SOUTH BUFFALO FLOODS AND PROPOSED REMEDY. 7 



tirely unexpected is as accurate as the statement that "this is 

 the worst flood ever experienced in South Buffalo." We have 

 them every year at about the same times. 



I am able to show here a few illustrations of the effects of 

 these annual occurrences in South Buffalo. 



During the ordinary stages of the Buffalo River it crosses the 

 city line in a small channel and is apparently very insignificant. 

 In the case of high floods, it crosses that line in a stream about 

 3000 ft. wide on the surface and sweeps over South Buffalo at 

 a nearly constant width, interspersed, however, with high points, 

 railroad embankments, bridge abutments, etc. 



From observations and measurements made March ist, 1902, 

 it was determined that the channel of the lower Buffalo River 

 was called upon to carry a flow of 25,000 cu. ft. per second. 

 This flood was coincident with other unusual floods in this sec- 

 tion. It was caused by the melting of a heavy body of snow 

 which had been on the ground for some time. The run off be- 

 gan as soon as the waters began to cut their way through the 

 hard snow. It seems probable that the conditions favored a 

 flow of longer duration than usual and that Cazenovia Creek, 

 while reaching its maximum three or four hours earlier than 

 Buffalo River, held such maximum flow until the latter also 

 reached its maximum. If this be true, then deductions made 

 from former measurements and observations, that the respective 

 maximum discharges were 8000 and 17,000 cu. ft. per second for 

 the two streams seem to be verified. 



Another element entering into the estimate of discharge from 

 measurements on the lower section of the river in 1902, is the 

 fact, that at that time about 1600 acres (the largest area of 

 which we have record) was overflowed within the city. This 

 represents storage at about the maximum discharge. 



A rough measurement of the contour of the country over- 

 flowed, gives a total storage within the city of 1 6 r, 172,000 cu. 

 ft., equivalent to 1 hr. 47 min discharge of the stream at the 

 above stated maximum of 25,000 cu. ft. per second, and this 

 amount of storage in the time stated would indicate a maximum 

 entry of water into the city of 29,800 cu. ft. per second, or an 

 increase over measured amount of flow in the channel of 18%. 

 Assuming these figures to be correct, which I believe they are 

 nearly, this would indicate the largest flood of which we have 

 record, no other flood of nearly as large measured discharge 

 having occured in 8 years. 



