List of Photographs

Photo. No, 1 - Water User-constructed cattle guard - Rio Grande
Project

Photo. No. 2 - Water User-constructed cattle guard - Rio Grande
Project

Photo, No. 3 - Water User-constructed cattle guard - Rio Grande
Project

Photo. No. 4 - Water User-constructed cattle guard - Rio Grande
Project

Photo. No. 5 - Typical standard cattle guard with reduced dimen-
sions - Colorado-Big Thompson Project

Photo. No. 6 - Typical standard cattle guard with full dimensions -
Colorado-Big Thompson Project

Photo. No. 7 - Damaged Wing Guard on Standard Cattle Guard -
Delta-Mendota Canal

Photo. No. 8 - Redwood Posts Protect Cattle Guard - Delta-Mendota
Canal

Photo. No. 9 - Provo Reservoir Canal cattle guard installation

Photo. No. 10 - Provo Reservoir Canal cattle guard installation

Photo. No, 11 - "Bed-spring" cattle guard

Photo, No. 12 - "Floating" cattle guard - Kittitas Division, Yakima

Project

Photo, No. 13 - "Floating" cattle guard - Kittitas Division, Yakima
Project

Photo. No, 14 - "Floating" cattle guard - Kittitas Division, Yakima
Project

17



Figure 12

Wat Pe pesps ypbuouge |
wy thy wet eset AE cig ca ©
+952 10d gf B L0 FY Of poodle sissies

OTDM ial 219 16 arp GelUey Ba Gy lolbnl wipro 1
; fs . = umojes’ bo gost /sueboino
| ‘uaaN WONT prepueys of vupsuue og Wy” repobayne hing haboy
SYWYOM TAR.LS NIOONIT
rrr, ; FLVDOINY J-ONIATT ALA AAVHY
(Popou te fooone poppe 2170/2 Huey FLY) -
MF
DY TTOURIULI] HOMLVAT TT wes 7 A IS
rw, | DE EOE z A at LA
WT TUS | 2 Giggs oS
oe Os 208 SEM G6
ta be De oe P
pis smnveys.s sproddns uy a
a
Pugeed ty J [
pely HO Teg IOD ool of reel FIP

TH

=
=

MI ONT

PLE nae ON

rag TS U ale

WO fd yoru

peoed pobery

Sapo

ra

[cc eee a

I I

it UI

7:06 4b 00h 3B s0z0ds 7
GED A LO ET

[

|
U

fopeones poops W/PiHf

|

i Uf

U

UT U

cara

iL

_
o



Figure 8

BILL OF MATERIAL

(FOR ONE CATTLE GUARD H-!5)

2'116"Bolt

10"Stub~

“Symm. about €

LX

A

al

4° 45° Chamfer-

Jp-10" Post Symm. about € except

2
g {for drainage slope
g =
i (81 8'x7"10" + 16"Bort
{ f vFu6'Bolts
Panam i 3'r30" Bolt

ITEM No.| DIMENSIONS
mans [12 | 60%er 709s _
Ss! [rans 5
ma [reer [2
a Timeer_|2 |
38 4
re Ted
8 2
a8 | ste __ {2 |
ee: pour |2
STi Bor | 34
i WASHER | 70
i piate ta | a ~
| Peare [ol 4
23 REQUIRED
#116" Bolt

8'847-10"-

44 jc 12" Plate-~

ee a

6° 18's 13-4"

8110's 13
80*Rail

94 for 60" Rail
93"for 70® Rail

Sym, about €

SECTION B-B
18 :

SCALE OF FEET

27077

SECTION A-A

Road surface

"110" 13 »--60*or 70* Rail

aS +
7 aainate — =,

Br /0'r13-4"

‘ ‘ —-4'3'10"-9" Plate

~<gr16"Bolts

SECTION D-D

NOTES

Lumber to be cut to dimensions given tg.

All lumber For cattle guards shall be treated southern yellow
pine, or treated west coast douglas fir

With carriage bolts use one malleable washer.

With machine bolts, use two malleable washers

Transverse rails may be furnished in random lengths, and
spliced and welded ot the supports as directed by the
contracting officer

For approximate location of cattle guards, see Dwg 163-D-41

UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT-NEW MEXICO
CHANNELIZATION
H-15 CATTLE GUARD DETAILS

HERO AREY. svenoweo



The C & P Autogate is quite inexpensive. Although used mate-
rials are permitted in its manufacture, the C & P Autogate has proven
to be highly satisfactory. The purchase price for this guard recently
was $68 each, f.o.b., Indianola, Nebraska, for a lot of 30. The price
will vary up to $100 each, depending upon the quantity purchased. The
low bidder for 12 units installed on the Trenton County Road Relocation
was $200 each for furnishing and installing this type of guard. However,
there was a lower unit bid of $100 each.

"Flying L" autogates, manufactured by the Lincoln Steel Works
at Lincoln, Nebraska, have been used on canal bank roads in the Path-
finder Irrigation District of the North Platte Project in Nebraska, on
the Newlands Project in Nevada, on the Columbia Basin in Washington,
and other projects in Region 1 and Region 6. Reports indicate that the
cattle guards are proving to be practical, and maintenance is negligible
if properly installed. Region 1 prefers a concrete foundation for the
guard and finds the autogate more expensive than some other types
they are using.

A unique arrangement has been made on the North Platte Proj-
ect in which the Pathfinder Irrigation District purchases the "Flying L"
autogates and sells them to the water users at a total cost of approxi-
mately $200, which includes a cost of $50 to $100 for installation. Con-
struction details of the Flying L" autogate are given in Figures 11 and
12. Some additional information, including a price list, taken from an
information circular is given below:

LINCOLN "FLYING L" AUTO-GATE
PRICE LIST

Net Prices f.0.b. Lincoln, Nebraska
(May 21, 1953)

Cattle Guards or Horse Guards

STANDARD GATES j HEAVY-DUTY GATES
+ Shipping Price Shipping Price
Size weight each Size weight each
8" x 6'6 640 Ib | $ 83.00 BT x 66 B45 Ib $108. 50
8'x 713" 700 lb 93.00 8' x 719" 1, 060 lb 127.50
9'x 719" 810 lb 104. 00 10' x 6'6" 1,060 lb 132.00
10' x 7'9" 925 lb 118.00 10'x 7'9" 1, 340 lb 156.00
12' x 7'9" 1,050 lb 134.00 12' x 7'9"' 1, 500 lb 174.00

Detachable Steel Wings

Size I Shipping weight per pair ; Price per pair

6'6" x 516" | 100 pounds $19.00

Special clamps for clamping two or more gates together, add per set
oftwo. ee ee ee ee ee $4, 00.

11



Photo 5 - A typical cattleguard of standard design
but with reduced dimensions, installed
on the Colorado-Big Thompson Project.

Photo 6 - A typical cattleguard of standard design
and full dimensions, installed on the
Colorado-Big Thompson Project.


END BARRIER
xk"
\
Stra cfow ed
BG
|



certain circumstances and especially serve a vital purpose in expediting
travel through stock-raising country.

Most field offices report that where cattle guards have been in-
stalled in accordance with the present standard design, they have given
generally satisfactory service, except where exceptionally heavy traffic
must be accommodated. The principal objection by most field people to
the present standard design is the cost of construction. On the other
hand, it is pointed out that from an O&M standpoint, the original cost
may not be the important cost. The present high cost of lumber and
labor and the short life of wooden structures may prove that an even
more costly design, one calling for concrete and steel construction, is
less expensive over a period of years because of lower maintenance and
replacement cost. In this regard, it is interesting to note that although
many object to the original cost, there is a tendency in replacement and
‘repair of cattle guards to use steel and concrete construction in an effort
to reduce replacement and maintenance costs in the future.

In accordance with the above, a new standard design should em-
body features that will result in lowest possible cost for materials, labor,
and construction, as well as maintenance and replacement, It is gener-
ally believed that some changes in the design can be made in the interest
of economy in construction and maintenance.

The cost of some guards installed, as reported by the contrib-
utors, is summarized in Table II of the appendix.

Some of the more specific suggestions and recommendations
for improving the cattle guard designs are listed below:

1. One design standard for cattle guards will not meet
the requirements for all projects or operating conditions.

2. “Bed-spring" type cattle guards, wire gates, or "bump-
gates" can be used in some locations in lieu of the more costly
cattle guards.

3. Commercially available, prefabricated cattle guards
should be installed wherever possible. They are manufactured in
quantity and, therefore, are less costly.

4. Narrower and less costly cattle guards could be installed
on canal-operating roads for passage of light traffic, providing ad-
jacent wire gates for the passage of heavy equipment and traffic.

5. Where the more costly type of cattle guar’ must be used,
specify as many similar guards as possible in one contract to take
advantage of mass production and resulting lower cost.

6. Eliminate the 24-inch pit under deck of the cattle guard
by using heavy railroad rails, or by setting the stringers of the


ESELH_Hvin GROSSE 007 Wwe

ESS gyn ded UIWITND
~asomapnarty S307 as

aywnaD altivd
TYNYD BOAHBSAY OACAD
Meet en a Sata

So Los Tesssmens — yea -v mee |

L004 |=HONIz4 BIVOg

Nn POz 54
N P09 sais
5 1%

Isa

3

Aviugiww do 118

9 inbig

—
66-2 ES

J] sarbunits ¢-9-,21>.%
J sup. did 41.2 susn0ds 4

WV NOILDES
= bi81

6-6 >

(saa



Figure No.
Figure No.

Figure No.
Figure No.
Figure No.
Figure No,

Figure No.
Figure No.
Figure No.

Figure No,
Figure No.
Figure No.
Figure No.
Figure No.
Figure No,

a OurRwW Ne

)

10
11
12
13
14
15

List of Figures

- Standard design Drawing No. 40-D-4383

- Deschutes Project Cattle Guard - Drawing No. 112-
104-2004

- Madera Canal Cattle Guard - Drawing No. 214-219-11008

- Sketch of Suggested Wing Guard - Madera Canal

- Salt River Valley Cattle Guard - Drawing No. B-14-52

- Provo Reservoir Canal Cattle Guard - Drawing No.
244-408 -288

- Tucumcari Project Cattle Guard - Drawing No, 257-
505-410

- San Marcial Division, Rio Grande Project Cattle
Guard - Drawing No. 163-D-56

- Rio Grande Project, CCC Cattle Guard - Drawing No.
23-503-4051

- C & P Autogate - Drawing No. 328-701-3644

- "Flying L" Autogate - Lincoln Steel Works

- "Flying L" Autogate - Lincoln Steel Works - Drawing

- "Powder River Ranch Guard" - Drawing

- "Powder River Ranch Guard" - Weight and Price List

- "Powder River Ranch Guard" - Bill of Material

18


Photo 11- ''Bed-spring" type cattleguard. Made of 14-
inch pipe, 50 inches wide and 120 inches
long. Springs 1-inch in diameter and 12
inches in length support a strip of 1} by
1/4-inch strap iron with sufficient tension
to carry the strap iron approximately 6
inches above the ground when not in use.


Photo 3 - A deck composed of pipe and angle iron is
used by the Water Users for the cattle
guard shown on the Rio Grande Project,

New Mexico-Texas.

Photo 4 - Another cattle guard deck fabricated from
pipe and installed by the Water Users on
the Rio Grande Project, New Mexico-Texas.


~_NOrLVATT2

We-POSLEd now mwrmronam | LEE &
aaaacaiaiae i conv: £437 2 - ommenou?
' me * ‘ruin02¥ ovr L477 2 oY ON LHOn8? f 19. Wiese Cuvng 30/6
— Sig ramen 3 V T¥L30-o¥¥LS ow LWIO? aw¥NS Nil
Gv0y ONILYHIdO 40d GUND 37449 NvId \y Joo
TWHWo SWHONOD q
noveynvone oe awtane = ——
siete entina Cony moses bo 1nj-% ot
NS “tel noms ag aaa
ENOLLYAITI +
oie estes
Nghe arsed
MOILWAITI

ATEN ISSY aYYND 30'S

vgs fe nnee eee al

‘uproo) 5-H 2 paubieep esaborsispue see dus batons 942
ats¢e) —

210j2q wioscan apndo jo uoleaiaa food 2

ujim pajoe.g ag 04s oui pno.b mejag aagury ¥
Moise 4sur 12130 i052 aye pace 9g
1 puntub reap, e808 30 Wand poe spovhb 2p
TFs uaa tuoi, ve ssetny
$310

3 snoze
Jebiaouwis

TFA Teer 98 20.7 Yee fleTpve09 |
[ormy Tk) sunesai sg | $9)
med suieg sboiss03| |
Pem| cm
Hi os 74
Pea et ae
FAL oy 2 (6-4) PEON 0?
“PAT Bier peas a
[oenl eaqoue #
a wee @
[ew spt Sb eon a
ns ia
z
7 (6)
z 105.359
| = «
oo 77 seaypeouning oaxeine-!
fo LL areersenens!
‘pong 2 | Wa e1as bub fro. 91.9342
Sis 108 | 2 7
= LZ
yaar) smasoe bot tg
4
2
2 a
- sauvno sie (6x4) 480a |
aaenpy ;
boas] _ shorswama Give | ow 3 sono eauiaaai. vb
auyng 77L1¥9 Io

os
WiaRLVN 40 76



TABLE I

PROJECTS CONTRIBUTING INFORMATION AND COMMENTS

Region 1:

Region 2:

Region 3:

Region 4;

Region 5:

Region 6:

Region 7:

Boise Project

Columbia Basin Project
Deschutes Project

Kittitas Division - Yakima Project
Vale Project

Central Valley Project
Klamath Project

Coachella Division - All American Canal
Salt River Project
Yuma Project

Newlands Project
Provo River Project
Uncompahgre Project

Middle Rio Grande Project
Rio Grande Project
Tucumcari Project
Vermejo Project

Buffalo Rapids Project

Missouri River Basin Project
Keyhole Unit - Cheyenne Division
Tiber Unit - Powder Division

Colorado-Big Thompson Project
Missouri-River Basin Project
Cambridge Unit - Frenchman-Cambridge Division
Superior-Courtland Unit - Bostwick Division
North Platte Project

15



Costs of Repairs and Replacements

A total of approximately 225 cattle guards of the present stand-,
arddesign, Figure 1, have been installed on the Madera and Friant-Kern Canals.
On the Madera Canal six of the cattle guards had to be replaced in about
6 years, and to date, approximately 30 have had to be replaced on the
Friant-Kern Canal; a total of 16 percent. It is estimated that six addi-
tional guards should be replaced now on Madera Canal and the remain-
ing 12 within the next 3 to 5 years, On the Friant-Kern Canal, it is
estimated that 45 cattle guards should be replaced now, 100 in the next
3 to 5 years, and the remainder within 10 years.

The cost of repairs and replacements varies considerably with
the extent to which repairs and replacements are made. Some of the
units on the non-operating bank of the canal, which is lightly travelled,
are not subjected to excessive damage. It is estimated that these will
require about $15 per year for painting and other maintenance. The
costs range upward to $200 for complete rebuilding and replacing, using
such materials as can be salvaged from the old guards, such as the pipe
railing, bolts, etc.

From the standpoint of project operation and maintenance, the
timber and pipe cattle guard installed in accordance with the present
standard on the Madera and Friant-Kern Canal have a maximum useful
life of about 10 years. The timber members rot and eventually cause
the cattle guard to settle and fail. Treatment of the timber with wood
preservatives will prolong the life of the guard, but not to the extent
possible by the use of concrete and metal, as has been done in some
replaced units on the Central Valley Project, as discussed in a.subse-
quent paragraph.

OTHER CATTLE GUARD DESIGNS

Several drawings submitted by individual projects or regions
are being attached to this memorandum as Figures 2 to 10, inclusive.
For permanence and economy, the cattle guards constructed on the
Deschutes Project, Figure 2, are considered the best design by O&M
personnel in Region 1. The steel grill is made of 1-inch square, rein-
forcing bars and the pit frame, sills, etc., are constructed of rein-
forced concrete. Sixty-eight cattle guards constructed under Specifi-
cations No. R1-80 (May 9, 1950) cost approximately $116 each, Prior
to the construction contract, however, a large number of these cattle
guards were constructed by O&M forces on at least two projects, using
reinforcing steel bars from war or construction surplus stock. Costs
for many of these earlier installations were considerably less than $116.
Region 1 adds that even if the steel had to be purchased from new stock,
this cattle guard would be their No. 1 recommendation because of its
economy and simplicity of construction. Also some projects precast
concrete, wing guard support posts. These add to the permanence of
the installation and are fireproof. Posts and wood structures are often
damaged by fire during the weed-burning season.



Figure 4

£102" Achor bolts(2 phces) x

Weld 6 places

£112" Anchor bolts (2 places)

Weld 2¢ cig te 3°K 10%? “place,
ere anchor with bolts as shown

905 dia pipe 2

3° 0.5. dia. pipe

rh 2207
Set 3°dia post in 24 124K 12"
Concrete block as Shown,

I 4-8 SY [24219-11008



2-9 MorLWA3?.

EE

ole

3 e-@ NOILVA13 neve

1 VAISS vais anv Linde autho

Noiuyagy3

feaidurs can fo-ornene

4g) t1ys 9099308982

1-9 wvag auvne 301s

IL feN

Fs
ee organs, s42
cs z <
Bhs a 9 s NOs paong ,9,2 *
do} uo ,| pasajwoyo

ne weg 99) [7

8, nowo os 8

92a
pw toussse|

| _ pny aps" 995 saat

—e a and
SVAYNIE—_ [ORNS] ——SROHENTATE ave a

Guvnd 2711¥9 3NO ¥Od TVINILVW.30 7718

v-v NoILo3s

A

wore pansanis.rue* pan yo a6pe wos4/

pions
sioweey.

Res

(08,1 498 $180q

§80d

909 40 26p2

470 UO

16-4) 894.0000909

adoy 20/091/0%

30 diss

of sinbry



have not been constructed on many of the operating roads; however, there
is a possibility that they may be needed at some future date. For this
reason, they also are interested in the new standard design.

On the Rio Grande Project in Texas, cattle guards on canal-
operating roads are not maintained at the present time. During the CCC
Program, a few structures were built throughout the project, but these
have since been abandoned, However, some of the water users on this
project have constructed inexpensive cattle guards, and Photographs 1,
2, 3, and 4 are typical of these installations.

One California project experienced considerable difficulty in -
various locations by horses crossing on the pipe of cattle guards. In
this particular instance, the spacing of the pipes was increased until
they were almost impassable for motor vehicles, but the horses con-
tinued to pass over the cattle guard. It has been suggested that installa-
tion of a pipe grating in which the pipes are loose and can roll has been
partially effective for such an instance. It alsois suggested that wire
gates or bump gates be given consideration in lieu of cattle guards.

Many canal ditch banks are too narrow for both cattle guards
and access gates, thus all heavy maintenance equipment must pass over
the cattle guard. In these instances, a heavy-duty cattle guard must be
constructed.

General Design of Cattle Guards

There are many types of cattle guards on our projects. Many
are very elaborate, such as some of those constructed during the days of
the CCC, consisting of heavy reinforced concrete footings and foundations
and elaborate wing guards. They were expensive to construct. By con-
trast, individual landowners on our projects have built many inexpensive
cattle guards. Although not entirely suitable for some operating roads,
they have been used for this purpose.

The type of cattle guard to be used should depend primarily upon
its functional purpose; that is, the type and amount of traffic, the founda-
tion material upon which it is constructed, the narrowness of the ditch
banks, etc. In some instances, other factors must be considered. In
the South and Southwest, drifting sand that fills the pit under the guard
will influence the type of cattle guard which will best serve the purpose.

The Boise Project Board of Control in Region 1 uses some con-
crete, precast cattle guards which are made and installed in the nonirri-
gation season. They report satisfactory performance and use the pre-
casting operationas a means to economically extend their work season to
a yearly basis. A design of this type would result in a less costly instal-
lation; one that can be installed as the traffic load develops or location

demands.


cattle guard deck. level with the roadway and ramping the roadway
over the structure.

7. Provide guard posts adjacent to cattle guards to elimi-
nate damage by the passage of wide equipment over it or to prevent
equipment from approaching the cattle guard at an angle.

8. Avoid placing a cattle guard ona sharp curve. It is
difficult to approach in a manner that permits traffic to move through
it without damage to wing guards.

9. Use lighter material in construction of wing guards,
1-inch instead of 2-inch material.

10. Fabricate wing guards separately and provide for tying -
them to the guard posts and surface-guard framing by metal strips
and bolts or lag screws.

11. Avoid use of mesh-type decking material for cattle
guards. Much difficulty has been encountered in breakage of the
unsupported mesh.

GENERAL

Eliminate Cattle Guards Where Possible

The use of cattle guards on operating roads has been a common
and accepted practice where the adjacent land holders were engaged in
stock raising before the construction of a canal. As farming operations
and ownerships change during development of a project, it frequently
happens that neither cattle guards nor fences are required. It is also
noticed during construction and operation, that where cattle guards were
used in conjunction with wire gates, most of the gates remained open
practically throughout the year. This open-gate condition is an indica-
tion that the requirement for cattle guards is not as extensive as one may
think. In many locations it is believed gates could be installed and main-
tained more economically.

On many Bureau projects the construction of cattle guards has
been limited to the carriage system only. Those located on the distri-
bution systems are installed by the landowners with the location and
construction subject to Bureau approval. On other projects cattle guards
are provided only in locations where landowners or other interested agen-
cies, such as the railroad, National Park Service, etc., insist.

Cattle guards are not used on many of our projects in the Sauth-
west, particularly in the Lower Colorado River District, and by the Yuma
County Water Users' Association or the Coachella Valley County Water
District. On the Salt River Valley Project, only a few cattle guards are
employed. On other projects in the South and Southwest, cattle guards



‘saasn sayem Aq paseygund Suraq 123je |

OTAYSTp uoTyestsat Aq pajeisuy

6b LZe S dwep weg ajoyfay
260 OZP T dwep weq aoyfay
‘ulseg JaATy TInossty] yno (ayesoyny
-- «002 7~ “\SIq ‘tay Jepurjyieg f-Yysnosy} srequew uaals ry 3ut414)
‘poelortg aye1q YON] pue [auueyo [333g ON @I aanstgq snolie,A
uOT}BIO[AY (azesony
7 00z ra peoy weg uojuery,| uaats adrd dD)
sulseg JeaTYy TanosstM} = ON} ,,2 8,91] T9qMUTL OT eanBta| 40-12 X 40-18
e€L S6h T dwep weg szeqry| sisod
rulseg JaaTYy TINOSST] = Ppoom yet #09) JequiTL g aunBIT] 0-18 X ,,E-1€%
-- 897 Te yeuep eirape
:AaTIeA Tera s9quarL [rez #09] 83019N0D € aansT] 01k X O2T
“paplam - spzend
pue yep ut seq
-- 9IT 89 saynyosaq 1293s aaenbs ,, J a}as19u0D Zaammnstg| eb X 8-18
Lip 0Sz z JeueD sapaeg yyOOoJ@s1I0OH (azts ut
€&e 0s@ or yeueD sapeag YyIOoJ@SIOH paonpey)
:uosdwoy.L Btq-opesojoo alaqurty adid 24 sequiy T aansta | Tl h X 078
(xoadde) soe P6L uUday-jUeIIg pue e1apeyy
‘katleA Teaqa;
Lob 007 L JeueD sapeaeg YOO] es10H
SLOTS oot b yeuea
1apIaq YI2ID MOTITM
suosdwoyy stgq-opeso0joD}
-- 00r L TeueD puey}inopD
-- oos $} T yeueD puey}in0D (udtsaq “pis)
iulseg Jaaiy Tatiosst] sequity, | edid 29 sequiy J aanstg | 0°18 X ,, 2016
pun/spig) WuQ | peseid jeueg pue yoaloug spazenr yoeq; aeweiy (sauna (ayeutxouddy)
ysamoy g] aad | szun |__._2 PIS Uq_ | peyoee aag)} uorsuawiqg
eseisAy] SOD juequn jo uojjonajsu0D usiseg yoeg

(Azeuiuins sty} s0y payszodaa sy) |

GHTIVLSNI SGUVAD ATLLVO 40 SLSOO AINOS

Il

aTdVL


bids were from $400 to $1, 100, low to high respectively. One of the
cattle guards of standard design is shown in Photograph 6.

Suggested Design Improvements in Present Standard

Regardless of the surface type of cattle guard made standard, it
is believed that a lighter material can be used in construction of the wing
guards, thus reducing the cost. 1- by 6-inch lumber is believed suffi-
cient for wing guard construction in place of the 2-inch material shown
on our present standard Drawing No. 40-D-4383, Figure 1. Italsois sug-
gested that the wing guards be fabricated as separate units and tied to
the guard posts and surface-guard framing by metal stripping and bolts
or lag screws.

Heavy damage to cattle guards results from the necessary use
of the operating road by contractor's equipment, as well as farmer's
trucks and equipment. The damage is usually caused by the vehicle not
passing properly through the guard, but at an angle or too close toa side,
The result is a crushed and destroyed wing guard, Photograph 7. The
damage is often the result of carelessness in centering vehicles as they
enter the guard or the necessity for making a sharp turn just before enter-
ing the cattle guard. In this latter, locating a cattle guard in a sharp
curve on a canal bank or too close to a farm bridge, where it is diffi-
cult to turn onto the bridge, contributes to a mamtenance hazard.

A curb or post of concrete, angle iron, or heavy timber at the
base of each side guard, and strong enough to withstand wheel impact,
would be especially desirable in some places to protect: the side guard,
One suggestion in this respect, Photograph 8, consists of 7- by 7-inch
redwood posts 18 inches high being installed at either end of each guard,
painted white and possibly fitted with red reflecting tape to act as guides
for approaching vehicles. The posts are made of surfaced redwood, 4
feet long. The posts are buried 23 feet in the ground and extend 18 inches
above the surface. Location of the posts is indicated on Figure 1a which is
a marked print of Drawing 40-D-4383. It is believed use of these or other
types of guard posts will cut the damage to cattle guards to a minimum.

Another suggested improvement in connection with the present
standard design is that of providing that the bottom of the stringers be
set level with the normal top of the operating road, and the road ramped
up to the cattle guard‘on both sides. Such a procedure would provide
adequate drainage, obviate the necessity for the 24-inch deep pit, .and
reduce costs of construction. This type of design also would be of use
on some of ourprojects in the South and Southwest, where considerable
trouble has been experienced with drifting sand filling the cattle guard
pit. However, if the pit is eliminated some provision must be made to
facilitate periodic cleaning of the space between bars.


Photo 7 - Damaged wing guard on standard cattle
guard on Delta-Mendota Canal.

Photo 8 - Redwood posts have been installed to
protect the wing guards on standard
cattle guards on the Delta-Mendota
Canal to prevent type of damage shown
in photograph 7, above.



LAST COPY - DO NOT REMOVE

jan

Department of the Interior

Bureau of Reclamation

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES

RELEASE NO. 13
July, August and September 1955

LAST COPY - DO NOT REMOVE

CONTENTS

Cattle Guards on Canal Operating Roads

LAST COPY - DO NOT REMOVE


used throughout the Project. No drawing of this guard is available.
Constructed entirely of timber, operating personnel have found that it
was desirable to modify the standard deck by substituting nine 3-inch
by 6-inch planks for the eleven 2-inch by 6-inch planks. With the one
modification, the cattle guard has proved to be very satisfactory under
operating conditions, and its continued use is planned.

Cattle guards installed by the Bureau on the Tucumcari Project in
1946 have been in continuous service since that time. A number of
these structures were built in accordance with Figure 7 (Drawing 257-
505-410). In some cases where the foundation material appeared to be
unstable, concrete was substituted for the timber sills, bulkheads, and
stringers. Most of these structures have proven very satisfactory and
have required very little maintenance even while accommodating the travel
of heavy equipment.

All cattle guards in use on the San Marcial Division of the Rio
Grande Channelization are Type H-15, as shown on Figure 8 (Drawing
163-D-56). These structures were constructed shortly after the first
of this calendar year. There has been little opportunity to make any
observations. However, it has been noticed that similar type cattle
guards in use elsewhere are experiencing some trouble with drifting
sand filling the pits. Figure 9 (Drawing No. 23-503-4051), shows the con-
struction details of some cattle guards previously installed on the Rio
Grande Project by the CCC organization. Most of these structures now
have been abandoned.

Region 6 has also installed cattle guards similar to that shown
in Figure 8. One installation of this type in which the deck grill was 23
feet, 3 inches in length was installed for $494. 60.

LESS COSTLY CATTLE GUARDS

The ''Bed-Spring" Type

In the March 1953 issue of the Reclamation Era, Mr. Theodore
Nelson, Chief, O&M Division, Region 1; illustrated and discussed a
practical, cheap, portable cattle guard fabricated from light metal strips
and small coil springs, mounted upon a tubular frame. A photograph
from the Reclamation Era has been reproducedfor reference and is in-
cluded in this memorandum as Photograph 11. Much interest has been
shown in this cattle guard.

The Klamath and Vale Projects report installations of the "bed-
spring" cattle guard and believe they are satisfactory, but that they have
not been in use long enough to determine their permanence or the amount
of maintenance that will be required. Several field offices believe the de-
vice especially practical and easily made standard with a few improvements.
If, under constant use, annual replacement might be necessary, however,
its original low cost may offset this.



Figure 3 (Drawing No. 214-219-11008, titled "Madera Canal, cattle
guard for operating roads"), is considered by Region 2 as not only a
worthy alternate for other cattle guards in the San Joaquin Valley Dis-
trict, but distinctly superior in some respects to many of them. Main-
tenance has been considerably less. Those installed on the Madera Canal
have required no maintenance other than painting of the wooden side guards.
The extra width permits the passage of pieces of maintenance equipment,
impossible with the narrower cattle guards. The Madera Canal design
with concrete and used rail costs an average of $468 per installation. It
is planned that all of the standard design timber and pipe rail guards will
eventually be replaced with the Madera design, as the presently installed
ones deteriorate and need replacement. To further reduce O&M and re-
placement costs, a side guard assembly constructed of the deck pipe from
the older cattle guards, Figure 4, is suggested.

A more permanent and costlier type of cattle guard is that utiliz-
ing railroad rails to support road traffic, at the same time offering mini-
mum tread for stock. This type of installation is used extensively for full
highway width, especially on hard-surfaced highways. The Salt River
Project, Arizona, uses a cattle guard of this type, patterned after that
used by the Arizona State Highway Department, Figure 5 (Drawing B-14-52).
In recommending this guard, it is believed most practicable to use rail of
at least 90-pound weight. Spacing of the rails of this size, 6 inches on
center, affords a space of approximately 3% inches between rail heads and
is sufficient to carry traffic without wheel or tire damage and enough to
discourage stock crossing. The use of rails can obviate the necessity for
having a pit under the guard.

The Klamath Project reports that cattle guards constructed using
23-inch standard pipe with a timber pit, as shown on the Standard Design
Drawing is quite satisfactory on roads carrying light traffic. During the
period that the CCC's were on the Klamath Project, some cattle guards
were constructed with precast concrete beams forming the pit. The ccc
cattle guards were constructed with timber deck gratings which were not
satisfactory. The timber was broken up under the impact of operating
equipment. Project forces believe that use of precast concrete beams
for construction of the pit was a good idea and has advantages of perma-
nence and simplicity, and that a foundation of concrete instead of wood is
almost essential on ditch banks that are too narrow for both a cattle guard
and an access gate and at a location where all heavy maintenance equip-
ment must pass over the guard. Supports for movement of draglines or
other heavy equipment require sturdy construction.

The "Provo Reservoir Canal cattle guard," Figure 6 (Drawing
No. 244-408-288), used on the Provo River Project, has proved to be
very successful. The "A" frame wings are of 2-inch, pipe-welded con-
struction. The deck consists of 10 pieces of 2-inch pipe, and the frame~
work for the pit is creosoted timber. Two views of a typical installation
are given in Photographs 9 and 10.

Cattle guards installed on the Uncompahgre Project in accord-
ance with Washington, D.C., Standard Drawing No. 29-28 still are


Size
6x8
6x10
6x12

75" x8
7'5""x 10
7T'5" x 12
8x8
8x10
8x12

Size
6x10
6x12

7'5" x 8
7'5" x 10
7'5" x12
8x8
8x10
8x12
8x14

Size
57x 10
7'5" x12
7'5"" x14

8x10

8x12
8x14

The following list shows the
weights of steel used in the manufacture
of the "Powder River" cattle guard

"Powder River" Ranch Guard

Understructure
4--6" standard channels
5--6" standard channels
6--6" standard channels
4--7'' standard channels
5--7" standard channels
6--7" standard channels
4--7" standard channels
5--7" standard channels
6--7" standard channels

Decking
10 ga. formed rails

10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails
10 ga. formed rails

"Powder River" Heavy Duty Guard

Understructure
7--7T 9.8 channels
8--7" 9,8 channels
6--7" 9.8 channels
7--7T" 9,8 channels
8--7" 9.8 channels
6--7" 9.8 channels
7--T" 9,8 channels
8--7" 9,8 channels
9--7" 9,8 channels

Decki
3/16 Tormedrails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails
3/16 formed rails

"Powder River" Extra Heavy Duty Guard

Understructure
8--7" 12.25 channels
9--7" 12,25 channels

10--7" 12,25 channels
8--7" 12,25 channels
9--7"' 12,25 channels

10--7" 12,25 channels

Decking (Rails
3 or ‘ormed
3/16 or 1/4 formed
3/16 or 1/4 formed
3/16 or 1/4 formed
3/16 or 1/4 formed
3/16 or 1/4 formed

Figure 15

GPO s3860



Suz2vas. BuWtd woKDWY
pu fierpowsowut ee

492) yo 21095. puey 44412 pucy syb2

T 7 wwe gevnd 3015
9 W190 aves 4Mior oMWnS

poderensp 40N, peaejeste s0N
Da NorsvAgy2 oo MoluwazT2

TwNw? vazoWi

fF) spsfoud
eed By.

ape eg yt 28M

S7L0N
W494 001

"ioe

#91008

341 0096 (ones pen)

woe 923009

won 109 ove 404)
S3ILENYNO ORLYWIL SI
tayon por | |

a 04 20 bof
G4
| -- wong pions 2015 b46
me
eam \\\ esovsem bve,se-2
douse uot paong | “5 rar
tnip 109 ~oysuy | 267)
et v
@ 4
4 pr.

109 mae
pur oq 02005

p09 pavné ay 104
Ses Pwo Se

tous ol puong

9 2ey2Ur ain

YWwisaivn 40700

Taner



FOCE-$0I-2il|erwte Arne Noo3a0‘aN7e | ES
“See sq aasenday pst empime BS

asomneory oenaunorze RI NVvId ve
PUL CIR_ aztuwons 247 waved [BS

Jef oieoua st
ty

TNAD 17918 gy!

GaND TILLVD ININWWAIT
NODISO - 425fOHE $34NHISIA
Noun 1224 40 YING

MORIN, WLIO Inimiend7a
SELS Ghuinn

4334 40 37¥295

s yoo 2 i ° 1

auroy vers pub ys
PIP 104 BiOg40 S2u/0d 42040940 F2bP2 mt B/OM

SILON

gal %4 BORING,

oe ESS

-swong soa
VW NOLL IIS 42 suewonssa in pub

s7bus03 40 £109 40h gy #,

a a
“
aaa pug nazsow uo pm
mays 82 puag priv) paonbayy40~, 7
Sous ute ese pronto
Low. soso poe anger.

dF

As

2704.4 wom sdouss orn, $1,2 +
54199 t0y2Ur LOS y

. fete, Aire
“9230 10g BALE, AR
WVLIO AVALS
ioe — fe ie fe
+ ee ;

fanpre

ohn
ab yap
Whur ues 0.8 sibod Jy b0p

7

1

1909 #9 wrdo oir 2 1 yung meson, wos; proabs 709 wom
OE 00 bea afb abel canaries

53800 aif s8/6n0g pares, gp"

40 dey 40 "wp ui e350 UPI PAY usa SM

Twas Jo 7718

Fenty



As previously stated, many projects operate without cattle
guards. Some need none other than those provided by the water users
themselves. In many instances, it is believed a lower-cost, although
less durable, bump gate or wire gate ina farmer's field might suffice,
even at a sacrifice of convenience

Although it is possible that less expensive, light-weight type
cattle guards will suffice in some locations, provided a gate is installed
for passage of heavy equipment and traffic, there are locations on our
canal systems that require a heavy-duty type cattle guard. Design of a
single standard to meet the many conditions enumerated will be difficult.

STANDARD DESIGN DRAWING NO. 40-D-~-4383

The standard cattle guard, Drawing No. 40-D-4383, Figure 1,
is reported by most projects on which thestructure has been installed to
be very satisfactory. The principal objection to the present standard is
that bids on this design have been very high. However, from an O&M
standpoint, as previously stated, the original cost may not be the im-
portant cost.

Cost of Present Standard Design

A detail study of costs has not been made. However, some in~
formation has been submitted, and has been summarized in Table II of
the appendix. With reference to this table it is apparent that often the
reason for the high bids for construction of cattle guards is that only a
few cattle guards are installed under one contract. For example, the
low bid for one gate in the Second Section of the Courtland Canal, fur=
nished and installed, was $500. On another, where seven were required,
the low bid per unit was $400.

In an attempt to reduce the cost of the H5 loading cattle guard
shown on the standard drawing and still retain the design standards, one
District office reduced the area of the cattle guard built. Instead of pro=
viding a structure with a 9 foot, 103-inch width and 8-foot length, drawings
were prepared for an 8-foot width and 4-foot, 11-inch length. Ten of these
cattle guards were constructed on the Horsetooth Feeder Canal of the
Colorado-Big Thompson Project and two on the Horsetooth Supply conduit
of the same.project. Bids varied from $250 to $800 from low to high,
respectively, in both instances. Typical of this redesigned cattle guard
is the installation shown in Photograph 5. However, since this canal has
been in operation, O&M forces have objected to its narrow width. They
all too frequently have had to replace the side guard assembly.

When Willow Creek Canal, another feature of the same project
discussed above, was constructed, the standard cattle guard was built
with bid prices for four cattle guards being $1, 000 and $1, 150, low to
high respectively. On the Flatiron Section of the Horsetooth Feeder
Canal, another feature of the same project, the South Platte River Dis-~
trict continued to use the standard cattle guard, and for sevencattle guards,

5



Photo 1 - Wooden deck on cattle guard installed by
Water Users on Rio Grande Project, New
Mexico-Texas.

Photo 2 - Cattle guard constructed of heavy pipe and
installed by Water Users on the Rio Grande
Project, New Mexico-Texas,


tb9S-10L-82E |15-9/-6 __“waaN‘v TONVIONL
VRAIS RD 7 WL OObadY ]77y -aaHOIHD
D777 yy py esansnmoray ~~" -azover

BN 4 Saat mans ~ ear“ naved

SUVLIG GAWND FTWLLVI
eHOAKASIY NOSNYMS LY
GVO ALNNOD 40 NOILVIOTIY

VSVY@IN-NOISIAIO 2901 BNVD-NYMHINTY /|
LIT ONS NISYG IAIN 1NOSSIN
‘Z NO1D3Y-NOLLYMY 1938 40 NY IHN?
BON FHL 40 LNIRLWIO
SUVS" OFLNA

QNIMVHD FAODTH

“edleys /ENfon.Y4S 10 [fed

1

‘RySRigoy
Yel Yp4ON 'fuiediung 2425 OfTY AbD
fig painjoepnuew pdenb 9/4402 Of pe

yoryso4 pou 4Ng seus 2q /eYs P1eNb 2/4;29
“SIS Of Pemas2¢ 40 poyids

SUS6ULYS Pie SIBBUIA4S Of PEPIIM 3g //eYS Sodio
punes fyesmnponys

4) Pesn ag flew susbuty4s pur edi /249U! PIS/)

“BupRey OH. OHS ¥ 44 Paublsep 2q of psenb 371429

SFLON

WY NOILIFIS

pPYL27Ip se ‘pomyins
; punetb jeuib/4IO,
mye
~All eee et —
‘F< STTUSTOO OOOO DOU a

“BPIS Y2@= Lo, s/
‘xo1dde Ww SeyzRoidde ‘speID

“sadrd

ale
peoyies 9g 0) ss2Bui4c 7

CL

h

ay a a a

WIS 4BquIE P84B24) ,0;6%,9%.9--"

NV Ta

<47
pecs seerne wing 3)

usomjog e2ucies/7,g-xorde [oe- 4 I IIL} tt ry}
Yim pozeds ediy,2 10 ,2¢/-/ WII tt
— i Se im
herr} | |
Keone ,0-8 a ae
<J v

Ol eanBi 4



Figure Il

FARMERS

‘Flying L’ Autogate Features

AND RANCHERS

PLATEAU TOP

“Plateau Top” cross bars—beveled for
extra strength—hold up to 15 tons. The
flat top provides a smooth ride at all

Rounded corners protect both
auto tires and livestock from injury. All
joints — except special locking device
that secures the center cleaning section
—are electrically welded to prevent
them from working loose. Cross bars
made of special high strength steel—
won't collect moisture and rust out.
Proper spacing keeps livestock from
crossing.

FIRM CHANNEL BEAMS

Four channel beams give heavy duty
support to the Plateau Top cross bars.
(Five beams insure “no-give”support in
Targer sizes.) The beams are sufficient-
ly below the cross bars to prevent live-
stock from crossing on them. Beams are
deep for strength, and are sufficiently
wide to insure lasting welds to the cross

SOLID ENDS
AND SIDES

‘This “closed” construction keeps dirt
from sifting into pit. Installation is easy:
dirt or concrete can be banked up
‘against ends without special forms.

For an especially wide gate,

two or more Autogates are used.

STANDARD SIZES

6 in. long—8 ft. wide
1% in. long—8 ft. wide
Qin. 9 ft, wide
Qin. wide
Sin

Heavy Duty Gates

HEAVY DUTY SIZES

ingers on
Tor 4 138

gatede

Outside stringers .. -
Inside string
BarSe sess

‘A new gate designed for use w

where stock

prac

Au
ning horses.

pgate especially des
The edges

Top cross bars are fl
duce the space betw
horse's hoof will not slip #

The Corral Gate and the Horseguard
are available in all sizes in both standard
and heavy duty types


Photo 12 -

Spring-suspended cattle guard
constructed from landing mats by
O&M forces. Used ona lateral on
Kittitas Division--Yakima Project.

October 28, 1952
Region 1

Photo No, P-33-100-14

Photo 13 -

Spring-suspended cattle guard--
showing how guides at base of side
posts eliminate swing without ob-
structing the floating action of the
mat when car goes over.

October 28, 1952
Region 1

Photo No, P-33-100-15

Photo 14 -

Spring-suspended cattle guard.
A pit is not required, but a
covering paint should add to its
effectiveness.

October 28, 1952
Region 1

Photo No. P-33-100-16


CATTLE GUARDS ON CANAL OPERATING ROADS

There is a considerable difference of opinion among O&M and
other project personnel regarding the Bureau's standard design for
cattle guards on canal-operating roads. In numerous instances, they
have designed and installed cattle guards which they believe are better
from a first-cost and maintenance viewpoint. In an effort to reconcile
the expressed difference of opinion, the subject was discussed with the
Chief Designing Engineer and designers in the Denver Office. Ina
memorandum to the Division of Irrigation Operations, the Chief De-
signing Engineer suggested a survey be made of the cattle guards in-
stalled on canal-operating roads on Bureau-constructed projects. Re-
sults of the survey were to be made available to the designers in their
consideration of a new or improved standard design for a more satis-
factory cattle guard.

In accordance with the above, a letter was prepared and for-
warded to Regional Directors, requesting their assistance and com-
ments on the subject, All responded. In addition, suggestions were
received directly from some Bureau and water-user-operated proj-
ects. A list of projects from which material on the subject has been
contributed is given in Table 1 of the appendix. Our thanks to the re-
gions, projects, and water users for their cooperation.

There are, no doubt, other manufacturers of cattle guards in
the proximity of our projects. Just recently, we were informed that
a "Powder River" cattle guard is manufactured in Baker, Oregon, by
the Commercial Welding Company. The study was made on cattle guards
in service on Bureau projects, as reported by the field offices, and only
the information received was included in the original study. However,
a drawing of the ''Powder River" guard has been added as Figure No. 13,
and the price list, weight and bill of materials as Figures 14 and 15.
The Design Division believes that the 8- by 10-foot extra heavy duty guard
can be modified to withstand an H-10 loading by using top rails formed
of 1/4-inch plate, 7-inch by 12. 25-pound end channels, and six 7-inch
by 20-pound intermediate I-beams. This construction would represent
a weight increase of approximately 350 pounds over the 1, 844 pounds
specified by the manufacturer.

Costs of the cattle guards given in the original memornadum
and requoted herein, except for the ''Powder River" guard price list,
Figure 14, recently received, reflect the costs of about two years ago
(1953). They are subject to correction. However, they will serve for
a comparison of costs and should so be used.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

One contributor states, "no cattle guard is an unqualified suc-
cess,'' and another that they, "constitute a continual source of mainte-
nance." In the interest of economy, many feel that the number of cattle
guards installed on our canal-operating roads can be reduced. Never-

theless, it is agreed by all that cattle guards are a definite need under

1



Some Features

Standard gate will carry over 10-ton load.
Heavy-duty gate will carry over 15-ton load.
Delivered ready for installation.
Two or more gates can be clamped together for wider roadways.
Corral gates, horse guards, and special sizes available on
special order.
Detachable steel end wings available.
End wings easily attached with only two bolts.
Special brilliant orange paint for:
Protection against rust.
Attracting attention of traffic or stock.
Attractive pleasing appearance.
Requires only a simple, flat top, low-cost construction, or
can be set on concrete, rock, or timber foundation or base.
Temporary installations can be set directly on ground.
Keeps dirt fill out of pit.
All smooth rounded corners.
Reduces injury hazard to livestock.
Will not cut or bruise tires.
Flat top 2 inches wide for smooth ride at all speeds.
Open on bottom to prevent accumulation of dirt or sand and other
debris which collects moisture and causes rusting.
Center section opens by releasing locking device.
Gate pit can be cleaned easily and quickly by one man with shovel.
No tools needed for installation.
Can be easily moved from place to place without loss or damage
to gate.

One commercially-manufactured cattle guard installed on an ex-
perimental basis is not satisfactory for the reason that it uses 4-inch,
heavy steel mesh over 6-inch by 4-inch I-beams. The beams are spaced
in such a manner that small-diameter wheels, such as the front wheels on
farm tractors, bear directly on the mesh causing it to fail.

WIRE GATES OR BUMP GATES IN LIEU OF CATTLE GUARDS

All cattle guards have been eliminated and wire gates substi-
tuted on some of our projects because of restricted funds. This sub-
stitution has resulted in a substantial saving, with wire gates usually
costing from $15 to $25.

When design data were being prepared for the St. Vrainand Boulder
Supply Canal of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, the question of
cattle guards arose because of the large number of them involved, 30
in the St. Vrain and 45 in the Boulder, 75 in all. It was decided in this
case that barbed wire gates could be substituted for the cattle guards.

Many believe that serious consideration might well be given
to the use of bump gates in lieu of cattle guards. A gate of this type

12


APPENDIX

14



Regional Director, Salt Lake City, Utah

Regional Director, Amarillo, Texas

Regional Director, Billings, Montana

Regional Director, Denver, Colorado

Assistant Commissioner and Chief En-
gineer, Denver Federal Center, Denver,
Colorado

* KKK K

ii


Guo} 6.1 2442.7 @ 400

6101,9.6 21.9

a neg

Guiddys adid yuonaud 0}

sijem

orebe p15 saul

Uo sadid nay paddoap

$24

HOF PapeeY 94% ~

masta
—

4g + —__—_.01-€ ————.01-

0-01 ~

on [506-FOR-<7 warove | aso
©
qe
a 2 crownrons 0
8) Lee NOILVYAI13
AWM 40 SLH9IY JO ONION3S BOF eve avLol 22yeq g uo | 4 498 54809 add xB yoq Guo] ye 428 adig
wos WKS -2 did 4
auvno FLLv> osz
Svani-09nW AON ~ 129/04 2GN¥ED O18 as-¥ 3did
wouvmvrae. 10 neane %
vowwa 20 "INaMLB¥sI6 Vl eee did 8
00 zi } _ 8
OK -6 Idid
09 9 | 942% S1108 |
al 2 sqlov oO 9% Suva
LOS 1+ Me 31VIS Ove kyo micas 9-79] #4 SUve
sso} so _§ [sows £ LNIW39
SauvA D1enD VI 413N9NOD
awioi| ova |y3ewon | Noirdi42sze
gqayinoaa IvisalvN aurypeus Jo} ponousssfse> oq
Uue2 sjsod yey) 08 apis [e9je} 40 eue> UO
0d Jj 2219009 us sanzajs adid W285 287) -31ON
vVouVv NO!|L935 NVo.d
imal
0-S 4 {

=" p jerou
2 920409 ut
dsoaicania ons



Photo 9 - Typical pit type cattle guard used on the
operating road of the Provo Reservoir
Canal, Provo River Project, Utah

Photo 10 - Close up of typical pit type cattle guard
above. Deck and "A" frames are con-
structed of 2" pipe. "A" frame is all
welded construction, Pit frame work
is creosoted timber.


INTRODUCTION

This is Release No. 13 of the Operation and Maintenance
Equipment and Procedures Bulletin. It is being devoted to a study
made of cattle guards on operating projects constructed by the Bureau
of Reclamation,

The study was made to obtain operating experience for use in
improving the design of the Bureau's present standard cattle guards,
a photograph of which is shown on the cover, or for use in the develop-
ment of a new standard design; one that would meet with the approval
of all concerned.

The summary of the study presented was prepared over a
year ago and was given limited distribution as an office memorandum.
Requests for additional copies of the memorandum by those offices that
received it and their suggestions that the material contained would be
of interest to operating projects, prompted us to release the summary
as an O&M Bulletin.

The study was made in the Denver Office of the Assistant
Commissioner and Chief Engineer by the Division of Irrigation Opera-
tions at the request of the Chief Designing Engineer. No recommenda-
tions have been made, but if one conclusion is to be drawn from the in-
formation obtained, it would be that it is doubtful if a single standard
design will meet all situations or operating conditions to be encountered.

The Operation and Maintenance Equipment and Procedures
Bulletin is published quarterly in the Office of the Assistant Commis-
sioner and Chief Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal
Center, Denver, Colorado. It is prepared for publication by the Di-
vision of Irrigation Operations from material supplied for the most
part by the regional, project and field offices. The Bulletin is circu-
lated for the benefit of project operation and maintenance people, with
its principal purpose being to serve as a medium of exchange of operat-
ing information. Reference to a trade name does not constitute an en-
dorsement of a particular product, and omission of any commercially
available item does not imply discrimination against any manufacturer.
It is the hope that labor-saving devices, less costly procedures, and
more serviceable equipment developed by the resourceful water users
will be a step toward commercial development of equipment and mate-
rials for use on our projects in a continued effort to reduce costs and
increase operating efficiency.

If additional copies of this issue or other issues of the Bul-
letin are desired, they may be obtained by writing any of the following
offices of the Bureau of Reclamation:

Regional Director, Boise, Idaho
Regional Director, Sacramento, California
Regional Director, Boulder City, Nevada



DBLAD BALIN OO)
3

NaIsSad Sawanvss

sey. suasit WAL NGLVA AATIVA ASIA WAR Lvs

Gog aso “Gasinae]

I

BWA

ONLI.

am 9%
TV Ae XK

*MOVLINAISNOD: d3d73M mw 4

LON

iz Bawlooss sv na21¢ ane

SFU NS ES SF Br GBINS

NIE GAM 0501 ¥ Ox, H)

GAONY 01 G2G73N) SACHIN 4.2/1

Adlujom) oy

SIADNV 0501 KPA VLY.S

ANG 32a Ney

~_DNOY 20-01 Aiwa CHivyersz

”

2HO7 2B 8 GHV3G G102 M3

+ alu fed| oto |

a
]

% AInA Aa

NOWAa5S3G

GISE5)

“are | Wail)

TShiviaaivu 30 ie,

3 ®@ Grva 2

}.———30

& eanbi 4



Figure 14

COMMERCIAL WELDING COMPANY
TENTH & WASHINGTON STREETS
BAKER, OREGON

Manufacturers of "Powder River" Ranch Equipment

Distribution points Telephone: JAckson
in the western states 3-3654
3-3655

THE "POWDER RIVER" CATTLE GUARDS
A guard for every job

The following prices f.o.b. distribution points.

"Powder River" Ranch Guards "Powder River" Heavy Duty
Size Weight Price Size Weight Price
Cx 8 —s60_ BU. 00 tx 10 “Toss 154.00

6x10 711 103. 00 6x12 1212 170, 00
6x12 906 132.00 7T'5" x 8 1063 150. 00

75" x 8 720 105.00 715" x 10 1239 175.00

75" x 10 979 142.00 75" x 12 1474 205.00

75" x 12 1082 157.00 8x8 1095 154.00

8x8 771 112.00 8x10 1330 188.50
8x10 1017 148.00 8x12 1568 220.00
8x12 1158 168.00 8x14 1817 256.50

"Powder River" Extra Heavy Duty Guards

Size Weight Weight Price Price
3/16 Tormed rail 1/Frermed 3/16 formed rail 1/4 formed

75" x 10 1475 1704 205.00 240.00
715" x 12 1711 1988 239. 50 278.50
75x 14 1933 2257 272, 50 315.50
8x10 1573 1844 222.50 259.50
8x12 1820 2144 257.50 299, 50
8x14 2066 2444 287,50 329.50

All above guards are formed having a plateau top. Clean out sections
in every guard, Detachable end wings available @ $16.50 per set.
Special sizes built on request.

Prices subject to change without notice.



ov TvL30-avuds ONY LNIor G¥wnD 1-9 mv3@ auvne 301s

Norwaa7a
(oH) 08 aig £2.

pi39-01942

ozone

2m) dont goo 9009.20

NOILVAaT3

(c-4 p00 bron

cena 0) 8

© (9 pu0 6-9) 510 pr

THAIS —[OENTS] —“SHGISNIRTE aE
duvn9 37L1v9 3NO HOS TVINSLYW 407718

(6-4) 1804.0-44949

ainbiy


It appears the "bed-spring" cattle guard would be satisfactory
for an installation whichaccommodates traffic at low speeds and of limited
weight. It is hard to visualize the practicability of the device for passing
heavy equipment, where the frequency of crossing the guard is high, or
where it must be crossed by tractors with or without lugs or pads. Pro-
viding gates alongside the cattle guard for passage of the heavier equip-
ment would make the "bed-spring" type cattle guard more feasible.

Suggested changes in design for the "bed-spring" cattle guard
include: Need for a greater width than 50 inches--72 inches or more would
be a more practical width; metal wickets driven into the ground over the
pipe framework to keep the device from moving while being crossed; at-
tachment of the framework pipe to adjacent wooden side posts in order to
minimize movement of the guard as well as prevent theft. The Klamath
Project also reports that the springs were too short and would not stand
up under the strain of many passing vehicles, suggesting that the guard
would be more satisfactory if springs of suitable length at the end of the
steel straps were provided.

In country where there is fairly heavy winter snow, the perform-
ance of the cattle guard would be questionable. On irrigation ditch banks
this need not be a problem. The guard is light. It could be lifted out of
position and a gate used during the winter time when the ditch banks are
subject only to travel in connection with maintenance work.

The Kittitas Reclamation District is using a spring-suspended
grill made of surplus steel landing mats for a guard, Photographs 12, 13, and
14, The inexpensive war surplus landing mats are suspended 3 to 4 inches
above the ground by use of a single spring on each side of the 90-inch by
120-inch mat. The springs, which are only 10 inches by 1 inch in size,
connect a triangularly braced strap iron, welded to the mat, with the top
of a side post. A guide is attached at the base of each post. Thus the mat
is permitted to move only in an up and down position. Use to date is limited
and the Project believes some improvements may be needed. However,
the cost of construction and installation is substantially less than the con-
ventional pit-type guards.

Autogates

There are other low-cost cattle guards available such as 'Capi-
tal", "C&P", and "Flying L" autogates, manufactured on a commercial
basis. All three of these cattle guards are in general use in the Kansas
River District; however, no one cattle guard has been chosen as a stand-
ard. These guards are manufactured by C and P Autogate Company, North
Platte, Nebraska; Capital Bridge Company (Capital cattle guard), Lincoln,
Nebraska; and Lincoln Steel Works (Flying L), Lincoln, Nebraska.

The C and P Autogate has been used extensively on the Cambridge
and Superior Canal Systems and on the County Road Relocation at Trenton
Dam. So far as is known no manufacturers' data or literature is available.
Figure 10 is a recorddrawing submitted by the Kansas River Proje¢ts Office.

10



will serve both to provide for passage of equipment too wide for a cattle
guard and provide a means of keeping stock from straying, without delay-
ing the ditch riders.

Adoption of bump gates would necessitate some education of the
farmers. In one experimental installation of this kind some opposition
was met, based on the fear that cattle, particularly, could operate the
bumper trigger.

13