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

An Analysis of Factors Governing Harbor Improvement at Important Lake Points—Need for Better Facilities Evident HE commercial enterprise and ! engineering ingenuity which has found expression in the modern ship traversing the Great Lakes has not been met with equal enterprise and forethought by the port cities harboring these vessels. While the’ modern ship minimizes in its construction the dangers of the open sea, catfries its cargo in maximum quantity to meet the com- mercial demands, and is administered with efficiency and reasonable safety, it frequently meets, in port, with insuffici- ent, obstructive and unsatisfactory ser- vice. The problems of the Great Lakes are confined in the main to the port cities, and have grown out of the newer conditions that are attending water-borne commerce. In short, the port cities have not entirely kept pace with the evolu- tion of the lake vessel. Therefore, the problem which stands out most prominently and: which covers a large number of lake cities deals primarily with deeper and wider river. channels | and increased terminal facili- ties. The constantly increasing size of vessels has rendered the inner harbors of many cities either partially or én- tirely inaccessible as far as ‘the larger vessels are concerned. Terminal Facilities At the same time the opportunities for terminal facilities have been lessened or become inadequate. Commercial and in- dustrial enterprises which have clustered near the rivers and channels of port cities have rendered the available water frontage inaccessible or too costly for transportation purposes. This has _ be- come particularly true where business streets have paralleled the rivers and where the’ business traffic on street fronts has outstripped the transporta- tion traffic on water fronts. Thus ship- ping warehouses in a number of port cities have been crowded from the more accessible to remoter and less accessible locations where the channels lack in depth and breadth, and where the move- ments of vessels becomes more difficult and expensive. Chicago proclaims, ‘The greatest need is for an unobstructed 200-foot channel in the Chicago river”. Mil- waukee says, “Give us more terminal facilities accessible to larger vessels”. Buffalo wants a wider channel en- trance; Cleveland wants a straighten- ing and widening of its water course; Oswego wants greater depth; Roches- ter wants straightening of river bends and deepening to accommodate larze craft; Toledo and Sandusky are striv- ing for a maximum depth and Erie is fighting shallow waters. And so we find nearly everywhere a demand for physical conditions that will meet a constantly changing lake commerce. Closely allied with the demand for Careful Study Made In the preparation of this paper, which was presented at the recent Great Lakes Waterways Conference at Detroit, data were collected from the principal ports on the Great Lakes including Chicago, Milwau- kee, Manitowoc, Green Bay, Racine, Kenosha, Duluth, Superior, Mar- quette, Ashland, Detroit, Bay City, - Port Huron, Buffalo, Cleveland, To- ledo, Erie, Ashtabula, Dunkirk, San- dusky, Oswego, Rochester and To- ronto. A series of questions was submitted to the authorities of the several ports and the opinions and conclusions advanced in the article are based on an analysis of the re- plies received. The questions sub- mitted were as follows: 1—What do you deem the great- est problem in connection with your lake port? What does your port need most? 2—Does your local government extend the desired aid to river and harbor improvements? 3.—Is there adequate co-operation between the local and federal au- thorities in securing needed improve- ments? 4—Who serves as the intermedi- ary between your city government and the Umted States Engineers: eat —How do you.raise money Jon . dredging and dockina—by bond | issue or by direct tax levv? improvements that shall facilitate the movement of vessels in the inner har- bors of lake cities is the néed for more adequate terminal facilities. This need is so generally recognized that the local authorities in many cities are striving to secure available waiter fronts to be developed for terminal purposes. Milwaukee is acquiring a peninsula, which lies between the lake and one of the rivers, covering a dis- tance of one mile, to be developed at a cost of several: million dollars into an outer and inner harbor. Rail con- 458 By William George Bruce President Milwaukee Harbor Commission nections and’ terminal facilities are contemplated. Chicago has acquired a large strip of lake frontage which | is to be improved at a cost of some $4,000,000 for outer harbor purposes. The plans contemplate a rail and water exchange center. Ashland wants to own a municipal dock and to equip it with a warehouse that ects ube publicly controlled. Detroit says, “Our greatest require ments are the possession of municipa docks and wharf sheds where inde- pendent boats may handle cargoes, and through belt line tracks to the docks”. Cleveland voted Nov. 2 on the trans- fer of one mile of lake frontage from railroad to municipal ownership. “The possession of this land now _ con- trolled by the railroads will enable development that has hitherto been impossible”. Rochester’ wants public dock facilities. Manitowoc 'says, “This port needs most a: public, “warehouse and dock with, municipally owned tracks’’. Duluth " says, “What we need most would b ‘municipal docks elec- trified and equipped, for handling mer- chandise freight”. Toronto. wants ad- ditional modern: docks and freight. sheds and proper co- -ordination of rail and water transportation facilities. Some Commercial Aspects While this report aims to deal solely with the physical aspects of the Great Lakes problems there are commercial considerations which, no doubt, come propérly within ‘the province of this discussion. ans this connection Duluth says, “Our ike port’s greatest problem is the independent operation of lake carriers of merchandise and the con- sequent construction of lake rates en- tirely independent of any comparison with the rail rates and only on the basis of actual lake cost of operation plus: a Profit. If we could get this firmly established, and this principle of rate making on the lakes, the lake cities will become the distribution points which they deserve to be and would reach far more into the interior than is now pos- sible under ‘the present rate structure”. Along the same line Erie says, “The greatest problem in connection. with our lake port is the securing of through rates such as are in use at Buffalo and Cleveland. For example, the rate via water from Erie to Chicago is 10 cents