The Corogal: one of the big dredges in Culebra Cut, Panama Canal (ca. 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

First U.S. battleships through Panama Canal: Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin (postcard ca 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

Tow boat fleet at Paraiso, Panama Canal (ca. 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

Panama Beach

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida. Photo caption: The tide rises 20 feet at high tide; at low tide the boats are used as stores to market goods.

View of Paraiso Yard showing dredging equipment, Panama Canal. (ca. 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

Emergency dam at Pedro Miguel, Panama Canal (ca. 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

Berm cranes at Miraflores Locks

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida. Photo notation: These are most economical in handling concrete but not so elastic as the cable way method (ca. 1914)

Lantern spillway and hydroelectric plant, Panama Canal (ca. 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

U.S.S. Ohio, Panama Canal (ca. 1914)

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

The Panamal Canal: general information

Leonard Carpenter Panama Canal Collection. Photographs: Dredging, Soldiers, and Ships. [Box 1] from the Special Collections & Area Studies Department, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida. (1 pamphlet; 15 pages)

PICES-GLOBEC International Program on Climate Change and Carrying Capacity: Report of the PICES 2002 Volunteer Observing Ship Workshop.

On April 4-5, 2002, the PICES MONITOR Task Team, the PICES Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) Advisory Panel, and the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council’s Gulf Ecosystem Monitoring (GEM) program convened a workshop in Seattle, U.S.A., to consider enhanced instrumentation for volunteer observing ships (VOS), particularly instruments to complement CPR data. (PDF contains 44 pages)

Summary report on water quantity and quality studies of Vancouver Lake, Washington

Vancouver Lake, located adjacent to the Columbia River and just north of the Vancouver-Portland metropolitan area, is a "dying" lake. Although all lakes die naturally in geologic time through the process of eutrophication,* Vancouver Lake is dying more rapidly due to man's activities and due to the resultant increased accumulation of sediment, chemicals, and wastes. Natural eutrophication takes thousands of years, whereas man-made modifications can cause the death of a lake in decades. Vancouver Lake does, however, have the potential of becoming a valuable water resource asset for the area, due particularly to its location near the Columbia River which can be used as a source of "flushing" water to improve the quality of Vancouver Lake. (Document pdf contains 59 pages) Community interest in Vancouver Lake has waxed and waned. Prior to World War II, there were relatively few plans for discussions about the Lake and its surrounding land area. A plan to drain the Lake for farming was prohibited by the city council and county commissioners. Interest increased in 1945 when the federal government considered developing the Lake as a berthing harbor for deactivated ships at which time a preliminary proposal was prepared by the City. The only surface water connection between Vancouver Lake and the Columbia River, except during floods, is Lake River. The Lake now serves as a receiving body of water for Lake River tidal flow and surface flow from creeks and nearby land areas. Seasonally, these flows are heavily laden with sediment, septic tank drainage, fertilizers and drainage from cattle yards. Construction and gravel pit operations increase the sediment loads entering the Lake from Burnt Bridge Creek and Salmon Creek (via Lake River by tidal action). The tidal flats at the north end of Vancouver Lake are evidence of this accumulation. Since 1945, the buildup of sediment and nutrients created by man's activities has accelerated the growth of the large water plants and algae which contribute to the degeneration of the Lake. Flooding from the Columbia River, as in 1968, has added to the deposition in Vancouver Lake. The combined effect of these human and natural activities has changed Vancouver Lake into a relatively useless body of shallow water supporting some wildlife, rough fish, and shallow draft boats. It is still pleasant to view from the hills to the east. Because precipitation and streamflow are the lowest during the summer and early fall, water quantity and quality conditions are at their worst when the potential of the Lake for water-based recreation is the highest. Increased pollution of the Lake has caused a larger segment of the community to become concerned. Land use and planning studies were undertaken on the Columbia River lowlands and a wide variety of ideas were proposed for improving the quality of the water-land environment in order to enhance the usefulness of the area. In 1966, the College of Engineering Research Division at Washington State University (WSU0 in Pullman, Washington, was contacted by the Port of Vancouver to determine possible alternatives for restoring Vancouver Lake. Various proposals were prepared between 1966 and 1969. During the summer and fall of 1967, a study was made by WSU on the existing water quality in the Lake. In 1969, the current studies were funded to establish a data base for considering a broad range of alternative solutions for improving the quantity and quality of Vancouver Lake. Until these studies were undertaken, practically no data on a continuous nature were available on Vancouver Lake, Lake River, or their tributaries. (Document pdf contains 59 pages)

The economic contribution of whalewatching to regional economies: Perspectives from two National Marine Sanctuaries

Whenever human beings have looked out on the sea, they have seen whales. First from the shore and later from ships when humanity entered the ocean realm as seafarers, we have responded to seeing these creatures with awe and wonder. Even when we hunted whales, a period well chronicled both in history and in literature, the sight of a whale brought an adrenaline rush that was not totally linked to potential economic gain. The first trips on boats specifically to watch, rather than hunt, whales began around 45 years ago in Southern California where the migrating gray whales, seen in the distance from land, drew vessels out for a closer look. Since that time whalewatching has boomed, currently conducted in over 40 countries around the world, including Antarctica, and estimated by economists at the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society to have a 1999 worldwide economic value of around $800 million USD. The economic contribution to local coastal communities is particularly significant in developing countries and those where declining fish populations (and in some cases like the Japanese, international bans on whaling) have driven harvesters to look for viable alternatives. Clearly, whalewatching is now, in many places around the world, a small but thriving part of the regional economy. Like in the days of whaling, we still get the rush, but for some, money is back contributing to the physiological response. (PDF contains 90 pages.)

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Area to be Avoided (ATBA) Education and Monitoring Program

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431, as amended) gives the Secretary of Commerce the authority to designate discrete areas of the marine environment as National Marine Sanctuaries and provides the authority to promulgate regulations to provide for the conservation and management of these marine areas. The waters of the Outer Washington Coast were recognized for their high natural resource and human use values and placed on the National Marine Sanctuary Program Site Evaluation List in 1983. In 1988, Congress directed NOAA to designate the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (Pub. L. 100-627). The Sanctuary, designated in May 1994, worked with the U.S. Coast Guard to request the International Maritime Organization designate an Area to be Avoided (ATBA) on the Olympic Coast. The IMO defines an ATBA as "a routeing measure comprising an area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and which should be avoided by all ships, or certain classes of ships" (IMO, 1991). This ATBA was adopted in December 1994 by the Maritime Safety Committee of the IMO, “in order to reduce the risk of marine casualty and resulting pollution and damage to the environment of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary”, (IMO, 1994). The ATBA went into effect in June 1995 and advises operators of vessels carrying petroleum and/or hazardous materials to maintain a 25-mile buffer from the coast. Since that time, Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS) has created an education and monitoring program with the goal of ensuring the successful implementation of the ATBA. The Sanctuary enlisted the aid of the U.S. and Canadian coast guards, and the marine industry to educate mariners about the ATBA and to use existing radar data to monitor compliance. Sanctuary monitoring efforts have targeted education on tank vessels observed transiting the ATBA. OCNMS's monitoring efforts allow quantitative evaluation of this voluntary measure. Finally, the tools developed to monitor the ATBA are also used for the more general purpose of monitoring vessel traffic within the Sanctuary. While the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary does not currently regulate vessel traffic, such regulations are within the scope of the Sanctuary’s Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan. Sanctuary staff participate in ongoing maritime and environmental safety initiatives and continually seek opportunities to mitigate risks from marine shipping.(PDF contains 44 pages.)

Guidelines for the Provision of Garbage Reception Facilities at Ports Under MARPOL Annex V

This report offers guidelines for the provision of adequate port reception facilities for vessel-generated garbage under the requirements of Annex V of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 1973 (MARPOL 73/78), Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships. MARPOL Annex V prohibits at-sea disposal of plastic materials from vessels, and specifies the distance from shore at which other materials may be dumped. Annex V also requires the provision of port reception facilities for garbage, but it does not specify these facilities or how they are to be provided. Since the at-sea dumping restrictions apply to all vessels, the reception facility requirement applies to all ports, terminals, and marinas that serve vessels. These guidelines were prepared to assist port owners and operators in meeting their obligation to provide adequate reception facilities for garbage. The report synthesizes available information and draws upon experience from the first years ofimplementation of MARPOL Annex V. (PDF file contains 55 pages.)