The Oklahoma City times. [volume] (Oklahoma City, Okla.) 1908-1984, 1915-06-15
DRAINAGE PLAN
RESUSC|TATED
Opponents OF Ditch Construction
Have Revised Views As
To Need OF II
FLOOD PREVENTION MUST COME
II People Desire II Sentiment Can
Put Through a Beneficial Pro-
gram, Says Advocate

II Drainage Ditch 80. had been
constructed us surveyed and planned,
no part Of oklahoma city would be-
flooded today ana there would have
been no dangcr from the high winter Of
the North Canadian Drainage lji,
trict M. e carrie, plans FOR II ditch
through the city that would take away
the surplus water AT all times. At
least That Is the Judgment of those
who planned the district.
The flooded district of the city NOW,
tie lu-s of property and the subsc
qutnt urOuyruirnccs that viii be- rN.
rrricuccd illustrate plainly the value
this ditch would be- to the city II
would cut off fifteen miles of tie
river aS II follow, tts present course
and give the water Il direct flUw There
would bc no oycrruws.
l'udcr ibr plnus aud surveys that
were nMdc the ditch was to start IN
the crutrr of section g. north NJ ruok
lngloWn, and fulow the course Of the
river In straight line to the Santa
lr bridge. under which II would pass
From tlNt point Il would take Il course
east and northeast ami pnss under the
frisco Track, to the border " the high
ground east ~ the city.
Prrliminaries Disposed Of
All the preliminary proceedings fur
the ditch wcrr put through aud II
would have been built bl this time cN
ccw for tcNhniralitics. The county
commissioners NJ one time advertised
for bids. but because litigation was
Threatened No bids were made TEN
rorury iuJuuctions were granted and
there the matter hus rested for months
Attorney Grant stanley. who has
had much to do with the proposed
drainage ditch says the proposition
cnn easily he put through II the people
viii take hold Of It now The matter
rests III court with only temporary IN
functions holling back The work
11Iter ikfnhettony-rs iAsflH'avpd h,
snys, n the people desire that II h,
done aud the work Of making the ditcl
can gu forward.
In this connection the North Cam
dian has been the most msilgnc,
stream IN the whole state Therr nr,
many who contend that the wntr II
the stream Is insufficient to fu'nizl
The city ~ supply others believe tha
the Canadian hhs enough water nj al
tlnrs Ia furnish az the city needs nn,
that reservoir Is not necessary.
Various aud supdry contentious ar,
mado IN respect "a thr iirlmage ditcll
such ~ II was proposed to llit thrOuIl
the city. The contention was mad
that there was no danger u The ftren,l
flooding the lowlmds IN the rlts. Tn
damagc a property was flie ktehtcs
ground for cnitention. akaiiist th
ditch and Il was from property owner
along the line that the principal ohlcc
ilOns ,nme They secured the temper
ary iniuctions that tied w the work..
Visible Proof vi Hand
Those who cunlrndcd that there wa
danger of fllUds have visible proO
now that they were right. Those VIII
fNllfllN lllNN wv Nll'hH Nhi w ~ wv
dsrlng the dry season that the wnte
supply for the city win he cut shor
have mly 10 wait awhile aud thei
will hc proof for them.
The fact Is that the Canadian rise
aud falls, according 10 the amount q
rainfall along its course, In time
mny come to I've recognized that
drainage ditch through the city Is u,
tcsslty. also II may he fully demor
strntcd that reservoir large enOug
N hold supply Of water through III
dry scnson is just rs badly needed,
Very likely the ipnuer Of the drnii
age ditch will be- taken mp again, aflC
the present flood has subsidized mn
pushed To completion. II IL ceEtal
that those whOP property ls now NJ
der water will withdraw their ,obje,
tlons, II they made any against III
construction of the waterway II thei
are still contentious against the dltcl
the case eau be Fought nut In III
courts Tor II is certain thai someihiu
needs 10 be done