NOTES. 1. The dumping ground was about 1 mile from the dredge, the current attaining at some stages of the tide a velocity of between 3 and 4 knots per hour. 2. The following extract from one of the recent reports of Mr. E. L. Ingram, captain of the dredge and inspector, will serve to show that the dredging in the Shrewsbury River has been under quite unfavorable conditions aggravated in addition by the fact that, owing to the slight depth of material to be removed, the dipper can only be worked to about one-third of its capacity: SIR: * UNITED STATES DREDGE ALPHA, I beg to call your attention to the following points which I have not yet brought into prominence: 1. The Alpha is a very large dredge, and is designed for deep digging. The depth we are making here is out of all proportion to the size of the machine. The spuds, for instance, are necessarily hoisted so high as to be extremely top-heavy, giving them great wrenching power, while at the same time they can not be dropped far enough to take much hold in the sand, thus occupying extra time and care to keep the dredge truly on line. An unfortunate wrench on the 13th tore two teeth from the after spud spur-wheel, causing eight hours' delay to put them in again. The dipper handle likewise acquires the same wrenching power from being drawn in so far, continually cutting of the bolts which hold the friction plates in place. On the 14th it became necessary to replace the bolts, causing a delay of two hours. I think I can prevent this trouble by bolting the timbers more thoroughly together in the neighborhood of the friction plates. Of course this would not be at all necessary where the work was proportioned to the machine. 2. In view of the above facts the machine requires great care in handling in order to avoid serious injury, and can not with safety be run at a high rate of speed. The machine is not doing the amount of work I would like to see her do, but if she is forced any more the delay by break-downs would more than balance any gain thereby. As one of the points which occupies time not usually needed in dredging, I may mention the hauling in of the dipper handle with the backing chain, which frequently has to be done two or three times over before it gets back to the unusual point desired. 3. The instructions were to dig not under 6 nor over 7 feet at mean low water, with as near an approach as possible to 7 feet. As far as possible this is done, but on lowwater work the dipper can not always be got in far enough for this, so that the amount dredged exceeds what would be expected from my calculation based on the chart. 4. The cuts already finished have commenced filling in with loose sand. Cut No. 1 was dredged 7 feet and over at mean low water, and now has a depth ranging only from 6 to 6 feet. The change in Cut 2 is not yet very decided. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Capt. Tuos. L. CASEY. 3. The working day, as above considered, consists of 10 hours. 4. The interest on plant is computed at 4 per cent. E. L. INGRAM, Inspector. The condition of the river as a whole is practically the same as last year. A depth of 5.9 feet exists on the bar at the mouth of the river at mean low water, and 5.5 feet can be carried to Red Bank, and 4.5 feet to Branchport. The expenditures during the fiscal year amount to $10,104,87, as follows: Construction of stone dikes (contract of June 7, 1888).. Cost of pro rata share of 3 dump scows. Cost of pro rata share of 1 tug-boat Cost of operating U. S. dredging plant (wages and supplies) Cost of examination of river (1889).. Cost of draughting.. Cost of inspection..... Cost of administration. Total... $2,915.95 2, 172.00 1,647.00 520.00 1,230.90 360.49 206.00 358.60 693.93 10, 104. 87 Whatever appropriation may be made by the next Congress will be xpended in completing the dikes and dredging the shoals. The most conomical results in the prosecution of the work can be obtained if he full amount required to complete the project be appropriated at nce. In addition to the steamers which regularly use the river a large umber of small sailing vessels are engaged in the shipment of coal, umber, sand, fish, and oysters. Capt. Jas. S. Throckmorton of Red Bank, who has reported the comnerce on the Shrewsbury River in past years, states that the aggregate for the year 1888 would amount to about the same as in 1887. A record of the craft passing the Highlands draw-bridge, recorded during July, August, and September 1888, is as follows: Probably 20,000 craft pass this draw annually. This river is in the collection district of Perth Amboy, which is the nearest port of entry; nearest light-house, Navesink Light; and the nearest fort, at Sandy Hook, N. J. Amount of revenue collected at the port of Perth Amboy during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1889, $59,632.83. July 1, 1889, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of liabilities outstanding July 1, 1888 $7,087.57 July 1, 1889, outstanding liabilities 998.72 8,086.29 3,267.83 July 1, 1889, balance available...... Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.... 40, 062.00 40,062.00 F 12. IMPROVEMENT OF KEYPORT HARBOR, NEW JERSEY. Keyport Harbor was originally accessible at low water only to vessels drawing less than 4 feet. Before its improvement was undertaken by the United States, a 6-foot channel had been dredged at private expense, which had shoaled in 1872 to 53 feet, and in 1882 to 5 feet, the range of the tide being 4.7 feet. A large commerce was carried on, however, valued at $2,932,000. The project for the improvement was adopted in 1873, and provided for dredging a channel 4,700 feet long, 8 feet deep at mean low water, and 200 feet wide from the steam-boat dock to the 8-foot contour in Raritan Bay, at an estimated cost of $30,475. The amount expended under this project to June 30, 1888, was $30,042.89, with which a channel had been dredged from the 8-foot curve in Raritan Bay to Keyport Wharf, a distance of 5,000 feet, with a width of 200 feet for the first 4,200 feet, and 160 feet for the remainder. The commerce of the harbor had increased greatly, being estimated at $5,000,000, besides 150,000 passengers carried annually. There has been no appropriation for this work since 1882, and the expenditures for the last fiscal year amounted to $290.83 for office expenses. The dredged channel is stated to have shoaled in places to about 6 feet mean low water, but it is reported that the commerce as yet shows no falling off. If it is the intention of Congress to complete this improvement, the balance of the estimate, $10.000, can be expended profitably as regards the efficient prosecution of the work during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1891, and would be applied to dredging the channel to the dimensions required by the project, which would add materially to existing facilities. The estimated amount required for the completion of the improvement is $10,000. This work is in the collection district of Perth Amboy, N. J., which is the nearest port of entry. Nearest light-house, Great Beds Light, in Raritan Bay; nearest fort, fort at Sandy Hook, N. J. Amount of revenue collected at the port of Perth Amboy during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1889, $59,632.83. July 1, 1889, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of liabilities outstanding July 1, 1888 $285.83 July 1, 1889, outstanding liabilities... 69.60 355.43 July 1, 1889, balance available.... 71.68 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.... 10,000,00 F 13. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF EAST ROCKAWAY CREEK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK. ENGINEER OFFICE, U. S. ARMY, New York, N. Y., October 25, 1888. GENERAL: In compliance with Department letter of September 29, 1888, I have the honor to submit the following report on the preliminary examination of East Rockaway Creek, Long Island, N. Y. The act of August 11, 1888, provides for surveys of East Rockaway Creek, Long Island, and of East Rockaway Creek, and both items were referred to me for report by Department letter of August 28, 1883. As far as I am aware there is but one East Rockaway Creek in this neighborhood, and it is believed that the item is repeated in the bill unintentionally. East Rockaway Creek, Long Island, N. Y., is a small stream that flows into Hempstead Bay on the south side of Long Island. The villages of East Rockaway, Pearsalls, and Rockville Centre are situated on or near its banks, and contain a population of from 2,000 to 3,000 inhabitants. The only shipments from the locality are oysters and garden truck, both of which go mainly by rail to New York, and would, I think, be likely to continue to do so were the stream improved as desired. The receipts consist of the coal and building materials required for this small community, whose main industries are farming, fishing, and a small amount of summer resort business; they do not exceed 10,000 tons annually. East Rockaway Creek formerly discharged a considerable volume of fresh water, and was then navigable for schooners of 40 tons from the Bay to the village, about 3 miles. But the stream has been dammed a short distance above East Rockaway and the fresh water diverted as a water supply to Brooklyn, causing the creek to shoal so that its depth is now in places only 1 foot at low tide. The range of the tide is about 4 feet. The improvement desired consists in straightening the creek at the sharp bends and dredging a channel 60 feet wide and 4 feet deep at mean low water from Hempstead Bay to East Rockaway. As far as I am able to judge, in the absence of a detailed survey, such an improvement would probably cost about $25,000; on account of the light draught of the channel, the small amount of work to be done, and the difficulty of reaching the locality, dredging would be expensive. As the creek has shoaled once it would undoubtedly shoal again; and in the course of time would have to be dredged again. Finally, by comparing this creek with Sumpawams Inlet, Rahway River, and Woodbridge Creek, where improvements were first begun and then abandoned by Congress, I am forced to the conclusion that East Rockaway Creek is not now worthy of improvement, for the possibilities of the creek itself are less than those of the streams mentioned and the population and interests that would be benefited are also less. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, GEORGE MCC. DERBY, Captain of Engineers, in temporary charge. The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. F 14. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF HACKENSACK RIVER, NEW JERSEY, FROM THE LOWER BRIDGE AT THE TOWN OF HACKENSACK TO THE ERIE RAILWAY BRIDGE. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, GENERAL: In compliance with Department letter of September 29, I have the honor to submit the following report on the preliminary examination of Hackensack River from the lower bridge at the town of Hackensack to the Erie Railway Bridge. The Hackensack River is a stream of considerable size entering New ark Bay at the head of the bay; it is navigable for a distance of about 16 miles. Below the Erie Railroad Bridge the channel has ample width and depth, and the same may be said of the next 5 miles of its course to Little Ferry, there being a depth of 9.5 feet at low water with a width of about 300 feet. The range of the tide is about 4.5 feet. From Little Ferry to Hackensack, about 2 miles, the stream is in places narrow and obstructed by sand bars, on which the low-water depth is about 5 feet. The improvement desired consists in widening the channel on this reach of the river to 200 feet and deepening it to 8 feet at mean low water. As far as I am able to judge, in the absence of a complete survey, I am of the opinion that this improvement could be made for about $25,000. It would meet the present demands of commerce and the prospective demands for many years to come. The lower 12 miles of the course of the Hackensack River, runs through salt meadows as yet entirely unimproved, but destined within the next twenty years to become very valuable; above Little Ferry, however, the country is well settled, the population of the four townships adjoining the river being about 18,000 people. The principal industry of the locality is brick-making, estimated at 85,000,000 brick per annum, and said to be on the increase. There are also a number of other factories established on the stream. The river also carries the coal for the brick yards, factories, and towns on its banks, and manure for the neighboring farms. The farming produce, however, goes by rail or is hauled in wagons to New York, there being no regular steam-boat line on the river at present. In my opinion the Hackensack River is worthy of improvement; it is a valuable stream naturally and susceptible of being made much more so at moderate expense. The population and interests that would be benefited by its improvement are large and growing, and the saving in the cost of transportation would more than pay the interest on the probable cost of the work. No survey will be required between the Erie Railway Bridge and Little Ferry, and I estimate the cost of surveying the reach requiring improvement at $1,000. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. GEO. MCC. DERBY, SURVEY OF HACKENSACK RIVER, NEW JERSEY, FROM THE LOWER BRIDGE AT THE TOWN OF HACKENSACK TO THE ERIE RAILWAY BRIDGE. ENGINEER OFFICE, U. S. ARMY, New York, N. Y., June 30, 1889. GENERAL: I have the honor to submit the following report, with accompanying map, upon the survey of the Hackensack River, New Jersey, "from the lower bridge in the town of Hackensack to the Erie Railway Bridge," authorized by act of Congress approved August 11, 1888, and made May 8-24, in accordance with Department instructions dated April 1, 1889. |