Laserfiche WebLink
<br />On the same date, the paper also reported that <br /> <br />.....Beaver Creek has reached high waters and flood levels <br />frequently in the past inflicting heavy damage to farmers <br />and stockmen, but this time the destruction was infinitely <br />greater than on previous occasions and marked the first <br />time in the history of Brush that flood waters ever reached <br />its streets. As one Brush man expressed it, 'Maybe the <br />Indians have seen a flood like this, but no white man ever <br />did. I <br /> <br />An aerial view of the city during the 1935 flood is shown in Figure <br />2. <br /> <br />In 1965, when floodwaters again came down Beaver Creek threatening <br />the City of Brush, the community was more prepared. The city <br />constructed a 5-foot high dike around the southeast portion of town <br />to protect that area against the onrushing floodwaters. The dike <br />held as the floodwaters came within inches of overtopping the dike <br />and again threatening the downtown area of Brush. Regardless, the <br />business district had taken action to minimize flood damages. The <br />merchants had not only sandbagged their places of business, but also <br />had removed stock merchandise from their basements to higher and <br />safer elevations. <br /> <br />In 1965, floodwaters took the U.S. Highway 6-34 bridge out of serv- <br />ice. Other bridges in the area were also washed out and closed for <br />a period of 2 to 3 days until repairs could be completed. <br /> <br />The U.s. Geological Survey estimated the peak discharge of the 1965 <br />flood at State Highway 71, crossing Beaver Creek south of Brush, to <br />be 24,300 cubic feet per second. This flood was comparable to <br />approximately a 25-year flood event (Reference 2). Figure 3 shows <br />an aerial view of the approximate flood limits of the 1965 flood in <br />the area southeast of Brush. <br /> <br />2.4 Flood Protection Measures <br /> <br />There are no existing or proposed flood control structures either in <br />the study area itself or upstream of it that would tend to reduce <br />the present flood hazard. Many small irrigation water storage <br />facilities and farm stock ponds exist along Beaver Creek and within <br />the Beaver Creek Basin; however, these facilities have little, if <br />any, impact on regulating or controlling the impact of major flood- <br />waters downstream. <br /> <br />3.0 ENGINEERING METHODS <br /> <br />For the flooding source studied in detail in the community, standard <br />hydrologic and hydraulic study methods were used to determine the flood <br /> <br />5 <br />