Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />O,JJj--:3 <br /> <br />5. fSased on prelitlinary investigations oaGe thus far, water <br />resocrce problems ir. the tlasin appear to be essentially as fcllous: <br /> <br />a. Flood problem. <br /> <br />(l) St:.-eal.lflow reco:,ds indicate tha: f]oo~s have occur;:~d <br />in 35 of the 64 years of the period 1902 through 1965. The latest <br />floed, in June 1965. CAused about $180,000 dlJ.l1'age. r"ostly along the <br />::Jain stem beiOt.. Sct,'ard, Nebraska, an~ abov~ the l:~nsas-ilebraska line. <br />A floo~ in June 1963 approached record stages in the upper basin, <br />particularly at Seward. The local protection worl:s at Set..ard prevented <br />severe damage to the city. but cons:!.de'":'able losses t.;ere sustained in <br />unprotected areas near Se-."ard and else....here alonp, th~ upfler Big Blue <br />River ar.d certain tributaries. The record 1951 flood caused S17.390,000 <br />da!nage In the basin, including $1.6,032 ,ODD damage on 139.000 acres of <br />rural flooded area. Only a small proportion of this flooded acreage <br />would be af:ected by existing, and currently authorized projects. Hld~ly <br />spaced intense rainfall often causes severe but localized flooding in <br />many areas throughout the basin. The Tuttle Creek Reservoir provides <br />flood protection to only the l~"cr feu miles of the riv~r valley. The <br />existing and authorized local protection p:'ojects do not protect the <br />agricultural flood pl~ins of the Big Jlue River and its tributaries. <br /> <br />(2) Tbe 1.933.000 acre-feet of flood control storage 1.n <br />the Tuttle Creek Reservoir is approximately 831,000 acre-feet less than <br />the desirable 2,764.000 acre-feet. Studies indicate that critical trans- <br />positions of the 1951 storms over the Big Blue basin would result in <br />flood runoff which the Tuttle Creek Reservoir could not completely con- <br />trol and which would cause discharges 1n eXcess of design capacity at <br />the Kansas Citys and elsetlhere. The resulting flood would cause damage <br />approximating $1 billion at the i~ansas Citys alone, and this damage <br />could be prevented by reduction of the Tuttle Creek spillway discharge. <br />Therefore. backup storage for flood control is considered desirable in <br />the Big Blue River basin. Incremental benefits for this storage could <br />amount to about $3 ~illion annually. <br /> <br />b. Hater supply. Studies conducted by the Federal t..'ater <br />Pollution Control Administration n,.Pc....) for the Big Blue River indi- <br />cate that existing sources of water l;ill be sufficient to meet t:lunicipal <br />and indust:,ial needs in the basin duri:"lg the foree~eable future. HO\-1- <br />ever, the study area for these investigations did not include the Kansas <br />River below :Ianhattan. Impoundments in the !Jig Elue River basin could <br />be effective in providing additional water supply for several cities <br />including ;:anhattan, Topeka, Lawrence, and others in the lower Kansas <br />River. The amount and value of such potential stcr..ge has yet to be <br />determined, but it is believed to be relatively high. Water supply <br />for irrigation has been studied by the Bureau of ~(!claI:lation and there <br />appears to be a potential future need in the basin. <br /> <br />c, <br />significant <br />tributaries <br /> <br />t'ater quality. Studies made by the FFPCA indicate that <br />t.'aste discharges are mace into the Sir Blue Ri....er and its <br />at Beatrice, C:'ete, Fairbury, nJstings, Seward, ancl York, <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />