HEARINGS BEFORE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 199 
afoot. Mr. H. Hawkins, secretary of the Shreveport (La.) Board of Trade, wrote 
as follows: 
‘The flood warnings sent out by the Weather Bureau before and during the over- 
flow were so accurate and timely that all had ample time to protect themselves. In 
consequence of said warnings there was no loss of live stock and practically no loss 
of movable property. We have no data from which to compute the actual value of 
property threatened from the overflow, but it rans into the hundreds of thousands. 
Certainly the Weather Bureau did wonderful work.’’ 
This is but one of the many commendatory letters and press notices relative to this 
flood that were received. 
The flood of March and April in the lower Mississippi River was the greatest in 
the recorded history of that section, and its culmination was awaited with feelings 
of deepest apprehension and concern. Although the aggregate volume of water was 
less than in the great flood of 1897, yet the extension of existing levees and the 
building of new ones had still more restricted the natural channels, and the out- 
come of the new conditions was difficult to forecast. The test of actual experience 
was necessary. Despite these difficulties the warnings of the Weather Bureau were 
characterized by an almost absolute accuracy, and were issued from four days to four 
weeks in advance. With stages of water higher than ever before known, and with 
the prevailing uncertainty as to the effects of the new levees, the maximum differ- 
ence between the forecasted stages and those actually recorded was only three-tenths 
of a foot, that being at New Orleans, where four weeks’ notice had been given of 
the coming flood crest. The forecasts, however, were conditioned upon the levees 
remaining intact, and had they not broken in a few places even this difference, 
slight though it was, would probably not have occurred. The following table shows 
in aconcise manner the stages forecast and those actually reached: 
Forecasts of lower Mississippi River flood and stages actually reached. 
Stations. BE hea Actual stage. 
Feet. Feet. 
COINOy, seweeesdies cece diede elie cece else araterarsieleiescisoim eatniawaeeien ee unmesseaaeeaeese 50.5 to 51 50.6 
Memphis ee 40 40.1 
Helena 51 51 
Arkansas C! = 53 53 
GON VAG: <icc cass sige asayare. cia sre erase otha: arate ates ve ait sinopaeersemicin x as araime eie wR xa erereraea ssa a 49 49,1 
VickSbUP Ri ssucvexececisiewr crew ciaaie sis sisisle sin cance Seis cae ae winaesocee sane, 52 §1.8 
New Orleans «sce sees viewesieneincas saigeiete eee Sentdesisincietigaemsie se ceresis cieisle'sies 21 20.4 to 20.7 
Mr. Burteson. How many employees of the Department did it 
take to make those observations and estimates ? 
- Professor Moore. Each of the employees of the service contributed 
a little. 
Mr. Bowrs. All of the Mississippi Valley employees? 
Professor Moors. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Burreson. Did it require any increase of force to make those 
observations ? 
Professor Moors. They were all made by the present force. 
Mr. Burieson. We have a river in Texas which runs through a 
very rich agricultural section. It overflows nearly every year and 
destroys a vast amount of property. It is the Brazos River, and I 
thought if, without any additional expense and without increasing the 
force of the Weather Bureau, that system of reporting, which | know 
does result ina great saving, could be inaugurated on that river, it 
would be very desirable. ; 
Professor Moorr. We have had an inspection made of that river 
with a view to inaugurating the service there. We have a skeleton 
service there now, but it is not sufficient. 
Mr. Burreson. I had one schoolmate who lost several thousand dol- 
lars worth of mules and cattle in Washington County, and I know that 
if he had been given only two or three hours’ notice he could have 
saved his property. 
