Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.- <br /> <br />FLOOD DESCRIPTIONS <br />Little information Is available relative to historic <br />flooding on the Little Thompson River probably because of its <br />rural nature which has resulted In little flood damage during flood <br />events. Some flood accounts are, however, available on the Big <br />Thompson River. The following accounts of flooding on the Big <br />Thompson River are representative of typical floods for which <br />information Is available. Many of these accounts do not describe <br />specifically accounts of flooding within the study reach of this <br />report. They do, however, Indicate that flood conditions existed <br />upstream thereby Implying that floodwaters would be passing through <br />the study reach. <br /> <br />During widespread floods of May and June 1864, the low- <br />lands of the Big Thompson River val ley were flooded, settlers' <br />cabins were washed away, and farmlands damaged. According to THE <br />LOVELAND REPORTER of 7 June 1894, the flood of 31 May - I June of <br />that year destroyed a dam near the canyon northwest of Loveland and <br />the river was "fully half a mile wide". On 7 July 1906, a dis- <br />charge of 6,000 c.f.s. waS recorded at the Drake station. A bridge <br />near Drake was washed out. The flood peak lasted only a "few hours". <br />THE LOVELAND DAILY HERALD of I August 1919 described a cloudburst <br />upstream of Drake on 31 July - "a 10-foot wall of water swept down <br />through the .. canyon." There was no mention of damage In the <br />plains area. <br /> <br />.", <br /> <br />June 1921. General rains from 2 through 7 June <br />measured a total of 5.29 inches at Longmont and 3.02 Inches at Fort <br />Coil ins. Apparently, the mountain regions received less, as Estes <br />Park reported 2.45 Inches for the 6-day period with 1.2 inches <br />received on 4 June. High water destroyed the recorder at the Drake <br />Station so the time and rate of the peak flow was not recorded. <br /> <br />19 <br />