80 BULLETIN 1017, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



The floodway should leave the Wild Rice River with a bottom ele- 

 vation somewhat higher than the river bed, and should be provided 

 with a concrete inlet sluiceway with control gates by which flow can 

 be entirely closed off. By cutting the sides to a gentle slope the whole 

 channel can be used for meadow or pasture land except during the 

 short periods of a few days or weeks at rare intervals when it will 

 contain water. Such use of the channel will be advantageous not 

 only agriculturally but also as a means of channel maintenance. 



The portion of the Red River channel between the mouths of the 

 Dakota Wild Rice and Sheyenne Rivers is rather restricted and badly 

 obstructed in certain parts. Above Fargo it is somewhat larger than 

 below but owing to greater obstruction has about the same capacity 

 of flow. At present about 6,000 second-feet is the maximum flow that 

 can be accommodated without overflow of improved property. By 

 channel improvement this can be increased to 8,000 second-feet from 

 the mouth of the Wild Rice to Fargo, and to 7,500 second- feet from 

 Fargo to the mouth of the Sheyenne. Of course the smaller figure 

 governs in the design for relief (see fig. 3, sheets 7 to 9, inclusive). 



The rate of flow in this part of the river channel has exceeded 

 7,500 second-feet in the past, and without doubt will do so in the 

 future unless steps are taken to control it. It is proposed here, by 

 diverting part of the flow of the Dakota Wild Rice River and by 

 controlling the run-off from the Lake Traverse watershed, to limit 

 the flow in this portion of the channel of the Red River to a maximum 

 of 7,500 second-feet, which can be carried by the improved channel 

 without damage to contiguous property. As the outlet of the Wild 

 Rice into Red River is but a short distance above Fargo, a. large 

 reduction in rate of discharge from Wild Rice will result in prac- 

 tically equal reduction in rate of flow in the Red River at Fargo and 

 just below that point, where the channel capacity is restricted. 



Considering first the summer flood flow (see Table 5), this is 

 estimated at a maximum of 9,652 second-feet at Fargo ; the probable 

 maximum for the Wild Rice is 3,315 second-feet ; for the Red above 

 the mouth of the Wild Rice, 6,656 second-feet; and for the small 

 streams between this point and Fargo, 520 second-feet. Assuming 

 that when the flow at Fargo reaches the maximum of 9,652 second- 

 feet the Wild Rice is contributing its maximum of 3,315 second-feet, 

 the flow at Fargo can be reduced to less than the allowable 7,500 by 

 diverting 2,250 second-feet from the Wild Rice through the flood- 

 way. On the other hand, if the Red River above the mouth of the 

 Wild Rice, and the small streams between that point and Fargo, 

 were all flowing at their maximum rates, the Wild Rice would be 

 contributing only 2,476 second-feet, and by diverting 2,250 of this 

 through the floodway the flow at Fargo would be kept within the 



