The city’s original street level can be seen below a section of the K Street Mall in this 2007 photograph. Photo by Lance Armstrong

Editor’s Note: This is part eight in a series about the history of the Sacramento River.

In the last article of this series, longtime Pocket resident Barbara Lagomarsino described how she became interested in the raising of the streets of Sacramento – an undertaking that created the city’s mysterious underground.
Raising the streets was far from a simple endeavor. The board of trustees of Sacramento City supported the raising of the streets and assumed the obligation to provide the necessary materials. In this case, thousands of yards of soil were to be deposited along streets in front of buildings.
Lagomarsino wrote: “Property owners were responsible for readying the length of streets, fronting on their property, for receiving the fill. Dirt was to be deposited along the streets to depths of about 10 feet, and such vast quantities of earth could not be left in heaps.”
The piles of soil would soon become piles of mud.
Continuing, Lagomarsino wrote: “To contain the dirt, each property owner arranged individually to have a brick bulkhead wall built at the edge of the street line in front of his property. The bulkheads extended from the ground up to the established grade, to which leveled dirt would later be piled in the street.”
Many of these brick bulkheads are still visible in Old Sacramento and whenever there is construction in the core downtown area.
The task of the business owner could seem arduous and expensive, but Lagomarsino wrote: “In the autumn of 1866, a bulkhead was built to high grade for only $3 a running foot.”
And while some of the bulkheads have collapsed, many are still standing more than 150 years later.
But the task of raising a building above the bulkheads was never easy.
Lagomarsino recounted the story of the St. George Hotel, which was raised in 1866.
“Two hundred and fifty (jackscrews) were put into place under that job in early August. It was about two weeks before work on the $7,450 contract was begun. By October, the whole job was finished; 160 feet by 76 feet, weighing about 1,900 tons, the building had been raised 8 feet (with very little damage inside and out).”
These massive modifications to the city’s structures also affected the infrastructure. The soil brought in to raise the streets covered fire hydrants and buried water lines beneath several feet of new soil; this made it difficult for the fire department to respond effectively. And if a water line broke, service was interrupted to the entire city.
Lagomarsino wrote, “In October 1865, a water line under newly raised 2nd Street broke.
Without warning, all water in the city was turned off at 5 o’clock in the evening.”
But it was not only underground water pipes that were affected. Because the streets were raised, buildings could not get proper water pressure from the old delivery system. In August 1867, the city water tank had to be raised 5 feet in order to provide enough pressure to carry water as high as four floors.
Lagomarsino’s research revealed that “most businesses were closed during the raising of their buildings. However, not all buildings were vacated while they were being raised.
In 1864, a wooden tenement in the Chinese section of town in (sic) I Street, between 2nd and 3rd (streets) was being raised during gale winds when it toppled over, scattering its occupants as it fell.”
Ultimately, Lagomarsino’s research concluded “such catastrophes were extremely rare. Most buildings were raised without problems and stood solidly afterwards.”
But even in the 19th century, buyers had to beware of nefarious and unscrupulous contractors who could not complete the jobs that they promised they would finish at certain arranged times.
Lagomarsino told the story of a house that was owned by Mary Esqueval on the block bounded by 2nd, 3rd, K and L streets.
Esqueval had arranged for a builder named Joel Johnson to raise her home and make elaborate changes that would significantly upgrade the beauty and condition of the house.
“The whole process was to take two weeks. The total cost was $500 in gold and silver, $100 to be paid when the screws were set, $200 more when the brickwork and sidewalks were finished and the final $200 when the job was completed. Unfortunately, the work was not so craftsmen-like as the agreement suggested it would be. He did not finish the work and she had to hire someone to raise the kitchen as well as to repair damage caused by raising the main house. All doors had to be re-hung; the whole house had to be painted and papered; the roof on the main building had to be fixed; and various other jobs had to be finished. The house settled several inches and developed cracks within a few months after he left the job. Both water and gas pipes were injured. Johnson had obviously not satisfied this customer.”
Shoddy construction was not the only problem with raising Sacramento.
While the responsibility of the city and the property owners was outlined in the raising of the streets and buildings, it was never clearly defined.
For instance, the sidewalks became the responsibility of the individual property owner. Hence, the completion of sidewalks at building level was very inconsistent.
In some cases, the sidewalks were not completed and a gapping hole existed in front of the building.
In other cases, the sidewalks were completed to street level, but the buildings had not yet been raised.
Lagomarsino wrote: “Under the best of conditions, a walk through Sacramento’s rising downtown area could be a hazardous up and down affair, especially at night. Among complaints, made editorially by local papers about dangerous sidewalks during the years of raising was one when a man fell 12 feet off a sidewalk to a vacant lot below. Another one, a man fell off a raised sidewalk onto an unraised street, and another when a man, ‘said to be perfectly sober’ following a sidewalk under construction, walked off the end of it and fell 9 or 10 feet onto the sidewalk below.”
All of this integrated construction to raise the city in order to achieve flood protection took several years and during those years, the streets were a perilous obstacle course for pedestrians and horse-drawn vehicles. Even today, the dangers of Sacramento’s underground are still visible even if the surface barriers have been gone for more than 150 years.
By 1873, the grading, raising and reconstruction was finished.
The lives of the citizenry and businesses had been disrupted for a decade. But was it worth it to the residents of Sacramento?
The answer may be found in the fact that Sacramento has not experienced any of the devastating floods that were common before the raising of the city and the creation of the underground.
The indomitable city once again displayed its courage, creativity and cooperation in the face of natural disaster.
But is the big flood still coming? The next article of this series will address the ultimate conclusion of the threat from hydraulic mining, some dangers that threatened severe damaged, the introduction of more modern mechanisms for flood control and the efforts of citizens and government agencies to partner in the control of rising waters.
Evidence of the Sacramento underground is still visible in many places and the Sacramento History Museum at 101 I St. in Old Sacramento now offers guided tours of some areas of the abandoned lower city.
Tickets are currently on sale on Saturdays and Sundays from 10 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. and tours leave every half hour. Beginning June 1, tours will be offered daily.
The costs of the tours are $15/adults and $10/youth, 6 to 17 years old.
For additional information regarding these tours, call (916) 808-7059.

The original street level of downtown Sacramento can be seen at the old Fulton’s Prime Rib Restaurant site at 906 2nd St. in Old Sacramento. Photo by Lance Armstrong

Editor’s Note: This is part six in a series about the history of the Sacramento River.

Within a quarter century of its founding, flooding had become the bane of Sacramento. It was a city born out of convenience rather than vision.
From 1839 to 1849, the area was known as “Sutter’s Embarcadero.”
According to local historian Barbara Lagomarsino’s essay, entitled “Sacramento on the Rise,” “A man named McVickar proposed around this time (1848) to build a grogshop right on the river bank – but in the limbs of a sycamore tree, about twenty feet up” and that “access was to be by ladder or canoe, whichever circumstances preferred.”
Sacramento City, as Sacramento was known during its earliest years, was founded by John A. Sutter, Jr., who despite his father’s wishes, established the town at the confluence of the two rivers, instead of on higher ground.
The more visionary John Sutter, Sr. had already planned a city, complete with engineered docks and canals in the more appropriate location of the current William Land Park area.
But the selected location of Sacramento City offered a sandbar that precluded the need for docks and piers. It also left the new city vulnerable to seasonal inundations.
The building of levees, the filling of creeks and the rechanneling of watercourses only set the stage for one of the most ambitious flood control efforts ever attempted.
The indomitable city now had the indomitable task of literally raising its streets above the level of serious flooding.
This endeavor would take time, money and a cooperative effort of paramount proportions.
Since prehistoric times, humans recognized that erecting their housing upon stilts could provide protection from rising waters.
But the concept of raising a large section of the city, including businesses that required walk-up traffic, was a challenge of unparalleled proportions.
The project began simply enough as businesses raised their buildings to protect their valuable merchandise.
The problem then became that a city built upon banks of mud was without sidewalks. And customers, during the muddy winter months and the searing heat of summer, had to trudge up flights of stairs just to reach entrances.
A solution was required that could accommodate customers and protect inventory and citizens from floods.
Stilts solved the problem of protecting the businesses from floods, but one still required a boat to go shopping during the rainy seasons.
The stilts were an insipient beginning, but the ultimate salvation was found in raising the city streets as much as about 15 feet and abandoning the first floor entrances in the business district.
Essentially, Sacramento was to become a city built upon a city.
In addition to stilts, in the 1850s, some street levels were modestly and independently raised on a business to business basis.
But it took the flood of 1861-62 for the citizenry to come to the conclusion that a massive street raising, fortification of buildings and a reconstruction of the sewer system was necessary.
The optimum level to which the streets would have to be raised for protection from flooding equal to the great flood of 1861-62 was referred to as “high grade.” This level varied from a few feet on the edges of the flood prone area to as much as 15 feet in the central business district.
According to an article, entitled “The Uptown Underground,” in the February 1998 issue of Comstock’s magazine, a March 18, 1862 vote determined that the grade level of J Street would be raised two feet above the high-water mark. The motion passed with only two dissenting votes.
And in Lagomarsino’s aforementioned article, she wrote: “Finally, in February 1863, the supervisors passed an ordinance establishing the official street grades of Sacramento’s business district well above all previous high-water marks. This monumental endeavor required a public/private cooperative effort of unprecedented magnitude for the young city.”
In the July 18, 1969 edition of The Sacramento Union, historian Ted Baggelman, in an article regarding the development of the K Street Mall, referred to the 1860s cooperative effort, as follows: “The city pledged to fill in between the bulkheads to the necessary level, pave the street, and construct curbs. The merchants obligated themselves to pay the construction costs for the portion of the eight foot bulkhead in front of his establishment, and bear the costs of raising or altering his building and restoring the sidewalk at the new street level.”
The impact and effect of raising the city’s streets was much more complex than simply hauling in soil and tamping it. It became a complex integration of altering buildings and the water and sewer systems, paving streets, and building sidewalks.
On Jan. 1, 1867, The Union published an article regarding this redevelopment.
It was noted in the article that some streets “have been raised to the ‘high grade’ on the level with the embankments on the waterfront, which necessitates building of bulkheads and raising or reconstructing buildings; and in many cases old buildings have been torn down and new ones built to correspond with the improvements around them.”
The article also mentioned that “the Pacific Railroad Company have (sic) also entered upon the work of filling up Sutter Slough, north of I Street, and grading the ground from First Street to Sixth (Street), for the purpose of erecting thereon buildings for machine shops, car manufactories, etc.” These are the same buildings in the “railyards” area that the city and state are preserving and developing as part of the California State Railroad Museum.
Building owners were forced to decide whether their structures were worth saving or how they could be adapted.
Baggelman considered the owners’ consternation, as he wrote: “Pity the poor merchant who had to move his store up to the second floor, which then became the first floor; or worse yet, the property owner who decided to have his building raised (to the new level), which, at one inch a day took four months to reach the required eight feet.”
An apparatus known as a “jackscrew” was the preferred method of raising buildings, and it was not always an easy or successful endeavor.
In Lagomarsino’s article, she mentioned a raised tenement structure that was on jackscrews in the Chinese section of town, and notes that it collapsed during high winds in 1864.
She also referred to an annex of the Union Hotel, which was located on 2nd Street, between J and K streets, as follows: “(The annex was) perched on dozens of jackscrews, eight feet above the ground, waiting for a new foundation. Before that could be supplied, however, in the middle of the night, most of the building collapsed, leaving a jumble of furniture, bricks and fixtures piled around the jackscrews.”
Fortunately, most of the buildings were raised without incident; although, the process could be expensive when performed by professionals.

This historic city of Sacramento map shows the city and its nearby vicinity during the great flood of 1861-62.

Editor’s Note: This is part four in a series about the history of the Sacramento River.

As a city of two rivers, Sacramento has a long history of trying to protect itself from the very entities – it waterways – that provided its birth and its life’s blood for the future.
In explaining this point, The Sacramento Bee, on Dec. 11, 1861, published the following words.
“Ever since the planting of Sacramento at the confluence of two mighty rivers, she has had to fight for existence with an energy and constancy which have developed her nerve and muscle and proved her vitality beyond that of any city of modern times.”
Sacramento, which was once referred to as the “Levee City,” experienced about an eight-year period of prosperity in regard to avoiding major floods within the city limits.
The great flood of 1853 forced businesses and residents to acknowledge the dangers of Sacramento’s rivers overflowing their banks. But this period of inactivity and a lack of inundation lulled the citizenry into a false sense of security.
In 1861, this false sense of security, along with much property, dreams and visions for the future, were again awash in a flood, the likes of which had never been seen in historic California.
As a precursor to the great flood of 1861, the level of the American River reached its highest point since 1853 – about 18 feet above the low water mark on March 27 of the same year.
During that evening, the wing dam on the east side of the city at Rabel’s tannery was swept away and the levee at that site was damaged.
As a result of the same storm, water from Sutter Lake overflowed and cut a channel through Front Street to the American River.
Furthermore, bridges along the same river from the capital city to Folsom were either swept away or useless as a means to cross this waterway.
But surprisingly, this storm was considered to have produced only minor property damage and no loss of human life.
The lack of extensive loss was due to the fact that the floodwaters receded rapidly. But the damage done to the wing dam at Rabel’s tannery would come back to haunt the city.
The rains of December 1861 came faster and were heavier than any ever experienced in the Sacramento Valley.
Both the Sacramento and American rivers, as well as all rivers to the north, rose above their previously recorded high water marks.
Once again, the big bend in the American River at Rabel’s tannery became the weak link in the chain of Sacramento levees that some politicians suggested at the time had cost as much as $1.5 million.
The irony of the flood is that the levees that were built to protect the city became dams that held the waters within its boundaries and inundated the city.
On Dec. 10, 1861, The Sacramento Union described the disaster, as follows:
“Sacramento was yesterday subjected to suffering and damage from the deepest and most destructive flood of those to which she has been exposed. It came, too, with the rapidity of a hurricane. In a few hours after the water crossed the levee, the whole city was underwater. The flood precipitated itself upon us without warning, and found people totally unprepared. The levee is now an injury, instead of a benefit, as it confines the water in the city, and has caused it to rise higher by probably two feet (more) than it would have done had no levee existed on the south side.”
Only a few places of high ground were spared the destruction of the flood of mid-December to mid-January 1861.
These locations where the floodwaters did not intrude included Sutter’s Fort and Poverty Ridge, which was roughly located between 20th, 23rd, P and W streets. Poverty Ridge was given its name due to the impoverished appearance of the people who took refuge there with their belongings and their animals during Sacramento’s periodic inundations.
The third location was a small mound along 10th Street at the site of today’s Cesar Chavez Plaza.
The rest of the city found itself underwater, ranging from a few inches to several feet.
Because the wing dam had been washed away from the great bend of the American River at Rabel’s tannery, the river broke through the A Street levee on the north side of the city, rushed down Burns’ Slough, passed Sutter’s Fort until it washed up against the R Street levee on the south side of the city.
The R Street levee held back the waters, just as it was designed to do, only from the wrong side.
The continual rush of waters, fed by more and more rain, hit the levee and rebounded back into the city proper where it continued to swing back and forth between the north and south levees, causing Sutter Lake to overflow and leaving destruction in the water’s wake.
The aforementioned Dec. 10, 1861 edition of The Union reported: “Several persons were drowned; and, had the water broken in during the night, the loss of life must (sic) have been fearfully great. Horses, cows, hogs, fowls, etc. have drowned, but how many we have no means of ascertaining. The damage to property has been great and may be greater. Thousands tonight are houseless, while hundreds of families are in second stories, without the means of making fires.”
The waters calmed, but the rains did not abate until February 1861 and some of the puddles from the flood did not dry up until the following August.
It was during the flood that Leland Stanford had to be taken by rowboat to his inauguration as governor.
If the three previous major floods had only sparked a desire for protection, the great flood of the winter of 1861-62 opened the citizenry’s eyes to the death that could be brought from life-giving waters.
The “Levee City” had then become a community with indomitable spirit, which led to major changes in how Sacramento approached and prepared for flood control.

The flood of 1849-50 resulted in efforts that led to Sacramento City’s notoriety as the “Levee City.” Photo courtesy

Editor’s Note: This is part three in a series about the history of the Sacramento River.

When presenting a history of the city’s rivers, it is important to not only provide details about major floods, but also measures that were made to combat potential floods.
The 1880 book, “History of Sacramento County, California,” notes that prior to the great flood of January 1850, “nothing had been attempted in the matter of protection from flood or high water.”
Capt. John Sutter and the Indians, who showed him where to build his fort, recognized that the proposed location for the new Sacramento City was in a natural flood plain that was regularly inundated in the winter months.
Flood control became an immediate concern of the citizenry and politicians.
The Saturday, Jan. 19, 1850 edition of the Placer Times included the following words: “A week ago last night, our city experienced one of the most terrific southeast storms known in this region, which had the effect of swelling the Sacramento (River) by Wednesday afternoon, so that the water commenced running over the slough on I Street, at various points between First and Third (streets). On Thursday morning, the entire city, within a mile of the embarcadero, was under water. The damage to merchandise and to buildings and the losses sustained by persons engaged in trade is very great – vast quantities of provisions and goods having been swept away by the rushing waters. The loss in livestock is almost incalculable; many persons have lost from 10 to 50 yoke of cattle each, and horses and mules have been carried down the stream in great numbers.”
It was obvious to all people concerned that flooding in the area needed to be stopped and the waters held at bay.
But there were some people who found a “gold lining” in the inundation.
The Times also reported in its Jan. 19, 1850 edition that “large numbers (of people) have been washing gold within the limits of our city during the week, without any great degree of success.”
It was also noted in the 1880 county history book that “waters had scarcely begun to recede from the city (following the January 1850 flood) when surveyors were employed to survey lines for and make a location of the proposed levee.”
A levee commission was established on Jan. 29, 1850 and one of the commissioners was Hardin Bigelow, who on April 1, 1850 became Sacramento’s first elected mayor, largely because of his support of building levees.
The need for building levees was immediate, but the funds for doing so were nonexistent.
Bigelow arranged for the city to borrow funds beyond the city’s $10,000 limit, and he also provided $6,000 from his personal assets.
With this money, the city was able to construct temporary embankments, which held off the anticipated second flood of 1850 and demonstrated the need and efficacy of levees.
On April 29, 1850, voters approved a special $250,000 tax assessment for a permanent levee that was built between September and December 1850.
The contract for the levee was given to Irwin, Gay & Co. on Sept. 6, 1850 and the labor began several days afterward.
Although the levee was not yet completed by Oct. 25, 1850, on that date, the San Francisco newspaper, the Daily Alta California referred to Sacramento City as “our sister, the Levee City.”
The levee, which commenced to the south at the high ground near Sutterville, ran for about nine miles along the northern and western boundaries of the city. And with this levee, the people of Sacramento City felt safe.
But less than a year and a half later – on March 7, 1852 – new raging waters broke through the sluice gate at Lake Sutter, breached the levee and once again inundated the city.
As a result, Sutter’s Fort, the knoll at the current site of Cesar Chavez Plaza and Poverty Ridge on the southeast side of the city stood as islands in a lake that in low spots reached 12 feet deep.
While once again the economic devastation was extensive, according to an article, titled “Sacramento defies the River: 1850-1878” by Marvin Brienes, “No lives were lost, and warnings before the levees gave way enabled many Sacramentans to remove their most valuable goods to high ground.”
Three days after the city was flooded, Mayor James Richmond Hardenbergh called for a new levee to be constructed on I Street, from the Front Street levee to 5th Street, from 5th Street along the edge of Lake Sutter and then to the levee of 1850, along the American River.
The proposal was adopted by the common council and this $50,000 project was completed after about two months of labor in November 1852.
Although local citizens were once again feeling safe in the Levee City, this feeling lasted only three weeks, as the American River levee was broken on Dec. 19, leaving a 40-foot-wide crevice.
Eventually, 150 feet of the levee was destroyed and Sacramento City was under water.
In its Dec. 25, 1852 edition, the Daily Alta California reported the following: “The water was running through Eighth Street, some six feet deep. Several lives were supposed to have been lost. One man was seen floating down the river on the top of his house. At the foot of L Street, a whole block is afloat; the Eagle Saloon is washed away and is floating round.”
As mentioned in the previous article of this series, on New Years Day 1853, the water level of the Sacramento River was 22 feet above the low water mark and two feet higher than the great flood of 1850.
By Jan. 2, 1853, floodwaters once again entered the heart of the city.
Frustrations mounted for the city’s “burned out and flooded citizens,” as one local man described the area’s residents.
In an early January 1853 letter to the editors of The Sacramento Union, the man wrote: “Our city government has been in operation nearly three years, has expended more than two hundred thousand dollars upon the levee, and very large sums for other purposes. Our taxes have been greater perhaps than those of any other city in the world; our city debt is now very large; and after all this taxation and expenditure, the city has not received a benefit commensurate with the costs. We have received nothing like a fair equivalent for our money.”
On July 29, 1853, a city ordinance “for widening, altering and improving the levee, and providing for the payment of the expense” was approved by the mayor and common council.
The cost was set at no more than $50,000 and the work, which was completed by the latter part of 1853, was paid for in scrip known as the “Levee Scrip.” The levee along Burns Slough at the eastern end of the city and down R Street was separate from this approximate sum and was paid for through a loan.
The levee system, which later underwent various improvements, proved to be a successful barrier against major floods in the city for several years. But that level of prosperity quickly changed on Dec. 9, 1861.

The flood of 1849-50 created a Venice-like scene in Sacramento City. Photo courtesy

Editor’s Note: This is part one in a series about the history of the Sacramento River.

In being a city of two rivers, Sacramento has a history that is very much tied to each of these tributaries. And, undoubtedly, the river most directly associated with the Pocket area is the Sacramento River.
The Pocket area itself is partially bordered by this river and its levee, which has received much attention lately due to the controversy surrounding a city proposal to extend public recreation access along the river.
Certainly, no event in the Pocket’s history made the area’s residents more aware of the Sacramento River’s existence than the Edward’s Break – the devastating levee break that flooded about 10,000 acres in the Riverside-Pocket area in February 1904.
The significance of the Sacramento River in the city’s history is so great that it would be impossible to present a thorough account of the city’s beginnings without referring to this river.
And by its name alone, the Sacramento River is important to the history of Sacramento, since the city took its name from this important waterway.
As the largest river in California, this 375-mile river has its source near Mount Shasta.
The river then meanders down the center of the Sacramento Valley and runs between the cities of Sacramento and West Sacramento.
It continues its way into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, where it is fed by other watercourses to become the Carquinez Straits and ultimately flows into the San Francisco Bay.
How the river was formed is a complex series of geological events, which include uplift and erosion of the Sierra Nevada and Coastal Mountains and the eruption and creation of Mount Shasta.
For more than 100,000 years, the Sacramento River has been cutting through deep deposits of sediment from the Coast Range and Sierra Nevada.
As previously mentioned, the city of Sacramento was named after the Sacramento River.
In 1808, the Spanish organized an expedition to go into the interior of California to explore rivers north of the Cosumnes River, which they discovered two years earlier, and to search for suitable locations for missions and pueblos.
This expedition was led by Spanish army officer Jose Gabriel Maraga, who gave names to many of the topographic features that he discovered on his journey.
At that time, the Spanish army in California was inextricably linked to the Catholic Church, thus almost all the names chosen by Maraga were taken from Catholic nomenclature.
Maraga named the largest of these tributaries El Rio de Sacramento, which translates as the River of Sacrament. The Sacramento River was thus named in honor of the “offerings of Christ.”
On Oct. 9, 1808, Maraga wrote in his diary: “Today, we broke camp and moved to the river discovered yesterday, which we named the Sacramento. They have measured this river at 169 varas (about 5,577 inches or about 465 feet) across.”
For some unknown reason, the only entry missing from Maraga’s diary, which was kept from Sept. 25 through Oct. 23, 1808, was the entry for Oct. 8 – the day that he discovered the Sacramento River.
During the following 40 years, the Sacramento River remained the quiet home of salmon, wildlife and native people of the area.
In 1848, bright, metallic flakes were found in a tributary of the Sacramento and for the river and its valley, its future changes were dramatic.

Sacramento City is shown during its early times. This image includes the Sacramento River embarcadero at the foot of J Street. Photo courtesy

It appears as if the word, “rush” from the famous Gold Rush of 1849 has much significance in the naming and location of the city.
Furthermore, little effort was given to the naming of the city’s streets, which received basic alphabetical and numerical names.
Sacramento City was built in a “rush” with little regard for expansion or flooding.
In fact, the very sands contributed to by flooding were responsible for the location of the new city, because the sand provided a low spot for large ships to beached, loaded and unloaded.
Neither Captain John Sutter nor the Indians who lived in the area before him regarded the eventual location of the city as habitable.
Sutter, guided by the local Indians, had his fort built in one of the few high ground sites in today’s city of Sacramento.
Even the city that Sutter had planned – Sutterville – was being built on the high ground in the area of today’s William Land Park.
The problem with this location was that its high banks that prevented flooding, also kept ships from landing.
As a result, Sacramento City was born almost overnight, because it was the one spot where large vessels could land and unload supplies, feeding the frenzy of the Gold Rush.
When it comes to presenting the city’s river history, it is certainly essential to include details pertaining to the topic of flooding.
While visiting Sacramento on Feb. 25, 1878, James W. Marshall, whose discovery of gold on the South Fork of the American River led to the Gold Rush of 1849, was interviewed by a Sacramento Record-Union reporter.
In speaking to the reporter regarding the topic of high water, Marshall referred to the 1845-46 flood, which covered all the Indian mounds in the Sacramento Valley.
Marshall described this flood as being so great that it came within two feet of entering Sutter’s Fort.
And in relating the 1845-46 flood to the then present times, Marshall estimated that the water of that flood would have reached at least four or five feet above the high grade of the city.
Continuing, Marshall noted that an old Hudson Bay trapper had told him about a flood, which occurred in the Sacramento Valley in the winter of 1830.
That flood, Marshall said, reached a level of five or six feet higher than the level of the 1845-46 flood.
Within a detailed account of the flood of 1849-50 in the Feb. 8, 1873 edition of The Sacramento Union, it was noted that by Jan. 12, 1850 “there was no dry land in town except at the knoll on the public square (today’s Cesar E. Chavez Plaza), between Ninth and Tenth streets.”
Another one of the great floods in the city’s history was the flood of 1852-53.
Having already recently suffered another tragedy – the great fire of Nov. 2, 1852 – Sacramento was flooded as the result of a rise in the Sacramento River from Dec. 20, 1852 to Jan. 24, 1853.

Volunteers from last year's Great American River Clean Up collected trash all along the river. About 1,500 volunteers are expected this year on Saturday, Sept. 15. / Courtesy of the American River Parkway Foundation

On Saturday, Sept. 15, about 2,500 volunteers are expected to take part in the American River Parkway Foundation’s annual Great American River Clean Up.
According to Stacy Springer, volunteer manager for the American River Parkway Foundation, which is based in Carmichael, these volunteers will spend three hours that morning cleaning up 20 site locations along the American River of trash and other debris. “And that does not even include the huge kayak and dive teams that go out and address the shoreline and deeper water channels,” she said.
Springer said it’s easy to volunteer for the Great American River Clean Up – volunteers just need to register on the Foundation’s website, www.arpf.org, and then show up on the day of the clean up wearing closed-toe shoes and long pants, plus sunblock and hat if the day is sunny and warm.

Cleaning Up
A site captain, such as Heidi Steger, a Sacramento resident who has been a site captain for the Great American River Clean Up for the past four years, mans each clean up location. Steger oversees the Howe Avenue river access location, which she said covers from Sacramento State upstream to the Watt Avenue location.
On the day of the clean up, Steger is in charge of putting up signs, handing out gloves to those who don’t have their own, distributing trash bags, waters and snacks, and giving some basic safety instructions to about 100 volunteers at her location.
She said there are both paved and unpaved portions of the Parkway, so volunteers can feel comfortable depending on their abilities. “If you’re the kind of person who doesn’t feel bad about walking through high grass or even under trees and through some brambles, that’s fine, but if you’re the kind that wants to stick to the path, that’s fine, too,” she said.
When out on the Parkway, Steger said volunteers are asked to pick up everything from cigarette butts to car tires. “There’s cans, bottles, paper trash, paper bags, plastic containers – it’s a mix,” she said.
There’s an emphasis on picking up cigarette butts at the clean up site location of Michael Rebensdorf, who has been a site captain for almost 10 years. At his site at Sailor Bar – just below Nimbus Dam, across the river from the fish hatchery – Rebensdorf holds a contest for picking up the most cigarette butts. “People walk by the little trash – they want to get the big trash to fill their bag up,” he said.

Having an Impact
Rebensdorf said through his years as a site captain at Sailor Bar, he has seen the amount of trash picked up each year decline significantly. “It’s probably 25 percent now from when I first started,” he said.
He said this is because people are more conscious of not throwing things on the ground and littering. “At Sailor Bar, there’s an entry point for fisherman to the river and I think they’ve become a lot more aware,” he said. “It’s more conscious in people’s minds that if you come out here and throw your things on the ground, you’re not going to be able to come out and fish anymore.”
Steger said the clean up also helps community members get a feel for what the riverbanks are like. “They figure out if you want to be able to enjoy this wonderful gift of the American River, you’ve got to take care of it a little bit, “she said.
And Stringer said volunteers leave with an awareness that everyone is responsible for their backyard regardless of where the trash comes from. “As good citizens and good Samaritans, we want to make sure that if we have to pick up somebody else’s trash because it’s laying there, then that’s what we do – it’s taking on a higher level of responsibility,” she said.

Adopt-a-Mile
In addition to the Great American River Clean Up, the American River Parkway Foundation has volunteers that help keep the Parkway clean all year long through various programs. One of these programs is the Volunteer Mile Steward program, where individuals and groups adopt a mile of the Parkway and commit to 20 hours of service per quarter to help keep it clean, according to Springer.
“Every mile is a little different – 99 percent of it is trash removal, but we have graffiti removal issues at times,” Springer said. “That’s a very popular program and we have very dedicated volunteers.”
Two of those volunteers are residents Theresa and Steve Graham. About seven years ago they adopted Mile 4, which starts behind the REI in the Arden area and runs down to Cal Expo. Steve said he and Theresa decided to adopt that particular mile because as an avid bicyclist he was using it all the time and realized he should give back.
Steve said he and Theresa go out two hours about twice a month to pick up trash on their mile and report any graffiti or encampments they encounter. “We pick up every little bit because I don’t want an animal stepping in this or eating this, so even if it’s a flip-top from a can it all comes up because we’ve got to keep this clean for the animals as they are there all the time,” he said.
Theresa enjoys their work on the mile as she enjoys being outside and exploring the nature in the area, as well as the flexibility the program offers. “You can do it at what time-frame works for you – you can make it work into your schedule, which really works for us,” she said.
And she also likes the good internal feeling volunteering gives her. “You feel like you’re contributing to the good of the society,” she explained. “I think everybody should do something for the good of their community – it just gives you pride in it.”

For more information on the Great American River clean up or volunteering with the American River Parkway Foundation, visit www.arpf.org.

corrie@valcomnews.com

Another Eppie’s Great Race has come and gone, but memories of a fun-filled day will live on. Thousands of people participated as well as volunteered for the annual event, now in its 39th year, which took place Saturday, July 21.
The race began with a 5.82-mile run along the American River bike trail near the bridge at William Pond Recreation Area.
Teams, “Ironmen” and “Ironwomen” then biked 12.5 miles from Guy West Bridge at Sacramento State to the Sunrise Avenue Bridge in Rancho Cordova.
The race concluded with a 6.35-mile kayak down the American River to River Bend Park.

tom@valcomnews.com