discharge

3,600

iiO

1,150

73

Year

1920

 . 

Discharge

6,580

572 

2,550

49.1

Year

1924

Discharge

544 

53

203

38.4

Year

1905 

1934

_________

Discharge

2,170 

227

791

151

Year

1907

IQQd.

Discharge

4,160

I

ylOQ

3,070

1,180

Year

1922

IQOyl

Discharge

80.1

99 ft

54.5

18.7

Year

1909

IQOyl

Discharge

131 

27.9

81.0

26. 5

Year

1907 

1924

Discharge

664 

93.6

278

66.0

Year

1921 

1934

Discharge

862

34 ft

334

19.8

Year

1904 

1934

_ _____ .. _

Discharge

416 

15.0

135

8.32

Year

1904 

1924

_____ ... ...

Discharge

22.000 

4,100

11, 300

3,480

Year

1907 

1931

Discharge

421 

16.8

167

9.41

Year

1906

1Q9J.

Discharge

5,300

2,270

469

Year

1934

1926

 

Discharge

6,280

2,650 

4,450

1,870

Year

1928

1926

 

Discharge

156,000

80, 200 

121,000

68,400

Year

1934

1930

 

Discharge

10, 300

3,370 

7,000

2,270

Year

1909

1931

Discharge

2,080

796

1 Aftfi

522

Year

1907

1931

...............

Discharge

5,140

1,470

o, U'U

1,300

Year

1928

1931

...............

Discharge

12 700

5,200

8,440 

3,260

Year

1904

1931

 I

Discharge

19 000

7,980

13, 740 

5,200

NOTE. Discharge records for 1934 are provisional and may be subject to slight change. 142748 36. (Face p. 70.)
ALLEVIATION OF WJOtTGHT DAMAGE 71

During drought periods surface waters stored in lakes, ponds, and 

reservoirs are usually heavily drawn upon and may be depleted 

entirely. The replenishment of these stored supplies in years following drought may draw so heavily on the precipitation as to cause 

noticeable shortages for various uses. Replenishment of groundwater storage may result in the same effect.

ALLEVIATION OF DROUGHT DAMAGE

Droughts are natural phenomena brought iabout by deficient and 

poorly distributed precipitation, high temperatures, and hot winds, 

which in turn depend upon other natural phenomena over which 

man has no control. There is nothing, therefore, that man can do 

to modify their occurrence. However, the economic losses resulting 

from shortages of water caused by droughts relate to activities that 

man can control, and it is possible for man to do much toward the 

alleviation of such losses by the conservation of available water 

supplies by storage, by efficiency in all uses of water, and by the 

adjustment of activities that depend upon water to available supplies 

and to variations in supplies.

In order to exercise either of these three controls, it is necessary to 

have complete information in regard to all available supplies, their 

fluctuations, and the possibilities for their conservation. This information should include climatic records, especially of precipitation; 

records of stream flow from which both the total flow and the distribution of flow that may be expected can be estimated; and records of 

fluctuations of the ground-water table, with other information relaitive to ground-water supplies. Topographic maps of watercourses, 

indicating reservoir sites and possibilities for diversion, will also be 

required.

Drought damages depend in a large measure on the climate of the 

area affected that is, whether it is humid, semiarid, or arid and 

on the type of activities in the area. Therefore, a full knowledge of 

the water requirements for agriculture and other activities in each 

area is also important in combating drought damages. , Although far from adequate, records of precipitation, temperature, 

stream flow, and other natural phenomena relating to water supplies 

are now of sufficient length to give an indication as to how far activities depending upon water can be extended without serious loss on 

account of deficient supplies. The extent to which economic losses 

due to droughts are eliminated will depend on the continuation and 

extension of these records and their use both in planning and in opera-r 

tion. :

The humid areas hi general have adequate precipitation to meet the 

needs of vegetation, both natural and agricultural, to supply adequate 

surface and ground waters to meet present demands for various other
$ DROUGHTS OF 193(H34

(needs, and also in most sections for additional demands if expansion is 

(wjsely planned. In any year there may be small areas that have 

shortages of water, and at intervals varying from 15 to 20 years there 

may be major shortages. In general, however, if due consideration 

is given to the character and extent of development, there should be 

no serious inconvenience due to water shortages in the humid areas, 

except at long intervals. If agriculture and other activities are 

properly planned and the facilities for utilizing available supplies 

are provided, damage due to these shortages can be minimized. 

. In the arid sections special caution should be exercised in the 

expansion of activities that will increase water-supply demands, until 

more information is available in regard to the amount of water that 

can reasonably be depended upon. Although there have been shortages of supply in many localities during drought years, the indications 

are that these shortages can, in the main, be overcome if all available 

sources are developed and if facilities are provided for their economic 

use. If, however, the present climatic trends in the arid sections 

continue, the development of additional water needs in many localities may result in serious loss.

The most pressing water-supply problems of the country are in the 

semiarid areas, which since their early settlement have had more or 

less trouble on account of deficient water supplies, especially as 

related to agriculture, the principal activity in these areas. The 

indications are that much readjustment must be made in these areas 

before they can be placed upon a secure basis in respect to water 

demands, and this will require much careful study not only of the 

available supplies that can be expected but of the types of agriculture 

and other activities that can be successfully carried on as limited 

by these supplies.

At the present time much water is made unavailable for use, especially in the vicinity of centers of population, by pollution from sewage 

and other wastes, and the conditions may eventually become so acute 

that large expenditures for elimination of pollution will be justified. 

Governmental agencies, Federal, State, and local, should give this 

question careful study with the idea of setting up sufficient regulatory 

measures to avoid disaster from pollution in times of drought. No 

section of the country is free from this danger.

The people who live on the land may be divided into three groups 

first, the agricultural industrialist, who is primarily interested in 

money crops and does not attempt to supply his own food needs; 

second, the farmer who raises both food for his subsistence needs and 

money crops and who is thus self-contained on the farm; third, the 

subsistence agriculturist, who raises only food crops and depends on 

outside work for his money.
ALLEVIATION OF DROUGHT DAMAGE 73

As a large percentage of the people who live on the land fall in the 

last two classes, the bulk of the food supply that enters into the 

commerce of the country is produced by a comparatively small 

percentage of the rural population. Drought effects are more serious 

to the group of agricultural industrialists than to the subsistence 

groups, as it is an exceptional drought in which there is not sufficient 

production of crops for subsistence, although supplies may at times 

be meager. In fact, during all drought years suffering has been 

largely confined to areas which have been devoted primarily to 

commercial agriculture and in which no special attention is given 

to subsistence needs. One of the outstanding results of the drought 

of 1930 was the large extension of subsistence agriculture in areas 

that had heretofore depended wholly upon money crops.

The Arkansas "live-at-home program" 17 developed as a result of 

the drought of 1930 indicates that a real solution to the problem of 

the alleviation of drought damages in rural sections is to eliminate 

the marginal producer and to insure that each farm unit raise sufficient food for its own needs. Under this program Arkansas officials 

are working to lift the one-crop curse and persuade farmers to plant 

food as well as money crops, so that they may be at least partly 

self-sustaining in time of drought. The principles of this constructive 

program are as follows:

To raise enough grain and hay to feed all livestock.

To produce enough meat to supply the family's needs.

To keep enough milk cows to supply the family with an abundance of milk 

and butter.

To provide health insurance in the form of a year-round garden, and to preserve any surplus of home-raised vegetables.

To maintain a flock of at least 30 laying hens.

To give increased care to home orchards, and in areas where no fruit is grown 

at present to plant enough fruit trees to supply the family's needs.

To rebuild soil fertility by planting at least half the present corn and cotton 

acreage to legumes and pasture crops.

To reduce tilled acreage and apply the surplus labor to terracing and drainage.

To install at least one home convenience and to beautify each homestead by 

painting all buildings, improving farm lawns, and planting flowering trees and 

shrubs.

One of the obstacles in the alleviation of drought damages is 

conservatism and the difficulty in changing established practices. 

This applies especially to the arid West and is illustrated by conditions outlined in the annual report dated March 4, 1935 (unpublished), of the committee of nine to the water users of district 36, 

Idaho, which comprises the Snake River drainage basin, as follows:

During a long series of years up to 1923 Snake River had an abundant run-off 

during 4 out of every 5 years. The streams remained at high stage until well

« How to live at home: Arkansas Univ. Coll. Agr. Extension Circ. 265,1931. 

142748 36 6
74 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

into July and discharged in ordinary years 5,000,000 acre-feet annually past 

Milner to the ocean. During the past decade, however, the stream flow has 

greatly decreased. During the past 6 years, for example, the amount of water 

discharged past American Falls was only.50 percent of the amount during the 

6 years from 1909 to 1914. The continuation of the present low discharge for 

so long a period, taken in conjunction with tree-ring and geologic studies, indicates 

that it is not unlikely that the period from the early settlement of the valley up 

to 1923 was one of overabundant water supply and that the present situation 

more nearly represents the normal condition.

If this proves to be the case, the water users on Snake River will be forced by 

necessity to eliminate certain pioneer habits and practices in the use of water 

that they acquired during the years of abundance and learn to adopt all available 

methods of conservation or else abandon part of the acreage now irrigated.

As a practical matter, however, in view of the established rights, viewpoint, 

and habits of the various water users, it is difficult to propose any plan to improve 

the present water supply that does not meet with the opposition of some section 

which feels that its rights and needs, either real or imaginary, are being infringed 

upon. As one studies the situation and comes to appreciate the difficulties involved in accomplishing the full conservation and efficient use of the waters of 

Snake River he feels a certain sympathy with that Persian poet who, 500 years 

ago, was moved to exclaim:

"Ah! would that I could grasp

This sorry scheme of things entire 

And mold a world anew

Nearer to my heart's desire!"

In all countries and at all times water has been the limiting factor 

in social and other development. We have now reached a time in 

the development of this country when much more careful consideration must be given to water supply than has been given in the past, or 

serious consequences will result. The disastrous effects of recent 

droughts in the arid and semiarid States have in a large measure been 

due to failure to give adequate study to the relation of water supply 

to development. With the growth of the country detrimental effects 

of droughts increase, and they will continue to increase unless a proper 

relation between water supplies and requirements is established and 

maintained. It is not safe to assume that droughts of greater 

severity than those which have been recorded will not occur, and 

even if they are not more severe, as measured by deficiency in water 

and length, their economic effects will be greater as utilization of 

and demands for water are increased. The maximum development 

and successful use of all natural resources can be accomplished only 

on the bask of full and reliable information as to water supplies, 

with special emphasis on drought periods, and, in order that this 

information may be available, it is essential that adequate provision 

be made for the collection of systematic records of the Nation's water 

resources on a continuing basis.
DROUGHTS OP 1930-34 75

PRECIPITATION DIAGRAMS

ANNUAL

MONTHLY

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 21. Annual precipitation in Maine, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to December

1931.

ANNUAL

III. I.I II

MEAN 

39J52

Mil il

MONTHLY

1929

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

:FIGUKE 22. Annual precipitation in New Hampshire, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
76 DROUGHTS OP 1930-34

ANNUAL

MEAN 

37.03

I

MONTHLY

,&47

1

>?i£s-<S'?il-<«5o^(5 i§B:<S1929 1930

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

FIGURE 23. Annual precipitation in Vermont, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 24. Annual precipitation in Massachusetts, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DSOUCMTS OF 1330-34 77

ANNUAL

MONTHLY

II I. «-i *!f < OS SO

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 26. Annual precipitation in Rhode Island, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

40

30 ll

MONTHLY

.

1929 1930 1931 / 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

26. Annual precipitation in Connecticut, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
78 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

MEAN 

39.01

SO Illl 11,1 lllllll

MONTHLY

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUEE 27. Annual precipitation in New York, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, Jane 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

MONTHLY

I ~ s .& £ »t; i, «i § s's&s-tgititsg-sig-s y £ & s -t *> -4 ti & sJ £33$;°£&3££3&£33&'=>£&3£&'S&3£3&o£'G 

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUBB 28. Annual precipitation in New Jersey, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OP 1930-34 79

50

K 40

30

MEAN 

4247

MONTHLY

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 29. Annual precipitation in Pennsylvania, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL w

40-

20- - -

59.77 ME/ 

41.8

1 1 1 I 1

1

\N 

9

,,

MONTHLY

7.7O

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUEE 30. Annual precipitation in Maryland-Delaware, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June

1929 to December 1931.
DBOUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

MONTHLY

6.92 6.64

1929 W30 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIQUBB 31. Annual predpitation in Virginia, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June. 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FiGtJBB 32. Annual predpitation In North Carolina, 1881-1934, and monthly predpitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

81

MONTHLY

'

7f I 7-31

n

1

 H --t-- n

il

7.14

1 1 i

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIOUBX 33. Annual precipitation in South Carolina, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

60, ANNUAL

MONTHLY

n T

 r

n

n

i i

I i

v78|

» ^ttlsll

1929 1930 1931

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIQUBE 34. Annual precipitation in Tennessee, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
82 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

MEAN 

45.81

MONTHLY

1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

FIGURE 35. Annual precipitation in Kentucky, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

60 ANNUAL

MEAN 

4383

!40

30

MONTHLY

 -» < a o 

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FiGUBE 36. Annual precipitation in West Virginia, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 tc

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34 83

ANNUAL

MEAN 

38.44

MONTHLY

li I II Hi ttlMl 14 1 Itll

1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGXJEE 37. Annual precipitation in Ohio, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

!tillIIIIIIII tillIIIIIII!1931

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGTJEE 38. Annual precipitation in Michigan, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
84 DKOUGHTS OF 193CH34

1

| | 1 1

1

1 1

WEAN 

4OI7

\

MONTHLY

i iii

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

30. Annual precipitation in Indiana, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1920 to 

December 1931.

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIOUBX 40. Annual precipitation in Illinois, 1878-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1920 to

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

85

MEAN 

48.97

t> 

|9.10 .10,10

n n "- - ""JTfT

.1 ...... ....... I. .11...

,!.« 6JM

r" f . ''1

[ Ii

7.79 

I

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 41. Annual precipitation in Arkansas, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, Jane 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

60

540

MEAN 

AOJ7

20

MONTHLY

1929 1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

:FIGTJBE 42. Annual precipitation in Missouri, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
86 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

gso

.Open columns in3icate mean monthly average

43. Annual precipitation in Iowa, 1873-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to 

December 1931.

ANNUAL

MEAN 

3L63

X 30 1

MONTHLY

t

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 44. Annual precipitation in Wisconsin, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DBOTJGHTS OF 1930-34 87

ANNUAL

I. .EmJl

MONTHLY

t illIflilfkl

11"» < !

1929 1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

FIGURE 45. Annual precipitation in Minnesota, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

MEAN 

52.94

ii

8 4

MONTHLY

,10.98 10.70

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 46. Annual precipitation in Florida, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
88

70 

f*fl

'&

S50

S

so

DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

MEAN 

50.48

.

\ 1 1 1 1 MONTHLY

a 4 -" 

1

1 3

9.62 

- I n

-

r||| |||||

n ' J|

' U [\

[

s-^'§;t^'lM § ^^-^ s

7

' ' 

 I||||S

.02 J

[

II

1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

FiotTBB 47. Annual precipitation in Georgia, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 Jo

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

89

1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

FIGURE 48. Annual precipitation in Alabama, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

142748 36 7
90 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

70 

r*n .,..,_

X 

O - .

g

40- 

30- .

,

1 I

*

It t 1

1

1

MEAN 

53.32

1

1 1

£3 8 O> O

MONTHLY

8.91,

1929 1930

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 49. Annual precipitation in Mississippi, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

91

MEAN 

5564

i

 MONTHLY

1010- ^7.80

i r

........................ I..

 WO 10.53

1 1

III Ilia l

1929

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

FIGURE 50. Annual precipitation in Louisiana, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
92 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

w

g 30 

g

.

«

,(

1

1

,50.! 4 ME-4/V 

32.63

[

MONTHLY

.0 '" * g1 

fe S < S

1930

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 51. Annual precipitation in Oklahoma, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 toDecember 1931.

ANNUAL

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 52. Annual precipitation in Kansas, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to.

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34 93

ANNUAL

.ill 11

MEAN 

'23.5O

II n MONTHLY

lirLkl nun

If fill Jill III! If 1^1 III 111!! If II11

1929 1930 1931 

Opencolumns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 53. Annual precipitation in Nebraska, 1876-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

54. Annual precipitation in South Dakota, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
94 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

gao

Illl

IMONTHLY

ln.n.n.1111

1929 1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 55. Annual precipitation in North Dakota, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

, 0

MONTHLY

Ill

1929 1930 1931 

 Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUKE 56. Annual precipitation in Texas, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34 95

30 ANNUAL

MEAN 

I4A9

II n

MONTHLY

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 57. Annual precipitation in New Mexico, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

li h

.MEAN \r

10 Ill ,1 Mil Illl ml ill

MONTHLY

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 58. Annual precipitation in Colorado, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
96 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

MEAN 

1405

U

MONTHLY

1931 

1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUKE 59 Annual precipitation in Wyoming, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

W20

g

l.lll.ll lnl.llll III. Illl II. III III!

MONTHLY

1929 1930

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUEB 60. Annual precipitation in Montana, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34 97

 a 8 i

iL nil l!,i UK Ilil illi lln Hi,

MONTHLY

1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

1931

61. Annual precipitation in Idaho, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to 

December 1931.

II nlll

I 2

1n.rlnn.i ih.il

$t gi < $ oz

1929 1930 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

62. Aonual precipitation in Nevada, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to 

December 1931.
98 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

1929 1931

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 63. Annual precipitation in Utah, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.

ANNUAL

1930 

Open columns indicate niean monthly average

1931

FIGURE 64. Annual precipitation in Arizona, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 toDecember 1931.
50

DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

3fc 

Illllll

20

I 1,1 III il

MONTHLY

'

I. A lll.-Jt;

8.48 

1

[hi^fl

,

|

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 65. Annual precipitation in California, 1881-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929

December 1931.
100 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

MEAN 

13.81

I

MONTHLY

1929

3§'"8oa) 0t'S^o< rtS tgsS< t3oS 

«<wO;Z;Q'-»fcS<!S»-»>:5<!o5O.z;Q

1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGURE 66. Annual precipitation in eastern Oregon, 1890-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
70

60

" ^

DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

101

<«0 

S3HDNI

0LA

 ^ s*t$ -> <! OT 

192S

I

^5

|

§ 8 ^ P

-

II

n

ill, II

1930

! r

1,1 1

lllllllli

1931

t

8 0

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

FIGUBE 67. Annual precipitation in western Oregon, 1890-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 1929 to

December 1931.
102 DROUGHTS OF 1930-34

ANNUAL

MONTHLY

4.13

1929 1930 1931 

Open columns indicate mean monthly average

Annual precipitation in eastern Washington, 1890-1934, and monthly precipitation, June 

1929 to December 1931.
DROUGHTS OF 1930-34 103

ANNUAL

MEAN 

56.98

iLs

12

MONTHLY

In-FLI n- nJ

1929 1930 1931 

'Open columns indicate mean monthly average

f iGtiEE «9.~Annual precipitation in western Washington, 1890-1934, and monthly precipitation, June

1929 to December 1931.
INDEX

Page

Acknowledgments for aid ...-- ._.___ 1-2 

Agriculture, drought damage to 17-18,32-35,56-59 

planning for alleviation of damage to.-.. 71-74 

American National Red Cross, drought relief

by .. - 41-45

Appropriations for drought relief, by American National Red Cross. ____ 41-45 

by Congress__________ 38,42,62,64-65 

Arid States, alleviation of drought damage in. 71-74 

crop yields in..___... ... 9,33,49,57-58 

precipitation in, tables showing__ 4,9,49,66 

vegetation in, water requirements of _ 16-18 

years of severe drought in 66 

(tables 14 and 15), 68-69, pi. 1 

Atmospheric pressure, fluctuations of water

table in response to. ____ 24

Bird refuges, development of 61-64

Carry-over effect of droughts .... 30-32,70-71 

Climate, fluctuations of, in California since

1769...__ ............. 68-69

general conditions of, causing drought 4,

6,46, 71

Conservation of water supplies, planning for. 62-64,

71-74

Crops, carry-over effects of drought on___ 70 

climatic factors affecting__ 11-18,32-35,57,68 

yield in relation to precipitation, in 1930

and 1931. 8-9,32-35

m 1934 .8-9,48-49,56-59

in 1929-34 8-0

Deficiency table showing effect of droughts

on stream flow ____.... 30

Discharge of streams. See Stream flow. 

Domestic water supplies, effect of drought

on. . - 36-37,5^-60

Drought relief - 37 38,41-45, 62-65,71-74

Droughts, area! extent of.. 2-3,

5-C, 32-33, 46, 56-58, 66-68, pi. 1

carry-over effect of ------------- 30-32,70-71

causes of----------__ - 2,6-11.46-52,68

comparison of, during period 1881 to 1934. 3,

65-69, pi. 1

from, alleviation of_- __ 37-38, 

41-45,62-65, 71-74

factors involved in___..,..__- 5 

tocrops. -.. 32-35,57-59,68 

to health._...._. . ... 37-38,60-61

to navigation______.....__ 39-41,61

to power plants 38-39,61

to recreational facilities _ _. _ 41,61 

to vegetation- 32-35,56-59,68 

to water supplies . 36-37,59-60,68 

to wild life 41,61

142748 36 8

Page 

Droughts, definition of-_......______ 2

frequency of- . - 2-3, 17, 65-69, pi. 1 

precipitation and stream flow as indexes

to-. 4, 65-70, pi. 1

records of, interpretation of. ___ 35,65-71

sources of__ ____ 4

relief measures for. _. 37-38,41-45,62-65,71-74

severity of __.__.. 2-3, 10-11, 65-69, pi. 1

stream flow as index to.. . 69-70 (and table)

Dust storms, occurrence of______ ___ 50-52

Economic aspects of shortage of water. __ 5,71-74 

Edaphic adaptation.. _... 16-17 

Electricity, production of, in drought years_38-39,61 

Engineering Institute of Canada, paper presented before.___________ 62-64 

Erosion, by wind - ____ 51-52 

Evaporation, diurnal fluctuations in stream

flow due to____________ 18-22

Federal aid in drought relief.___ 38,42-43,62-65

Garden planting for drought relief _____ 43,73 

Great Plains. See Semiarid States. 

Great Salt Lake, level of. ____ 55 

Ground water, discharge of 13-15,20-21,26,53-54 

fluctuations in level of - _____ 13,22-26,53-54

Health, conditions during drought__ 37-38,60-61 

Humid States, alleviation of drought damage

in.-- - 71-73 

crop yields in - 8-9,32-35,48-49,56-58 

precipitation in, tables showing. 4,8-9,48-49,66 

vegetation in, water requirements of._- 15-17 

years of severe drought in. 2-3,65-68, pi. 1

Industrial water supplies, effect of drought

on._ -_ __ 37, 59-60 

Inland waterways, effect of drought on . 39-41,61 

Irrigation, conservation of water for_____ 60,63, 

domestic water supplies developed in

connection with.......__..__ 60

effect of drought on___ __ 16,35,56,57-58,60 

feasibility of, in arid and semiarid regions. 16,

17,18

Jones, L. A., quoted______..._...... 62-64

Lakes, development of, for recreation and

for bird refuges__________ 61-64

effect of drought on__...._......__ 55-56

" Live-at-home program" for agriculturists_ 73 

Livestock, feed for . _._ 43-44,58-59

water supplies for___.....__... _.. 62-64 

Loess, movement of, by wind_____.... 51-52 

Lynch, H. B., quoted. ........

105
106 INDEX

Navigation, effect of drought on.

Page

39-41,61

Pasture land, effect of drought on . .. 58-59

Pellagra, foods to prevent__... ____ 37-38

Plants. See Crops; Vegetation.

Pollution of water, avoidance of- ______ 72

due to drought._____..-._____ 37

Power, effect of drought on production of- 38-39,61

Precipitation, by States, annual, 1881-1934... 4

(table 1), 66 (table 14), 75-103

by States, for major drought years___ pi. 1

for six lowest years.....__ 66 (table 15)

June-August, 1930 and 1931___ 8-9,33-35 

June-August, 1934__________ 57 

monthly, 1929-31...... .......... 75-103

crop yields in relation to_._____.. 7-10, 

33-35,48-49,56-59

deficiency in, drought defined in terms of. 2,

65-66

tables and diagrams showing-. ___ 3, 

8-10,30-31,48-49,66,67

discharge of water received by__ 11-26,53-54

distribution of, areaL.. ____ 4 (and table 1),

65,66 (table 14)

seasonal...__..._ 8-#, 16,33-35,47-50,57

fluctuations in annual amount of____ 66-69

records of, available__ ..._ 4

interpretation of.. __ .. 35,65-69,71

stream flow in relation to, comparison of

records of______.. __ 15-16,25-32

stations used in study of.______ 70

trends in California since 1769______ 68-69

utilization of, by plants._ . .. 14-21

Public water supplies, effect of drought on_ 36-

37,59-60 

improvement of. _ ..__..___ 36-37,60,63

Rainfall. See Precipitation.

Recreational uses of water________ 41,61-64

Red Cross. See American National Red

Cross.

Relief in drought areas_. 37-38,41-45,62-65,71-74 

Reservoirs, effect of drought on____ 35,56-58,60 

Rivers, run-off of. See Stream flow. 

Root zone, features of____________ 13 

Run-off. See Stream flow.

Seeds for relief gardens____________ 43,45 

Semiarid States, alleviation of drought damage in 71-74 

belt including_______._______ 4 

crop yields in. .______ 9,32-34,49,57-58 

precipitation in, tables showing__ 4,9,49,66 

vegetation in, water requirements of__ 16-18 

years of severe drought in_ 2-3,17,65-68, pi. 1 

Silt, movement of, by wind_________ 51-52 

Sources of information____________ 1,4 

Stock, feed for.._...__............. 43-44,58-59

water supplies for. ____._______ 62-64

Page

Stream flow, deficiency table____ __ 30 

effect of drought on_ 25-32,39-41,54-55,69-70 

evaporation and transpiration causes of

loss in 18-22

fluctuations in, diurnal.________ 18-21

general 25-32

lag in recovery of.. 30-32

minimum, at selected stations. 69-

70 (and table)

plant growth a cause of fluctuations in... 15-

16,18-21

precipitation and, comparison of 15-16,25-32

stations used in study of__ . 70

records of, interpretation of.__ .. 69-71

period covered by_____ _ 4

tables and diagrams illustrating.._ 16,

27-31,64-55,70

Subsistence farming_ _____ 72-73 

Surface water. See Lakes; Reservoirs; 

Stream flow.

Temperature, in 1930 and 1931 11,12 

in 1934 .... ....... . 48-49,50,51

Transpiration, diurnal fluctuations in stream

flow due to_______ ___ 18-22

Vegetation, adaptation of, to environment 16-

17,56

carry-over effects of drought on. 70 

drought damage to_______ 32-35,66-59,68 

factors affecting.______ 11-18,32-35,57,68 

water requirements of..... 14-21

Water, pollution of, avoidance of_ 72 

quality of, affected by drought. 37 

recreational use of..__ _ 41,61 

storage of, artificial. __._._ 16,35,56-58,60 

natural___________ 13,15,53 

utilization of, by plants . 14-21 

See also Ground water; Stream flow.

Water power, reduced output of, during

drought . 38-39,61

Water supplies, development of as relief projects..... ...___ . _ . - 62-64 

economic aspects of shortage in 6,71-74 

effect of drought on______ 36-37,59-60 

efficiency in use of.__.____ 71-74

Water table, fluctuations of.__... 22-26,53-54 

position of . 13

Water year, beginning of. 16

Wells, additional water supplies from 36,59-60 

effect of drought on_____ 22-26,36,53,59-60 

fluctuations of water level in . 22-26

Wildlife, effect of drought on .. - 41,61 

refuges developed for.... 63-64

Wind, during drought.. . 11,50-52

Zone of aeration, features of '- 13-14 

Zone of saturation, features of-... 13-14

o