County agent project progress report, Flood control - soil conservation, November 1, 1939

COUNTY AGENT PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER Progress Report State Office #172 DATED: November 1, 1939 Clark County #12 NAME OF PROJECT: Flood Control - Soil Conservation The various items for consideration under this project can best be presented under: 1. The Virgin Soil Conservation District 2. The Moapa Soil Conservation District Virgin River Watershed 1. The Virgin Soil Conservation District. (l) The Virgin Soil Conservation District in cooperation with the Soil Conservation, the Clark County Extension and Farm Bureau Service agencies failing to secure the establishment of a side CCC Camp in Bunker- ville at the close of the year 1939 all help possible was extended toward the end of establishing this camp at the earliest date possible to avoid continued bank erosion at vulnerable points along practically entire community's farm land and canal bank area, extending over a distance of approximately 5 1/4 miles. Through continued appeals by local, county, state, and national agencies, technicalities were all eventually overcome, such as securing 34 farms plans, range management plans, when in March, though seasonally late, the side camp moved in,?and with a $1,000 loan from the Disaster Loan Corporation and an appropriation of $500 by the Clark County Com- missioners, over 300 automobile frames and over 3,000 feet of 3/4 to 1 inch cable were secured for the construction of tetrahedrons. Twenty-two such tetrahedrons were constructed at one point, fifty at another point,?distance covered being approximately 1200 feet. This work, though limited, during the September 1940 floods again proved its worth in that at one point, owing to the method of placement, proved only partly effective, whereas, at the other point, for 1000 feet, per- fect performance resulted,?definitely proving the way to all future work of this type. Other items indirectly concerned with this bank erosion and flood control program and contributing- toward a program of permanency are: (2)-District Farmer farms plans 34 -Acres under Agreement 984 ?Number of Farms 113 -Acres of crop land 2052.6 -Total Farm land acres 4780.2 Potential acreage that might, with continued programs of bank erosion control, be reclaimed and developed 745 -Additional potential acreage that might be reclaimed under a water- shed flood control water storage program 1255.00 (3)Range management plans (grazing) Acres involved 267,212.0 (4) Classification of farm lands according to use capabilities. ...re-occupation of the Bunkerville CCC side camp in early November 1940. A balance of approximately $600 of the $1500 indicated heretofore, is on hand for further purchases of car frames and cable for use in tetrahedron structures. 2. The Moapa Soil Conservation District. (1) Completion of the Meadow Valley Wash Diversion Spillway by CCC boys under Forest Service supervision is an outstanding accomplishment... will divert major parts of the flood stream over a dissipating flood plain with potentialities of reducing the main flow from 20 to 50 percent, thus greatly reducing flood damage hazards among farms and homes in Moapa Valley from 10 to 20 miles below. In addition, this structure in conjunction with the flood plain provides a desiltation process that prevents silting of Lake Mead to an appreciable extent. ...the structures at the Wells Siding spillways and the Bowman Reservoir - 3 - needs; namely: Of first importance,?the inclusion of the upper reaches of the Meadow Valley Wash watershed under a responsible governmental agency that will open the way for: a. Practical Range Management; thereby institute a re- vegetative program to prevent the accelerated erosion that is taking place in the area; and, b. Construction of detention and desilting basins at especially Delmue, Saw Mill and Mathews Canyons. Of second importance, the realignment, grading, enlargement of the lower Moapa Valley Flood Channel to such capacity that would per- mit an adequate carry-off of flood waters that by pass any or all struc- tures that are now, or might become evident over any part of the upper or lower Meadow Valley Wash watershed areas. (2) The Lower Moapa Valley Flood Channel and Drain. Following completion of the Flood Channel and Drainage Survey by the Soil Conservation Service in 1939, the Soil Conservation District petitioned the Forest Service in early 1940, with its CCC Camp facilities to consider the re-alignment, grading, and enlargement of the channel to 10,000 cfs. capacity during its 1940-1941 CCC Camp period; at the same time, said district petitioned the Soil Conservation Service to assist in the construction of a drain through approximately 1100 acres of land in the very heart of the area. Finances for the two phases of work came to present a real problem for the area, Estimated costs ranged from approximately $60,000 to $130,000 for both the drainage and the flood channel work. To insure such a financing program was out of the question, Following a period of intensified attempts to meet the needs of the program it was finally concluded that approximately $2000 cash would fulfill the requirements of the drainage phase of the program; whereas, to meet the prime essentials of the Flood Channel Improvement program, approximately $3200 would be needed to provide a 10,000 cfs. capacity channel. It was assumed that CCC labor and CCC Camp facilities would be made available for both phases of work inasmuch as both problems were of semi-private public interest significance, especially that of the flood channel. a. Drainage Channel Accordingly through mutual memoranda of understanding between the Moapa Soil Conservation District Supervisors and the Soil Conserva- tion Service, a dragline secured, arrangements for finances ($2000) from cooperating land owners and County Commissioners completed, over two and one half miles of drain were excavated. Details for the second unit of approximately four additional miles to drain is in a favorable stage for procedure ...it is anti- cipated that the program will be fully completed in accordance with plans during the early spring months of 1941. b. Flood Channel Action. Following controversial aspects during June, July, August, September and October of whether or not the Forest Service should proceed with the proposed program of Flood Channel Improvement, it was finally concluded late in October that that service should proceed; and, accordingly, the Charleston Mountain Park CCC Camp moved into the Wells Siding CCC Camp P-206 P-206 during latter October. Following this clearance a meeting of representatives of each Soil Conservation Service, the Forest Service, and the Moapa Soil Conservation District Supervisors, met and agreed to procedure providing for action to proceed with the pro- gram under Forest Service supervision in accordance to plans and spec- ifications mutually agreed to by each the SCS, the Forest Service, and the Moapa Soil Conservation District Supervisors. Among other items concerned with this program, the last agency agreed to pay to the Forest Service in installments according to the following schedule: $1000 in December - 1940 $1000 in January - 1941 $1200 in February - 1941 c. Drainage District Organization. To insure stability in setters of finances for improvements and maintenance for each the drainage and the Flood Channel projects, preparations were, with the close of this report period, proceeding toward the organization of a Drainage District under the Nevada State Drainage District law for the entire Lower Moapa Valley, under guidance of Leo A. McNamee, retained attorney for the Muddy Valley Irrigation Company working in very close cooperation with the Moapa Soil Conser- vation District Supervisors. The area to be served comprises approximately 7680 acres, of which at present, approximately 4400 acres are farm lands, end of which in turn approximately 2600 acres are at present crop land. As the drain becomes effective, an additional approximate 600 acres will become arable, whereas 500 or more acres now under cultivation will become greatly improved. The entire area will receive benefits, either directly or in- directly as a consequence of both the drainage and flood channel improve- ment work, besides avoiding heavy silting in Lake Mead as a consequence of halting an enormous movement of silt that would otherwise in time take place along the greater part of the seven or more miles of Flood Channel coursing through practically the very heart of the area con- cerned. - 5 - d. Other items for consideration of the Moapa Soil Conservation District Supervisors are: (a) Securing 35 farm plans to further interests of foregoing Flood Control and Drainage projects. (b) Reinforcing the Bowman Reservoir by way of preventing seepage leaks?as follow-up work in cooperation with the Forest Service and CCC boys. (e) Side wash Flood Controls in each the Logandale, Overton and Nepac (formerly Kaolin) areas of the Lower Moapa Valley in cooperation with the Forest, the Soil Conserva- tion, Fish and Wild Life Service agencies. 3. The Virgin River Watershed. Other items to which follow-up and preliminary consideration have been given are: (l) White Narrows Dam Site for Flood Control water storage near the Moapa Indian Reservation which has been given further con- sideration by the Nevada State Engineers office, the U. S. Army Engineers and the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Moapa Soil Con- servation District Supervisors, the Muddy Valley Irrigation Company, the Moapa Indian Service. A contract for detailed study of foundation, side wall forma- tion, and all other essentials toward final determination for a construc- tion program is in course of preparation to be let in early November, 1940. (2) Raising of Arrowhead Dam or building a dam of such height on a site near the present structure that will serve the purpose of con- trolling floods only for a given period of years much longer than that of the present dam. (3) Specific study of the entire Virgin River watershed has been under consideration of District Supervisors of each the Virgin, the Moapa, the Pahranagat, the Meadow Valley Soil Conservation District's Supervisors in cooperation with the Forest, the Soil Conservation, Fish and Wild Life, and Division of Grazing Service agencies,?the objective of which has been to determine the most substantial course through which to effect soil erosion and flood control and water storage; to revegetate where possible, through improved management and practices, such range areas as are feasible for consideration; and to secure the highest use possible of all available arable lands commensurate with maximum use of waters for which storage might be provided for within the entire watershed. County Extension Agent