REPORT ON INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY-ACROSS FLORIDA

SECTION.

WAR DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS,

Washington, August 9, 1913.

From: The Chief of Engineers, United States Army.

To: The Secretary of War.

Subject: Inland waterway across the State of Florida.

1. There is submitted herewith, for transmission to Congress, report dated November 9, 1911, with maps, by a special board of engineer officers, made pursuant to the following item contained in the river and harbor act approved March 3, 1909:

Survey for the construction of a continuous inland waterway across the State of Florida, between suitable points on the eastern and Gulf coasts of said State, for the purpose of ascertaining the cost of a channel with a maximum depth of 12 feet, or such lesser depths along any section or sections of said waterway as may be found sufficient for commercial, naval, and military purposes. Such survey shall include an examination of all practicable routes, the preparation of plans and estimates of cost along the most available route, and a report upon the desirability of utilizing as a part of such waterway any existing public or private canal, or any part thereof, and the probable cost of acquiring the same.

2. The special board gives a general description of the principal topographic features of the State of Florida and of the most available routes for the proposed waterway. From a study of available data it decided that five routes were available and worthy of more careful investigation, these being designated as the Okeefenokee route, the Santa Fe route, the Orange Lake route, the Lake Harris route, and the Okechobee route. Of these the first named is the most northerly and for this reason is regarded as most desirable from a commercial standpoint, but its water supply is precarious, and its cost would be great. The Santa Fe route is the next most northerly route, but its water supply is barely sufficient for lockage, while the water supply of the Lake Orange route allows no great surplus over the estimated needs. The Okechobee route is the most southerly one of the five, and the special board is of opinion that this route would have few advantages for through traffic between Gulf and Atlantic ports over the existing route around the peninsula. The board finds that the water supply of the Lake Harris route is much larger than necessary for the proposed canal and will provide a large surplus for increase in commerce and for a possible future improvement or enlargement of the canal, and that this supply could be further augmented if necessary by drawing from other large lakes in the vicinity. For reasons given, the special board is of the opinion that this route by way of St. Johns River, Oklawaha River, Lakes Griffin and Harris and Withlacoochee River is the best route. The cost of a canal along this route having a depth of 10 feet below lowest water, a standard

bottom width of 100 feet, to be increased in open water to a maximum of 200 feet depending upon the width of the open water, and with locks of 400 feet usable length and 45 feet width, is estimated at $16,538,005 for original construction and $375,000 annually for maintenance. In a supplemental report dated July 30, 1913, the special board estimates the cost of a canal 7 feet deep with locks designed for the same depth, at $13,277,626, and the cost of a canal 7 feet deep with locks designed for a depth of 10 feet at $14,444,869 3. The special board discusses fully the probable commercial, naval, and military uses of the canal and it reaches the conclusion that these uses are entirely insufficient to justify the large expenditure required for the construction of the canal and its maintenance, and, therefore, the board is of the opinion that the project is not worthy of being undertaken by the United States.

4. These reports have been referred, as required by law, to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors and attention is invited to the board's accompanying report of July 30, 1913, concurring with the views of the special board.

5. The Chief of Engineers believes that although before many years it may be considered desirable to have a canal across the northern portion of Florida capable of use by boats of 10, 12 or more feet draft, yet if the cost is to be as great as $13,000,000 for a 7-foot depth canal and $16,000,000 for a 10-foot depth canal, it would be better for the present to pay a moderate amount more for a much greater depth than 12 feet, or for the present to accept a 6-foot or less depth for small boats at a very much less cost over a longer route through southern Florida, utilizing so far as practicable the State drainage canals and other small-depth canals through the Everglades and Lake Okechobee. Reports and approximate estimates of cost on 6-foot or less draft waterways via Lake Okechobee have been ordered prepared for submission to Congress at its coming session as the final part of this report, the present report being submitted at the present time so as to make its information immediately available to Congress and the general public.

6. So far as concerns the reports and estimates herewith presented, and after due consideration of the same, I concur in general with the views of the special board and the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, and therefore, in carrying out the instructions of Congress, I report that the construction by the United States of a continuous inland waterway of 12 feet or less depth across the State of Florida north of the Everglades, between suitable points on the eastern and Gulf coasts of said State, in the manner apparently desired by the interests concerned and as described in the reports herewith, is not deemed advisable at the present time, my final views as to a crossing through or south of the Everglades being left to a further report. W. H. BIXBY,

Chief of Engineers United States Army.

REPORT OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS.

[Second indorsement.]

BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS,
July 30, 1913.

To the CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY.
1. This is a report by a special board called for by the act of March
3, 1909, on a survey for the construction of a continuous inland
waterway across the State of Florida. It was found from a study
of the physical features of the section of country to be traversed
that a lock canal is the only one worthy of consideration. The fol-
lowing dimensions for the canal and for the locks were adopted:
Depth of the canal, 10 feet below lowest water; standard bottom
width, 100 feet, to be increased in open waters to a maximum of 200
feet, depending upon the width of the open water; locks, 400 feet usable
length and 45 feet width.

2. An essential feature of a canal of this type is an ample summit water supply. With this prime consideration in view, the special board decided after consulting all available data, including former survey and examination reports, that the following routes were available and worthy of investigation:

First. The Okeefenokee route, which would utilize for its summitlevel supply the extensive natural reservoir of Okeefenokee Swamp, as developed and improved along lines suggested by General Gilmore in his report on a trans-Florida Ship Canal in 1880.

Second. The Santa Fe route, which would utilize for its summitlevel supply the lakes at the headwaters of the Santa Fe River.

Third. The Orange Lake route, which would utilize Orange Lake as the summit-level supply.

Fourth. The Lake Harris Route, which would utilize for its summit-level supply the lakes at the head of the Oklawaha River.

Fifth. The Okechobee route through the Everglades and Caloosahatchee River utilizing Lake Okechobee for its summit-level supply. 3. As the last-named route is so far south that it would have few advantages for through traffic between Gulf and Atlantic ports over the existing route around the peninsula, and as other more northerly routes were found to be practicable, no survey or estimate along this line was prepared, and further consideration is given only to the four more northerly routes.

4. The Okeefenokee route would receive its water supply from Okeefenokee Swamp and have its termini at the mouth of the St. Marys River at Fernandina on the Atlantic, and the mouth of the St. Marks River on the Gulf, or it might receive its water supply from Bay Swamp, a short distance south of Okeefenokee and at a higher elevation, in which case the eastern terminus would be the St. Johns River. The total length of this route from the Atlantic to the Gulf is 215 miles with the eastern terminus at Fernandina or 251 miles if at the mouth of the St. Johns River. The respective estimates are $41,938,000 and $44,478,000. The water supply for this route is a serious question and could be definitely determined only through extensive investigation at considerable cost. This being the most northerly route, the special board states that from

the standpoint of through commerce from Gulf ports to the Atlantic it must be considered the most desirable.

5. The Santa Fe route, with termini in the St. Johns River and at the mouth of the Suwannee, being the next most northerly, has advantages over a route farther south. The length of this route is 217 miles, the cost being estimated at $17,208,000. The water supply is insufficient. At one point the Santa Fe River disappears into a hole 40 feet deep, reappearing from another hole 45 feet deep at a distance of 3 miles. It is believed that the river is continuous underground between these two points.

6. The Lake Orange route, with the same termini as the last named, is the next route going south. Its length from the Atlantic to the Gulf is 245 miles, the estimated cost being $16,485,000. While the water supply appears sufficient, there would be no surplus.

7. The Lake Harris route, while the farthest south and the most indirect of all those seriously considered, has advantages which are believed by the special board to be paramount. Its total length is 237.2 miles. The water supply is unquestionably larger than neces sary, and this could be increased materially by tapping other lakes on the summit. The cost is estimated at $16,499,396, which takes into consideration all contingencies and difficulties which can be foreseen. This estimate is based upon final and careful location survey with many borings, and the special board believes that actual construction would probably indicate that the estimates on the three more northerly lines were too small, while on this route they are sufficient. The special board is unanimously of the opinion that this is the most available route for the canal, and that the mouth of the St. Johns River on the east and Port Inglis at the mouth of the Withlacoochee River on the west are suitable points for termini. While the other routes were surveyed in a preliminary way only for the purpose of determining the most desirable, the Lake Harris route, after selection, was made the subject of a careful, detailed survey with numerous borings.

8. This route may be briefly described as follows: Beginning with the St. Johns River there is a navigable channel 24 feet deep with a present project depth of 30 feet to Jacksonville, a distance of 28 miles; a navigable channel 13 feet deep from Jacksonville to Palatka, a distance of 55 miles; from Palatka to the mouth of the Oklawaha, a distance of 22 miles, there is a navigable depth in excess of that of the proposed canal, except at four points, aggregating a length of 1,500 feet. The mean low-water level of the St. Johns River at the mouth of the Oklawaha is 3.15 feet above mean low water of the Atlantic, which is 1 foot above mean low water of the Gulf at Port Inglis. The canal starts from the St. Johns River a short distance below the mouth of the Oklawaha River and follows up the valley of that stream through Scrub Lake, Lake Jumper, Deep Lake, Half Moon Lake, Long Lake, Lake Griffin, Lake Harris, and Lake Okahumpka, and thence to the Withlacoochee River, which it follows to its mouth. Fifteen locks will be required.

9. The chain of lakes lying in the vicinity of Leesburg, consisting of Lakes Harris, Dora, Eustis, Yale, and Griffin, with a few smaller lakes, cover an area at low water of about 83 square miles and will furnish the summit source of supply. The estimated cost of the