ArticlePDF Available

California Washed Away: The Great Flood of 1862

Authors:
WEATH ERW ISE JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2007
26
Downloaded by [SFSU San Francisco State University] at 06:45 08 January 2014
To put the issue in context, the December
2005 rainfall event in San Francisco recorded
a little more than 11 inches, followed by 3.5
more inches in January 2006. Compare this to
nearly 10 inches for San Francisco in December
1861, followed by an unprecedented 24 inches in
January 1862. And unlike the winter 2005-2006
storms, the 1861-1862 storms caused record or
near-record flooding events across the state, from
Eureka and Humboldt counties in the northwest,
all the way to Orange and San Diego counties in
the south.
California
Washed Away
The Great Flood of 1862
hen the first storms of the winter season arrived in California in
December 2005, they were initially a welcome sign that the state’s
long dry season was finally over. But as 2006 began, rivers were
pushed over their banks as heavy rains prevailed across the northern
third of the Golden State. For many Californians, the localized flooding that
occurred in the towns of Healdsburg, Guerneville, and Sacramento seemed
near Biblical proportions, and there was a great gnashing of teeth and fear for
the California levee system. Although the 2005-2006 season was alarming,
many people likely would have been surprised to know that their Civil War-
era ancestors faced a much larger crisis in 1862, as a record-setting rainy
season prompted the construction of that same levee system and threatened
to rain destruction on the many budding communities in the young state.
by Jan Null and Joelle Hulbert
JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2007WEATHE RWIS E 27
Downloaded by [SFSU San Francisco State University] at 06:45 08 January 2014
WEATH ERW ISEJANUARY / FEBRUARY 2007
28
A State Dependent on Its Rivers
To better understand the concern over river
flooding and the levee system in California, one
must first understand the geography of California’s
Central Valley. Composed of the Sacramento Valley
from Redding to Sacramento, and the San Joaquin
Valley from Modesto to Bakersfield, the terrain is
generally flat and surrounded on all sides by moun-
tains. The Coast Ranges lie to the west and the
Sierra Nevada mountains to the east. When rain
falls on these mountains, it runs into creeks that
flow down the mountains into streams and rivers
and into the Central Valley. From there it flows
toward the only sea-level outlet to the ocean, the
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, and on out
through the San Francisco Bay. In the Sacramento
Valley, the American, Feather, and Sacramento riv-
ers all rush through the Sacramento area and then
toward the delta. In the San Joaquin Valley, the San
Joaquin, Kern, Stanislaus, and Merced rivers also
flow to the delta before heading out into the San
Francisco Bay and into the Pacific Ocean.
In the mid-1800s there were no interstate high-
ways crisscrossing the state. The major highways of
that era were the rivers, so life in California devel-
oped along its banks. The Gold Rush in the 1850s
had resulted in an impressive influx of people whose
livelihoods were tied to the rivers of California as
commerce flowed along their waters. Meanwhile,
scores of farmers had settled along the banks of the
rivers, where the most fertile farmland could be
found in the low-lying, flood-prone areas.
But the promise of rich cropland along the banks
of the rivers came at a high risk. Farmers gambled
their life savings on crops and livestock, and resi-
dents of burgeoning urban areas near the rivers lived
with the constant knowledge that it would take only
a couple of days of rain to destroy their operations
and bankrupt their finances. In a natural desire to
protect their property, people who made their homes
along California’s rivers constructed earthen levees
along many riverbanks in an effort hold back the
waters. From the early 1850s to 1861, more than
$1.5 million was spent on building and improving
the levee system in and around Sacramento. Adjust-
ed to today’s dollars, that is almost $30 million.
The Deluge
Although extremely wet weather in California
is sometimes associated with an El-Niño weather
pattern, the definitive paper on historic El Niños,
written in 1992 by Oregon State Climatologist
Victor Neal and William Quinn, an oceanogra-
pher at Oregon State University, determined that
the synoptic weather pattern during the December
1861-January 1862 flooding event was non-El Niño.
An artist’s view of K Street in Sacramento during the 1862 flood. Another view of K Street from 4th Street looking east during
the 1862 flood.
California’s 30 days of rain in
December 1861 and January 1862
was the equivalent of at least a
30,000-year [flood] event.
An artist’s view of K Street in Sacramento during the 1862 flood.
Another view of K Street from 4th Street looking east during
Downloaded by [SFSU San Francisco State University] at 06:45 08 January 2014
JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2007WEATHE RWIS E 29
The Signal Corps network of weather stations would
not be established on the West Coast for another 10
years, but there were a number of Army observers
and private weather observers in place when the
1862 floods occurred. According to these stations’
records in December 1861, the polar jet stream was
to the north as the Pacific Northwest experienced
a mild rainy pattern for the first half of the month.
The jet stream slid south, and on Christmas Day
1861 the Oregon stations reported freezing condi-
tions. Heavy rainfall began falling in California as
the longwave trough moved south over the state.
This trough remained nearly stationary over Cali-
fornia through the end of January 1862, allowing
heavy rains to fall statewide just shy of the proverbial
40 days and 40 nights. Eventually, the polar jet slid
even farther south, allowing several inches of snow
to accumulate in the Central Valley and adjacent
mountain ranges.
Daily rainfall was reported in the Sacramento
Union, the Los Angeles Star, and the Alta California.
During the period from December 24, 1861-January
21, 1862, rain occurred in the state on 28 out of the
30 days. San Francisco recorded nearly 34 inches of
rain between December and January. Sacramento
tallied over 37 inches for the 2 months, with a
one-day maximum of 4 inches. Nevada City, in
the lower reaches of the Sierra Nevada mountains
reported snowfall equivalent to 115 inches of rain
for the storm. At Red Dog, also in Nevada County,
the 24-hour maximum rainfall was reported at 11
inches. Also in the Sierra Nevada foothills, the
Tuolumne County mining town of Sonora reported
over 102 inches of rainfall in December and Janu-
ary. In Southern California, flooding in Los Angeles
was among the worst on record following nearly 35
inches of rainfall. San Diego also suffered the effects
of the storms, recording over 7 inches of rain—300
percent of the January normal at the time! The San
Diego River floodplain also suffered severe flooding
as the tide backed its waters into the city, eventually
cutting a new channel into the bay.
Widespread Flooding
When considering buying property or insurance,
many people use the 100-year flood line as a safe
benchmark. However, California’s 30 days of rain in
December 1861 and January 1862 was the equiva-
lent of at least a 30,000-year event. In San Fran-
cisco, the storms resulted in a 10,000-year event,
while in Sacramento, the flooding was “only” a
2,300-year event.
Preceding the actual flood-producing rains in
Sacramento, there was a levee break on December
9, 1861. The Sacramento River flooded to a stage
of 22 feet, 6 inches. This prompted the California
state Legislature to propose moving the Capitol to
San Francisco until the floodwaters receded. While
it is not clear how much time the Legislature actu-
ally spent in San Francisco, the California Supreme
Court moved its operations to the city and remains
in San Francisco to this day. Notes from the court
that were stored at the California Historical Society
state, “...it appears that weather, water, and whiskey
had a lot to do with it.”
An artist’s view of J Street in Sacramento during the 1862 flood.
PHOTOS COURTESY OF THE CALIFORNIA H ISTORY ROOM, CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
An artist’s view of J Street in Sacramento during the 1862 flood.
PHOTOS COURTESY OF THE CALIFORNIA H ISTORY ROOM, CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
Downloaded by [SFSU San Francisco State University] at 06:45 08 January 2014
WEATH ERW ISE JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2007
30
The flooding was exacerbated by warm rains that
caused an unusual December melting of the snow
pack in the Sierra Nevadas. This prompted noted
California naturalist and Sierra Club founder John
Muir to comment, “The Sierra Rivers are flooded
every spring by the melting of the snow as regularly
as the famous old Nile. Strange to say, the greatest
floods occur in winter, when one would suppose all
the wild waters would be muffled and chained in
frost and snow ... But at rare intervals, warm rains
and warm winds invade the mountains and push
back the snow line from 2,000 to 8,000, or even
higher, and then come
the big floods.”
The state Legislature returned from its winter
recess in early January—several weeks into the
heavy rainfall—and was in session on Inauguration
Day, January 10, 1862, when another levee broke
on the Sacramento River. The event raised the
flood level to a full 24 feet. Newly elected Governor
Leland Stanford, California’s eighth governor, trav-
eled to his own inauguration ceremony in a row-
boat. Newspaper accounts of the day were dramatic,
and on January 13, the Sacramento Union reported,
“Continuous rains and melting snows in the moun-
tains have brought disaster and destruction upon
those valleys and cities of California which have
been the chief pride of the state.”
William Brewer, a geologist from Yale University,
was in Sacramento during the start of the storms in
December. On January 19, 1862, he reported, “The
great Central Valley of the state is under water—the
Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys—a region
250 to 300 miles long and an average of at least
20 miles wide, a district of 5,000 or 6,000 square
miles, or probably three to three and a half million
acres! Although much of it is not cultivated, yet a
part of it is the garden of the state. Thousands of
farms are entirely under water—cattle starving and
drowning. Benevolent societies are active, boats
have been sent up, and thousands are fleeing to
[San Francisco]. There have been some of the most
stupendous charities I have ever seen ... A week
ago today news came down by steamer of a worse
condition at Sacramento than was anticipated. The
news came at 9 o’clock at night. Men went to work,
and before daylight tons of provisions were ready—
11,000 pounds of ham alone were cooked. Before
night two steamers, with over 30 tons of cooked
and prepared provisions, 22 tons of clothing, several
thousand dollars in money, and boats with crews,
etc., were underway for the devastated city.”
High Costs
Early American settlers in the Santa Ana Val-
ley in modern-day Orange County laughed at the
Spanish rancheros for building their homes in the
hills, away from the valley and water. After 20
people drowned in the 1861-1862 flood, the settlers
laughed no more.
Ruminating on the actual cost of the damage
that resulted from the great flood of 1862, Brew-
er noted, “The floods have still more deranged
finances and make some action imperative. The
actual loss of taxable property will amount to
probably ten or fifteen millions, some believe twice
that, but I think not even the latter sum. I suppose
the actual loss in all kinds of property, personal
and real, will rank anywhere between fifty and a
hundred million dollars, surely a calamity of no
common magnitude!”
In today’s dollars, the $50 million to $100 million
figure translates into $1 billion to $2 billion. Taking
into account the fact that the tax base was expected
to be cut by over 30 percent, the losses would be
considerably more tragic if the same storm were to
occur today, given the massive influx of people into
the state since the 1860s; the 1860 census counted
380,000 individuals in California, compared with
a 2005 estimate of more 36 million. The statewide
damage estimate of the flooding of December 2005-
January 2006 exceeded $500 million.
Although memories of this storm are all but lost
to the history books, we continue to look to our
past for knowledge. In light of the failure of the
levees in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina
in August-September 2005, much scrutiny is being
given to the aging levee system in California. Fol-
lowing the 2005-2006 flooding in California, Gov-
ernor Arnold Schwarzenegger asked Congress for
over $1 billion in aid to shore up the levees in the
state, an expenditure voters approved as part of a $4
billion statewide initiative to address infrastructure
problems in California. Even a rainfall event that
saw totals only half of those recorded in January
1862 would inundate huge populated areas in the
Golden State.
W
JAN NULL is a Certified Consulting Meteorologist with
Golden Gate Weather Services and an adjunct professor
of meteorology at San Francisco State University. JOELLE
HULBERT is a meteorologist at the California Air Resources
Board and is pursuing her Ph.D. in Atmospheric Science at the
University of California-Davis.
Newly elected Governor
Leland Stanford, California’s
eighth governor, traveled to
his own inauguration ceremony
in a rowboat.
Downloaded by [SFSU San Francisco State University] at 06:45 08 January 2014
... Observed extreme precipitation and severe subregional flood events during the 20th century-including those in 1969, 1986, and 1997-hint at this latent potential, but despite their substantial societal impacts, none have rivaled (from a geophysical perspective) the benchmark "Great Flood of 1861-1862" (henceforth, GF1862). This event, which was characterized by weeks-long sequences of winter storms, produced widespread catastrophic flooding across virtually all of California's lowlands-transforming the interior Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys into a temporary but vast inland sea nearly 300 miles in length (6) and inundating much of the now densely populated coastal plain in present-day Los Angeles and Orange counties (7). Recent estimates suggest that floods equal to or greater in magnitude to those in 1862 occur five to seven times per millennium [i.e., a 1.0 to 0.5% annual likelihood or 100-to 200-year recurrence interval (RI)] (5,8). ...
... In ARkFuture, spatial patterns of event total precipitation are similar but are uniformly characterized by heavier accumulations, with broad areas in both northern and southern California exceeding 700 mm and widespread areas in the abovementioned mountain areas above 1400 mm (domain maximum of ~3200 mm; Fig. 2B). We note that these values are comparable to maximum precipitation informally reported during the GF1862, which exceeded 2500 mm in at least two locations on the SN western slope over a slightly longer (~40-day) period (6). In general, cumulative precipitation in ARkFuture is between 35 and 60% higher than in ARkHist for northern and central California (although locally >80% higher), with lesser increases in far southern California ( fig. ...
Article
Full-text available
Despite the recent prevalence of severe drought, California faces a broadly underappreciated risk of severe floods. Here, we investigate the physical characteristics of “plausible worst case scenario” extreme storm sequences ca-pable of giving rise to “megaflood” conditions using a combination of climate model data and high-resolution weather modeling. Using the data from the Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble, we find that climate change has already doubled the likelihood of an event capable of producing catastrophic flooding, but larger future increases are likely due to continued warming. We further find that runoff in the future extreme storm scenario is 200 to 400% greater than historical values in the Sierra Nevada because of increased precipitation rates and decreased snow fraction. These findings have direct implications for flood and emergency management, as well as broader implications for hazard mitigation and climate adaptation activities.
... Several case study analyses have examined the impacts of multiple sequential ARs (e.g., Cordeira et al., 2013;Dominguez et al., 2018;Michaelis et al., 2022;White et al., 2019) which often generate increased precipitation totals and elevated stream discharge rates compared to isolated ARs (Vano et al., 2018). Within the historical record, one of the most notable successive AR events occurred in the winter of 1861/1862, generating intense precipitation in Northern California over 43 days, capped by a warm storm event that produced catastrophic flooding over the Sacramento Valley (Dettinger & Ingram, 2013;Null & Hulbert, 2007). This precedent-setting event prompted the ARkStorm scenario, a hypothetical storm intended to provide emergency responders, resource managers, and the public with a realistic assessment of the very real threat to human life, property, and ecosystems posed by extreme successive AR events along the West Coast (Porter et al., 2011). ...
Article
Full-text available
The serial occurrence of atmospheric rivers (ARs) along the US West Coast can lead to prolonged and exacerbated hydrologic impacts, threatening flood‐control and water‐supply infrastructure due to soil saturation and diminished recovery time between storms. Here a statistical approach for quantifying subseasonal temporal clustering among extreme events is applied to a 41‐year (1979–2019) wintertime AR catalog across the western United States (US). Observed AR occurrence, compared against a randomly distributed AR timeseries with the same average event density, reveals temporal clustering at a greater‐than‐random rate across the western US with a distinct geographical pattern. Compared to the Pacific Northwest, significant AR clusters over the northern Coastal Range of California and Sierra Nevada are more frequent and occur over longer time periods. Clusters along the California Coastal Range typically persist for 2 weeks, are composed of 4–5 ARs per cluster, and account for over 85% of total AR occurrence. Across the northwest Coast‐Cascade Ranges, clusters account for ∼50% of total AR occurrence, typically last 8–10 days, and contain 3–4 individual AR events. Based on precipitation data from a high‐resolution dynamical downscaling of reanalysis, the fractions of total and extreme hourly precipitation attributable to AR clusters are largest along the northern California coast and in the Sierra Nevada. Interannual variability among clusters highlights their importance for determining whether a particular water year is anomalously wet or dry. The mechanisms behind this unusual clustering are unclear and require further research.
... Interspersed across the past two centuries, California has also experienced several extreme precipitation events (e.g., 1908-1909, 1913-1914, 1940-1941, 1955-1956, 1969, 1986, and 1997); most prominently, the Great Flood of 1861-1862 that turned the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys into an inland sea (Dettinger & Ingram, 2013). This event notably occurred after a 20-year drought (Null & Hulbert, 2007). Sediment reconstructions in the Klamath Basin suggest that the 1861-1862 megaflood was not an extreme outlier, but rather a 100-200-year event that has been matched in magnitude several times over the last two millennia (e.g., 212, 440, 603, 1029(e.g., 212, 440, 603, , 1300(e.g., 212, 440, 603, , 1418(e.g., 212, 440, 603, , 1605(e.g., 212, 440, 603, , 1750(e.g., 212, 440, 603, , and 1810Dettinger & Ingram, 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
To aid California's water sector to better understand and manage future climate extremes, we present a method for creating a regionally consistent ensemble of plausible daily future climate and streamflow scenarios that represent natural climate variability captured in a network of tree‐ring chronologies, and then embed anthropogenic climate change trends within those scenarios. We use 600 years of paleo‐reconstructed weather regimes to force a stochastic weather generator, which we develop for five subbasins in the San Joaquin Valley of California. To assess the compound effects of climate change, we create temperature series that reflect projected scenarios of warming and precipitation series that have been scaled to reflect thermodynamically driven shifts in the distribution of daily precipitation. We then use these weather scenarios to force hydrologic models for each of the five subbasins. The paleo‐forced streamflow scenarios highlight periods in the region's past that produce flood and drought extremes that surpass those in the modern record and exhibit large non‐stationarity through the reconstruction. Variance decomposition is employed to characterize the contribution of natural variability and climate change to variability in decision‐relevant metrics related to floods and drought. Our results show that a large portion of variability in individual subbasin and spatially compounding extreme events can be attributed to natural variability, but that anthropogenic climate changes become more influential at longer planning horizons. The joint importance of climate change and natural variability in shaping extreme floods and droughts is critical to resilient water systems planning and management in the San Joaquin.
... California's warm, dry summers are predictable, but annual precipitation is not. Indeed, multi-year droughts are common (Dettinger, 2011;Meko et al., 2014), yet atmospheric rivers can fuel storms that historically flooded the valley and created a massive, seasonal estuary (Madgic, 2013;Null & Hulbert, 2007). The landscape supports a gradient in water temperatures across elevations, which is especially relevant to cold water fish during summer when aquifers, springs, and snowmelt prolong the availability of cold water at higher elevations while waters at low elevations become quite warm (FitzGerald et al., 2021). ...
Article
People seek reliable natural resources despite climate change. Diverse habitats and biologies stabilize productivity against disturbances like climate, prompting arguments to promote climate-resilient resources by prioritizing complex, less-modified ecosystems. These arguments hinge on the hypothesis that simplifying and degrading ecosystems will reduce resources' climate resilience, a process liable to be cryptically evolving across landscapes and human generations, but rarely documented. Here, we examined the industrial era (post 1848) of California's Central Valley, chronicling the decline of a diversified, functional portfolio of salmon habitats and life histories and investigating for empirical evidence of lost climate resilience in its fishery. Present perspectives indicate that California's dynamic, warming climate overlaid onto its truncated, degraded habitat mosaic severely constrains its salmon fishery. We indeed found substantial climate constraints on today's fishery, but this reflected a shifted ecological baseline. During the early stages of a stressor legacy that transformed the landscape and -- often consequently -- compressed salmon life history expression, the fishery diffused impacts of dry years across a greater number of fishing years and depended less on cool spring-summer transitions. The latter are important given today's salmon habitats, salmon life histories, and resource management practices, but are vanishing with climate change while year-to-year variation in fishery performance is rising. These findings give empirical weight to the idea that human legacies influence ecosystems' climate resilience across landscapes and boundaries (e.g., land/sea). They also raise the question of whether some contemporary climate effects are recent and attributable not only to increasing climate stress, but to past and present human actions that erode resilience. In general, it is thus worth considering that management approaches that prioritize complex, less-modified ecosystems may stabilize productivity despite increasing climate stress and such protective actions may be required for some ecological services to persist into uncertain climate futures.
... Because Oregon was not occupied by American settlers until 1811 (Judson, 1919), we are not aware of any historical documentation that could be used to corroborate or refute our inference of hard winters during these earlier years. However, the largest floods in the known history of Oregon and California occurred between December 1861 and January 1862 and was triggered by weeks of heavy rain and snowfall at high elevations across the region (Engstrom, 1996;Null and Hulbert, 2007). And the winter of 1899 is notable because of the "Great Arctic Outbreak" that delivered record low temperatures to Oregon, Washington, and Idaho in February (Pague, 1899). ...
Article
Full-text available
The environment holds both valuable resources and potential dangers, with natural disasters, particularly floods, standing out prominently as a major threat to the society. Floods are a recurring natural phenomenon that has caused widespread destruction and human and economic loss. The U.S. has witnessed significant damages caused by flooding, contributing approximately 7.4% of the total economic losses attributed to natural disasters. This literature review investigates several aspects of floods in the U.S.: (1) The exploration of flood history unfolds a narrative of recurrent floods, highlighting significant events, their societal impacts, and the evolution of flood management strategies over time. (2) Causes triggering floods in the U.S. are scrutinized, emphasizing the influence of weather events such as heavy rainfall, snowmelt, and storms, which are connected with climate change, alongside the impact of anthropogenic factors like urbanization, deforestation, and inadequate infrastructures. (3) Previous studies discussed the future of flooding and agreed that climate change is increasing the risk of flooding in the U.S. (4) This review also synthesizes current trends, acknowledging the efforts in the ongoing research on flooding as well as suggesting the research and knowledge gaps that need in-depth investigations.
Preprint
Full-text available
Rainfall strongly affects landslide triggering; however, understanding how storm characteristics relate to the severity of landslides at the regional scale has thus far remained unclear, despite the societal benefits that would result from defining this relationship. As mapped landslide inventories typically cover a small region relative to a storm system, here we develop a proxy for landslide-inducing rainfall, A*, based on extremes of modelled soil water relative to its local climatology. We calibrate A* using four landslide inventories, comprising over 11,000 individual landslides over four unique storm events, and find that a common threshold can be applied to estimate regional shallow landslide triggering potential across diverse climatic regimes in California (USA). We then use the spatial distribution of A*, along with topography, to calculate the landslide potential area (LPA) for nine landslide-inducing storm events over the past twenty years, and test whether atmospheric metrics describing the strength of landfalling storms, such as integrated water vapor transport, correlate with the magnitude of hazardous landslide-inducing rainfall. We find that although the events with the largest LPA do occur during exceptional atmospheric river (AR) storms, the strength of landfalling atmospheric rivers does not scale neatly with landslide potential area, and even exceptionally strong ARs may yield minimal landslide impacts. Other factors, such as antecedent soil moisture driven by storm frequency, and mesoscale precipitation features within storms, are instead more likely to dictate the patterns of landslide-generating rainfall throughout the state.
Research
Full-text available
Fire, flood, and landslide dam history of the southern Santa Barbara County area including post-fire debris flows and debris laden floods, landslide dam outbreak floods and quasi-clearwater floods. This flood research spans the last 200 years and includes flood inundation mapping of events in the 20th century. This study identifies five large magnitude debris flow events, four of which were larger than the recent 9 January 2018 debris flows.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.