2
the barrier in a dense fog, when it would have been more prudent for him to have been at anchor. As far as I can ascertain, Captain Lloyd is the only ship captain on the river who has any particular desire to see the north section removed, and even he would probably not have made the suggestion had he known the conditions of the river immediately above the barrier, but, like the other river captains, his knowledge of the river is confined to the channels which he habitually uses.
5. On receipt of your despatch No. 1360, Captain Myhre stated that, before giving an opinion on the subject, he thought it necessary that a new survey and a careful examination of the northern section and of the river for some distance above and below the barrier should be made. As the "Feihoo" was engaged in survey work outside the Bogue, from which she could not be withdrawn at the time, I applied to the Kowloon Commissioner for the services of the "Kaipan," by whose officers the survey was made under the supervision of Captain Myhre. The result showed that the changes that had taken place since the last survey were not important.
6. Before submitting his Report, Captain Myhre consulted Captain Eldridge on the subject, and it is the opinion of all the responsible members of the Coast Inspector's Department that the entire removal of the north section is not necessary. Captain Myhre points out in his Memorandum, of which I inclose a copy, that the argument in favour of removal is that in thick or hazy weather this section is a dangerous obstruction to steamers, especially to those coming up river, as the bank to the east of it is so steep that vessels can keep close to it until they are quite near the barrier, of which the lead gives no warning before it is too late to haul out for the opening. But, as Captain Myhre points out, if the barrier were removed, and steamers continued to hug the bank without knowing their exact position in relation to the barrier, they would soon be ashore on the spit to the westward, or get jammed in the false channel inside it. Captain Myhre's Memorandum is accompanied by two tracings--one of the "Feiboo's," 1903, and the other of the "Kaipan's," 1906 survey. On the former Captain Myhre bas marked the ordinary course of steamers, and also the probable course that would be taken in a fog if the north section of the barrier were removed. The lines, I hope, will help you to understand our objections to the removal of this section.
7. It must not be forgotten that fogs are of comparatively rare occurrence in the river, and that in clear weather the red light at the southern end of the north section of the barrier is of very great assistance to ships. The removal of this section would mean the abolition of the light; and it is a question whether the "improvement" now proposed would not in the end prove detrimental to shipping interests. That at least is the opinion of the Coast Inspectors, whose wide experience in such matters renders their views more worthy of attention than the individual opinions of local ship-masters, who are merely river pilots-if that. The navigation of most vessels between this and Hong Kong is left almost entirely to native pilots.
S. Though Captain Myhre is of opinion that the north section of the barrier should not be removed, still he considers that a more powerful light should be placed on the end of the arm. He also recommends that a reliable fog-signal should be established there. He consulted Captains Tyler and Eldridge regarding his proposals, and the last named has written as follows: "We are both of opinion that, as an alternative measure to the removal of the north arm of the barrier, it would of course be cheapest and best to have a more powerful light on the south end of the northern arm---że., say a 7th order light, and a fog-signal; but automatic fog-siguals in the hands of Chinese light-keepers, such as are procurable at Canton, would be most uncertain, unless some reliable means were devised for the tide to work the machine and store up power to keep the machine going during slack water. To establish a fog-signal, and then have a vessel get on to the barrier in a fog through its not working, is a responsibility to be avoided, and if captains and pilots would be satisfied with more powerful light only, it would be best to avoid making any mention of the fog-signal.
9. Captain Eldridge's objections to an automatic fog-signal are certainly sound, but it is questionable whether a more powerful light alone would be sufficient. There are two light-keepers at the barrier, and it seems to me that they could be trusted to manage an ordinary signal, such as a bell or gong, especially if they were given a small increase of pay during the foggy season.
10. Though, for reasons given above, the removal of the north arm of the barrier is not considered necessary by the Coast Inspectors, still it is possible that the British Government may press their demand, and therefore the probable cost of the work must be considered. It is, of course, very difficult to estimate closely in such a case, and I can only base my calculations on what we spent on the portion of the barrier which we have already removed. Excluding costs of administration, we paid about 27,500 dollars
3
in widening the opening and dredging the channel. In all, 24 single piles and 41 groups of 3 piles each were removed. The north arm consists of 24 single piles and 49 three- pile groups. It is possible that the contractor who removed the other piles, and who has experience, would remove the piles in the north arm for about the same sum as he charged before--viz., 15,800 dollars; but, on the other hand, the piles in the north arm appear to be more firmly imbedded in the stone than were those in mid-stream, which was one of Captain Tyler's reasons for not touching them originally.
11. The main expense, as was the case with the other barriers, will be in connection with dredging. A considerable amount of dredging will be necessary where the steel piles now are, but the most difficult and expensive work will be on the old barrier to the eastward. This consists of sunken junks, wooden piles, and huge masses of stone, which will be very difficult to remove. It will no doubt be found necessary, as before, to employ a steam-dredger, and this will probably cost from 40,000 dollars to 50,000 dollars. Therefore, the mere cost of the proposed work is likely to be from 56,000 dollars to 66,000 dollars, to which must be added cost of administration, which may amount to another 20,000 dollars, or possibly more. This will depend upon the time taken over the work.
12. But, assuming that the piles are removed and the channel dredged to 16 feet, the depth of the present channel between the harrier head, there will still remain the question of the shoal to the westward. This is not an artificial construction, and therefore does not come under the scope of the Mackay Treaty; yet, as it exists, it would be a great danger to vessels in foggy weather if the barrier were removed.
13. Consequently I would suggest that the barrier be left as it is, a more powerful light-and perhaps a fog-signal-supplied, and, finally, that river steamer captains be recommended to exercise greater caution in foggy weather. Ocean steamers almost invariably anchor when the weather is thick; but there seems to be an idea that river steamers must keep their schedule times under any circumstances,
I have, &c.
(Signed) F. J. MAYERS, Acting Commissioner.
Inclosure 2 in No. 1.
Memorandum by Captain Myhre.
I BEG to inclose herewith two tracings of the steel barrier surveys of 1903 and 1906 respectively, both on a scale of 100 feet to 1 inch.
Comparing them, we find that the water on the western side of the barrier has deepened towards the northern shore, the spit, with less than 6 feet of water, being now 30 feet to 40 feet nearer the shore than in 1903, and that the 12-foot contour has also shifted in the same direction in a corresponding degree. To the east of the barrier we also find the 12-foot line somewhat closer to the northern shore than formerly, but otherwise no radical changes.
Re the Removal of the Northern Section of the Steel Barrier.
The proposal to this effect was probably originated by the fact that two of the river steamers and, I believe, one of the coasting steamers ran into this part of the barrier in a fog.
The argument is that in thick or hazy weather this section is a dangerous obstruction to steamers, especially to those coming up river, as the bank to the east of it is so steep that vessels can keep it close aboard until quite near to the barrier of which the lead gives no warning before it is too late to haul out for the opening.
Its removal would certainly allow steamers to run on along the bank, but the chances are, however, that they in this case would either run ashore on the spit to the westward or get jammed in the false channel inside it, and though either of these alternatives would be preferable to fouling the barrier, the actual non-presence of this would consequently not enable vessels to run on up river any more so than under the present circumstances if the weather was at all thick.
As it is unanimously agreed upon that the opening is this barrier is, in clear weather, ample for all practical purposes as far as navigation is concerned, the question is therefore limited to whether the dangers which the northern section presents in thick
253
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.