165 



of this year, following that of the previous year and combined 

 with the absence of overflows with rise and current sufficient 

 to lift and carry away the vegetation, resulted in a very unus- 

 ual growth of the aquatic flora in the lakes and even along the 

 river margins. The conditions prevailing throughout the 

 greater part of the year thus continued to favor the autonomy 

 of the main stream noted in the previous year. In brief, the 

 year may be characterized as one of extreme low water, with 

 some minor and unusual fluctuations. The contrast with 1894 

 is best seen on comparison of the total movements of the two 

 years, viz., 39.98 and 51.75 feet respectively. 



The year 1896 (PI. X.) is one of still more unusual char- 

 acter, since it presents a series of bimonthly rises culminating 

 in step-like succession throughout the year. In none of these, 

 however, save the initial one, is more than a very moderate 

 stage of water reached. This results (PL VII. ) in a reduction 

 of the normal March flood, the isolation of the June flood in 

 the hydrograph, and the submergence of the September rise 

 between the abnormal rises of August and October. The gen- 

 eral result of such a series of rises is to bring the average level 

 for the year up to 6.98 feet (7.26 at Copperas Creek), 0.71 feet 

 above the general average, though the rainfall for the year is 

 slightly below normal. The increased average height does not, 

 however, in this case carry with it the usual extension of the 

 flood period. The river was above ten feet for less than a 

 month and above eight feet only three months. The overflow 

 stage was thus slight, and in addition it occurred in the 

 first months of the year, during the winter minimum of the 

 plankton, while during the spring months, when the normal 

 overflow occurs, the river was practically confined to its banks. 

 The succession of minor floods and the slight increase in the 

 average level does, however, greatly extend the reservoir action 

 of the permanent backwaters. The repeated floods also had 

 the effect of clearing out the vegetation in the river and lakes 

 where some current develops, as, for, example, in Quiver Lake. 

 This reduction in the amount of vegetation in the reservoir 



