Page images

less—even a nominal sum—but this is a matter for arrangement with the owners. The privately owned tidelands should be worth about $250 an acre, the swamp lands $300 to $500 an acre, and the solid, level land, $500 to $750 an acre. In case any of these lands other than the hill portions and the State-owned tidelands were needed, we believe the Government could obtain concessions that would minimize the cost.

Water: The water supply is obtained from the same system that serves the rest of the East San Francisco Bay cities, but the important feature of a water supply for the Point San Pablo site is the seven-mile reservoir the East Bay Water Co. has just completed in San Pablo Creek 6 miles east of Richmond. It is one of the largest reservoirs for domestic purposes in the world, its capacity being 13,000,000,000 gallons. The pipes of this company reach the Point San Pablo site. Richmond will eventually have the Hetch Hetchy or some other mountain supply.

Electric power: The main cables of the Pacific Gas & Electric Co., and the Great Western Power Co. enter Richmond, bringing an unlimited supply of electric current rom the Sierra. Both lines serve this site. The Byllsby corporation of Chicago is also in the Richmond field supplying through the Western States Gas & Electric Co., current being contracted for from the Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

Protection ftom gales: The Point San Pablo site is protected from the southeast gales, the most violent of any that sweep San Francisco Bay.

Protection from gunfire: A circle with a 30,000-yard radius drawn around the Point San Pablo site shows it to be farther from range of big guns at sea than any other excepting Mare Island. At the closest point, Bolinas Bay, warships would have to fire over the Marin Hills.

Military attack: We are informed that sea forts and naval works and bases are usually taken from the land side by an invading army. For this reason the east side of the bay has the advantage that attacking troops would have to cross water. The Point San Pablo site has a considerable percentage of advantage in its favor on this -score, we believe, though that is for experts to say.

Distance to open sea: This is about the same as from the Hunters Point site. There is a clear, direct run from the Golden Gate to Point San Pablo.

Current and dredging: There is a current of sufficient strength to keep the channel scoured clean at all times, but not of sufficient velocity to impede handling of vessels. Thus only a minimum of dredging will ever be needed, and perhaps none at all.

Absence of ferries and other obstructions: No site could offer a more thoroughly clear way for navigation of war craft. There is no ferry traffic to impede and much less of other traffic than on other parts of the bay. There is only one ferry to cross the Richmond-Marin auto ferry, running boats every hour.

No fogs to hinder navigation: The absence of fogs in Richmond is an aid to navigation at all times. The fact that there is little fog there is probably due to the winds that sweep in through the Golden Gate. It is a fact that while other parts of the bay are covered with fog it is generally clear at Richmond.

Anchorage: The entire San Pablo Bay gives anchorage ground and there is anchorage under the lee of the Marin hills in San Francisco Bay and also further down. California City, on the Marin side, where the Government coaling station is located, was one of the sites suggested for a naval base.

Public utilities rates: Water and electric power rates are fixed by the railroad commission and are the same as in other communities, excepting that as a matter of fact the Kyllsby corporation supplies electric current at a lower rate than is enjoyed in other bay communities. This company, as stated, acquires its current wholesale from the Pacific Gas & Electric Co., which, like the Great Western, charges a surtax permitted by the railroad commission. The Western States Co. (Byllsby) does not charge this surtax.

Freight rates: Richmond enjoys the same freight rates as the other bay communities. Ocean cargoes or overland freight are laid down just as cheaply at Richmond as at any other point. On rail shipments over the Santa Fe and the Southern Pacific main lines through Contra Costa there is a considerable saving in time.

Labor: Richmond is a manufacturing seaport and nationally known plants are located there, including the Pullman shops, the Santa Fe shops, the Certainteed Products Corporation's west coast plant, the Standard Oil Refinery, now the largest refinery in the world. The Proctor & Gamble Co., of Cincinnati, has purchased a 54acre site on the inner harbor and will erect its west coast plant in Richmond at a cost of $2,000,000 to $3,000,000. There are numerous other industrial plants. About 9,000 hands are employed in the city. To the north along the Contra Costa shore line are other vast plants employing more thousands. Contra Costa County is in fact the second industrial county in California. There is always a plentiful supply of labor. With a naval base established, there will be a still greater supply at all times. There need never be a fear of any labor shortage at so central a point within the metropolitan area of San Francisco, with its population of 1,000,000.

Homes, schools: Every community around. San Francisco Bay has good schools and is a high-class home community. Richmond is the equal of any, though not superior.

Richmond in metropolitan area: The idea seems to prevail with some that location directly in one of the larger cities has advantages for a naval base. It seems, however, that a site in what is really a unit of a larger city, where congestion does not exist and operation is free and clear, while at the same time there are all the advantages of the metropolis, is more desirable. Richmond is merely a part of the metropolitan area of San Francisco, this area containing about 1,000,000 population at the present time, and as such Richmond shares all metropolitan advantages. - It has a wide and attractive area for home building, and workers can obtain well-located lots for homes at very low figures—many as low as $150 each. The percentage of workers in Richmond that is home owning we believe to be as large as that of any community in the country and larger than most of them. Naval base employees would have every reason to own their own homes in Richmond and be permanent workers there, as are most of the employees of our large industries.

In conclusion we would say that the people of the Nation are paying for this naval base and we know, as do all, that the people would not want the fact that land would have to be paid for, in case the price is within reason, to stand in the way of selecting what is absolutely the best site. The safety of the Nation depends upon the efficiency of this Pacific coast naval base as much as upon any other, and we think that every site that has obvious points of merit should be given thorough technical investigation before a decision is reached.

Thanking the joint congressional naval base committee for its courtesy and consideration shown, we are Respectfully,


H. W. WERNSE, Secretary. P. S.-One administration: Were a naval base established at Point San Pablo it is probable that both that main base and the Mare Island Yard could be administered by one set of officials at a great saving.

Senator BALL. Mr. Joseph E. Caine, of Oakland, desires about four minutes, to present matters concerning the Alameda site.

Mr. JOSEPH E. CAINE. Senator Ball, during the war I was a FourMinute man, and I never made a speech that lasted over two minutes and ten seconds.

I desire to file some additional information with regard to passenger traffic service on the Alameda site, and in answer to the challenge of Mr. Dwyer, I want to say a word. I want first to call your attention to the fact that the presentation of the Alameda site was made entirely upon the merits or the supposed merits of that site, and not upon the demerits, real or imaginary, of some other site.

Admiral Rodman has already disposed of Mr. Dwyer's fears that those wooden boats on the Alameda Line might dash the Navy out of the waters of the Bay, if the Alameda site were accepted.

The statement of Mr. Dwyer that transportation was the only point made in favor of our site is not true. I

Mr. DWYER (interrupting). You misunderstood me, Mr. Caine. I did not say that.

Mr. CAINE. You said it was summed up in that one point, and challenged me to deny it. It is not true, and I will refer you to quotations that are made here from the report of the Helm commission and the McKean board, in which not only transportation but many other considerations are set forth.

Mr. Dwyer's statement that neither the Helm commission or the McKean board nor we people over there know what we are talking about, I submit for your consideration.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you.

Senator BALL. Is Capt. Randall here? I would like to state that Senator Walsh has requested that Capt. Randall should tell us about tides and currents here. Senator Walsh is not present, and I think we should have this statement. Capt. Randall, Senator Walsh desires that you should make this statement, and I will ask you to do so as briefly as possible.

Capt. ClEM RANDALL, of the Rolph Navigation & Coal Co. In any particular respect, Mr. Chairman ?

Senator Ball. That is all I know; that he just requests that you make a statement for the record—that you tell us about the tides and currents of the bay.

Mayor Rolph. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt Cant. Randall to say that he is a seafaring man and the only lingo he knows is that used aboard ship. He never made a speech in his life, and he was timid about coming here, even in the first place, but he has come now because word was sent that Senator Walsh and some of the members of the committee desired to ask him some questions in regard to tides on this side of the bay and tides and silt on the other side of the bay. If there is any member who desires to ask any questions, I know Capt. Randall will be glad to answer them.

Senator Ball. Senator Walsh, unfortunately, left last night. Mr. P. R. THOMPSON. Supervisor Welch, who is in Mary's Help Hospital, called me on the telephone and had me visit him just before this hearing, and he was going to ask Capt. Randall some questions.

Senator Ball. Do you know the facts that Supervisor Welch wanted brought out?

Mr. THOMPSON. I think perhaps I do.

Senator Ball. If so, you ask him questions and get into the record the point.

Mr. THOMPSON. Very well. Then I will ask the questions, Captain. I think it was in their mind to bring out that the flood tide as it comes through the Golden Gate is much similar to the force of a stream coming out of the nozzle of a high-powered fire hose-the force is terrific and it meets the current of the San Joaquin and the Sacramento Rivers and deflects it into the San Francisco shore, and is responsible for the deep water on the San Francisco shore. That flood tide comes into the bottom of the bay and then when it goes out, it goes out with almost similar force, and hits Hunters Point, and that deflects the silt that is in the tide to the east side of the bay, and it goes and deposits on the east side and goes on up until it meets the Sacramento and San Joaquin current again, and then part of the silt is deposited at the foot of Van Ness Avenue, where there is now 12 feet of water instead of 36 feet, and the rest of the silt goes into the bay. Is that about correct?

Capt. RANDALL. Well, I should say the cause of silt over on the Alameda shore is for the reason that there is no current there-it deposits naturally in the water.

Mr. THOMPSON. The other one is that the flood tide or the tide of the swinging Sacramento and San Joaquin River current is responsible for and causes the quiet waters on the Pinole Shoal, which has been testified here as being 5 or 6 miles across—that that causes the quiet waters there, which causes an accumulation of the silt that makes up the Pinole Shoal. And that in 1913 the Pinole Shoal was dredged for 27,700 feet to the depth of over 30 feet, and that they took out over 3,000,000 cubic yards. That in 30 months it filled up 64 feet for 24,600 feet, depositing over 3,000,000 cubic yards of silt. He wanted to ask you that question,if you are familiar with that dredging up there.

Capt. RANDALL. The natural depth in the channel there is about 22 feet.

Mr. THOMPSON. In San Pablo Bay ?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes; that was there for years and years and was not touched. That is the natural depth.

Mr. THOMPSON. But he wanted to bring out that this natural condition existing all the time, the meeting of the two currents, will always cause quiet waters there and always make dredging necessary.

Capt. RANDALL. That is correct.

Mr. THOMPSON. He also wanted to ask you this: The advantage of the Mare Island site is particularly brought out in dollars and cents, and that covering a period of 30 months the dredging expense would be, based on the record, approximately a half a million dollars, and that over a period of a hundred years, which is a short time, will amount to $20,000,000.

Mr. NOLAN. We have a lot of matters to close up here, and I wish you would ask the captain questions briefly.

Mr. Hicks. I would like to ask the captain a question. Assume that the Mare Island channel—I don't mean in the straits, but across San Pablo 'Bay—were dredged to a depth of 40 feet, 600 feet wide. Would, in your opinion, the current keep that channel open or not?

Capt. RANDALL. No, sir; it would not.
Mr. Hicks. Do you think it would silt a foot a year?

Capt. RANDALL. Well, it is very hard to say just how much it would silt.

Mr. Hicks. But it would silt very materially?
Capt. RANDALL. It would.
Mr. Hicks. Even though we put a dike along one side ?

Capt. RANDALL. A dike will help it some, but it will only push it down the bay farther.

Mr. Hicks. So that eventually we would have to dredge farther down.

Capt. RANDALL. Yes.

Mr. Hicks. Captain, let me ask you another question. In your opinion, is the drift accumulating on the Alameda side from year to year?

Capt. RANDALL. No, sir. I think that condition has existed for years as it is.

Mr. Hicks. If we should build these dikes that are contemplated under this proposed site at Alameda, would there not be a constant drift in front of those dikes?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes; unless you got it into the deep water.
Mr. Hicks. Would it be a material drift, in your opinion ?
Capt. RANDALL. Yes.

Mr. PADGETT. If you put them out at the dike, out 18 or 20 feet, into 18 or 20 feet of water, and dredge out in front of it to 40 feet of water, would there be a deposit and an accumulation in front of the dikes?


Capt. RANDALL. Yes, sir.
Mr. PADGETT. To what extent?

Capt. RANDALL. Well, it would fill up to its natural depth, unless you could take it somewhere there south of it, put a dike out and throw the current, deflect the current from the end of your dikejust the same as our piers on the city front—we have to dig those at the ends.

Mr. PADGETT. The proposal was that the dikes come in there [indicating), according to program, and then a breakwater is built out there for perhaps 500 feet beyond the mouth of the dike on either side. Would that prevent the silting in front of the dike, or would that produce an eddy in which it would go around and accumulate?

Capt. RANDALL. It would accumulate. Wherever you create an eddy, it is bound to accumulate—it is slack water.

Mr. PADGETT. That is what I wanted to find out. For instance, say this represents the breakwater that goes out 500 feet either side in front of the dikes that are set back 500 feet back there, and the mouth of the dike there is dredged 40 or 42 feet from the sills. Is the current such that it would sweep in and make an eddy and deposit silt in that pocket in front of the dikes?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes, it would.
Mr. PADGETT. How fast do you think it would ?
Capt. RANDALL. Oh, that is very hard to say.

Mr. PADGETT. I don't mean in inches, but would it be a substantial and material deposit ?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes; it would deposit very fast. It does the same thing along the city front—the wharves on the city front, between the wharves it fills in very quickly. They are continually digging, probably dig them down to 30 feet, and I suppose they will last maybe a year and a half, and they have got to be dug againcontinually digging. It is just the same between two piers as it is between two breakwaters-it would be exactly the same thing,

Mr. Hicks. Captain, there has been a good deal of talk about the relative conditions of fog in the southern part of the bay and the northern part. What is your opinion in regard to that?

Capt. RANDALL. There is more fog in the northern part of the bay, a great deal. Mr. Hicks. More fog in the northern part ? Capt. RANDALL. Yes. Mr. Hicks. We have been hearing the reverse.

Capt. RANDALL. You have got winter fogs that last about two months steady, say in January and February you have got a great deal of fog in the northern part of the bay, particularly above, say, Angel Island. In the summer months you

have your fog that comes in through the Gate and breaks off at Angel Island to the northward, and breaks off about Goat Island to the southward-goes in across the channel. They will last, I suppose, about five months of the year. South of that you have no fog to speak of, only occasionally in the wintertime, maybe, oh, I suppose 20 or 25 days in the year.

Mr. Hicks. But for the 365 days of the year, on an average, there would be more fog to the north of Angel Island than to the south of it, you think? Čapt. RANDALL. Yes, sir. Senator Ball. We are obliged to you, Capt. Randall.

« PreviousContinue »