sary facilities. All these ports are within a few hours' trucking distance from the Port Lavaca area. 18. Water power and other special subjects.-Lynns Bayou is tidal. There are no related questions of power development, land reclamation, irrigation, flood control, drainage, or special features to be considered. 19. Conclusion.-It is believed that the proposed improvement will materially benefit the fishing industry and local business in general. The fish, shrimp, and oyster business will doubtless expand when the proposed packing and canning plant is constructed. Pleasure boating will be fostered. The plan of entire improvement is believed sound and the estimated costs to be borne by local interests reasonable. With the completion of the intracoastal canal already authorized possibly new commerce would develop. 20. Recommendations.-The proposed work should in reality be considered under the project authorized from Pass Cavallo to Port Lavaca, Tex., since the city proposes to enlarge the terminal facilities. at Port Lavaca by construction of an additional terminal on Lynns Bayou. The original project called for a channel 80 feet wide and 7 feet deep at Port Lavaca. It is believed to be within the spirit of the law and regulations to so consider it. Therefore, after consideration of the need for a reasonably safe harbor at Port Lavaca, the probable increase in existing commerce, and in view of the fact that local interests propose to construct at their own expense through loans and grants the harbor basin, wharf, and public packing plant, the major portion of the entire improvement, it is recommended that the present project for the channel from Pass Cavallo to Port Lavaca, Tex., as contained in House Document No. 1082, Sixtieth Congress, second session, be modified to provide a channel 7 feet deep and 80 feet wide from the present harbor to the shore line at the mouth of Lynns Bayou at an estimated cost of $12,000, with $3,000 annually for maintenance, in addition to the amount now required, provided that local interests furnish necessary rights-of-way and spoil-disposal areas, and provided further, that no work be undertaken until local interests have given assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of War that they will carry out their portion of the proposed improvement— to wit, dredge the harbor basin, construct the wharf and public packing plant. E. H. MARKS, Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers, о REPORT OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS ON REVIEW OF REPORTS HERETOFORE SUBMITTED ON BOSTON HARBOR, MASS., WITH ILLUSTRATION Hon. J. J. MANSFIELD, WAR DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, Washington, April 8, 1935. Chairman Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. MANSFIELD: 1. The Committee on Rivers and Harbors of the House of Representatives, by resolution adopted April 10, 1934, requested the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors to review the reports on Boston Harbor, with a view to determining the advisability of widening the recommended 40-foot channel to afford a suitable approach to the Navy drydock. I enclose herewith the report of the Board in response thereto. 2. Boston Harbor is a large and well sheltered but generally shallow bay, which has been extensively improved for harbor purposes. The United States has expended over $14,000,000 in providing a channel 2 miles long, with a minimum width of 900 feet and a minimum depth of 40 feet from the ocean to a deep-water area in the outer harbor known as "President Roads"; a main ship channel 6 miles long, 1,200 feet wide, and 35 feet deep from President Roads to the principal terminals in Boston and the Charlestown Navy Yard; two other channels of lesser dimensions from the sea to President Roads; and branch and subsidiary channels within the harbor. The State of Massachusetts has expended $22,000,000 for terminal and harbor improvements. The improvements recommended in the reports under review include the deepening of the main ship channel to 40 feet for a width of 600 feet from President Roads past the United States Navy Drydock No. 3 to Commonwealth Pier No. 1, East Boston. The 126938-35 further improvement now requested by the Navy Department and State and local authorities is the widening of this 40-foot channel to include an approach channel to the Navy drydock, one of the largest in the United States and capable of handling any ship afloat. If the main channel is improved as recommended there will still remain in the approach channel to the drydock obstructions which establish a controlling depth of 35 feet. The city of Boston also requests the removal of rock ledges off the eastern end of the Army base pier. 3. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, concurring with the district and division engineers, is of the opinion that if the recommended deepening of the main ship channel is authorized, a corre sponding deepening of the drydock approach channel would be fully justified. The Navy Department has indicated its intention to deepen the portion of the approach channel shoreward of the harbor line. The Board points out that the drydock is a Government-owned facility of great importance both to national defense and to the larger commercial vessels. The improvement proposed, by eliminating existing hazards to vessels entering or leaving the dock and permitting entry by large vessels at all stages of tide, would definitely increase its value and usefulness for military purposes and to commercial shipping. No present necessity is seen for the desired removal of ledges off the eastern end of the Army base pier. The Board recommends that the project for Boston Harbor as proposed in House Document No. 244, Seventy-second Congress, first session, be extended to include deepening to 40 feet at mean low water that part of the approach channel to the United States Navy Drydock No. 3 between the main ship channel and the United States harbor line, substantially as shown on the accompanying map, at an estimated cost of $128,700 for new work with no increase in the recommended amount for annual maintenance. 4. After due consideration of these reports, I concur in the views and recommendations of the Board. Very truly yours, E. M. MARKHAM, REPORT OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS WAR DEPARTMENT, BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS Subject: Boston Harbor, Mass. Washington, D. C., March 25, 1935. To: The Chief of Engineers, United States Army. 1. This report is in response to the following resolution, adopted April 10, 1934: Resolved by the Committee on Rivers and Harbors of the House of Representaties, United States, That the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors created under section 3 of the River and Harbor Act, approved June 13, 1902, be, and is hereby, requested to review the reports on Boston Harbor with a view to determining the advisability of widening the recommended forty-foot channel to afford a suitable approach to the Navy drydock. 2. Boston Harbor is a well-sheltered bay, ample in size, but gener ally too shoal for harbor purposes. The United States has provided a channel 2 miles long, 900 feet in minimum width, and 40 to 45 feet deep from the ocean to a deepwater area in the outer harbor, known as "President Roads", a main ship channel 6 miles long, 1,200 feet wide, and 35 feet deep extending from President Roads westerly along the South Boston water front and then northerly to the terminals of Boston, Charlestown, and East Boston, and the Charlestown Navy Yard. In addition, there have been provided two other channels of lesser dimensions leading from the sea to President Roads, and branch and subsidiary channels within the harbor. The tidal range in the harbor is from 9 to 9.5 feet. In the report under review, which has not been acted upon by Congress, the Chief of Engineers recommended modification of the existing project to provide for deepening the main ship channel from President Roads to Commonwealth Pier No. 1, East Boston, to 40 feet for a width of 600 feet, and for dredging an anchorage area of the same depth 2,000 feet wide and 5,500 feet long on the north side of President Roads. The anchorage area is now being constructed with funds allotted by the Public Works Administration, but no provision has been made for the deepening of the channel. The channel improvement will, when made, afford a 40foot depth up to and beyond the Navy drydock. The total Federal cost of improvement of Boston Harbor to June 30, 1934, was $14,300,000, largely for new work. In addition, the State of Massachusetts has expended $22,000,000 for terminal and harbor improvements. 3. United States Navy Drydock No. 3, referred to in the committee resolution, is on the South Boston water front, 2.5 miles below the Charlestown Navy Yard. The drydock is one of the largest in the United States and is capable of handling vessels drawing 40 feet of water. Access to the dock is through an approach channel 1,800 feet long which leaves the main channel at an angle of 40°. To facilitate the movement of vessels into and out of the dock the entrance of the approach channel has been flared, but difficulty is still experienced with the larger vessels. This is due to the sharpness of the turn, to inadequate depth in the approach channel, now 35 feet and to the presence of two obstructive rock ledges near the entrance of the approach channel. Deepening of the entrance channel over its entire width to 42 feet at mean low water to alleviate these conditions and permit the ready docking and undocking of the larger naval and commercial vessels at all stages of tide, is strongly urged by the Navy Department and by State and city authorities. It will be noted that unless undertaken the controlling depth to the dock will remain at 35 feet even should the main channel be improved to 40 feet as recommended. Local authorities also request the removal of other rock ledges off the eastern end of the Army base pier. 4. The district engineer estimates the cost of deepening that portion of the approach channel seaward of the United States harbor line, which includes the obstructing rock ledges, at $128,700, provided the work is accomplished at the same time as the recommended deepening of the main channel. Maintenance costs would be nominal. The full benefits of this increased depth will be realized only if similar improvement of the portion of the entrance channel shoreward of the established harbor line, which cannot be undertaken with river and harbor funds, is carried out by other interests. The district |