New Ulm review., 1920-11-17
SUMMARY FLOOD
CONTROL REPORT
CONSTRUCTION OF LEvEE OR
s CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
NOT FEASIBLE.
COST OF VALLEY PROTECTIVE
PROJECT is ESTIMATED
AT $4,000, 900.

IT.
Construction of three large reser-
voirs, with total capacity of 18,5OO,-
100000 cubic feet, at various sites in
the Minnesota river valley to protect
most of the valley lands from the de-
vastating floods that have inundated
the valley periodically for many years,
doing incalculable damage, is recon-
mended in the report Of the depart
ment on flood Investigations, which
has been made public by e. V. Willard,
commissioner Of the state department.
of drainage and waters. = :
s5a Estim ated Cost, 81, 1000, 900.
2 The report declares that material
reduction of devastating floods is
possible, but that some lands must be
sacrificed for the protection of the
other. The cost Of the project is
estimated at nearly $2,0O0,O0O and
the food protection it would afford
would materially benefit over $4,000
acres, while large additional areas
would receive minor benefits. This
does not included prairie lands to
which the valley furnishes ditch out
lets.
Location of Benefited Lands.
The lands that would be benefited
by the proposed flood control project
are divided into five districts, located
between the following points: Big
Stone Lake and Marsh Lake; Lac qui
Parle and Granite Falls; Minnesota
Falls and Fort RidgeIy; New Ulm and
Mankato, and Mankato and Carver.
Minor benefits will accrue to lands be-
tween Carver and the mouth of the
Minnesota river. About 10000 acres
Of agricultural lands lying within the
reservoirs will be deprecated, because
they will be flooded more frequently
than at present, according to the
report. ~
Area of Local Reservoir.
|. The total surface area Of the New
Ulm reservoir is 1850 acres. This
includes $500 acres of cultivated land;
4,500 acres Of hay marsh, meadow and
pasture land, and $500 acres of timber
land. The land at the upper end of
this reservoir will not be flooded as
freqently as at presents It will re-
ceive greater benefits from the, upper
reservoirs than it will be deprecated
by being within the New Ulm reser-
voir. }
Reservoir Sites Named.
The first reservoir site, according
to the report, is Big Stone Lake,
where 4,O00,000,o00 cubic feet of
storage capacity are available. The
Whettons river must be diverted into
this lake. g
The proposed site for the second
reservoir is Lac qui Parle and Marsh
Lakes, where capacity of 5000, ,0OO,-
600 cubic feet can be secured. Both
the Lac qui Parle and the Chippewa
river are to be diverted into the
reservoir at this point.
! The valley at the mouth of the
Cottonwood river, where capacity
of 100000 cubic feet can be
secured, is the third reservoir site
mentioned in the. report Of the flood
Investigations department..
Conclusions Briefly Stated.
Following are the summarized con
clusions, reached by the department,
as result of its Investigations:
No substantial protection of the
Minnesota river valley lands from
floods can be accomplished by either
levee construction or channel improve
ment. Flood protection must. and
can be accomplished by reseryoi,
construction.
Protection Of the valley lands from
all floods, including those ,extraor.
dinary ones of rare oceurrance, is no,
worth what it would cost. The pro
lection Of most Of the valley lands from
frequent inundation is possible and is
worth. more than twice what it vii
cost. n ~ -
Best Paying Project.
! The best paying project is thai
which protects the valley lands from
all floods, except those which may b
expected to recur, on an average
once in 10 or 10 years.
4 Automatic retarding basins are no
practicable on the Minnesota river
Manuafly controlled reservoirs mus
be used. Satisfactory reservoir site
J are not availahln on tha trih1,far,