Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Never Before Seen


Eight previously unknown photographs of the 1913 flood purchased on ebay portray the flood at its peak in Rochester, New York. Who was the mystery photographer?
 
Last November, out of the blue, one Steven Schooler sent me this email message:

Sorry to bother you like this, but I found your blog online and thought you might be interested in some photos I have listed on ebay that show the aftermath of the 1913 flood in Rochester. I came across these recently in an antique store here in my home state of Texas. They are listed under ebay #111511780776, with the auction set to end Sunday night, Nov. 16.
Of course, I immediately jumped to ebay and beheld eight images I’d never seen 
Previously unknown image of 1913 flood in Rochester, NY, on Saturday, March 29, showing turbulent floodwaters coursing over the Court Street Dam. The original photograph - on photographic paper of an oddball size of 3.25 x 5.5 inches - was one of eight sold to me in November 2014 by Steven Schooler. Credit: Collection of Trudy E. Bell
before of the Great Easter Flood, primarily on March 28 and 29, 1913 in Rochester, New York. Now, you’ll never find Rochester topping the list of cities devastated by the 1913 flood, and no wonder: it’s more than 460 miles northeast of the city that gave a human face to the disaster and became synonymous with it: Dayton, Ohio. But Rochester—along with Albany and other New York cities—suffered record flooding that likely would have resulted in national headlines had Dayton (and elsewhere in Ohio and Indiana) not suffered far worse (see “Rescuing Albany’s Water).

Only two cameras existed in 1913 that
could have taken photos of such an
oddball size. The most likely one was
this Kodak 3A Folding Camera.
Credit: Camerapedia
I e-mailed Schooler and asked if I could purchase the images outright. Although he was unable to discontinue the auction at that point with less than 12 hours to go, he wrote:

"I do like what you're doing with your blog, though - I'm actually a professional archaeologist, so I appreciate your love of history. I mostly sell rare/scholarly/reference books on ebay to supplement my income, but I also enjoy poking around in antique stores and am always drawn to the inevitable baskets of sad, cast-off photos. For the ones that have enough clues to situate them in time or place, I enjoy doing a little research and seeing what I can figure out about them. (These Rochester pics were obviously pretty self-explanatory.) Anyway, by putting these wayward photos on ebay, I figure they're at least getting a shot of winding up in the hands of someone who'll be able to more fully appreciate them."
I bit my nails all through November 16, crossing my fingers that the photos would not sell. The next morning, Schooler replied to my query:

"Trudy, no bidders on the photos, which I am actually grateful for too - I really wanted you to get them. You clearly have a passionate interest in the topic, and you're probably the one person best situated to extract the maximum educational / public awareness value from them. Do you think you'll make a blog post out of them? Or maybe even incorporate into another book? (Saw from your email you have one titled The Great Dayton Flood of 1913.)"

The only other camera at the time taking
the oddball film size was the No. 2
Stereo Brownie, a less likely possibility.
Credit:Marlo Groleu

He did not know the identity of the photographer, although the box that contained them had other photos of upstate New York landscape scenes with handwriting on the back identical to the writing on the back of the flood images. 

Because the prints are small and large-format film and glass plate negatives were common a century ago, I speculated that the images might actually be contact prints instead of enlarged. Before shipping them to me, Schooler scanned the prints at 1600 dpi, and was excited to report “there actually is some pretty amazing detail. Like on one, there's a billboard in the distance and on the extreme zoom you can tell it had the image of a roadster-style motor car. And you can actually see one of the pumper vehicles a lot better in another.” 

Schooler packed them very well and they arrived quickly. He added:

If you do use the Rochester images in a new post, or in a new book down the line, please do drop a line -  it would be exciting to see the photos I found used in a finished product!
The camera and photographer
I began digging online for information about the camera and locations noted, as well as in the photocopies of four Rochester newspapers on microfilm (obtained several years ago during a research trip to Rochester) for details about the flood scenes. 

Mystery picture, taken of dry
Water Street on Easter Sunday,
March 23, before the rains began.
Why? Credit: Trudy E. Bell
From my own wet lab darkroom work with black-and-white film, I recognized the small white round dots as being from bubbles in the developer that settled on the film because of too-vigorous pouring and agitation during developing. The composition of the images is not the greatest (indeed, in a couple the out-of-focus window sill obscures a bottom corner of the scene), nor is the printing job expert, yielding inadequate contrast. To me, all these characteristics suggested that the photographer was likely an amateur, not a professional. 

Both the images and the paper prints are also an oddball size: the images themselves are 3 by 5.25 inches, and the paper on which they are printed is 3.25 by 5.5 inches. These sizes perplexed me until belatedly I recalled that Rochester was the headquarters of the Kodak Co. The fabulous British site Early Photography has a marvelous table of standard film and plate sizes for antique and vintage cameras. According to that table, the only possible candidates that could have existed by 1913 would have been Kodak roll film size 122 introduced in 1903 or Kodak roll film size 125 introduced in 1905, both 3.25 by 5.5 inches, sometimes also called a “postcard” film size. 

Now, according to Kodak’s own list of historical cameras, the only camera that could have existed in 1913 using that oddball 122 film would have been one of half a dozen models of a No. 3A Folding Pocket Camera, which was on the market from 1903 to 1915. Initially, it retailed for $78—hardly chump change in 1913, equivalent to about $1700 today—but quickly dropped to $20. 

The other possibility, for 125 film, would be a No.2 Stereo Brownie Camera, on the market from 1905 to 1910 for $12 (about $265 today). Although the price point would be right for an amateur, the camera itself seems unlikely unless there were an option for exposing the entire film plane for a single image. 
Men boating on Front Street. Possibly the water was too deep to allow the anonymous photographer to approach closer to his subject, which was beyond the pile of bricks.
Credit: Collection of Trudy E. Bell

My bet is on the No. 3A Folding Pocket Camera, suggesting to me that the photographer might have been a fairly wealthy amateur.

Easter Sunday mystery
The least interesting image of the eight has the most intriguing mysteries. It shows just a dry empty street with pieces of trash along the curb and some random people at the far end, a couple of them moving fast enough to be blurred during the exposure time. On the back the photographer has written: “Water St. Out of the office window looking toward Main St. Taken Easter Day 3/23/13.” Water St.—or, more precisely, North Water St.—in Rochester is only a block long, which instantly narrows down the location (see map).

Water from the flooded Genesee River washing into houses on March 28, 1913. Note the snow on the roof and the icicles. From sun angle, photo was taken in the morning. Credit: Collection of Trudy E. Bell
Okay, so why was the photographer in the office on Easter Sunday? Doesn’t sound like the behavior of an observant Catholic or Protestant in 1913 on one of the two holiest days of the Christian year. Might the photographer have been of another faith? (Certainly today University of Rochester is one of the top 30 private universities in North America with a large Jewish population.) If the photographer had access to the office on a Sunday, was he (most likely male in 1913) a senior employee with a key or did the office work 24/7? Or did he/she have living quarters there? If the office never closed, including on Easter Sunday, what was its business? 

Compare this image from the Rochester Municipal Archives (second image in the Rochester Subway's blog) of some of the same buildings with the image just above. From the sun angle, this one was taken in the afternoon.
The biggest mystery is: why was the photograph taken? Was it a test shot with a new camera? There is nothing obviously noteworthy out the window. Moreover, the rains had not yet begun, as the heavy weather moved over upstate New York at least a day later than it hit Indiana and Ohio.

Peak flood, March 28
There are four images from Friday, March 28—the day the waters were receding from cities in Ohio, but were just cresting in upstate New York. One—evidently taken from 
High water under buildings on the Main
St. bridge from the river flowing below.
Credit: Collection of Trudy E. Bell
an upper floor across the Genesee River—is annotated “Water washing into the houses across the river from back of our shop & office. Ordinarily there is dry ground about 15 feet below the balconies. The water went right on through & came out on Front Street. 3/28/13.” 

Assuming that the photos were again taken from the same office on Water Street, that suggests that the building fronted the river on the west side of Water; note also the mention of a “shop,” which implies a factory. The photo itself shows snow on the roofs and huge icicles; the buildings’ east-facing walls are in full sun, suggesting the photo was taken in the morning. A sharper image of part of this same scene is the second photograph in the Rochester Subway’s blog installment “Rochester’s Great Flood(s), which is a fast enough exposure it better shows the water’s turbulence; some of the snow has melted and the east-facing walls are in shadow, implying that photo was taken later in the afternoon.

Another that same date, with the notation “From back window,” says “These buildings are on Main St. They are built right over the river, which ordinarily runs 15 feet below, and you can see the arches. Now the water is right up under the buildings. 3/28/13.” 

Mill Street, Rochester. Trudy E. Bell
Until the 1960s, Rochester’s Main Street was unique in the world: despite previous floods and fires that destroyed three predecessors in the nineteenth century, the fourth and stone Main Street Bridge was lined with buildings on both sides, with the Genesee River flowing underneath them. This 1913 flood view probably shows the snow-covered roofs and the backs of the buildings on the upriver (north) side of the Main Street Bridge, judging from the likely location of the back office window. 

A third photo for the same date reads “Andrews St., Rochester N.Y. 3/28/13.” The fourth reads “Mill St. Rochester N.Y. 3/28/13.” The two might be usefully considered as a pair, as in 1913 Mill and Andrews intersected; thus, the photographer might have shot one, turned 90 degrees, and shot the other. The water on Mill St. is clearly not very deep, and likely also the same on Andrews, judging from the “open for business” sign on the grocery store and the coat-covered fire hydrant. Note the hose snaking across Mill St., and at the far left water is gushing out of a pipe that is pumping out a basement.

Saturday, March 29
Andrews Street, Rochester. Collection of Trudy E. Bell
The next day, the water was still at least knee deep on Front Street, as can be seen from the photo annotated “Good boating on Front Street Rochester N.Y. This is where the river dropped in the back doors and left by the front. 3/29/13.” The camera’s focus is on the two men in the boat in the middle distance beyond the pile of bricks.

Elsewhere, even though streets were dry, cellars were still flooded. On the back of one image the photographer wrote, “Engines pumping water out of cellars. Rochester, N.Y. 3/29/13.” Unfortunately, no location is noted, but perhaps a reader familiar with Rochester history may be able to identify this busy brick or stone street with its trolley tracks and landmark buildings. The pumping at left appears to be being done with the aid of a fire engine.

Engines pumping. Location?
Collection of Trudy E. Bell
The last photo (lead photo at top of this page) reads “Court St. dam Rochester, N.Y. Ordinarily you can see all the rocks in the rapids. The ‘roll’ of water coming over the dam is about 9 feet high. 3/29/13.” Note also the dangerous turbulence of the floodwater.

The floodwaters had scarcely receded when Rochester’s mayor, Hiram Edgerton, wrote a letter on April 1, 1913, urging the city council to “immediately” consider ordinances to build a protective wall along the west side of the Genesee River, which was completed two years later. The wall still exists and is undergoing improvements today.

Can you help?
I also have scanned the backs of six prints where there is a paragraph of writing, on the outside chance that some reader may recognize the handwriting and be able to identify the photographer. 

The handwriting is quite legible with few abbreviations; indeed, the nature of the explanations suggest that the annotations were not notes to self, but explanations to a friend or relative somewhere else who may not be familiar with the Rochester. That causes me to wonder whether these images were actually mailed to someone distant from the city. And of course, the question has to be asked how they finally ended up in Texas, where Schooler purchased them. 
Anyone recognize the handwriting of the anonymous photographer on the backs of the photos? Scans by Trudy E. Bell

If you have any clue as to the identity of the photographer from the handwriting—or if you know the history of Rochester well enough to have a good supposition as to the “office” and “shop” from which the photographer was shooting—please definitely contact me. I will feature any further information in a future installment.

©2015 Trudy E. Bell

Next time: Katrina + 10

Selected references
A selection of images that make interesting comparisons appear in the installment “Rochester’s Great Flood(s) in Mike Governale’s blog Rochester Subway.com, May 19, 2014. 
 
A few paragraphs of interest appears in “The Flood at Rochester, N.Y.,” by E. A. Fisher, Engineering News, v. 69, p. 741, April 10, 1913. 

Tidbits about the 1913 flood in Rochester appear in this USGS reference on floods in upstate New York 1865-1989, with discussion about five notable floods including 1913.

For more about buildings on a bridge, see "Historic Main Street Bridge" by Dorothy S. Truesdale in Rochester History 3(2): , April 1941.

Bell, Trudy E., The Great Dayton Flood of 1913, Arcadia Publishing, 2008. Picture book of nearly 200 images of the flood in Dayton, rescue efforts, recovery, and the construction of the Miami Conservancy District dry dams for flood control, including several pictures of Cox. (Author’s shameless marketing plug: Copies are available directly from me for the cover price of $21.99 plus $4.00 shipping, complete with inscription of your choice; for details, e-mail me), or order from the publisher.


Monday, June 1, 2015

Prayers and Lessons


The massive multistate flooding in the southern plains states in late May 2015 actually approaches the magnitude of the multistate Great Easter 1913 Flood in some ways. Message: Extreme, widespread, non-hurricane rain events in the middle of the nation can happen again. Are we ready?

The epic flooding across Texas still ongoing strikes personal alarm in my heart: my sister and nephew live in a suburb of Dallas. 

Flash floods can be as damaging as tornadoes, as evidenced by the smashed ruins of a home on the Blanco River after heavy rains caused flash flooding in Wimberley, Texas, May 24, 2015. Credit: Rodolfo Gonzalez/AP

But just because Houston, Dallas, Austin, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, and other Texas major metropolitan areas have riveted the public eye, let us not forget that also hammered were Oklahoma (my sister’s in-laws live near Oklahoma City), Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri—and even Kansas and Nebraska. Yet, just in the way the news focuses on Texas, one can see the forgetting is already setting in.
Radar mosaic of storm system marching across Texas and Oklahoma, May 24, 2015, causing multistate flooding. Credit: National Weather Service 
In fact, I’m willing to wager that this 2015 multistate natural disaster will be remembered as something like the Great Texas Flood, or worse, the Great Houston Flood—thereby diminishing its significance to history—instead of with a name befitting its scale, such as, say, the Great Memorial Day 2015 Flood. And with a diminished name comes forgetting. After all, we’ve seen it all before: in what has been handed down to us with a name diminished to be one city’s flood—the Great Dayton Flood—instead of the Great Easter 1913 Flood, so vast that it engulfed more than a quarter of the nation, and yet has been virtually forgotten.  
Left: Rescue personnel grab the hand of a man stranded in rushing water at the northwest corner of Lamar Blvd. and 15th St. in Austin, Texas. Shoal Creek overflowed its banks and inundated the major traffic artery with rushing water. Several cars were stalled under and near the 15th St. Bridge on Monday, May 25, 2015. Credit: Alberto Martinez/Austin American-Statesman via AP 
Right: After floodwaters had receded perhaps six feet at Burns Avenue and Catherine Street south of downtown Dayton, Ohio, stranded people could be rescued in one of the National Cash Register flat-bottomed boats. Note the dark staining on the sides of the brick buildings showing peak flood height. Credit: Dayton Metro Library
Despite differences in the regions and eras, the tragedy playing out in the southern plains states right now bears such striking parallels to what happened across the Midwestern, eastern, and northern plains states a century ago that a few comparisons are instructional. Moreover, the comparisons point up two additional, chilling cautionary messages for our future.

Side by side
Below are selected photographs of the severe flooding across the southern plains states in 2015, paired with similar photos from various states from the Great Easter 1913 flood. For all images, all rights remain with the original photographers and news organizations credited in the captions.
Incredible lightning strike seen in Kyle, Texas, on Monday, May 25, 2015. Credit: Twitter/@marteenee13 and @WarrenHughes13
First striking parallel: the storm system itself. In neither case was the flooding due to a hurricane or storm surge. In both cases, flooding was due to long-duration, intense rainfall from a monumental, slow-moving storm system featuring repeated lows following one right after another, concentrated over a region already saturated from previous intense rainfall so runoff was exceptionally high (for 1913, see “Be Very Afraid”; for 2015 see Weather. com). In both cases, the storm was accompanied by violent lightning (see image 4 at here) and tornadoes (for 1913 see “’My Conception of Hell’” and “Terror at Terre Haute”; for 2015 see Wikipedia.
Left: Woman climbing through the ruins of her tornado destroyed house in Oklahoma. Credit: NBC News. Right: Woman surveys ruins of a home destroyed by the Great Easter 1913 Omaha tornado. Credit: Omaha Public Library 
In both cases, rivers rose rapidly and descended on communities as veritable walls of water, even in regions not normally prone to flooding. Such flash flooding has the violence of tornadoes (see "An Unnecessary Tragedy").
Left: The level of the Blanco River at Wimberley soared from 5 feet on Saturday afternoon, May 23, to a record 40.21 feet at 1:01 am CDT Sunday, more than 7 feet above the prior record. The river gauge stopped reporting after this point. Credit: NWS Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service. Right: The fast-rising Muskingum River at Zanesville, Ohio, in 1913 also wiped out the weather gauges, and also crested at nearly 52 feet (vertical line in the middle of the chart) – 15 feet higher than a previous record set by a flood 20 years earlier. Credit: NWS 
But here’s a big difference between the two storm systems. Communications still functioned in 2015 and warnings were issued and heeded, so “only” 28 lives were lost—actually, likely 28 and counting as more bodies turn up and as people injured during the violence of flash flooding perish from complications of their injuries. In 1913, the death count—over 600 in Ohio and Indiana alone—was much higher because the massive windstorm on Good Friday, March 21 severely crippled communications so that weather data could not be gathered nor warnings issued (see “The First Punch”). Moreover, some of the flash flooding occurred in the dark of night, sweeping away people in their homes with no warning (see “’Death Rode Ruthless…’”).
Left: In this aerial photo, water from the Arkansas River floods a farm shed in Faulkner County near Conway, Ark., Friday, May 29, 2015. Credit: Danny Johnston/AP.  Right: Dayton homes were submerged to their eaves in the Great Easter 1913 Flood. Credit: Dayton Metro
In both calamities, homes and buildings drowned, the floodwaters reaching midway up the first story or even to the eaves. Note the sheen of oil on the floodwaters surrounding the half-submerged farm building photographed in 2015. That points out a serious hazard of severe floods today—the fact that they can breach stores of chemicals and toxic waste dumps, so the chemical-laden floodwaters are themselves toxic (see “Benchmarking 'Extreme'”) Indeed, in Houston, 100,000 gallons of untreated wastewater and raw sewage spilled into the floodwaters when the Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant was flooded. But perhaps that was no different than conditions during the 1913 flood when the human excrement from the vaults of thousands of outdoor privies (outhouses) contaminated the floodwaters.
More than 100,000 gallons of untreated wastewater has spilled after Houston's Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant flooded Tuesday when a bayou overflowed its banks. Credit: Before It’s New
By the way, don’t be surprised if the flooding in the southern plains states also causes fires due to electrical shorts and broken gas mains—it happened in Dayton, Ohio, and Troy, New York, in 1913 and also after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 (see “Like a War Zone”) .
Left: Flooding in Norman, Oklahoma, on Saturday, May 23, 2015. Credit: StevenAnderson. Right: 1913 flooding photographed in Hamilton, Ohio. Credit: Michael J. Colligan History Project
In both 2015 and 1913, flooding brought transportation to a standstill, by flooding roads and streets, stranding vehicles, and destroying bridges. In 1913, railroads were also crippled as sections of track were washed away.
Floodwaters in May 2015 swept away an entire bridge in Wimberley, Texas. Credit: Twitter/@bez2012 Fifth Street Bridge over the Great Miami River in Dayton was completely destroyed in by the Great Easter 1913 Flood. Credit: Miami Conservancy District.
Altogether, rainfall for May 2015 in Oklahoma and Texas blasted through previous records, with totals exceeding two feet in that single month in Norman and between 18 to 24 inches widespread elsewhere. For perspective, that approaches triple the average winter monthly rainfall in Olympia, Washington, in the Pacific Northwest rain forest (about 8 inches per month). Indeed, in Houston and elsewhere, rain fell at a rate of more than 4 inches per day. A few places received rain at a rate of up to four inches per hour for short stints.

Some wag at the Fort Worth National Weather Service calculated that the rain that fell on Texas during the month of May amounted to more than 35 trillion gallons, enough to cover the entire state 8 inches deep. 

For comparison, in 1913, W. J. Cox, head of the Pittsburgh weather bureau, calculated that an average of 6.26 inches inundated the combined area of Ohio and Indiana in just four days  , amounting to close to 1.1 trillion cubic feet; at 7.48 gallons per cubic foot, that would come to about 8.2 trillion gallons. 

Actually, two years ago, Sarah Jamison, senior hydrologist at the Cleveland National Weather Service, recalculated that that 8 trillion gallons was runoff, produced by closer to 12 trillion gallons of actual rainfall. Yes, 12 trillion gallons is only a third of 35+ trillion gallons, but Ohio and Indiana together also have less than a third of Texas’s area (1/3.6 to be exact). More importantly: the 1913 calculations are for just four days, whereas the Texas ones are for the entire month. A more direct comparison would be the intensest four-day period over the southern plains states. And of course, for full storm volume, one really needs to add in the rainfall totals over all the other states deluged in both floods.

Two chilling cautionary messages
Still, at first glance, the rainfall totals point up an astounding revelation: the Great Memorial Day 2015 flood in the southern plains states likely approaches the magnitude of the Great Easter 1913 Flood for both intensity and multistate  
Left: May 2015 shattered rainfall records across both Texas and Oklahoma for the entire month of May—over 2 feet in some places. Credit: Weather. com  Right: modern reconstruction of rainfall across Indiana and Ohio for just "flood week" March 23–28, 1913. Credit: Midwest Regional Climate Center 
area—especially monumental as both natural disasters were due to rainfall alone, not to a hurricane (the heaviest rainfall ever in the U.S. was 43 inches in 24 hours, also in Texas, but during a hurricane).

The Great Memorial Day Flood of 2015 was a multistate event comparable in certain ways to the Great Easter Flood of 1913. Here they are shown side by side roughly to scale. Each deluge exceeded the other in some ways, but both were notable in being extreme non-hurricane rain events. Southern plains states map: USA Today; U.S. map with 1913 contours and tornadoes: ©2008 Trudy E. Bell
Let’s explore this 2015-1913 comparison a little further. In the southern plains, four inches per day comes to a foot in three or four days, comparable to the 11+ inches in four days in the most intense part of the 1913 flood over Ohio’s continental divide. Texas’s and Oklahoma’s overall monthly rainfall far exceeded any monthly total Ohio has ever experienced. 

In short, had the southern plains rain fallen over the same wide geography as the Great Easter 1913 Flood centered on Ohio’s continental divide, no question it would have precipitated a comparable repeat of that disaster. That is relevant because several recent (2012–2014) reports have cautioned that intense rain events are likely to increase both locally and regionally (see “Benchmarking 'Extreme'”).
In both floods, human beings were not the only victims. In 1913, thousands of horses, cattle, other livestock, and countless wildlife succumbed. In 2015, livestock, deer and alligators are in danger (see Click2Houston and the above Reuters video) while scores of pet animals are separated from their owners.
Moreover, if 1913 is any guide for today, recovery will be a long, tough slog. Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kansas, and elsewhere will not return back to normal as soon as the waters recede. The severe damage to infrastructure and homes will require months, if not years, for recovery. 

Moreover, today as in 1913, most people do not have flood insurance: normal homeowners’ policies do NOT insure against flood or groundwater. Flood insurance is required only in those areas designated as flood zones. As many 
8 Left: Rising floodwaters at Shoal Creek are shown after days of heavy rain on May 25, 2015 in Austin, Texas. Credit: Drew Anthony Smith/Getty Images. Right: Water rushing against the arches of the Court Street Bridge in Rochester, New York, in March 1913. Credit: Monovisions 
areas in Texas and Oklahoma that flooded were not in designated flood zones, most of those residents likely did not have policies. In other words, the destruction of their homes and all their contents and life's savings is a dead loss. 

Last: one unpleasant surprise from 1913 was: areas flooded that were not supposed to flood. The lesson from 2015 for the future is: how true that still can be.
My fervent thoughts and prayers go out to all the flood sufferers, with hopes that aid pours into them as it did to those in 1913.

©2015 Trudy E. Bell

Next time: Never Before Seen

Selected References
For discussion about the 1913 flood losses being especially severe because areas flooded that were not normally prone to flooding, see A. H. Horton and H. J. Jackson, The Ohio Valley Flood of March–April 1913, Water Supply Paper 334, U.S. Geological Survey, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1918, especially pages 45 and 85.
Bell, Trudy E., The Great Dayton Flood of 1913, Arcadia Publishing, 2008. Picture book of nearly 200 images of the flood in Dayton, rescue efforts, recovery, and the construction of the Miami Conservancy District dry dams for flood control, including several pictures of Cox. (Author’s shameless marketing plug: Copies are available directly from me for the cover price of $21.99 plus $4.00 shipping, complete with inscription of your choice; for details, e-mail me), or order from the publisher.