The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

242 to prevent damage to the propeller if it is used at all, as of course it must be to progress ever so_ slowly. Propellers have been carried away indeed without move- ment because of the closing of gaps referred to earlier. The loss due to damaged propellers this year far outruns that to hulls and nothing that ice-breakers can do will reduce this loss; in fact it might easily be increased. While the actual money loss due to replacing propeller blades to an individual ship is not such a heavy matter the consequential losses may be, and generally are, large, as the ship is helpless and must be towed and the tow- bills and lost time are many times more than the actual cost of the blades themselves. A ship with a damaged,: or with no propeller, is none the better for an opened channel; she is not able to take advantage of it. The light ship is particularly liable to this damage, but with such ice as has been encountered this year and particularly with the depth of water existing at some points, the loaded ship is very little better off. Any propeller thrust of any magnitude, particularly with a low rate of advance of ship, inevitably draws floes into the propeller. The action is perfectly visible and the less the depth of water under the ship the more pronounced the action. Another thing which enters into consideration of the problem is the handling of ore. A great deal of impor- tance is attached to the ore movement, in fact it is urged as a reason for forcing an opening, but I think if inquiry is made it will be found that in such weather as pre- vailed in the early weeks of the season and which was largely responsible for the delay, even if the carriers could have been got through and up to the ore docks THE MARINE REVIEW July, 1917 they would not have been able to get cargoes. Frozen ore doesn’t move very fast. Grain, of course, could be handled, but that is not the basis of the complaint. It might be interesting to think about how many ice-breakers would be required to open, and keep open, channels at Whitefish, Duluth, Fort William, the Straits and Buffalo, even if the thing were possible. With my experience of such matters I do not think any of the interests mentioned, or all of them together, are likely to ever consider it seriously. It goes without saying that it would be useless to open one point of congestion if another is the only result. Permit me to touch upon the subject of Russia and Archangel, since it was suggested. There are some of us here on the lakes who remember very well where the Russians got their idea and the gentlemen who came to represent them and where they obtained their plans (for which, by the way, they conveniently forgot to pay), and it is not necessary to suggest them to us as a model. Nixsky. But the Ermack and sister were designed for work only in protracting open water and for breaking out cargo ships overtaken by ice in the White sea and for working about the comparatively restricted harbor at Archangel, and not for any such job as is here pro- posed. Moreover, the cargo ships with which they had to deal were in all cases fully loaded and to much greater draughts and had the advantage of much more deeply immersed propellers and with much greater depths of water under them, besides working in tidal waters where the fields are never permanently at rest even without regard to winds. HE actual decrease in ore ship- ments from the Lake Superior May and for the season to June 1 are as follows: district up to June 1, is 3,612,847 —Shipments— t This decline is in compari- = Mey pee? cis J Boke “ol pain ipa Pp Escanaba ......eeeuees 1,105,086 1,295,493 son with the tonnage moved last year, Marquette ............ 98,048 98,048 4 feslane 4 b h Netlanadis oie 732,951 732,951 when the lake fleet began to hang up Superior ER es 1,383,294 1,404,419 r fr m h nin x DUBE MS ene oes 1,765,683 1,765,683 new records pie CPeeiie. we Harbors: . 2.066 os 1,198}550 1,198,550 The total shipments of iron ore = Rear, ARE Foor) ee ee Dacca Cte 6,283,612 6,495,144 from upper lake ports up to June 1 1917 decrease ....... 2,165,968 3,612,847 aggregate 6,495,144 gross tons, com- : Records of THe Marine’ ReEvIEW pared with a movement of 10,107,991 gross tons up to June 1, 1916. The decline of 3,612,847 gross tons repre- sents a decrease so far this season of 35.74 per cent from the 1916 ship- show that receipts of ore at Lake Erie ports during May, out -of a total movement of 6,283,612 gross tons, were 4,154,739 gross tons: ments. This proportion will be cut poet Gross tons Pinot Buffalo and Port Colborne.. 556,323 down, of course, as the season con- yeah a ok he 187,475 ; Conneaut ewok aia eet 825,369 he tae Adimbola oie. cs 920,605 The decline in the May, 1917, move- Reberts, Sey ae wah vee 252,885 ; OVEN at aware cies cae 826,770 ment from that recorded in the same Eatin Oe 207,828 month last year was 25.63 per cent, Huron is (WRUOl e-e.cane a erece ue we epelelk 127,405 = PROLGUO 7 Sica tne ge ee 201,540 an encouraging mark when the un- Detach 48,539 usual delays encountered all last Wein oa 4,154,739 month are considered. The May shipments aggregated 6,283,612 gross tons against 8,449,580 gross tons in May, 1916, a decline of 2,165,968 gross tons. Delays from ice and numerous minor causes had so seriously dis- arranged schedules during May that a decline of 4,000,000 tons had been expected in the ore movement. The-ore shipments by ports during Se a a ve Soo Canal Report The total freight movement through the Soo canals up to June 1, shows a decline of 5,442,656 net tons from the tonnage moved in the corresponding period of 1916. The total movement so far this year aggregates. 9,066,182 net tons, compared with 14508838 net tons moved to June 1, 1916. The movement during May, 1917, aggregated 8,807,892 net tons against 12,293,476 net tons in May, 1916; 7,348,567 tons in May, 1915. Of the May movement, 6,590,714 net tons passed through the American canal and 2,217,178 net tons through the Cana- dian canal. The eastbound movement accounted for 7,148,834 net tons and the westbound movement for 1,659,058 net tons. The detailed report of the com- merce through the Soo canal up to June 1, 1917 and to June 1, 1916, follows: EAST BOUND ‘ To June 1, To June 1, 1916 1917 Blour,<-barrelse: os. 348.2 902,190 876,160 Wheat, bushels ....... 58,195,320 40,956,059 Grain bushels ........ 19,412,738 17,558,579 Copper, net tons...... 13,423 12,210 Iron ore, net tons..... 9,019,682 5,436,467 Pig’ iron, net tons..... 8,29 La eas Lumber, M. ft. B. M.. 36,047 23,524 Gen’1 merchandise, net TONS ey ek Faire 24,337 12,068 Passengers, number.... 1,108 274 WEST BOUND Blour:, barrels <3... 205 Grain, bushels ....... 100 eae Coal, hard, net tons... 352,181 334,802 Coal, soft, net tons.... 2,581,150 1,364,435 Iron ore, net tons..... A Rear ces 15,883 Mfctd. iron, net tons.. 36,217 15,047 salt; barrels o.oo 179,882 119,279 Gen’l merchandise, net CONSE Gave ae 193,013 169,675 Passengers, number 697 246 SUMMARY Vessel passages, No... 3,913 2,444 Regis. tonnage, net... 11,518,848 7,474,266 Freight: Eastbound, net tons... 11,319,403 7,148,838 Westbound, net tons... 3,189,435 1,917,344 Total frgt., net tons. 14,508,838 9,066,182