Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-12-03
AS TO THE RIVER.


AS TO THE RIVER.
We have received the following ie'-
ter from Mr.. E. C. Vose, Section Dlrec-
tor of the Weather Bureau at ParKers-
burg, upon which we desire to make
some good natured remarks:
PUBLIC BUILDING.
"PARKERSBURG. Nov. 80, l9oo'
ITO the Editor of the Register, - ,.o,,r
"Sir:-Referring to the artlcle IN yU 1
issue of November g. 1900, our PTeu!c1
tions of River Stage Were Nerlned' anu
esneciaily to this statement in the last
naragraph of that article, The difference
In the stage between this city ana fllts
burg is probably less than ever pelots,
/ desire to invite your attention 10 ING ne
fact that as compared with any stage OIL
n feet and over at P:ttsburg or the Gam
since January, 1884, the highest water at
lower. In the flood of 1884, with cr e. :
of 319 feet at Pittsburg, the rise was "a. .
feet higher, or 46.5 feet; In the nood %
1891, with a stage of 3O3 at Pittsourg' the
rise at Wheeling was 14.3 feet or 44.o
feet; in the last flood of 1898, with a stage
of exactly 81 feet at Pittsburg, the rise
at Wheeling was 1873 feet Also with
crest of q feet and over at Pittsurg, since
January 1884. the average rise is ten feet
at Wheeling as the following Will snow !:
In February, 1885, the crest was 20 leet
at Pittsburg, and the rise was 81 feet, or
800 feet; in March, 1890, with stage OIL
225 feet at Pittsurg, the rise was exactly
10 feet or 325 feet Even with a crest
at Pittsurg of less than q feet, the rise
following: In April, 1896, with a stage. of
203 at the dam, the crest at WheennS
was 96 feet higher; in May, 1880, with
crest of 1875 feet at the dam, the rise was
so feet; and in May 1893, with stage OF
1910 feet at the DAM the rise was ll5 feet
at Wheeling.
1T will thus be seen that the present
rise was considerably lower than the
average, which IS about 10 feet, Tor d
stage of 27.0 feet at Pittsburg, and con-
siderably lower than the average Tor a
stage of - feet at Pittsburg, which IS
about 10 feet The explanation which
you, make as to the cause does not appear
to be tenabe as the fall was very SLOW at
Wheeling and the water in the Great
Kanawha was holding up well up to
Il therefore consider that Wheeling
was very fortunate in escaping with
such slight rise, when previous flood
periods would certainly warrant the pre-
diction of a considerably higher stage.
Very respectfully,
'E. C. VOSE,
Section Director"
With all possible regard for Mr.. Vose,
we don't quite understand what he is
driving at. He goes into details re-
garding previous floods, and falls into
error, notably in his citation of the
food of 1884. He gives it as ''31.9 at
Pittsburg and 46.5 at Wheeling"
whereas it was 1876 at Pittsburg, 1872
1t Steubenville, and 524 at Wheeling.
There were 402 inches of water at Pitts
)urg in 1884, while at Wheeling there
we're 628 inches. The difference is 226
inches, or more than IS feet. So much
or 1884. Errors may be found in the
>ther computations, but it isn't worth
While going over them.
The trouble with the signal service
officials in the late flood was, appar-
emily, twofold: They had faulty data
in the first place, and they became
little ratified because all the upper
rivers were coming out, for the first
time, to amount to anything, since
1884. The observer at Pittsburg was
worthless. He predicted that the rise
would stop at midnight, whereas it
didn't stop until ten hours afterwards.
That was calculated to throw people
off their guard. The observer at Par
6ersburg, the afternoon after the crest
G the rise passed Pittsburg, predicted
maximum of thirty-nine feet at
Wheeling, with a possibility of forty
feet" The Wheeling maximum was
81. The trouble appears to have been
that these observers based their judg-
ment upon past figures, which were
inaccurate in at least one instance. in
stead Of studying present conditions.
There is no rule by which the Ohio
can be judged in flood times, as the
Register has pointed out Every freshet
is liable to break a record and to set
sss own standard. The prevailing con-
H.:ions must be studied, and not past
figures, except as a general guide. An
example is that the flood OF November.
1900, made new record in lowering
the difference in the stage between
Pittsburg and Wheeling. The weather
observers were deceived. but the Reg
lister was not, because, while keeping in
mind the past figures, the Register
studied the present situation, and there
in lay the secret o. successful pre-
diction. Data is all right, and usually
is very valuable-but it is only one ele-
ment in arriving aT a conclusion, for
there are other factors worthy of con-
sideration.
We print Mr.. Vose's letter very
cheerfully; but at the same time point
out with the Difference due to a public
official, some points wherein he and
others fell into error.
The ArmOurS SlNifts and Other hio,