OSAGE
RIVER, MISSOURI,
November 9, 1871.
SIR: I have the honor herewith to report my
examinations of obstructions upon White River, from James Fork, in Missouri, to
the foot of Buffalo Shoals, in Arkansas, a distance, by my estimate, of 194
miles.
I left Saint Louis, Missouri, on the 10th of
June last, and reached Maberry’s Ferry, on the White River, June 13, at which
place I obtained a small flat-boat with which to proceed down stream.
The examinations were commenced on the 21st
at the mouth of James Fork. The estimated distance from this fork to Forsyth,
Missouri, is fifty-two miles. This point I reached Saturday evening, June 24.
This may be considered the termination of the first section. The rest of the
distance to Buffalo Shoals, having been examined last year, will form a
separate section.
Before entering upon the details of this
report it may be well to make some general remarks.
The
improvement of White River, as herewith estimated, does not embrace a true
low-water channel, such as is being made upon the Osage River, but is intended
to include the removal of all obstructions to navigation when there is a rise
of 5 feet above low water upon the head of the principal shoals. The fall of
some of these shoals is too great for an improvement at a moderate low-water
stage, unless at a very great expense, which the resources of the country do
not now justify. At present, a navigation which will permit steamers and other
craft to ascend and descend, when there is a rise of 5 feet or over upon the
shoals, is all I can now recommend as admissible in the expenditure of public
funds.
Thus far I have no hesitation in saying that
I believe such an improvement as herein is recommended is worthy of an
appropriation to the extent of my estimate. The country, to be sure, is far
from being developed, either in its agricultural or mineral resources; much of
this is owing to the want of facilities for getting to market with these
products when obtained, and getting supplies of salt, groceries, and other
necessary articles, at a reasonably cheap rate.
The bottom-lands upon this river are not extensive;
but what there are will compare favorably with any other bottom-lands along the
rivers of the States.
The hills are high and the land considerably
broken; still there is some very good land in the valleys and low elevations
bordering the small streams, and most of the hills afford a fine range for
stock.
The hills along this stream have,
undoubtedly, much mineral wealth, which is yet far from being developed. Iron
and lead, I judge, will be found quite abundant; other minerals, such as copper
and zinc, are said to exist in many places. Upon the whole, I am of the opinion
that this country, in due time, will teem with population and wealth, more from
its mineral resources than from its agricultural products, which, at best, will
only supply the miners and their families if such become numerous.
SECTION NO. 1 —From
James Fork to Forsyth, a distance estimated at 52 miles.
We found 59 shoals on this section. My
estimate of the fall at these shoals, together with the estimated fall of the
pools, amounted to 89.25 feet, which is an average of 1.55 feet per mile. The
water in the river, at the time we examined this section, was believed to be
from 12 to 15 inches above low water.
The pools I found to be from 2 to 10 feet
deep ; generally not over 6 feet; the deepest channel upon the shoals, about 15
to 18 inches. As we descended the river we found the water lessening in depth
upon the shoals, so that at Forsyth it could not be over 12 inches above low
water. The width of the river upon this section will average about 350 feet.
The obstructions to navigation do not
materially differ from those found in a similar number of miles below Forsyth.
Names, &c., of the worst shoals in this section,
with the estimated cost of their improvement.
China
Bowman Shoals, No. 25.—This shoal should have a dam across the right-hand
channel, estimated at a cost of $2,000.
Long
Creek Shoal, No. 28.—The river divides into several channels. The right-hand
ones must be closed by dams. The cost of the work here is estimated at $4,000.
First shoal above Bull Shoal, No. 41.—This shoal
should be improved by a dam across left-hand channel, the cost of which I
estimate at about $2,000.
Bull
Shoal, No. 42.—This channel is very crooked, and should he straightened,
and a wing-dam built to concentrate the water. The cost estimated at $4,000.
Jenning’s Shoals, No. 50.—A wide
gravel-bar on the left. An old dam here extends too far toward the right shore,
a portion of which must be removed; the other end extended to the left shore.
This shoal has an estimated fall of 2.5 feet. The improvement of this shoal
will cost about $5,000.
Shoal No. 52.—A brush and gravel dam
required across one channel. The water here divides into nearly two equal
parts. Required, a brush dam, estimated to cost $500.
Shoal
No. 56.—Water spreads over a wide surface and should be concentrated by a
brush and gravel dam, which is estimated to cost $500.
The seven miles upon which these shoals are situated
are therefore estimated to cost $18,000. The balance of the distance the cost
will be light, and may be estimated at $50 per mile, $2,250.
Total
cost of fifty-two miles…………..$20,250.00
Add 50 per cent, for contingencies……..10,125.00
Grand total………………………………30,375.00
SECTION NO. 2.—From Forsyth, Missouri, to the foot of
Buffalo Shoals, in the State of Arkansas, which we estimated by our run this
year at one hundred and forty-two miles.
This is considerably more than was estimated
last year. A part of the examination last year of this section was made when
the river had risen some 4 or 5 feet, which I judge, to some extent, caused an
underestimate.
I, however, am of the opinion, while last
year’s run was underestimated, the estimate for this year may he too great.
Actual measurements only can determine the true distance.
For the first one hundred miles, as
estimated last year, I can hardly improve the figures. With 50 per cent, added
to my estimate, instead of 20 which I then made for contingencies, I shall
cover the difficulties suggested by your report of last year upon this work. In
reviewing the river, I am satisfied that your remarks upon the difficulties to
be encountered are strictly just. The estimated fall of the shoals of this
section is somewhat greater than I estimated last year. The pools I now
estimate at 4 inches instead of 6 inches per mile, as per last year's report.
The whole fall, therefore, is slightly less than my previous estimate.
The shoals number 130 from Forsyth to the
foot of Buffalo, with an aggregate fall estimated at 159.10 feet, to which add
4 inches per mile for the pools, making in all 206.43 feet, or 1.45 feet per
mile. The bad shoals upon this section, which require considerable engineering
skill to improve, number 12. These shoals have mostly local names, and are
situated in the following order upon the miles, as numbered this year, namely:
The estimate for section No. 2 varies mainly
from last year’s estimate by a considerable increase of funds required for
Buffalo Shoals. These shoals were examined this year carefully under favorable
circumstances. The river was low and I took a level of the whole fall, which I
found to be 9.5 on a distance of only one and one-fourth miles. Last year the
estimate of these shoals was ten feet fall, and the length two miles. The fall
this year was found to be 7.6 feet per mile, while last year the fall was 5
feet per mile. It is evident, therefore, that it would require greater skill
and a greater expense to overcome the force and velocity of the water, in order
to permit boats to ascend in such a moderate rise as 4 or 5 feet.
The bottom of these shoals is solid rock the
whole length; there are large quantities of loose rock upon the shoals, which can
be placed in dams at a low cost. These dams should be frequent, not less than
16 in number, and will contain about 500 cubic yards of stone each. The cost
per yard may be set down at $1.12½ , making this item $9,000. The amount
required for excavating the channel I place at the same figures as last year,
viz, 3,000 cubic yards at $3 per yard, thus making the total expense of
improving the shoals $18,000. Owing to the great fall on these shoals, and the
limited distance from the head to the foot, I am satisfied that these shoals
are now largely the greatest obstacle to an ascending navigation at moderate
floods on this river. The work of improving the same should be done under the
direction of a practical and scientific engineer.
I feel satisfied, therefore, in making a
large increase in my estimate for this work over the amount thought sufficient,
under the circumstances, by me, as you find by last year’s report.
I respectfully refer you to my last year’s
report for the details of my plan for improving Elbow and McGar Shoals, which,
next to Buffalo, are the most important shoals to be improved. The width of the
river from Forsyth to Buffalo Shoals is fully 400 feet upon an average.
The height of the bottom-lands will average
about 23 feet above low water, and the highest flood known 28 feet, the place
having been pointed out to me by the citizens of Forsyth. In my report of last
year I stated I had measured the water of White River, and found it to
discharge 264 cubic feet per second. This measurement was made when the water
was at its lowest stage. The oldest inhabitants told me they never knew this
stream to be lower than it was last season. One-half of this quantity would
fill a lock of 10 feet lift, 60 feet wide, and 250 feet between the gates,
every 19 minutes. This would allow one-half of the water as wastage through the
dam and lock gates.
Very
respectfully, your obedient servant.
ALONZO LIVERMORE,
Civil
Engineer,
General
W. F. RAYNOLDS,
Lieutenant-Colonel
U. S. Corps of Engineers.
No comments:
Post a Comment