The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-10-17
FROM THE PEOPLE.
THE LooKLEss TIDE LEVEL CANAL
seattle. wash. oct. rs. ]

Seattle. Wash, Oct. 10 400
To tho Editor: I have been reading
with much interest all that relates to tho
Lake Washington ship canal, and espe-
cially as Viewed from an engineering
standpoint the proposition of lowering
the level OF the lake as n factor bearing
on that proposed waterway II the aim
be to drop tho level OF Lake Washington
to that OF Lake Union. or even somewhat
lower. II does not seem that any valid
objection can be urged. while on the other
hand, the advantages constructive and
otherwise would be many and important.
But as to the proposition as set forth
In your editorial In your sunday issue OF
October a. namely, that the canal be
built without locks, but in lien thereof
the level OF the lake be lowered TO that
OF salt water. tho case. as II presents It,
self 10 the writer. Is open to forceful OBJ
jections.
The nominal level OF Lake Washington
is seventeen feet higher than mean tide
on Puget sound and the level of Lake
Union IL seven feet lower than that OF
It's larger neighbor. The rib OF drift de-
post that divides tho lakes Is small
matter probably not over sixty rods
wide and an average depth say OF twelve
feet. Judging from recollection only, in
passing across the divide more than u
year ago, tho highest point where tho
logging channel cuts through. IL not much
over twenty feet.
To attain salt water level. would thus
mean lowering OF seventeen feet for
Washington and ten feet for Union. This
common level once attained. the entire
depth OF canal. which ought to be no less
than thirty feet, must then be secured
below this general level. This would lay
the bottom OF the canal forty feet lower
than the present level OF Lake Union
and would require more or less dredging
TO secure the needed depth throughout the
entire length OF the lake trsversed by tho
canal. which n to say. from Fremont 10
the portage.
We are now approaching the objection
able features that present themselves TO
this plan OF the elimination OF any lock
system."
Both lakes would then be under tidal
influence and necessarily would change
70 salt water II Is not unusual TO SEQ
tides Of fourteen feet variation between
high and low water and the ingoing and
outgoing tides as they rushed through
Lake Union and the canal channel
through the portage. would be At a pace
compared with which no "narrowsH on
the inside passages 20 Juneau would af-
ford any comparison.
One OF the results OF this tidal action
y
continually into the canal channel IN
that part OF the waterway through Lake
Union and an endless tearing away and
widening OF the cot through the divide
aud, alternately with the inE0lng aud out.
going rush Of water. depositing the alt
az both ends Of the cut
Among the enc features 10 be secured
In making o ship harbor ot Lake Wash.
inston. would 10 fresh water for lis
beneficial effects on ship bottoms. a per-
manent. unchanging level and The alb
ssnee IL the destructive teredo. Taat
there must be some form Of a lock to
stand sGalns, tho influence ~ The tides
seems Imperative and II 40. lt would seem
that Lake Union should be main.
tanned somea here near tia present level
and that the upper and larger lake be
c9Erespondingly lowered
As Seattle is destined 81 the near ~.
lure to become the chief port on the
Pacific coast and. as a fresh water lake
nsrb1r and a salt water haFhgr In such
close proximity 40 not again occur on ths
continent. u even On this hemisphere. and
such proximity a most assirAhia. Il "a
aeii worth while - FlYa this matter she
most rarnest sttcation snd make no nsts-
take u n true, that TIE sstaaries -
some rivers. to q limited and raFyinE Eay
fern fresh water hafbors. - IL ths case
80 Portland, Everest and atEcf localities.
bat there "a not smother Instance q such
neawess 20 salt water % such . fresh
water hsrbaT a. Lake washington N9uiA
make Here 10 body az water large
enough 90 acromm date al the maFins
~ the Pari8e and exempt both from
aine~s freez3ns Lover this lake
and q viii he a better lake than
s present. as Il now u Ike an overfaH.
luundAung dam. large volums of ihs
water that now meets tide through Tho
LsiWsmisn river would pass through the
canal and strike sail water at Ballard
But by an means refrain from making
fhiA q mere salt water adjunct "a the
sound. ~. &EfDiG