the existing project, but is greatly in need of repairs in various directions. Those most to be recommended are the continuing of the dredg ing inside the harbor, so as to give throughout the entire area 18 feet at mean low water, to repair one crib, and to rebuild another, which is in constant danger of being destroyed, and to place about 100 cubic yards of riprap around the pier. The amount that can profitably be expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1888, is $15,600. If this sum should be appropriated it is proposed to expend it in dredging the harbor to a depth of 18 feet at mean low water, to rebuild one pier, repair another, and place riprapping around those piers exposed to strong currents. Amount appropriated by act approved August 5, 1886...... Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project..... (See Appendix G 3.) $5,000 00 15,600 00 15,000 00 4. Duck Creek Delaware.--The original condition of Duck Creek was a bar at the mouth, having 3 feet at ordinary low water, with nine shoals with a minimum depth of 2.5 feet in the channel between the bar and Smyrna, the head of navigation. The approved project was to construct a channel through the bar to 8 feet depth at mean low water and having in width not less than 100 feet, and the removal of the existing shoals as far as Smyrna to the same depth. The amount expended to the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $10,000, in making a channel through the bar at the mouth of the creek, but the improvement was not permanent, and the channel soon filled up for want of a protecting work. No work was ever done to remove the shoals between the mouth of the river and Smyrna. The navigation would be greatly improved if these shoals could be removed, by enabling vessels to pass between Smyrna and the mouth on any tide, and reach the deep water of Delaware Bay with high water, whereas it now takes several high tides to reach that point. The commerce on this stream is large and would seem to justify the removal of the shoals, but it is not believed to be sufficient for the expenditure necessary for the permanent improvement of the mouth. This plan has been adopted for the improvement of both the Saint Jones and Broadkiln rivers, and navigation has been greatly benefited thereby, and the tendency has been, as reported by captains of vessels sailing these rivers, since the removal of the shoals from the bed of these rivers, to increase the depth of water over the bar at the mouth. Nothing was done during the year ending June 30, 1886, for want of money. The amount that can be profitably extended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1888, is $6,000, and if appropriated will be applied to the removal of the shoals between Smyrna and the mouth of the river, to give a low-water navigation of 8 feet in depth. Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project... (See Appendix G 4.) $12,000 00 6,000 00 5. Saint Jones River, Delaware.-The obstructions to navigation in this river consist of a bar at its mouth with only 2 feet in depth at mean low water on it; from its mouth to Lebanon numerous shoals, over which there is only 4 feet at mean low water, and from Lebanon to Dover, the head of navigation, 2.5 feet at low water. Many bends in the river also interfere with navigation. The original project for the improvement of this river was to give a 6-foot navigation by cutting a channel through the bar at the mouth 100 feet in width, to be protected by a jetty; to remove the shoals and make several cut-offs. The amount expended to the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $719.99. The amount expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, is $11,546.08, and has resulted in giving a 6-foot navigation from the mouth of the river to Lebanon and a portion of the distance between Lebanon and Dover. Vessels are enabled now to go from Lebanon to the mouth of the river on any tide, and pass over the bar on high water, whereas before the improvement they were frequently detained by low water at each shoal. The amount that can be profitably expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1888, is $10,000, and if appropriated will be applied to continuing the improvement by removing the shoals, cutting off points and bends which obstruct navigation. The benefits to be derived from this improvement are to shorten the distance between Dover and the mouth of the river, and to lessen the time required by enabling vessels to navigate the river at any tide. July 1, 1885, amount available.... July 1, 1886, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of liabilities outstanding July 1, 1885 July 1, 1886, outstanding liabilities July 1, 1886, amount available..... Amount appropriated by act approved August 5, 1886..... Amount available for fiscal year ending June 30, 1887............. $14, 162 11 $11,546 08 12,668 52 1,493 59 10,000 00 11,493 59 10,000 00 10,000 00 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project..... (See Appendix G 5.) 6. Mispillion Creek, Delaware.-In its original condition this river had a width of about 90 feet at Milford, the head of navigation, increasing to 240 feet at its mouth. The entrance to Delaware Bay had a depth of 13 feet at mean low water, and between the mouth and Milford are several shoals having a depth of from 4 to 5 feet on them. The originally adopted project was to make a 6-foot low-water navigation with a channel width of 40 feet through the bar at the mouth, and to remove the shoals from the bed of the stream to the same depth. The amount expended to the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $13,000, in removing the shoals from the bed of the river, which has been of benefit to the ship-building and commercial interests of this locality. Nothing has been done during the year ending June 30, 1886, for want of appropriations. The amount that can be profitably expended during the year ending June 30, 1888, is $3,500, and if appropriated it is proposed to continue the removal of the shoals between Milford and the mouth of the river to a depth of 6 feet at mean low water, which will be a further benefit to navigation by allowing vessels to go up and down the stream at any stage of the tide and lessening the time now required. The estimated amount required for the entire and permanent completion of the work of improvement in accordance with the adopted project is $58,500, and if the bar at the mouth is to be improved the whole amount should be appropriated at once. (Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.. Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30,1888 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 6.) $58,500 00 3,500 00 7. Broadkiln River, Delaware.-The Broadkiln River had a bar at its mouth having only 24 feet of water over it at mean low water, and was also obstructed by numerous shoals between its mouth and Milton, the head of navigation. The original project was for a 6-foot navigation from the mouth of the river to Milton, by improving its entrance into the Delaware Bay and removal of the shoals from the bed of the river and cutting off certain points. Owing to the appropriations being small no attempt has been made to improve the mouth, and operations have been confined to removing the shoals and cutting off points. The amount expended to the close of fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $11,745.92 which was applied to dredging the main shoals and to examinations of the river; $13,254.08 was expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, and resulted in giving a 6-foot navigation at low water from Milton to the mouth of the river. The mean rise of tide at Milton before the improvement was commenced was 1.8 feet; after the work was finished, it was 3 feet. Vessels are now able to pass between Milton and the mouth of the river at any stage of the tide, saving from two to three days in time. July 1, 1885, amount available July 1, 1886, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of liabilities outstanding July 1, 1885 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G 7.) $13,254 08 13, 254 08 31,500 00 8. Broad Creek, Delaware, from its mouth to Laurel.-The originally adopted project was to make a channel 7 feet in depth and 60 feet in width to the town of Laurel, the estimated cost of which was $46,500; and if training-walls, to regulate the water-way, are constructed the estimate should be increased to $60,000. The project was amended by the officer in charge in 1883, who recommended a channel of 6 feet in depth at mean low water, and 50 feet in width, which is as great a width as the stream will bear, and the building of dikes for the protection of the channel. The estimated cost is $32,625. The amount expended to the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $20,000, and a channel was excavated, 32 feet wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water, from the railroad bridge at Laurel to a point about 6,900 feet down the stream, and the natural channel below this point straightened and widened by cutting off some sharp points for a further distance of 4,300 feet. Nothing was done during the year ending June 30, 1886, for want of money, no appropriations having been made for this improvement since 1882. It is proposed to make a channel 7 feet in depth and 50 feet in width, and to construct dikes for its protection. $32,000 00 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project... (See Appendix G 8.) 9. Indian River, Delaware.-The main obstructions in the Indian River in its original condition consisted, in "The Bulkhead," over which there was only a depth of about 2 feet at low water; the bar at its mouth with a depth on it of only about 2 feet at mean low water, and a few obstructions in Indian River proper. The original project for the improvement was to dredge a channel 80 feet wide and 4 feet deep through "The Bulkhead"; thence a channel straight to the inlet, protecting it by means of a dike on its northern side, through to the sea-beach, and to construct a >-shaped dike to bring the currents on each side at Burton's Island into more regular confluence. The estimated cost of this project was $50,000. The amount expended to the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $10,000, and the cut through the Bulkhead Shoal was completed, but not to the full width contemplated. The cut was made 4 feet in depth the entire length of the shoal, and 80 feet wide for two-thirds of the length and 60 fect wide through the other one-third. Nothing was done on the improvement during the year ending June 30, 1886. The dredging here will amount to more than the original estimate, and will certainly cost $60,000. Its entire completion, therefore, will require the sum of $50,000 additional. Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project...... Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and harbor acts of 1866 and 1367. (See Appendix G 9.) $50,000 00 10. Susquehanna River above and below Havre de Grace, Maryland.The first appropriation by the United States for this river was made in 1852, and at that time the navigation was obstructed by two shoals between the light-house at Havre de Grace and Spesutia Island, upon which there were depths of only 5 and 6 feet at mean low water. The originally adopted project for the improvement was to increase the depth by dredging to 12 feet at mean low water. This has been done several times, but the improvement has not been permanent. A later project was submitted and approved for the improvement of the channel to the depths of 12 and 15 feet at mean low water, respectively; to dredge off the shoal above the railroad bridge and along the west bank of the river near Watson's Island to a depth of 8 feet, with a view to relieving the ice-gorge which usually occurs there and does much damage; for the construction of a channel, basins, and breakwaters, under the designs of the United States Fish Commission, at Fishing Battery light-house for use of the commission. The amount expended to the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1885, was $130,746.13, in maintaining the 12-foot low-water navigation below the bridge; the shoal near Watson's Island was dredged back a width of 200 feet, to a depth of 8 feet at mean low water, and at Fishing Battery light, the channel, basins, and breakwaters were constructed for use of the United States Fish Commission. The amount expended during the year ending June 30, 1886, is $11,224.80, and the shoal near Watson's Island was dredged back a further distance of 200 feet, to a depth of 8 feet at mean low water. The effect of this work has been of great benefit and the tendency of the ice to gorge lessened. ' The two important interests of the Susquehanna River below Havre de Grace, the navigation and fishery, are somewhat in antagonism, as the means deemed necessary for securing a permanent deeper channel in that section of the river, viz, jetties and other regulating works, are greatly opposed by those engaged in the fisheries. The alternative was submitted to Congress, in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1883, of appropriating at once $100,000 for these regulating works to be put in, to the detriment of the fishery interests, or to appropriate $20,000 annually for dredging. Assuming the alternative adopted by Congress by appropriating $20,000 for this improvement in 1884, the amount that can be profitably expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1888, is $20,000. If appropriated, it is proposed to continue the work, under the adopted project for a 15-foot navigation below Havre de Grace, by redredging the two shoals to that depth, and to cut off as much more of the shoal near Watson's Island as the balance of the funds will permit. July 1, 1885, amount available... $11,643 8 July 1, 1886, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of liabilities outstanding July 1, 1885.... 11,224 80 July 1, 1886, amount available.... 419 07 Amount appropriated by act approved August 5, 1886........ 6,000 00 Amount available for fiscal year ending June 30, 1887 ..... 6,419 07 Amount (estimated) required for annual dredging..... Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1888 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and harbor acts of 1866 and 1837. 20,000 00 20,000 00 (See Appendix G 10.) 11. Chester River, at Kent Island Narrows, Maryland.-The approved project was to reopen a channel, formerly existing between Chester River and Eastern Bay, which had been shut up by a solid causeway under the authority of the State of Maryland. This project was com pleted and an unexpended balance of $2,500, has remained since 1878. No further work is deemed necessary. The channel opened seems to be of little use, and, as no steamers pass through, it has been gradually filling up. July 1, 1885, amount available. July 1, 1886, amount available. (See Appendix G 11.) $2,500 00 2,500 00 12. Chester River, from Spry's Landing to Crumpton,Maryland.—In its original condition only 63 feet of water could be carried between these two places. The originally adopted project was for dredging an artificial channel 120 feet wide and 8 feet deep at mean low water. This project was completed in July, 1883. No work has been done on this locality since that time. The amount expended to June 30, 1885, was $13,000, which was the original estimate for the improvement. (See Appendix G 12.) |