- ^ 
 
 1627 
 
 129b 
 
 
 
 
 r yft 
 
 " V*. I J 
 
 no.18 
 
 v '? ; ^ r • 
 
 
 c.3 
 
 
 
 131 51OU 
 
 STATE OF ILLINOIS 
 
 v ;*.i isa 
 , ■ #.<! 
 
 Rivers and Lakes Commission 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 Bulletin No. 18 Chicago, Illinois December 1, 1916 
 
 FLOOD CONTROL FOR 
 PECATONICA RIVER 
 
 
 Issued in accordance with Act 
 of the General Assembly 
 
 Approved June 10, 1911 
 Amended June 30, 1913 
 
 [Printed by authority of the State of Illinois.] 
 
REPORT OF 
 
 <c 
 
 * 
 
 Rivers and Lakes Cmnnfeiorf^ 
 
 * 4 ^ <?* <4 
 
 ON 
 
 '<%> 
 
 PECATONICA RI 
 
 FOR 
 
 FLOOD CONTROL 
 
 Arthur W. Charles, Chairman 
 LeRoy K. Sherman, Commissioner 
 Thomas J. Healy, Commissioner 
 Charles Christmann, Secretary 
 
 Survey and Investigation by 
 
 Rivers and Lakes Commission and State Geological Survey. 
 
 Schnepp & Barnes, State Printers 
 Springfield, III. 
 
 1917. 
 
 [Printed by authority of the State of Illinois.] 
 
 ILLINOIS ST ATE LIBRARY 
 
 3 112A 0123Q7A2 2 
 
General Views Along Pecatonica River. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 Introduction. 5 
 
 Summary of conclusions. 5 
 
 The river and its industrial development. 6 
 
 Description. 6- 
 
 Navigation. 7 
 
 Pishing. 7 
 
 Pollution. 7 
 
 Industries. 7 
 
 Data on bridges crossing river. 8 
 
 Railroads. 9 
 
 Dams and water power. 9 
 
 List of dams on Pecatonica River and its tributaries in Illinois. 11 
 
 Stream flow. 11 
 
 General conditions of flow. 11 
 
 Stream gaging data. 12 
 
 Study of duration curves and discussion of flow. 14 
 
 Past and probable future floods. 18 
 
 Flood relief. 24 
 
 General application. 24 
 
 The problem at Freeport. 26 
 
 Plan recommended for Freeport.;.. 26 
 
 Estimated cost of project. 31 
 
 Conclusions..,.... 32 
 
 Bench marks on Pecatonica River. 33 
 
 Publications by the Rivers and Lakes Commission. 34 
 
 ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 Frontispiece, General \ x iews along Pecatonica River.*. 2 
 
 PLATE. 
 
 I. A. Nucleus of natural dam. 10 
 
 B. Illustration of bank erosion. 10 
 
 II. Map of Pecatonica River showing natural channel changes. 12 
 
 III. Drainage area showing rainfall contours for storm of March 
 
 24-27, 1916. 18 
 
 IV. Curves of daily flow of Pecatonica River at Freeport, flood of 
 
 March, 1916. 20 
 
 V. Drainage area showing rainfall contours for storm of September 
 
 12-16, 1915. 22 
 
 VI. C. & N. W. Railway bridge and approach: 
 
 A. Bridge looking dowmstream. 25 
 
 B. Bridge looking up stream. 25 
 
 C. East approach. 25 
 
 VII. A. Railroad transfer bridge at Freeport, looking downstream.... 28 
 
 B. West end of same. 28 
 
 C. Cinder pile, Moline Plow Works. 28 
 
 VIII. Rating curve, Pecatonica River at Freeport. 29 
 
 IX. Profile of Pecatonica River in Illinois. 33 
 
 X. Map of East Freeport showing proposed method of flood pro¬ 
 
 tection . 33 
 
 FIGURE. 
 
 1. Duration curve for 1915, at Freeport. 15 
 
 2. Duration curve for 1916, at Freeport. 17 
 
 3. Sketch showing flooded area near East Freeport. 21 
 
 4. Flood profile of Pecatonica River in Freeport. 27 
 
 5. Cross section of proposed new channel through high ground. 30 
 
 6. Cross section of proposed new channel through low ground. 30 
 
/ 
 
 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. 
 
 Hon. Edward F. Dunne, Governor of the State of Illinois, Springfield, 
 Illinois. 
 
 s 
 
 Dear Sir: At the request of the Pecatonica River Relief Asso¬ 
 ciation of Stephenson County, and in view of the serious damage 
 caused every year by the overflow of Pecatonica River in the vicinity 
 of Freeport, The Rivers and Lakes Commission has made a careful 
 survey and study of the river and has issued this bulletin No. 18 on 
 “Flood Control for Pecatonica River,” presenting briefly the results 
 of this study with an outline and estimate of a definite plan for con¬ 
 trolling the flood waters through the city of Freeport. 
 
 Respectfully submitted: 
 
 Rivers and Lakes Commission of Illinois. 
 Arthur W. Charles, Chairman. 
 
 LeRoy K. Sherman. 
 
 Thomas J. Healy. 
 
 Charles Christmann. Secretary, 
 
 905, 130 North Fifth Avenue, Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 December i, igi6. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The frequent recurrence of more or less damaging floods along 
 the bottom lands of the Pecatonica valley has been a source of great 
 annoyance and financial loss to the residents and property owners for 
 a number of years. In 1914, the Rivers and Lakes Commission made 
 a survey of the river from a point 14.5 miles above Freeport to 
 Brown’s Dam, 11.6 miles below the city, to determine the effects of 
 Goddard’s Dam and Brown’s Dam in causing overflow damage, and 
 also to study the general flood conditions of the valley. At the request 
 of the Pecatonica River Relief Association of Stephenson County a 
 further reconnaissance of the valley was made by this commission 
 under the direction of J. P. Ball, assistant engineer, for the purpose 
 of developing a definite plan of flood relief. Before the completion of 
 this work a flood of unprecedented height occurred in March, 1916, 
 causing damage that, in the city of Freeport alone, was estimated at 
 over $100,000. Careful observations and measurements were taken 
 during this flood by H. C. Beckman, junior engineer, U. S. Geological 
 Survey, working in cooperation with this commission, and further 
 investigations as to its effects were made by Mr. Ball. 
 
 This bulletin is compiled from the results of these investigations 
 and presents a definite plan for the prevention of further flood damage 
 at Freeport with an estimate of the outlay required for its execution. 
 In the preparation of this work maps and profiles of the river below 
 Freeport, 1 made by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with 
 the State Geological Survey, have been of great value. Acknowledge¬ 
 ment is made to Mr. Chas. S. Hepner, city engineer of Freeport, and 
 a number of the residents of the valley for valuable infomation rela¬ 
 tive to damages sustained, high water marks, etc., and-to the engineer¬ 
 ing department of the Illinois Central Railroad Company, the Chicago 
 & North Western Railway Company and the Chicago, Milwaukee & , 
 St. Paul Railway Company for railroad maps furnished by them. 
 
 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS. 
 
 The general conclusions regarding the flood situation in the Peca¬ 
 tonica valley, as more fully developed in the body of this report, may 
 be briefly stated as follows: 
 
 1. That the greatest known flood in the history of the Pecatonica 
 valley occurred on March 28, 1916, the water reaching a height of 19.4 
 feet on the Freeport gage, with a corresponding discharge of about 
 17,000 cubic feet per second. 
 
 2. That this discharge was produced by a comparatively small 
 rainfall amounting to less than two inches in three days over the upper 
 drainage area, accompanied by a marked rise in temperature, at a time 
 
 1 Copies may be obtained from State Geological Survey, Urbana, Ill. 
 
6 
 
 when the ground was sealed with ice and frost and covered with about 
 five inches of snow. 
 
 3. That the probability of the occurrence of a much greater rain¬ 
 fall under similar run-off conditions is comparatively remote, and the 
 construction of controlling works to protect the valley from inundation 
 in such a contingency is financially impracticable. 
 
 4. That the river, in its natural state, spreads out over the whole 
 valley during flood periods and the tendency is toward a general 
 increase of flood height and property damage due to the silting up 
 of the channel and the encroachments of civilization. 
 
 5. That the benefits to be derived from a general project de¬ 
 signed to prevent the inundation of the bottom lands of the valley as 
 a whole would not, at the present time, be commensurate with the 
 cost of such work, but the annual damage sustained at Freeport and 
 vicinity is sufficient to warrant the outlay necessary to protect that 
 city against a flood flow of 21,000 cubic feet per second, or nearly 
 25 per cent greater than that of March 28, 1916. 
 
 6. That this protection can best be accomplished by providing 
 channel area sufficient to carry a flood of 21,000 cubic feet per second 
 with a slope of approximately 0.5 foot per mile through Freeport and, 
 where necessary, constructing levees to protect the low sections of the 
 city against overflow. 
 
 7. That the required cross section can be most economically 
 obtained by constructing an auxiliary channel through East Freeport 
 as the enlarging of the old channel, on account of the limited width 
 available and the many obstacles to be overcome, would involve an 
 expenditure much greater than that required for an auxiliary channel. 
 
 8. That this project, more fully detailed in the body of this 
 report, will protect the city of Freeport against the greatest flood that 
 can be reasonably expected at a cost of not more than $500,000, and 
 the expenditure of this amount is warranted by the value of the pro¬ 
 tection secured. 
 
 9. That the carrying out of this project would not aggravate the 
 flood conditions in the valley below nor interfere with possible future 
 activities for flood control at other points. 
 
 THE RIVER AND ITS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. 
 
 DESCRIPTION. 
 
 The Pecatonica, or, as the Indians originally named it, “Peekee- 
 onikee,” meaning “a stream of curious moods and antics,” rises among 
 the highlands in the southwestern part of Wisconsin, flowing in a 
 general southerly direction as far as Freeport, thence northeasterly 
 to the point where it empties into, the Rock River just above Rockton. 
 Its total length is about 158 miles, 66 miles in Wisconsin and 92 miles 
 in Illinois. With its tributary streams it drains 2,610 square miles of 
 which 816 are in Illinois. Its principal tributary streams in Illinois 
 are: 
 
 Richland Creek, entering north of Freeport and draining 137 
 square miles of which 79 are in Illinois. 
 
7 
 
 Yellow Creek, entering south of Freeport, about 32 miles in 
 length and draining 190 square miles. 
 
 Rock Run, entering near the village of Pecatonica, 13^ miles 
 long and draining 89 square miles. 
 
 Sugar River, entering about six miles west of Rockton with its 
 drainage area largely in Wisconsin. 
 
 The drainage basin of the Pecatonica in the State of Illinois 
 covers practically the whole of Stephenson County and nearly half of 
 Winnebago County, but inasmuch as the headwaters and by far the 
 greater portion of the total drainage area of the stream lie in Wis¬ 
 consin, the variations in the flow are governed largely by the physical 
 and climatic conditions of that state. 
 
 The total fall of the river from the extreme headwaters in Wis¬ 
 consin to its junction with the Rock River is about 500 feet, although 
 within the State of Illinois the fall is only about 55 feet. 
 
 NAVIGATION. 
 
 In the original government survey the Pecatonica was meandered 
 and classed as a navigable stream, and, in the deeper portions, small 
 motor craft are in use for pleasure purposes at the present time, 
 but in 1884 reports from the U. S. engineers showed that the river 
 was not worthy of improvement in that respect and navigation of the 
 stream not a public necessity. 
 
 FISHING. 
 
 Little or no commercial fishing is carried on in the waters of this 
 stream, and though most of the various kinds of fish common to 
 Illinois may be found at many points in its course, the Pecatonica, as 
 compared with other streams of the State, is of little value to the 
 fishing industry. 
 
 POLLUTION. 
 
 The question of stream pollution has not yet reached a critical 
 stage as there are but few large towns in the drainage basin. At 
 Freeport the sewage, both domestic and industrial, discharges through 
 various outlets directly into the river. In February, 1914, the Rivers 
 and Lakes Commission approved plans allowing the discharge of an 
 untreated 24-inch sewer into the river at that city, subject to the 
 stipulation that, if at any time the pollution becomes objectionable the 
 city shall install a suitable disposal plant. 
 
 INDUSTRIES. 
 
 The rich alluvial soil of the bottom lands and the good railroad 
 facilities encourage extensive farming and grazing, and with the ex¬ 
 ception of the city of Freeport the whole valley is devoted largely to 
 the raising and manufacture of dairy products. The U. S. Census 
 Report for 1910 shows the proportion of farm land in Stephenson 
 County to be between 95 and 100 per cent, and in Winnebago County, 
 between 80 and 90 per cent, and the average value of land for both 
 counties between $75 and $100 per acre. Both Stephenson County 
 and the city of Freeport have shown a steady growth in population, 
 
DATA ON BRIDGES CROSSING THE PECATONICA IN ILLINOIS, 
 
 8 
 
 73 
 
 X 
 
 u 
 
 ri 
 
 S 
 
 <D 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 n 
 
 4-i e\t 
 0) 
 
 B CO 
 
 *■3 
 
 B 
 o 
 
 !-i 
 
 a 
 
 Bo 
 
 D B 
 
 a, cl, 
 
 a 
 
 4-1 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 <Ur 
 
 00 
 
 M • V 
 »+2 0) 
 
 ■ga® 
 
 B — a 
 O • -*-» 
 
 £«a 
 
 P, •'-< 
 
 a2£ 
 
 B a 
 <u V y 
 
 am« 
 
 Oh a 
 
 C 
 
 O 
 
 • rH 
 
 -t-> 
 
 B 
 
 4-* 
 
 CO 
 
 ho 
 
 B 
 
 ho 
 
 ri 
 
 0 
 
 a> B 
 y 0) 
 
 B B 
 
 __ w 
 
 a ijj 
 
 y.B 
 
 >&4 
 ri — 
 
 a . 
 
 ! 2 
 co C 
 0) 
 
 a • 
 
 oc/3 
 B I 
 P B O 
 
 <-E 
 
 CO 
 
 a; 
 
 a 
 
 B 
 
 Eh 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 (4 
 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 -< 
 
 4) . 
 
 •—< 
 
 £2 
 
 <U J-I 
 
 £b 
 
 o3 
 
 8 
 
 B 
 
 a 
 
 l- 
 
 
 
 cc 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 IP 
 
 
 
 IP CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 Cfi 
 
 
 
 00 00 
 
 
 • X 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 DC 
 
 
 O 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 X 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 00 X 
 
 
 • X 
 
 
 
 X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 £ s 
 
 A 
 
 X 0 
 
 CO 
 
 0 
 
 a 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 O 
 
 
 0 
 
 ip 
 
 0 
 
 Ci — co 0 ip 
 
 to 
 
 . 
 
 X — 
 
 
 X 
 
 co 
 
 X 
 
 X 
 
 
 (M 
 
 
 CO 
 
 0 $ 
 
 os cc ~r (M 0 co 10 
 
 CM 
 
 2 y-B 
 
 0 to 
 
 oi 
 
 CO 
 
 ri 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 d <M td 00 05 ip X 
 
 ri 
 
 r* H 
 
 CO CO 
 
 
 -r 
 
 IP 
 
 ip 
 
 IP 
 
 10 
 
 ip 
 
 ip 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 
 CO to to to to r- 
 
 00 
 
 ^ rt B 
 
 l- t- 
 
 r- 
 
 
 l- 
 
 
 
 t- 
 
 
 1 - 
 
 r> 
 
 1 - 
 
 i- j- t- 1 - i> r- 
 
 t- 
 
 ^ > B 
 
 « £ § 
 
 a °i 
 
 ip ip 
 ip — 
 
 — 00 
 co co 
 
 i- i- 
 
 IP 
 
 r- 
 
 O 
 
 CM 
 
 CM 
 
 X 
 
 
 1 - 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 05 '-t* 0 0 
 
 0 
 
 X 
 
 0 
 
 to 
 
 0 
 
 05 
 
 
 
 IP 
 
 1- 
 
 CM 
 
 0 co co *- co co 
 
 ip 
 
 CO 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 CO 
 
 '-r 
 
 d 
 
 00 
 
 d 
 
 06 
 
 d 
 
 — co to d O CM IP 
 
 03 
 
 ■*T 
 
 -r 
 
 IP 
 
 I-P 
 
 ip 
 
 IP 
 
 IP 
 
 ip 
 
 ip 
 
 ip 
 
 to to 
 
 
 i- 
 
 r- i'- «» 
 
 O O 
 
 0 
 
 IP 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 CM 
 
 O 
 
 0 
 
 CM 
 
 0 
 
 0000000 
 
 O 
 
 x d 
 
 
 
 
 06 
 
 d 
 
 CO 
 
 3 
 
 00 
 
 1 - 
 
 00 
 
 co d to 0 to to 
 
 CO 
 
 t- — 
 
 CM 
 
 iP 
 
 ip 
 
 CM 
 
 
 X 
 
 — y 
 
 0 
 
 O 
 
 05 CM — ^0 co ip 
 
 X 
 
 T-H ' 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CM 
 
 CM 
 
 r-H 1 1 1 - ■ ' • rH 
 
 
 « bo & ti 
 >-* p a; £ 
 
 ^ D 
 
 Bg*s 
 
 y *j 4-> 
 
 ?ai;s 
 o a 42 
 ri 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 E 
 
 4-1 
 
 B 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 g « 
 
 -*-> •—I 
 
 c/3 D-t 
 
 0) 
 
 4-1 
 
 y 
 
 U 
 
 O 
 
 B 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 <u 
 
 B 
 
 O 
 
 (U 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 m in 
 
 CO 
 
 y 
 
 a 
 
 B 
 
 H 
 
 B 
 
 a 
 
 B 
 
 0) 
 
 B 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 4-> 
 
 C/3 
 
 y 
 
 4-1 
 
 y 
 
 >i 
 
 y 
 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 y 
 
 a 
 
 B 
 
 Eh 
 
 o 
 
 •rH 
 
 •*-> 
 
 ri 
 
 E 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 O 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 c/3 c/3 
 
 y 
 
 4—1 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 
 
 
 4-1 
 
 4-4 
 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 
 0) 0 >-» 
 
 y 
 
 B B B “i B % a, 
 o O O O C —1 
 
 -*-> 4-J 4-> O H-J O -p 
 
 C/3 C/3 C/3 O C/3 O a 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 4-1 
 
 C/3 
 
 y 
 
 a 
 
 >i 
 
 Eh 
 
 ho 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 (-4 
 
 y 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 3 
 
 y 
 
 73 
 
 y 
 
 C 
 
 73 
 
 73 
 
 03 
 
 73 
 
 73 
 
 73 
 
 73 
 
 3 
 
 £ 
 
 73 
 
 73 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 73 
 
 B 
 
 B 
 
 B 
 
 y 1 
 
 y 
 
 3 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 Eh-2 
 
 p*H 
 
 -*—> 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 Eh 
 
 — 
 
 Eh 
 
 Eh 
 
 Eh 
 
 he 
 
 B 
 
 Eh 
 
 y b 
 
 y 
 
 rH 
 
 y 
 
 G 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 O 
 
 i. 
 
 y 
 
 y 0 
 
 c 
 
 y 
 
 c 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 ^H 
 
 r-H 
 
 y 
 
 4-1 j. 
 
 0 
 
 4-1 
 
 
 4-4 
 
 4-1 
 
 
 4-1 
 
 ceil 
 
 0 
 
 C/3 
 
 hH 
 
 c/3 
 
 C/3 
 
 
 C/3 
 
 • y 
 
 • 4-1 
 
 : y 
 . y 
 
 • y 
 
 • B 
 : o 
 
 con 
 
 CO 
 
 g 5 
 
 Eh El 
 j= * 
 
 “Sg 
 
 O o B 
 
 aik 
 
 tnb 
 
 C0 
 
 CO 
 
 B 
 
 Sh 
 
 Eh 
 
 a 
 
 ho 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 S-4 
 
 a 
 
 CO 52 S CO CO CO CO 
 co ^2 S2 co co co n 
 
 3 B 3 3-3 B 3 
 
 J_I P B B Jh in !-< 
 
 yyyy 
 o y y y y y y 
 
 1 . 4 -> 4 -> 4 -J 4-1 4 -> 4-1 
 
 i C/3 C/3 C/3 C/3 C/3 C/3 
 
 co 
 
 CO 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 Eh 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 4-1 
 
 C/3 
 
 co 
 
 B 
 
 (Tj 
 
 a 
 
 C/3 
 
 co 4 >B 
 y > 4-1 
 ■3 C B 
 
 Sac 
 
 2 3 B 
 
 B 
 
 o 
 
 H-» 
 
 ri 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 I 1 < 
 
 a 
 
 B 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 E 
 
 rt 
 
 £ 
 
 e* -4 
 
 T»< -4 —4 
 
 —4 CM (M 
 
 CO CO 
 
 O IP 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 IP 
 
 0 
 
 r—< 
 
 ip 
 
 0 
 
 O O 
 
 O 
 
 Q O O O O iO tfS 
 
 ip r- 
 
 i- 
 
 X 
 
 Cl 
 
 IP 
 
 IP 
 
 CM 
 
 IP 
 
 X 0 
 
 GM 
 
 aOnf’CNO 
 
 x d 
 
 CM 
 
 d 
 
 to 
 
 d 
 
 d 
 
 
 
 — CM 
 
 CM 
 
 ci co O co **r cm ip 
 
 
 CO 
 
 co 
 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 
 to to 
 
 to 
 
 to to t- l- t- X X 
 
 ci 
 
 >i 
 
 ri 
 
 p: 
 
 a 
 
 ho 
 
 >> 
 
 ci 
 
 & 
 
 a 
 
 HJ E w- 
 
 e 0.5? 
 
 o-2W 
 
 £ b * 
 b££ 
 
 >> 
 ri 
 
 a • 3 
 
 .5fo * 
 
 K’?a - 
 B ho o 
 
 ri O---- 
 
 3 y—• 
 c y 
 
 y 
 
 ci 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 >. 
 
 pi 
 
 a 
 
 ho 
 
 y 
 
 B 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 y bi a 
 y ri 3 a 
 
 y y 
 > ri 
 
 £ 41 
 
 =3 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 y 
 
 o 
 
 £ 
 
 =<j 
 
 B o 
 3 ^ 
 
 .a 
 
 . ■ ho 
 
 a :-a 
 
 
 ,__3 V 
 
 W Eh Oh fe 
 
 oS-g y o 
 2« o B2 
 D3 Pi - 
 
 
 ) ■ y 
 
 . ; jg 
 
 B*^ B ^ 
 u Q y > 
 y ?. y < 
 
 •J CX *J 
 73 73 n3 
 
 V V V c 
 
 ^a ^ b 
 
 o O 
 
 : y 
 
 ^ y 
 y 44 
 
 o 3 
 
 a 3 
 y > 
 y ? 
 y a 
 
 • y 
 
 • y 
 ; y 
 
 , 4-4 
 
 C/3 
 
 -BE 
 §30 
 
 4-1 -ou 2 
 3 O B 
 hoa o 
 
 b a 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 rf r-4 
 
 ca 
 y 3 
 a o 
 
 « y 
 
 y a 
 
 PI '-4 
 
 ^ > 
 co y 
 
 B 3 
 
 ci a 
 y y 
 Eh O 
 
 pi 
 
 >. _ 
 a-S3 
 
 bo o 
 
 a a 
 
 s 
 
 3 
 
 c >, 3 ci : 
 b b ^ ^ * 
 
 > i^aa- 
 .. 5 a tio ho f 3 
 
 S-g^KSs 
 
 Srga®§5S 
 
 E >1 w E 2 
 
 22go'o 
 B £ E o S 
 b .2? 3 y a 
 
 pi 
 
 ? 
 
 a 
 
 ho 
 
 5 
 
 ■s 
 
 o 
 
 73 
 
 E 
 
 •»“H 
 
9 
 
 valuation and revenues. At the present time Freeport has a popula¬ 
 tion of about 22,000 with 61 industrial plants employing more than 
 3,200 people. The following other communities are located on the 
 river and its tributaries: 
 
 Pecatonica River. Richland Creek. Yellow Creek. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Pop. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Pop. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Pop. 
 
 Pecatonica ... 
 
 _1,200 
 
 Orangeville ... 
 
 . . . 400 
 
 Pearl City . .. 
 
 .. .. 500 
 
 Winslow . 
 
 ... . 500 
 
 Buena Vista .. 
 
 ... 150 
 
 Kent . 
 
 .... 170 
 
 McConnell ... 
 
 . .. . 350 
 
 Red Oak . 
 
 ... 150 
 
 
 
 Ridott . 
 
 .... 180 
 
 Sciota Mills . .. 
 
 ... 150 
 
 
 
 Shirland . 
 
 .... 110 
 
 
 
 
 
 RAILROADS. 
 
 The Illinois Central Railroad is the chief transportation factor in 
 the valley. The headquarters of the first division of the line from 
 Chicago to Omaha with terminal and roundhouse facilities are loca¬ 
 ted at Freeport. From this point branch lines run to Dodgeville, 
 Wisconsin, and Madison, Wisconsin, and the old charter line south to 
 Cairo. The Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad enters the valley 
 near Rockton, following the bottom lands up to Freeport where it 
 crosses the river and continues to Savanna, Illinois. A branch of the 
 Chicago & Northwestern Railway, running from Chicago to Freeport, 
 enters the valley at Pecatonica. The Chicago & Great Western Rail¬ 
 road passes about four miles south of Freeport. The Freeport & 
 Rockford Interurban Railroad parallels the Chicago & Northwestern 
 from Pecatonica to Freeport. 
 
 DAMS AND WATER POWER. 
 
 There are many small dams on the various streams of the Peca¬ 
 tonica basin in Illinois, but at only three of these is the water power, 
 at present, being used. 
 
 Goddard’s Dam, at Freeport, has a crest length of 119 feet and 
 develops a head of about 4.2 feet at medium low water stage. It is 
 owned and operated by the Freeport Railway and Light Company in 
 producing electric power for traction and lighting purposes. 
 
 Brown’s Dam, about 10 miles below Freeport, has a crest length 
 of 175 feet with available head of about 4.2 feet at medium low water 
 and is operated by the Pecatonica River Power Company for electric 
 traction and lighting purposes. 
 
 Orangeville Dam, at Orangeville on Richland Creek, Charles W. 
 Bennett, owner, furnishes power for a feed mill and an electric light¬ 
 ing system. 
 
 The Rivers and Lakes Commission has held public hearings and 
 passed on matters relative to back water effects of Goddard’s Dam and 
 Brown’s Dam in the cases of Robert Ilgen et al. v. Freeport Railway 
 and Light Company et al., (Docket No. 12). Case of C. C. Nolb v. 
 Chas. W. Bennett, account of back water. Dam at Orangeville (Docket 
 No. 75). 
 
PLATE I 
 
 
 A. Nucleus of a Natural Dam. 
 
 B. Illustration of Bank Erosion 
 
11 
 
 The following is a list of dams in the Illinois portion of the drain¬ 
 age area showing the owners, location, and uses. In addition to this 
 list permits have been granted by the state of Wisconsin for twenty 
 dams in that state. 
 
 LIST OF EXISTING DAMS ON PECATONICA RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES IN 
 
 ILLINOIS. 
 
 Local name. 
 
 Owner. 
 
 Location. 
 
 Uses. 
 
 Stream. 
 
 Pecatonica Dam 
 
 Sec. 20, T. 27N..R. 10 E. 
 
 Brown's Dam 
 
 Freeport Light 
 & Power Co.. 
 
 Sec. 1, T. 26N..R.8W. 
 
 Goddard’s Dam... 
 
 Freeport Light 
 & Power Co.. 
 
 Sec.30,T.27 N..R. 8W. 
 
 Fisher’s Dam.S. K. Fisher_ 
 
 Orangeville Dam.. C. F. Bennett... 
 
 Yellow Creek Dam. 
 
 Buena Vista Dam. 
 
 Scioto Mills Dam. 
 
 Reader’s Dam. 
 
 Polsbury Mill Dam. 
 
 Davis Mills Dam. 
 
 Mill Pond Dam. 
 
 Sec. 12, T. 28 N..R.6E. 
 Sec.36, T.26N..R. 7E. 
 
 Sec. 14,T. 26 N..R.6E. 
 Sec. 15, T. 23N..R. 7E. 
 Sec. 10, T. 27N..R. 7E. 
 Sec. 23, T. 27 N..R.9E. 
 Sec. 35, T. 28N..R.9E. 
 Sec. 27, T. 28 N..R.9E. 
 Sec. 15, T. 28N..R.9E. 
 
 Grist mill not in 
 use. 
 
 Electric light 
 and power.... 
 
 Electric light 
 and power.... 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Electric light 
 and feed mill. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Not in use. 
 
 Pecatonica. 
 
 Pecatonica. 
 
 Pecatonica. 
 
 Pecatonica. 
 
 Richland Creek. 
 Yellow Creek. 
 Richland Creek. 
 Richland Creek. 
 Rock Run. 
 
 Rock Run. 
 
 Rock Run. 
 
 Rock Run. 
 
 STREAM FLOW. 
 
 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF FLOW. 
 
 The surface of the Pecatonica drainage basin at the headwaters 
 in Wisconsin is steep and hilly, and the slope of the channel relatively 
 great. In Illinois, however, the valley flattens out the slope of the 
 channel gradually lessens, and the river winds back and forth across 
 the valley, often doubling back on itself so as to form sharp oxbows. 
 The average fall of the river in Wisconsin is more than 6 feet per 
 mile, whereas in Illinois it is only a little over half a foot per mile. 
 The width of the channel ranges from 100 to 200 feet. The banks 
 are low or of medium height, and are, in most places, fringed with a 
 heavy growth of timber. The valley contains no large lakes or 
 swamps which might serve as natural reservoirs for storing and 
 retarding the flood waters. 
 
 The form of the channel in the bottom lands is subject to con¬ 
 tinuous change due largely to erosion of the banks. This change is 
 generally slow but in some seasons it amounts to several feet. Occa¬ 
 sionally a tree, whose roots have been undermined by the water, falls 
 into the river and forms the nucleus of a natural dam that causes the 
 river during high stages to cut an entirely new channel for some dis¬ 
 tance. Plate I shows something of the cause and effect of such 
 action, and Plate II shows two distinct natural channel diversions that 
 were doubtless the result of similar action. 
 
 The average annual precipitation in the valley is about 33 inches, 
 the larger part usually falling in the spring and summer months. The 
 water of a heavy rainfall in the steep upper regions of the drainage 
 basin reaches the flat bottom lands so quickly that it overfills the 
 
12 
 
 crooked and somewhat snag-obstructed channel and spreads out over 
 the adjacent low lands, often covering the entire valley. 
 
 STREAM GAGING DATA. 
 
 Gaging stations have been maintained on the river and records 
 of flow collected since 1914 by the Railroad Commission of Wisconsin 
 
 W 
 
 3 
 
 v> 
 
 i) 
 
 O 
 
 c 
 
 to 
 
 t • 
 
 €> .E 
 
 X ~ 
 
 I ® 
 
 I 
 
 CO > 
 -c -A 
 o 
 
 tl 
 
 v> .y 
 £ .£ 
 
 o 
 
 2 
 
 cooperating with the U. S. Geological Survey at Dill, Wisconsin, and 
 by the Rivers and Lakes Commission of Illinois cooperating with the 
 U. S. Geological Survey at Freeport, Illinois. The mean discharge 
 
13 
 
 at these stations is determined for each day by applying the mean of 
 two observed gage heights to a rating curve which shows the relation 
 between gage height and discharge and which is based on discharge 
 measurements made with a current meter. The records of mean daily 
 gage height and discharge are given in the water supply papers of the 
 U. S. Geological Survey, and will also be published at an early date in a 
 report on the water resources of Illinois by the Rivers and Lakes Com¬ 
 mission. Summaries of these data follow. In the data presented the 
 following definition of terms is used: 
 
 “Second-feet” is an abbreviation for “cubic feet per second.” A 
 second-foot is the rate of discharge of water flowing in a channel of 
 rectangular cross-section 1 foot wide and 1 foot deep at an average 
 velocity of 1 foot per second. 
 
 MONTHLY DISCHARGE OF PECATONICA RIVER AT DILL, WIS., FOR THE YEARS 
 
 ENDING SEPTEMBER. 30. 1914-1916. 
 
 (Drainage area, 959 square miles.) 
 
 Month. 
 
 Dischargre in second-feet. 
 
 Run-off. 
 
 • 
 
 Accuracy. 
 
 Maxi¬ 
 
 mum. 
 
 Mini¬ 
 
 mum. 
 
 Mean. 
 
 Per 
 
 square 
 
 mile. 
 
 Depth in inch¬ 
 es on drain¬ 
 age area. 
 
 1914 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 October. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 November. 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 December. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 January. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 February. 
 
 
 
 308 
 
 0.321 
 
 0.24 
 
 c 
 
 March. 
 
 
 
 681 
 
 .710 
 
 .82 
 
 c 
 
 April. 
 
 803 
 
 411 
 
 515 
 
 .537 
 
 .60 
 
 A 
 
 May. 
 
 1.290 
 
 355 
 
 575 
 
 .600 
 
 .69 
 
 B 
 
 June. 
 
 1,340 
 
 399 
 
 613 
 
 .639 
 
 .72 
 
 A 
 
 July. 
 
 879 
 
 336 
 
 430 
 
 .449 
 
 .52 
 
 A 
 
 Augrust. 
 
 651 
 
 300 
 
 352 
 
 .367 
 
 .42 
 
 A 
 
 September. 
 
 4,110 
 
 327 
 
 839 
 
 .875 
 
 .98 
 
 B 
 
 1914-15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 October. 
 
 735 
 
 376 
 
 461 
 
 .481 
 
 .55 
 
 A 
 
 November. 
 
 425 
 
 
 380 
 
 .396 
 
 .44 
 
 c 
 
 December. 
 
 
 
 315 
 
 .328 
 
 .38 
 
 D 
 
 January. 
 
 
 
 266 
 
 .277 
 
 .32 
 
 D 
 
 February. 
 
 5,460 
 
 
 1,630 
 
 1.70 
 
 1.77 
 
 D 
 
 March. 
 
 1.360 
 
 556 
 
 840 
 
 .876 
 
 1.01 
 
 B 
 
 April. 
 
 556 
 
 400 
 
 493 
 
 .514 
 
 .57 
 
 A 
 
 May. 
 
 1.240 
 
 400 
 
 576 
 
 .601 
 
 .69 
 
 A 
 
 June. 
 
 2,060 
 
 476 
 
 777 
 
 .810 
 
 .90 
 
 A 
 
 July. 
 
 1,320 
 
 450 
 
 585 
 
 .610 
 
 .70 
 
 A 
 
 Augrust. 
 
 1,680 
 
 400 
 
 631 
 
 .658 
 
 .76 
 
 A 
 
 September. 
 
 6,590 
 
 400 
 
 2,050 
 
 2.14 
 
 , 2.39 
 
 B 
 
 The year. 
 
 6.590 
 
 
 741 
 
 .773 
 
 10.48 
 
 
 1915-16 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 October. 
 
 1.480 
 
 625 
 
 877 
 
 .915 
 
 1.05 
 
 A 
 
 November. 
 
 1,320 
 
 556 
 
 679 
 
 .708 
 
 .79 
 
 A 
 
 December. 
 
 661 
 
 476 
 
 538 
 
 .561 
 
 .65 
 
 C 
 
 January. 
 
 5,180 
 
 489 
 
 1,780 
 
 1.86 
 
 2.14 
 
 D 
 
 February. 
 
 2,510 
 
 528 
 
 1,040 
 
 1.08 
 
 1.16 
 
 D 
 
 March. 
 
 013,100 
 
 400 
 
 1,960 
 
 2.04 
 
 2.35 
 
 C 
 
 April. 
 
 1,160 
 
 537 
 
 692 
 
 .722 
 
 .81 
 
 A 
 
 May. 
 
 1.200 
 
 511 
 
 651 
 
 .679 
 
 .78 
 
 A 
 
 June. 
 
 1,880 
 
 498 
 
 922 
 
 .961 
 
 1.07 
 
 B 
 
 July. 
 
 1,320 
 
 414 
 
 521 
 
 .543 
 
 .63 
 
 B 
 
 Augrust. 
 
 462 
 
 314 
 
 375 
 
 .391 
 
 .45 
 
 B 
 
 September. 
 
 1,970 
 
 356 
 
 552 
 
 .576 
 
 .64 
 
 B 
 
 The year. 
 
 13,100 
 
 314 
 
 883 
 
 .921 
 
 12.52 
 
 
 a Crest stagre. 
 
14 
 
 MONTHLY DISCHARGE OF PECATONICA RIVER AT FREEPORT, ILL., FOR THE 
 
 YEARS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1915-1916. 
 
 (Drainage area, 1,330 square miles.) 
 
 Month. 
 
 Discharge in second-feet. 
 
 Run-off. 
 
 Accuracy. 
 
 Maxi¬ 
 
 mum. 
 
 Mini¬ 
 
 mum. 
 
 Mean. 
 
 Per 
 
 square 
 
 mile. 
 
 Depth in inch¬ 
 es on drain¬ 
 age area. 
 
 1914-15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 October. 
 
 942 
 
 469 
 
 590 
 
 0.444 
 
 0.51 
 
 A 
 
 November. 
 
 ODD 
 
 341 
 
 477 
 
 .359 
 
 .40 
 
 A 
 
 Dpr.ember. 
 
 
 322 
 
 443 
 
 .333 
 
 .38 
 
 B 
 
 January. 
 
 
 
 450 
 
 .338 
 
 .39 
 
 D 
 
 Pphrnarv. 
 
 8.520 
 
 
 3.320 
 
 2.50 
 
 2.60 
 
 D 
 
 March. 
 
 6,310 
 
 824 
 
 1.410 
 
 1.06 
 
 1.22 
 
 B 
 
 April. 
 
 801 
 
 519 
 
 667 
 
 .502 
 
 .56 
 
 A 
 
 May. 
 
 2.100 
 
 502 
 
 801 
 
 .602 
 
 .69 
 
 A 
 
 June. 
 
 2.670 
 
 672 
 
 1.140 
 
 .857 
 
 .96 
 
 A 
 
 July. 
 
 1; 710 
 
 632 
 
 963 
 
 .724 
 
 .83 
 
 A 
 
 August. 
 
 2,880 
 
 612 
 
 996 
 
 .749 
 
 .86 
 
 A 
 
 September. 
 
 6.310 
 
 555 
 
 2.630 
 
 1.98 
 
 2.21 
 
 B 
 
 The year. 
 
 8,520 
 
 322 
 
 1.140 
 
 .857 
 
 11.61 
 
 
 1915-16 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 October. 
 
 4.270 
 
 894 
 
 1,300 
 
 .977 
 
 1.13 
 
 A 
 
 November. 
 
 2,020 
 
 757 
 
 981 
 
 .738 
 
 .82 
 
 A 
 
 December. 
 
 1,020 
 
 714 
 
 813 
 
 .611 
 
 .70 
 
 B 
 
 January. 
 
 6.310 
 
 593 
 
 2.480 
 
 1.86 
 
 2.14 
 
 D 
 
 February. 
 
 3.830 
 
 714 
 
 1.500 
 
 1.13 
 
 1.22 
 
 D 
 
 March. 
 
 17.000 
 
 593 
 
 2,910 
 
 2.19 
 
 2.52 
 
 B 
 
 April. 
 
 7,770 
 
 779 
 
 1.270 
 
 .955 
 
 1.07 
 
 A 
 
 May. 
 
 1,530 
 
 757 
 
 1.050v 
 
 .789 
 
 .91 
 
 A 
 
 June. 
 
 3.120 
 
 894 
 
 1.600 
 
 1.20 
 
 1.34 
 
 A 
 
 July. 
 
 1,710 
 
 537 
 
 874 
 
 .657 
 
 .76 
 
 A 
 
 August. 
 
 1.090 
 
 423 
 
 530 
 
 .398 
 
 .46 
 
 A 
 
 September. 
 
 2,520 
 
 453 
 
 844 
 
 .635 
 
 .71 . 
 
 A 
 
 The year. 
 
 17.000 
 
 423 
 
 1.350 
 
 1.02 
 
 13.78 
 
 
 “Second-feet per square mile” is the average number of cubic 
 feet of water flowing per second from each square mile of area drained 
 on the assumption that the run-off is distributed uniformly both as 
 regards time and area. 
 
 “Run-off, depth in inches” is the depth to which the drainage area 
 would be covered if all the water flowing from it in a given period 
 were conserved and uniformly distributed on the surface. It is used 
 for comparing run-off with rainfall, which is usually expressed in 
 inches of depth. 
 
 The information given in the column headed “Accuracy” in the 
 monthly discharge table is applicable to the monthly mean only and 
 not to the estimate of maximum and minimum discharge nor to that 
 for any one day. It is based on the accuracy of the rating curve, the 
 probable reliability of the gage reader, the number of gage readings 
 per day, the range of the fluctuations in stage, and knowledge of local 
 conditions. In this column A indicates that the mean monthly flow is 
 probably accurate within 5 per cent; B, within 10 per cent; C, within 
 15 per cent; D, within 25 per cent. Special conditions are covered 
 by foot notes. 
 
 STUDY OF DURATION CURVES AND DISCUSSION OF FLOW. 
 
 The duration curves, Figures 1 and 2 for the flow at Freeport 
 show the number of days and percentage of time in each year that the 
 
15 
 
 flow equalled or exceeded any given amount. For example, to find 
 the number of days in 1916 that the flow was equal to 4,000 cubic feet 
 per second, follow the horizontal line representing that quantity to 
 the point where it intersects the curve and then drop vertically down¬ 
 ward to the scale of days, which shows 17 days. Subtracting 17 
 
 from 366 gives 349 as the number of days for which the flow was less 
 than 4,000 cubic feet per second. 
 
 The terms ‘‘ordinary flow” and “normal flow” are usually taken 
 to mean the flow which is equalled 50 per cent of the time, or, in 
 other words, the flow that is exceeded as many days in the period 
 under consideration as it is not equalled. The duration curves show 
 
16 
 
 that the ordinary flow for 1915 was 660 cubic feet per second, or 
 0.496 cubic feet per second per square mile of drainage area; and that 
 for 1916 was 930 cubic feet per second, or 0.699 cubic feet per second 
 per square mile. 
 
 The “average flow” or “mean flow” of a stream is the average 
 for all the days during the period under consideration. It is not the 
 same as the “ordinary flow.” The tables of monthly discharge show 
 that the average flow at Freeport for 1915 was 1,140 cubic feet per 
 second, or 0.857 cubic feet per second per square mile, and that for 
 1916 was 1,350 cubic feet per second, or 1.02 cubic feet per second per 
 square mile. It will be observed that these are larger than the ordin¬ 
 ary flow for the same periods. 
 
 PRECIPITATION. IN INCHES. AT STATIONS IN DRAINAGE BASIN OF PECATONICA 
 RIVER DURING THE YEARS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1915-1916. 
 
 Station. 
 
 October. 
 
 November. 
 
 | December. 
 
 January. 
 
 February. 
 
 March. 
 
 April. 
 
 May. 
 
 June. 
 
 July. 
 
 August. 
 
 September. 
 
 Annual. 
 
 1914-1915 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dodgeville, Wis. 
 
 3.20 
 
 0.48 
 
 1.15 
 
 1.31 
 
 1.92 
 
 0.20 
 
 0.00 
 
 7.78 
 
 2.90 
 
 5.43 
 
 2.12 
 
 11.88 
 
 38.37 
 
 Darling-ton, Wis. 
 
 3.21 
 
 0.45 
 
 2.05 
 
 0.75 
 
 2.53 
 
 0.75 
 
 0.30 
 
 6.30 
 
 4.15 
 
 4.35 
 
 4.00 
 
 10.85 
 
 39.69 
 
 Dakota, Ill. 
 
 2.00 
 
 0.24 
 
 1.99 
 
 1.39 
 
 1.04 
 
 0.11 
 
 0.20 
 
 a 
 
 4.63 
 
 7.21 
 
 2.66 
 
 6.77 
 
 628.24 
 
 1915-1916 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dodgeville, Wis. 
 
 0.34 
 
 3.52 
 
 0.50 
 
 4.30 
 
 1.20 
 
 3.82 
 
 2.30 
 
 4.35 
 
 7.50 
 
 0.46 
 
 2.27 
 
 7.20 
 
 37.76 
 
 Darling-ton, Wis. 
 
 0.70 
 
 2.45 
 
 0.14 
 
 2.15 
 
 1.02 
 
 3.06 
 
 3.00 
 
 2.40 
 
 4.85 
 
 2.64 
 
 1.17 
 
 8.05 
 
 31.63 
 
 Dakota. Ill. 
 
 0.64 
 
 2.95 
 
 0.18 
 
 3.89 
 
 0.81 
 
 2.44 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Freeport, Ill..’. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5.30 
 
 7.88 
 
 1.60 
 
 4.60 
 
 9.05 
 
 C39.34 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a No record. 
 b li Months. 
 
 c 11 months at Dakota and Freeport. 
 
 Although the total precipitation during each year was about the 
 same it will be noted that both the ordinary and average flow were 
 considerably less in 1915 than in 1916. This 'was due probably to the 
 difference in the distribution of the precipitation throughout the years. 
 The precipitation from July to September, inclusive, when the quan¬ 
 tity evaporated and used by plants would be the greatest, was a larger 
 percentage of the total precipitation for the year in 1915 than in 1916. 
 Also, the heavier rainfall during the summer of 1915 increased the 
 amount of water held as ground storage and afterward gradually re¬ 
 leased to augment the flow during the following autumn, thereby in¬ 
 creasing the flow for 1916. Further, in 1916, the precipitation from 
 January to April inclusive, when the percentage of run-off would be 
 relatively large, was greater than for the same period in 1915. 
 
 It is difficult to estimate from the records of only two years how 
 these ordinary and average flows would compare with those determined 
 from records of a much longer period. The average precipitation in 
 the drainage basin for each year was about 37 inches, whereas the 
 normal annual precipitation for this region is only about 33 inches. 
 Owing, however, to the conditions favorable to relatively small run-off 
 that existed during 1915, as described above, the results for that year 
 
17 
 
 are probably nearer the average that might be expected from a long 
 
 period. 
 
 It is interesting to note that the average flow per square mile of 
 drainage area was greater at Dill than at Freeport during both years, 
 the average flow at Dill having been 0.773 and 0.991 cubic feet per 
 
 o — 
 
 
 
 D 
 
 IS( 
 
 ;hc 
 
 U 3 
 
 e- 
 
 
 UP 
 
 71 
 
 'ee 
 
 P 
 
 er 
 
 oeco 
 
 id 
 
 o 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 L— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .< 
 
 O 
 
 { 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 » 
 
 J 
 
 > 
 
 > 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 C 
 
 C 
 
 < 
 
 p 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 l 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 £ 
 
 c 
 
 1 
 
 P 
 
 > 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 i 
 
 o 
 
 Oo 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 rs> 
 
 o 
 
 .< 
 
 o 
 
 © 1 
 
 O 
 
 <T> 
 
 3 
 
 0> 
 
 03 
 
 0) 
 
 S o 
 
 3* -h 
 
 d 
 
 3 
 
 (0 
 
 8 
 
 .« 
 
 s« 
 
 8 
 
 s* 
 
 8 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 & “ 
 
 2 
 
 e 
 
 3 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 O- O ’ 
 
 0) 
 
 •n 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ o 
 
 < S’ 
 
 2f T - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 8 1 
 
 fb 
 
 3 
 
 CL ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 o 
 
 <£> 
 
 CO 
 
 OJ r-o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 “5- "O ST 
 
 oj pi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ~ o » S H 
 
 O' z £ , 
 
 / o _ Ln 
 
 c o ^ h 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 £ H S 
 
 _ d 23 r* m 
 
 <£ 5 “ o 
 
 a> z rn -n 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 ^ _ 8 H 
 
 c > £> P 
 
 5 H 3 i o,I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 rn ^ ^ o 
 
 x> 3 cn 
 m oi 
 
 m c/i c>i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ~ 
 
 o § * f 
 
 H sill 
 
 — 
 
 1 1 
 
 ( 
 
 ■J 
 
 
 tn 
 
 ! 
 
 c 
 
 
 -o 
 
 ) 
 
 09 
 
 1 
 
 < 
 
 7 
 
 O 
 
 1 
 
 7 
 
 r- 
 
 S 
 
 E>j 
 
 £ 
 
 1 
 
 
 f 
 
 <u 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 j 
 
 1.0 
 
 ri 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 1 -off 
 
 per Sq IV 
 
 rainaqe Area - 
 
 Cubic Feet 
 
 per 5 
 
 ec. ^ 
 
 FIGURE 2 . 
 
 second per square mile in 1915 and 1916 respectively, and that at 
 Freeport only 0.564 and 0.797 cubic feet per second per square mile 
 during the same periods. This probably was due largely to the fact 
 that the average slope of the drainage basin above Dill is greater than 
 
18 
 
 that above Freeport. Other things being equal, the run-off from steep 
 slopes is greater than that from moderate or flat slopes. 
 
 PAST AND PROBABLE FUTURE FLOODS. 
 
 As conditions that exist in the region of the headwaters favor 
 quick run-off, floods on the river are caused rather frequently by the 
 
 PLATE III. 
 
 heavier storms, and usually the banks in Illinois are overflowed several 
 times each year. As a rule spring floods are the heaviest and, espe¬ 
 cially when accompanied by ice jams, cause considerable damage in the 
 city of Freeport. Water passing over the east bank above the city 
 
19 
 
 flows through the section known as East Freeport, inundating large 
 areas, flooding the cellars and ground floors of residences, destroying 
 goods and furniture and putting out of service the sewerage system. 
 At the factories, some of which employ more than 2,000 men, the 
 damage to property and the loss in time and wages are great. Traffic 
 on most of the railroads is prevented by the washing out or submerging 
 of the tracks, and even vehicle traffic is made impossible. The aver¬ 
 age annual monetary loss is estimated by Mr. C. S. Hepner, city en¬ 
 gineer, Freeport, at $50,000. 
 
 The summer floods, although usually not so large as those of the 
 spring, inflict much damage on the farm lands and often destroy whole 
 fields of corn and wheat. 
 
 Since the gaging station at Freeport was established, in Septem¬ 
 ber, 1914, many floods have occurred. On September 16, 1914, the 
 river reached a stage of 18.4 feet on the gage, flooded East Freeport 
 and caused much damage to crops on the low farm lands. In 1915 it 
 reached a stage of 17.1 feet February 28, 16.1 feet September 17-18, 
 and 15.8 feet September 28. In 1916 it reached a stage of 16.5 feet 
 January 22, 16.8 feet January 28, 14.1 feet February 23, and 19.4 feet 
 March 28. 
 
 The storm causing the flood of February, 1916, left the drainage 
 basin with an impervious coating of ice and frost which, on March 22, 
 was covered with a blanket of snow equivalent to a rain of about 0.8 
 inch. The temperature began to rise March 24, and in the next three 
 days there was a rainfall, as shown in Plate III, averaging about 1.75 
 inches on the drainage basin. Although the precipitation during this 
 period was not exceptionally heavy, the run-off was very rapid, owing 
 to the impervious condition of the ground, and the flood was the largest 
 within the memory of the oldest residents of the valley. The water 
 began to rise rapidly at Freeport March 25, reaching the maximum 
 stage of 19.4 feet by the morning of March 28 and continuing at that 
 stage until night. By the next morning the water had dropped to 19.2 
 feet on the gage and it continued to fall slowly. At the maximum 
 stage of 19.4 feet on March 28 the discharge, or flow, in the regular 
 channel of the river at the Stephenson Street bridge was measured by 
 
 H. C. Beckman, junior engineer, U. S. Geological Survey, by means of 
 a current meter and found to be 14,000 cubic feet per second. The 
 amount of the overflow through East Freeport was determined by 
 multiplying the mean velocity, estimated from the velocity of drift¬ 
 wood, by the cross-sectional area of the overflow channel determined 
 by leveling after the water had subsided. Thi% method gave a flow of 
 3,000 cubic feet per second. The total discharge at this maximum 
 stage was thus determined to be 17,000 cubic feet per second, or a run¬ 
 off averaging about 13 cubic feet per second per square mile from the 
 
 I, 330 square miles of drainage area above Freeport. The details of 
 time and magnitude of this flood are shown graphically in Plate IV. 
 
 As this flood came before the crops were planted the damage sus¬ 
 tained by the farming interests was not great. In the city of Freeport, 
 however, it was very large. Traffic into the city was stopped on most 
 
20 
 
 of the railroads for several days. The electric light plant and sewer- 
 
 PLATE IY. 
 
 and did much damage by flooding basements and first floors of resi¬ 
 dences. Speaking of this flood Mr. C. S. Hepner, city engineer, Free¬ 
 port, Ill., says that “$100,000 is a fair estimate of the direct monetary 
 loss. The indirect loss due to depreciation of property values, reduc¬ 
 tion of rental rates, and retarding of the development of this section 
 of the city certainly totals an equal amount.” 
 
21 
 
 As the flood of March, 1916, on this river was the greatest within 
 the last fifty years, or more, it may be regarded by some as the largest 
 possible. A study of the factors causing floods and the extent to 
 which these factors acted in causing this particular flood indicates that 
 this opinion is not well founded. Of the principal factors controlling 
 run-off on any particular drainage basin, all are fixed and invariable 
 
 except three—precipitation, condition of soil, and temperature. The 
 greater the rate and amount of the rainfall, other things being equal, 
 the greater will be the flood produced. A heavy rain falling on a dry 
 and pervious soil is partly absorbed by the ground and slowly released 
 in the future; but if this rain falls on a soil already saturated from 
 
22 
 
 previous rains, or melted snows, or on a soil made impervious by frost 
 and ice, the run-off will be much greater, and if the rain falls when 
 considerable snow is melting, the run-off is further augmented. The 
 heaviest floods occur when the most favorable condition of all these 
 factors are combined. 
 
 As already indicated, the rainfall preceding the flood of March, 
 1916, was not large, but the conditions of temperature and soil were 
 ideal for quick run-off, as the ground was sealed with frost and ice, 
 thus preventing absorption of water, and the temperature increased 
 just in time to add snow water to that resulting from the rain. 
 
23 
 
 During September 12-16, 1915, one of the heaviest storms ever re^ 
 corded in Southern Wisconsin swept across that region. The average 
 rainfall, as shown in Plate V on the drainage area above Freeport was 
 over 5 inches, the maximum having been 9 inches in the vicinity of 
 Dodgeville, Wis. This storm, however, came at a time when the 
 ground was fairly dry, and although the rainfall was about three times 
 as large as that of March, 1916, the maximum discharge of the river 
 at Freeport was less than half as large. 
 
 The maximum discharge per square mile of area drained is never 
 as great under the same conditions from a large drainage basin as 
 from a small one. This is due to the fact that in the larger drainage 
 basin a greater part of the water falling in the lower regions of the 
 basin can be carried away before the water from the upper regions 
 arrives. The drainage area of Sugar River, a tributary of the Peca- 
 tonica, above Brodhead, Wis., is 529 square miles whereas that for 
 Pecatonica River above Freeport is 1,330 square miles. The average 
 slope of the river above Brodhead is also greater than that above 
 Freeport, so that the rate of run-off at Brodhead would be greater. In 
 the storm of September 12-16, 1915, the average rainfall above Brod¬ 
 head was nearly 6 inches, yet the maximum discharge was only about 
 16 cubic feet per second, or a square mile rate of only about 25 per 
 cent greater than that of the Pecatonica River during March, 1916. 
 
 Much heavier storms than either the one of September, 1915, or 
 March, 1916, have occurred in the Upper Mississippi Valley in recent 
 years. During July 23-24, 1912, there fell in about 24 hours at Mer¬ 
 rill, Wis., a rain of 11.25 inches; 10 inches fell on an area of 100 
 square miles, and 6 inches on an area of 1,650 square miles. Accord¬ 
 ing to Mr. C. B. Stewart, consulting engineer, Madison, Wis., the 
 average rainfall on the 700 square miles of area draining into the Wis¬ 
 consin River between Merrill and Tomahawk was 7.7 inches, and the 
 maximum run-off from this area about 65 cubic feet per second per 
 square mile. 
 
 During March 23-27, 1913, a heavy storm occurred in the vicinity 
 of Dayton, Ohio. The average rainfall in the drainage basin of Miami 
 River above Miami, near the mouth, was about 9.5 inches. The maxi¬ 
 mum run-off from this area of 3,937 square miles was 98 cubic feet 
 per second per square mile. 1 The following table gives the rainfall on 
 areas of 1,500 square miles, or a little greater than the drainage area 
 of Pecatonica River at Freeport, for nine of the greatest recorded 
 storms in the Upper Mississippi Valley: 
 
 1 From report of Chief Engineer, Arthur E. Morgan, Miami Conservancy 
 District. 
 
24 
 
 DEPTH IN INCHES OF THE EATEST AVERAGE RAINFALL ON AREAS OF 1.500 
 SQUARE MILES DURING NINE GREATEST STORMS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN 
 THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY. 
 
 Storm. 
 
 Center. 
 
 Greatest 
 
 24-hour 
 
 rainfall. 
 
 Greatest 
 
 48-hour 
 
 rainfall. 
 
 Greatest 
 
 72-hour 
 
 rainfall. 
 
 1889, May 31-June 1. 
 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
 7.3 
 
 8.6 
 
 
 1900. July 14-16. 
 
 Iowa. 
 
 6.5 
 
 10.1 
 
 10.9 
 
 1903. August 26-28. 
 
 Iowa. 
 
 9.5 
 
 10.2 
 
 
 1905, June 9-10. 
 
 Iowa. 
 
 9.2 
 
 
 
 1909. July 5-8. 
 
 Kansas. 
 
 6.5 
 
 7 2 
 
 9 4 
 
 1909, July 19-22. 
 
 Michigan. 
 
 7.0 
 
 7.9 
 
 8 3 
 
 1910, October 4 6. 
 
 Illinois. 
 
 6.2 
 
 9.9 
 
 12.4 
 
 1913, March 23-27. 
 
 Ohio. 
 
 6.3 
 
 8.3 
 
 9 2 
 
 1915, August 17-20. 
 
 Arkansas. 
 
 6.5 
 
 9.4 
 
 12. 
 
 A comparison of the storm of March, 1916, with those cited for 
 Merrill, Dayton and the ones listed in the above table makes it obvious 
 that the flood of March, 1916, is by no means the largest that might 
 occur on Pecatonica River. Had a storm as heavy as any of those 
 cited above occurred in the drainage basin of Pecatonica River under 
 the conditions prevailing in March, 1916, it is safe to estimate that the 
 maximum flood flow would have been several times as great as it was, 
 and the maximum stage reached would have been several feet higher. 
 Even if a storm as heavy as those were to occur under ordinary sum¬ 
 mer conditions the flood of March, 1916, would probably be exceeded. 
 
 Several factors, however, tend decidedly to reduce the probability 
 of such an occurrence. First, it is very improbable that the area of 
 the most intense rainfall of any storm will cover the whole of any par¬ 
 ticular drainage area as large as that of Pecatonica River above Free¬ 
 port. Second, it is extremely improbable that a storm as heavy as 
 those enumerated, which occur at any particular place on an average 
 only once in a century or more, will ever occur under conditions as 
 favorable to quick run-off as those which existed in the Pecatonica 
 Valley during the flood of March, 1916. On the other hand, it should 
 be borne in mind that although the probability of such occurrence is 
 very small, it is entirely within the realm of possibility and may take 
 place in any year. 
 
 FFOOD REFIEF. 
 
 GENERAL APPLICATION. 
 
 In studying the problem of flood relief let us first consider its 
 application to the whole section of the river which is subject to over¬ 
 flow. In general, the prevention of damage from floods on streams 
 like the Pecatonica can be accomplished either by decreasing the 
 amount of the flow by means of retarding reservoirs, decreasing the 
 slope by channel improvement, preventing overflow by means of levees, 
 or by some combination of these methods. 
 
 In the case of the Pecatonica, the construction of retarding reser¬ 
 voirs is out of the question for the topographical conditions are such 
 that it would require an outlay estimated at more than $3,000,000 to 
 effect a material reduction in the flood discharge by this means. The 
 
PLATE VI 
 
 A. Bridge, Looking Down Stream. 
 
 B. Bridge, Looking Up Stream. 
 
 C. East Approach to Bridge. 
 
 C. & N. W. Ry. Bridge and Approach at Freeport 
 
26 
 
 method of channel improvement, as applied to the whole valley, is also 
 impracticable on account of the enormous amount of work and expense 
 involved as compared with the benefits that would result from such a 
 project. These methods have been studied somewhat in detail in con¬ 
 nection with the survey, but it seems unnecessary to further develop 
 them in this report. The results, however, indicate that local relief 
 must be obtained by the application of local measures where the cost of 
 such measures is commensurate with the value of the protection se¬ 
 cured. 
 
 The agricultural bottom lands could be protected against overflow 
 by the construction of levees, but this would require that additional 
 channel area be provided to compensate for the reduction in width of 
 natural floodway produced by the levees and, at present, the benefits 
 to be derived from such improvement hardly seem to warrant the ex¬ 
 penditure that it would involve. It is possible, however, that the 
 growing demands of agriculture and the gradual silting up of the river 
 bed will make it desirable to adopt such measures for the protection 
 and reclamation of certain areas at some future time. 
 
 THE PROBLEM AT FREEPORT. 
 
 The flood conditions at Freeport, as previously described in the 
 chapter on “Past and Probable Future Floods,” are much more acute 
 than at any other point in the valley and have become a-serious menace 
 to the industrial growth and welfare of the city. These conditions 
 have been greatly aggravated during recent years by the encroach¬ 
 ments of man upon the natural flood channel of the stream. Practic¬ 
 ally all the land now occupied by East Freeport was originally a part 
 of the river’s flood domain. Even the narrow confines of its medium 
 flood channel have been invaded by bridges, manufacturing plants, 
 dams, cinders, city refuse, and what not, until the flood waters have 
 been forced to such heights that the low lying sections of the city have 
 become their legitimate prey. 
 
 A profile of the water surface based on observations of the March, 
 1916, flood (See Fig. 4) shows a fall of 2.7 feet between Cedarville 
 Road and a point just below the Chicago & Northwestern Railway 
 bridge, or about 2.1 feet per mile, while the corresponding slope below 
 this point, where the river is allowed to spread over the whole valley, 
 was only 0.5 feet per mile. 
 
 In seeking the best method of protection for Freeport the possi¬ 
 bilities of improving the old channel have been considered as well as 
 the relative advantages and disadvantages of using various channel 
 areas. It has been found that a plan contemplating the enlargement 
 of the old channel would require such an extensive use of high retain¬ 
 ing walls, on account of the limited width available, that its cost would 
 greatly exceed that of an auxiliary channel. After- careful and ex¬ 
 haustive study the following general plan is recommended as the most 
 practical and satisfactory means of securing the desired protection. 
 
 PLAN OF PROTECTION RECOMMENDED FOR FREEPORT. 
 
 The recommended plan of flood protection contemplates the con¬ 
 struction of an additional channel through East Freeport, beginning 
 
27 
 
 at a point just above Cedarville Road, thence following eastward 
 along the center line of section 30 through the north end of Taylor 
 Park to a point a quarter of a mile east of Henderson Road, thence 
 in a southeasterly direction following the general course of the creek 
 in that region to its confluence with the river. Levees to prevent 
 
 FIGURE 4. 
 
 overflow will be required along both banks of this channel and also 
 along the east bank of the present channel for the greater part of the 
 distance from the Cedarville Road to the Chicago & Northwestern 
 Railway bridge below the city. In order to maintain the ordinary 
 
PLATE VII. 
 
 A. R. R. Transfer Bridge, Looking Down Stream. 
 
 B. West End of R. R. Transfer Bridge, Looking Down Stream 
 
 C. Cinder Pile at Moline Plow Works 
 
29 
 
 stages of water and yet provide for the ready passage of flood waters 
 down the new channel it is proposed to construct, at the upper end of 
 this channel, an overflow dam having a spillway about 30'0 feet long, 
 the crest elevation of which will be slightly higher than that of the 
 Goddard dam. A general outline of the entire project is shown on 
 the accompanying map, Plate X. 
 
 PLATE VIII. 
 
 In the chapter on “Past and Probable Future Floods” it was 
 shown that floods considerably greater than the one of March, 1916, 
 although somewhat improbable, may occur. The question now arises 
 as to how great a flood shall be provided against. Protection against 
 the heaviest possible floods would, on account of the probable infre- 
 
30 
 
 quency of such floods and on account of physical limitations, be im¬ 
 practicable. After careful consideration it has been deemed advisable 
 to base the design of the proposed improvement upon a flood discharge 
 of 21,000 cubic feet per second, or about 25 per cent greater than that 
 of March, 1916. 
 
 This improvement will have practically no effect on the flood 
 stage below the city but will serve to reduce the slope through the city 
 and confine the water to the channels provided for it. 
 
 The profile (Fig. 4) shows the high water line of March, 1916, 
 through Freeport. The surface slope below the city, owing to the 
 greater area of overflow there, was considerably less than the slope 
 through the city. 
 
 The high water elevation of March, 1916, below the Chicago & 
 Northwestern Railway bridge near the lower limits of the city was 
 758.2 feet. From the rating curve (Plate VIII) it may be deduced 
 
 Cross-section of proposed new channel through low ground 
 
 FIGURE 6. 
 
 that in a flood of 21,000 cubic feet per second the surface elevation at 
 this point would probably be raised to 759.1 feet. On the profile 
 (Fig. 4) are shown the probable high water lines that would obtain 
 through Freeport after the completion of the proposed improvements 
 during floods of 17,000 (equal to the flood of March, 1916,) and 
 21,000 cubic feet per second. These also represent very closely, under 
 the same conditions, the high water lines in the proposed new channel. 
 
 As stated before, the project has been designed to carry safely a 
 flow of 21,000 cubic feet per second. In order to determine the size 
 of additional channel necessary to accomplish this, the quantity of 
 water that would be carried by the present channel was first computed 
 
31 
 
 by means of the Kutter and Chezy formulas. Taking the surface ele¬ 
 vation below the Chicago & Northwestern Railway bridge as 759.1 
 feet and the slope as 0.0001, the area of the present channel in the city 
 would be about 3,200 square feet, and the mean hydraulic radius about 
 15.2 feet. The value of n (coefficient of roughness) was computed 
 from the flood of March, 1916, and found to be 0.045. By solving the 
 formulas with these values it was found that the present channel would 
 carry a flow of 7,700 cubic feet per second, leaving 13,300 cubic feet 
 per second to be taken by the new channel. 
 
 After several trials it was found that a section, as shown in Fig. 5 
 for the new channel would carry the required amount. In the compu¬ 
 tations the slope, s, was taken as 0.0001 and the coefficient of rough¬ 
 ness, n, as 0.030. The area of this section is 3,820 square feet and the 
 mean hydraulic radius 16.3 feet. By solving the formulas with these 
 values the mean velocity was found to be 3.46 feet per second, and the 
 discharge very near the desired 13,300 cubic feet per second. 
 
 The bottom of the new channel will, at the lower end, be at an 
 elevation of 738.0 feet; the slope will be 0.0001, thus making the eleva¬ 
 tion at the upper end approximately 739.0 feet. A large part of the 
 new channel will be through rather low ground, and the required depth 
 of 21 feet will have to be obtained by the aid of levees. Fig. 6 shows 
 a typical cross section of the channel through the low regions. 
 
 ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT. 
 
 Excavation— 
 
 1,100,000 cu. yds. @ $0.18.$200,000 
 
 Bridges— 
 
 3 railroad bridges. 75,000 
 
 3 highway bridges...:. 50,000 
 
 Dam and spillway. 30,000 
 
 Right-of-way— 
 
 For auxiliary channel, 65 acres @ $500. 32,500 
 
 For levee along left bank of main river', 14 acres @ $500 7,000 
 
 Damages— 
 
 Moving or" buying 20 buildings. 24,000 
 
 Miscellaneous damages. 10,000 
 
 Overhead Charges— 
 
 Engineering, administration, interest 10 per cent, etc. . . . 42,500 
 
 Contingencies, 7 per cent. 29,000 
 
 Total .>.,.$500,000 
 
 In the above estimate the price for excavation is intended to cover 
 the cost of placing the excavated material in levees both along the new 
 channel and the east bank of the river, and in highway embankments 
 and other places where filling may be required. 
 
 The items for bridges are for the three railroad and three high¬ 
 way bridges that will have to be built across the new channel. The 
 cost of the right-of-way is for a strip of land 300 feet wide throughout 
 the length of the new channel, and a strip with an average width of 
 
32 
 
 65 feet along the greater part of the east bank of the river through the 
 city. 
 
 This is only an approximate estimate but is considered adequate 
 to cover the actual cost of the undertaking. 
 
 In view of an average annual flood loss of $50,000, a total expendi¬ 
 ture of $500,000 for protection is amply justified. The total cost is 
 only five times the estimated direct loss sustained in the single flood of 
 March, 1916. ' 
 
 CONCLUSIONS. 
 
 The following points with reference to the proposed improvement 
 stand out for special consideration: 
 
 1. The improvement will protect the city of Freeport against a 
 flood of 21,000 cubic feet per second, or 25 per cent greater than that 
 of March, 1916. This is the largest flood, in view of the probability 
 of its occurrence, against which it would be economically advisable to 
 provide protection. Even in the event of a heavier flood the loss 
 therefrom would be considerably reduced by the project. 
 
 2. The expenditure required for the improvement—estimated at 
 $500,000—is justified by the benefits it will provide. 
 
 3. The lands along the river above the limits of the improvement 
 will be benefited during floods by a slight reduction in stage, and inas¬ 
 much as the rate of flow will not be increased by it the lands below its 
 limits will not be damaged through an increase in flood heights. 
 
 4. It will not appreciably reduce the stages obtaining in the river 
 during periods of low and ordinary flow, but will produce a material 
 reduction in stage during floods. 
 
 5. Owing to the fact that during periods of small flow most of the 
 water will be required for the operation of the Goddard power plant, 
 only a relatively small amount, during such periods, can be diverted 
 through the new channel. The amount, however, will probably be 
 sufficient to prevent stagnation and its unsanitary effects. 
 
 6. As the improvement is of only local interest it should be ad¬ 
 ministered by local authority. It can probably be handled best through 
 the formation of an improvement district. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PLATE IX. 
 
e&- 
 
 PLATE X. 
 
33 
 
 LIST OF BENCH MARKS ON PECATONICA RIVER. 
 
 Elevation. 
 
 1. Rockton, Ill.— 
 
 In yard of Town Hall, northeast corner, iron post 
 
 Stamped Ill. 1915, 741. 741.100 
 
 2. Rockton—1 mile south by 1.5 miles west of, at T-Road south at north¬ 
 
 west corner Sec. 2 6, T. 46 N., R. 1 E. by S. E., fence corner, 
 iron post 
 
 Stamped Ill. 1915, 743. 742.616 
 
 3. Harrison—2.5 miles east by 0.5 miles south of, at T-Road south, oppo¬ 
 
 site Bate’s School north of center of Sec. 32, T. 46 N., R. 1 E. 
 by S. W., fence corner, iron post 
 
 Stamped Ill. 1915, 741. 740.942 
 
 4. Harrison—550 feet east of bridge over Pecatonica River on north side 
 
 • of east and west road in line with center of road south, iron post 
 
 Stamped 1915, 734. 733.829 
 
 5. Trask Highway Bridge—T. 27 N., R. 11 E., near northeast corner of 
 
 Sec. 6, north end bridge, copper nail in elm tree. 738.51 
 
 6. Pecatonica—0.3 mile of, northeast end of concrete bridge over Peca¬ 
 
 tonica River, on top of concrete guard rail chiseled square. 751.24 
 
 7. T. 27 N., R. 9 E., center of S. E. % Sec. 23, at road forks, 75 feet 
 
 south of center line of road west at southwest corner of yard 
 belonging to J. P. Reider—iron post stamped 747. 746.883 
 
 8. 1.0 miles north of Ridott—At steel bridge over Pecatonica River, top of 
 
 northeast wing wall of north abutment, chiseled square. 752.35 
 
 9. Ridott—1.5 miles south by 2.5 miles west of, at T-Road north in yard 
 
 of State Road Reform Church, nail in cherry tree. 775.36 
 
 10. Freeport—Postoffice Building, south entrance, west end of top step, 
 
 bronze tablets stamped 781. 780.871 
 
 11. Freeport—Chiseled square in top of stone wall on north line of C. & 
 
 N. W. R. R. right of way 5 feet east of east line of Stephenson 
 
 St. bridge. 762.201 
 
 12. Cross on downstream wing wall of left abutment of Harlam Bridge 
 
 over Pecatonica River in Sec. 15, T. 27 N., R. 7 E. of 4 P. M. . . . 765.899 
 
 13. Cross upstream wing wall of left abutment of Rigney’s Bridge over 
 
 Pecatonica River on north line of Sec. 9, T. 27 N., R. 7 E. of 
 
 4th P. M. 768.208 
 
 14. Cross on downstream side of right abutment of Damascus Highway 
 
 Bridge over Pecatonica River in Sec. 4, T. 27 N., R. 7 E. of 
 
 4th P. M. 770.776 
 
 15. Cross on upstream wing wall of left abutment of McConnell Highway 
 
 Bridge near McConnell. 774.44 
 
 16. Cross on upstream wing wall of Winslow Highway Bridge over Peca¬ 
 
 tonica River at Winslow. 782.10 
 
 15a. Bolt on guard rail on upstream side, right bank on I. C. R. R. Bridge 
 
 below Winslow. 778.55 
 
 11a. Freeport—Cross on upstream wing wall of left abutment of Cedar- 
 
 ville Road Bridge over Pecatonica River. 771.093 
 
34 
 
 PUBLICATIONS ISSUED BY THE RIVERS AND LAKES 
 
 COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS. 
 
 i 
 
 Bulletin No. 1— 
 
 The Conservation of Water Power in the Desplaines and Illinois 
 Rivers and the improvement of these Rivers for Navigation—1911. 
 
 Bulletin No. 2— 
 
 Prospectus of a project for a Deep Waterway and conservation of a 
 natural resource of the State of Illinois, prepared by Lyman E. Cooley 
 —1911. 
 
 Bulletin No. 3— 
 
 Uses of the Great Lakes—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 4— 
 
 Land Drainage in Illinois, by Robert Isham Randolph—1913. 
 
 Bulletin No. 5— 
 
 A Compilation of money spent by the Government on various Harbors, 
 Rivers and Canals, and the riparian property holders benefited—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 6— 
 
 Argument on behalf of the State of Illinois supporting the prayer of 
 the Sanitary District of Chicago for a permit to take 10,000 cubic feet 
 of water per second from Lake Michigan, by Isham Randolph—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 7*— 
 
 The 1912 Flood on the Lower Mississippi, by A. L. Dabney, Consulting 
 Engineer and “The 1912 Flood in the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers,” by 
 H. C. Frankenfeld.—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 8— 
 
 Proceedings of the organization meeting of the Association of the Mis¬ 
 sissippi Valley States for river control—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 9— 
 
 The Illinois Water Power Waterway—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 10— 
 
 Illinois Waterways. A guide for navigators from Lake Michigan to the 
 Mississippi River via the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, the Illinois 
 and Michigan Canal and the Illinois River. Also an Alternate Route 
 via the Illinois and Mississippi Canal—1916—Second edition. 
 
 Bulletin No. 11*— 
 
 European Harbor Development, by Robert R. McCormick—1912. 
 
 Bulletin No. 12 *— 
 
 Common Sense Applied to the Inland Waterway Problem, by Robert R. 
 McCormick—19 i 2. 
 
 Bulletin No. 13— 
 
 The Illinois Waterway, A Review by Isham Randolph—1912. 
 
35 
 
 Bulletin No. 14— 
 
 Water Resources of Illinois—A cooperative report prepared by Rivers 
 and Lakes Commission and A. H. Horton, District Engineer of the 
 United States Geological Survey—1914. 
 
 Bulletin No. 15— 
 
 The Illinois Waterway—A Project for a waterway of eight feet minimum 
 depth between Lockport and Utica and available for immediate con¬ 
 struction—1914. 
 
 Bulletin No. 16— 
 
 Stream Pollution and Sewage Disposal in Illinois with reference to 
 Public Policy and Legislation, by LeRoy K. Sherman—1915. 
 
 Bulletin No. 17 *— 
 
 Survey and investigation, La Moine River—1916. 
 
 Bulletin No. 18— 
 
 Study of Pecatonica River, with special reference to flood control. 
 
 Report No. A— 
 
 The Illinois Waterway Report with plans and estimates of cost for a 
 deep waterway from Lockport to Utica by way of the Desplaines and 
 Illinois Rivers, Internal Improvement Commission—1909. 
 
 Report No. B— 
 
 Surface Water Supply of Illinois, Internal Improvement Commission— 
 1908-1910. 
 
 Report No. C— 
 
 Annual report of Rivers and Lakes Commission—1912. 
 
 Report No. D— 
 
 Report and Plans for reclamation of lands subject to overflow in the 
 Kaskaskia River Valley, Illinois—1910-1911. 
 
 Report No. E— 
 
 Report upon the prevention of overflow of the Little Wabash and Skillet 
 Fork Rivers—1911. 
 
 Report No. F— 
 
 Annual Report of Rivers and Lakes Commission—1913-1914. 
 
 Report No. G— 
 
 The Illinois River and its Bottom Lands, by Alvord and Burdick—1915.* 
 
 Report No. H— 
 
 Map and Profile of Fox River—1915. 
 
 * On file in office of Rivers and Lakes Commission—supply for distribution 
 exhausted. 
 
 For any of the foregoing Publications, address Rivers and Lakes Commission 
 of Illinois, 130 North Fifth Avenue, Chicago, Illinois. 
 
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 
 
 3 0112 121965211