Summary

This 52 page research paper was written to analyze just exactly what Mr. Stewart did in his 1923 report. The overall conclusion reached is that we should abandon his work product as Skagit County and the Corps recommended in 1924, and utilize the 80 years of gage records we have at The Dalles.

My reflections on my trip to Washington D.C. Wherein I got to watch my federal government do what they do best... which is absolutely nothing.

Two years worth of additional research culminated in this now 90 page document.  All of the "new" information gathered further supported the conclusions reached when the paper was originally published in 2004.  Reasons the Stewart data should be rejected include but are not limited to: Doesn’t conform to local history; Report is in conflict with Stewart’s handwritten notes and field notebook; WSP 612 (1929) and WSP 1527 (1961) both use Stewart’s 1918 and 1923 data. (You can’t get to the 1923 figures by using 1918 data.); Reports (1923 and 1961) were never completed; Stewart paid directly by Skagit County not USGS (Skagit owns his work product); No measurements taken between Baker River and The Dalles; Stewart’s work product rejected by Corps of Engineers in 1924 and 1951; Determination of “N-factor” at Sedro-Woolley inappropriate for The Dalles something Mr. Stewart himself was concerned about.

Corps maps shows depth of river in Hamilton same in 1911 as it is today.

This report is significant in that it was the first study devoted entirely to the Avon By-Pass concept and it was authored by private enterprise.

The first page of the Stewart notes is significant because it shows that as of March 17, 1923 Mr. Stewart was no longer in Washington State but was in Pennsylvania.  When both pages of notes are transcribed they show the inconsistency of Stewarts measurements and estimates when compared to his field notebook and his final report.

“I would like to emphasize the point, that Mr. Knapp brought out in his paper, that before any highly scientific plan can be prepared for the protection of this valley from floods, it is necessary to have more authoritative information than we now have as to the amount of water carried by the river in time of floods. ... The information that was collected by Mr. Stewart and given in his report to the committee was excellent so far as the dots that he had to work upon permitted, but that data was necessarily more or less inaccurate.”  Colonel W. J. Barden, Colonel, Corps of Engineers Seattle District Engineer

“Standard project flood was determined to be 440,000 cfs. … The standard project flood was derived for natural river conditions and assumes no regulation by the dams.”

"#3.  We do not have funds to do any additional work on the flood frequency study.  That study is complicated by storage in the reservoirs so perhaps the most simple study is desirable."

"#5.  The high water profile is not very complete but it seemed that some sort of profile should be presented."

“I am particularly interested in securing information on the nature and scope of the flood control improvements desired; the problems and difficulties encountered under the present conditions, and the proposed developments which would utilize the desired improvements that you would suggest.” (Col. Young, US Army Corps of Engineers)

“The Dames and Moore study discusses some kind of limitation on densities for development to allow flood flows through the area. I think that’s the big issue. When the city prepares an ordnance, does there have to be a limitation on density? If so, what form will that limitation take? Should the limitation be uniformly applied? I don’t know the answers to those and I assume that you don’t either. We need to know those answers in order to write a good ordnance.” (Pete Shanin, Chairman of the Burlington Land Use Committee) See also Dames & Moore Report )

This letter was prepared in response to the letter written by Colonel Debra M. Lewis to FEMA re: hydrology analysis.

This paper was created primarily from transcripts of Mr. Stewarts field notebook and a set of handwritten notes found in his files.  It is further documentation that supports the usage of the 80 years of gage records rather then the estimates submitted by Mr. Stewart of the 1897, 1909, 1917 and 1921 flood events in determining the 100 year flood flows on the Skagit River.

PowerPoint discussing hydrology and the Nookachamps storage proposed project.

Mr. Slipper's declaration documents the fact that not all of the homes in Hamilton had water in them in 1921 (See 12/24/21 C.H.) and that the house he grew up in only had water in it in 1921 to the depth of a couple of inches until the 1990 flood when it had 16 inches. 

This is a retyped version of Mr. Stewart's 1923 work product. The only changes that were made were the font was changed from Courier 10 to Times New Roman 12 and the spacing was changed from double space to 1.5 in order to save space.  Footnotes were added to indicate handwritten notes that appeared on the original presumably from Corps of Engineers employees.  NOTE:  You can do word searches on this document.

This is a retyped version of Mr. Stewart's 1918 work product.   Footnotes were added to explain terms and indicate handwritten notes that appeared on the original.  NOTE:  You can do word searches on this document.

This is a retyped version of Water Supply Paper 1527 (WSP 1527). The only changes were those of formatting and two footnotes were added to explain technical details.  NOTE:  You can do word searches on this document.

This document analyzes the guidelines contained in the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data, commonly referred to as 17B as they apply to using the Stewart data in computing flood flow analysis on the Skagit River.

Letter to Carl Cook by Burlington City Administrator Jon Aarstad stating, "We believe the information we have uncovered in this preliminary investigation casts doubt about the magnitude of the historic flood discharge estimates for the 1909, 1917, and 1921 floods.  Therefore, we are submitting this report to you as you proceed with your work to produce new flood plain maps for the Skagit River."

“The objective of this initial investigation was to find direct evidence of the historic floods within the structure of the “Smith” House.”

Corps responds to City of Burlington concerns re: hydrology however still refuses to address local concerns.  The Corps, however, remains open to the consideration of new technical information that may be developed on this matter.  The problem with this statement is that they are still ignoring the importance of the historical data that does not support the technical data.

Latest Corps of Engineers Hydraulic Study for FEMA Flood Insurance Maps.

Memorandum describing methodology to be used for new flood insurance maps.

Map showing how floodplain would be impacted by levee failures in FEMA model.

Burlington will request additional language be submitted in the Corps Project Management Plan to address the lack of consensus on the Corps hydrology issue.

Overall, while the document could use some tweaking, it is the best analysis of the historical flood flows ever performed on the Skagit River.

Handout from May 24, 2007 Burlington Chamber of Commerce Town Hall meeting summarizing the nhc report.

Skagit County Commissioners write after receiving final nhc report that "Skagit County now intends to pursue several recommendations made in the report and seek the assistance and cooperation of the USACE, USGS, Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and Seattle City Light (SCL) in doing so (see pages 28-29 for Conclusions and Recommendations)."

There is 12 seconds of silence before the movie starts.

FEMA Q&A regarding the Skagit County Flood Insurance Study.
[Skagit County Government also has a page about this.]

Agenda for "FEMA Flood Mapping: How Will It Affect You?" and handout Flood Hazard Mitigation - The Future of The Skagit Valley.

Two of the three PowerPoint presentations given at the Burlington Chamber of Commerce Town Hall Meeting by Chal Martin and Don Gordon regarding the hydraulics and economics of the FEMA flood insurance maps.

NAHB press release issued several days before the town hall meeting beginning with, "The National Association of Home Builders continues to be concerned about the speculations and unscientific information employed in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) draft Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for the Skagit River basin.  As a result, the plan lacks utility for the audience and use for which it is intended. It is inaccurate and unreliable."

Examples by the City of Mount Vernon and City of Burlington Public Works Departments of FEMA-claimed flood elevations in their cities.

Compilation of articles describing the FEMA flood insurance base flood elevation and floodway determination made by FEMA in 1984.

"We are currently working on a report that bears directly on the magnitude of the historic floods on the Skagit River near Concrete."

USGS lowers 1921 flood at Concrete by 5% (12,000 cfs).

Letter from Esco Bell, Mt. Vernon Public Works Director, requests "FEMA review the submittals made by the Cities of Mount Vernon and Burlington related to the Smith House and by-pass channel at The Dalles."

Cover letters for Mount Vernon-Burlington joint submission of alternative data.

"The Cities of Mount Vernon and Burlington direct the preparation of Flood Insurance Rate Maps to comply with all provisions of the FEMA Flood Insurance Program (Base Flood Elevation, Floodplain Boundary and Floodway Maps) using the best and most accurate science available, which in the Cities’ opinion is the science performed by Pacific International Engineering".

Mayors of Burlington and Mount Vernon request Representative Rick Larsen to endorse their alternative hydrology and flood plain maps.  Representative Larsen has made clear though in a recent op-ed that his position was, "I have no comment on the credibility of the studies, not only because my opinion on the science is irrelevant but also because I also have no opinion on that aspect of the debate. All levels of government have to make their own assessment about the studies they use and support."

Briefing by City Engineer of Burlington Chal Martin on Skagit River hydrology issues, followed by discussion and action to join the Skagit Flood Advisory Conference Team (Skagit FACT). Also a request for the federal government to submit the municipal-generated data from expeditions to The Smith House and work by Pacific International Engineering (PIE, PI Engineering).

As to documents, the Impacts of an Incorrect Hydrologic Analysis for the Skagit River presentation is available, as is the Joint Resolution of the Cities of Burlington and Mount Vernon to use PIE hydrology for FEMA base flood elevation maps plus a Joint Mount Vernon-Burlington letter to US Rep. Rick Larsen, Re: Support for alternative hydrology.  Finally, official Mount Vernon minutes are available.

You can watch the presentation via Skagit 21.

Notice of public hearings on flood elevation maps on October 9th and 23rd in Burlington & Mt. Vernon.

“This document provides a review of Pacific International Engineering's "Skagit River Basin Hydrology Draft Report - Existing Conditions", August 2007, and its Appendices A through J. The review focuses on PIE's development of unregulated flood frequency curves for the Skagit River near Concrete. Limited review is also provided of regulated flood frequency curves and synthetic flood hydrographs for the regulated condition as developed by PIE.”

“Skagit County has requested that nhc review the Flo-2D model used in the draft Skagit River Flood Insurance Study (FIS) as one part of its overall review of the study. Concerns with the hydrology portion of the study are being separately addressed and will not be reiterated here. Ultimately, it is the base flood elevations determined from the Flo-2D model that are at issue as these will be used to evaluate development potential and determine flood insurance premiums.”

The Skagit Valley Herald published a story about this letter in the 9 Jan. 2008 edition.

FEMA announces upgrade of FLO-2D software and that the Corps of Engineers "recently discovered the historic data necessary to convert the data for the Skagit River near Concrete for water years 1924-1944 to unregulated conditions."

Latest presentation showing how historical data does not support the USGS, FEMA, and Corps of Engineers hydraulic data.
See also: TV10: Update on the Flood Insurance Study

“The simulations performed represent a fixed bed analysis so erosion and sedimentation in the floodplain are not modeled. Culverts under roads are also not modeled. The reason that culverts are not modeled for overland flow is that the capacities of the culverts are small compared with the overbank discharge. The FLO-2D model does not contain any sea dike failure scenarios and do not account for pump stations or any other flood fighting techniques to reduce the flood damage.”

Differences, although adjusted, still remain between Corps of Engineers (226,400 CFS) and locally supported data (178,700 CFS) at Concrete.

“Corps understatement at meeting, “Doing anything with us is kind of complicated.” ”

A PowerPoint in PDF explaining hydrology research and also how Burlington may address the increased flood elevations.  Supplemental material is also included.

“Pacific International Engineering (PIE) performed a hydraulic analysis to estimate the water surface elevations of the Skagit River at the Smith House, located in Hamilton, associated with the magnitude of the 1909, 1917, and 1921 floods as they were estimated by James E. Stewart.”

“This technical memorandum presents details and an analysis of the Skagit River watershed rainfall-runoff modeling for the two 1990, the 1995, and the 2003 flood events using HEC-HMS software Version 2.2.2 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2003a), HEC-RAS software Version 3.1 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2004), and HEC-5 software Version 8.0 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1998).”

“This technical memorandum presents information on and analysis of the Skagit River Basin flood routing from Newhalem to Skagit Bay, using HEC-RAS modeling software (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004a). A HEC-5 model was also developed and used to facilitate flood control storage operation of existing dams located at the headwaters of the Skagit and Baker Rivers, which are owned and operated by Seattle City Light (SCL) and Puget Sound Energy (PSE), respectively. The HEC-5 model also performs stream flood routing from these dams to the Concrete gage on the Skagit River.”

Hydrographs attempting to recreate 2003 flood in Upper Skagit Basin.

Hydrographs attempting to recreate 2003 flood at Concrete, Sedro-Woolley and Mount Vernon

Printout of maximum peak flows of Skagit River at Mount Vernon river gauge

“With regard to research on the historic floods of 1921, 1917, 1909, and 1897 (and even further back to approximately 1856 and 1815), authors of numerous technical reports produced over the years have accessed available historical documentation to add context and perspective to the results obtained by various technical analyses. This appendix will list the documents often cited and provide some discussion of each. This is not a complete discussion but we believe it is important to include a synopsis of the historical documents as an appendix to the main report to provide a point of departure for the user to conduct additional review of the written historical record.”

“There is no indication that Stewart was able to tie any high water marks in this reach into eye witness reports of flood levels. We know from experience that identification of high water marks from natural indicators one year after a flood can be quite uncertain. For example, for the same reach of the Skagit below The Dalles, the USGS had difficulty in identifying reliable high water marks from the October 2003 flood in field work conducted nine months after the event (Mastin and Kresch, 2005). In that case, the scatter in high water marks at any particular location was as much as 6 feet.”

“It should be stated that at this time the USGS considers the peak-discharge estimate of 228,000 ft3/s for the 1921 flood on the Skagit River near Concrete as documented in the USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5159 as the best estimate of the 1921 peak discharge. It utilizes modern indirect hydraulic analysis at a relatively uniform site selected to minimize complications in the flow hydraulics. Also, it utilizes HWMs and channel geometry data surveyed soon after the peak, and it does not require the data to be tied to an elevation datum.”

1.8-ft gage datum discrepancy

“1.8 ft is the difference between USGS published and Stewart’s surveyed 1921 HWM elevations.”

Overview of Corps of Engineers Seattle District's attempts to address Skagit River hydrology.

02 - Summary Report: Appeal of the Revised Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (rDFIRM) and Revised Flood Insurance Study (rFIS) For Skagit County, Washington, dated July 1, 2010 and Submittal to the Scientific Resolution Panel by the Cities of Burlington and Mt. Vernon, Washington

03 - Technical Report - Supporting Data and Analysis for Skagit River RFIS Appeal Prepared For: City of Burlington, City of Mount Vernon, City of Sedro-Woolley and Town of La Conner

04 - Probability Estimates for Historical Flood Events and Recorded Floods

05 - Pacific Survey & Engineering Professional Opinion of Methodology and Results of Upper Dalles Gauge Calibration Survey Performed by James E. Stewart (1922-1923)

06 - Cities of Burlington and Mount Vernon Reply to USGS May 6, 2010 Memo

07 - Cities of Burlington and Mount Vernon Reply to FEMA Evaluation of Flood Frequency Analyses for the Skagit River, Skagit County, Washington

08 - Memorandum RE Legal and Procedural Issues by Cities of Burlington & Mt. Vernon

Handout: Skagit River Flood Risk Management Study Hydraulic Effectiveness of Measures Spreadsheets

Handout: Skagit River Flood Risk Management Study Hydraulic Effectiveness of Measures FINAL DRAFT