Arizona republican., 1913-10-13
Investigators Employed By United States Geological Survey Compile Facts From Which Prevention Solution Is Expected.
SAY LOSS WAS
 $2OO,OOO,OOO
Distinction Is Made Be tween Prevention of Floods and the Proven tion of Damage By Floods With Suggestions.
Especial to The Republican,

WASHINGTON, D. C.. Oct. f2- The causes which led to the great flood in the Ohio valley last spring. the losses therefrom. and the pre- vention of damage by future floods are discussed in the timely report just issued by the United States Geological Survey as the result of a field investigation of the districts affected and study of the rec ords of precipitation, run-off and stream flow. While the flood of 1913 was the most destructive that has ever visited the Ohio valley, it is pointed out that floods of the Ohio are now the rule rather than the exception and that the problem of preventing flood damage is a vital one. pressing for solution. In no year since 1873 has the Ohio river failed to overflow it's banks at some point along it's course and flood large areas. and in some years the flooding has been repeated five times. The actual material loss on account of the recent flood is more than $200. 100000 without consider ing indirect losses or the loss of life.
 A distinction is made between the prevention of floods and the proven tion of damage by floods in order to
 bring out forcibly the obvious idea that excessive rainfall and the aC- cumulatiOn of excessively large vol umes of surface water in river basins cannot be prevented, but that the thing to strive for is to prevent the great damage done by flood water all along the rivers course. The two means of preventing dam age by floods that are most dis cussed and that are stated to be unquestionably the best and most reliable are levees and storage reser- Voirs, although forests are also prominently mentioned. The geOlog- icaI survey points out, however. that to guard against the most de- structive floods all available pre- ventive measures must be employed. and that no one alone can possibly be adequate. In analysing the fig ures showing the volume of the floods of various years at Cincin- natl it is interesting to note that to have kept the highest flood on record at that city below the dan ger line it would have been neces- sary to hold back above Cincinnati 226. 900 million cubic feet of water representing the dangerous crest or top of the floOd-the accumulated excess during the nineteen days that the height of the river was above the danger line. The capacity Of the fortv-three reservoir sites above Pfttsburg. investigated in 1912 by 1 the Pittsburg Flood Commission. is S0.5OO million cubic feet, and pre- lfminary investigations during 1908 1 bv the geological survey in the Kanawha river drainage area dis covered seventeen reservoir sites with an additional storage capacity of about 2S0.O00 million cubic feet. There are also many other available
 reservoir sites on the tributaries oI the Ohio above Cincinnati Even greater storage capacity, however.
 will probably be required to contro.
 fulIv the floods on the Ohio, for all
 the floods do not originate on the
 same tributaries. and therefore sur ficient reservoirs must be provided
 to control floods on two or more
 combinations of tributaries
 The report emphasizes the lhdue ! ouacv of the data available concern
 JCVo~+ir,,e6 Ou Page SeVen.)