and
because the water is shallow in the bay and the channel is too winding for
you
to follow.

Yes - very shallow. Not like the shallow water we had in Florida Bay.

really? Florida Bay is more shallow? How shallow is that, jeffies? Keep in
mind, jeffies, that the dredged channel from the Shinnecock canal to the ocean
outlet is often less than six feet. That is the dredged channel, you fumb
duck. The water either side is often less.

jeffies, attempting rational discussion with you is like attempting same with a
dog pile.

a 4 knot current in a channel a mile wide is a little different
from 4 knots in a cut 100 feet wide.

yeah, it is faster, right?

The CG says it is not a lock

No. They say its a lock.

no they do not. the CG knows what a lock is. So does the Corps of Eng.

Its a lock because it was built as a lock and continues to function as a
lock.

it does not function as a lock. it functions as a gate, which you plainly
state below (even as you fumb duckly say is "not relevant").

The fact that it is only used to when the current runs north
(as I pointed out in my first post) is not relevant.

wanna tell again that an inflatable doll cooks because it has the shape of
a
woman?

That's your department, jaxie.


I keep forgetting, jeffies, that you don't begin to have the intellectual
capacity to understand metaphor. attempting rational discussion with you is
like attempting same with a dog pile.

The decision to put in a lock is a bit more complex then simply
measuring the tidal differences. But this subtlety seems to be lost on
you.

And remember, the lock was built in 1919, before the inlet was opened by
the Hurricane of '38. Back then the tide differences was as high as 5
feet, according to references I posted.




JAXAshby wrote:
so, fumb duck, the shinnecock needs a "lock" because of the tidal difference,
but The Race, Hell Gate, the East River, the Verizanno Narrows, the Harlem
River, Block Island Sound, the Cape Cod canal and the Cape May canal do not
even the "tidal difference" is greater?????????????

jeffies, do you even bother to read WTF you write?


From: Jeff Morris
Date: 12/5/2004 5:43 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

JAXAshby wrote:

so, jeffie, are those "locks" or "gates" across The Race, or the East

River, or

the Harlem River, or the Verizano Narrows, or Block Island Sound, or the

Cape

Cod canal?

Nope. No need for locks there, even though the tidal differences are
over 2 feet in these areas.


Gee, they all have currents equal to or greater than the Shinnecock canal.


What's your point? Each situation is different. And the locks were
added to the Shinnecock Canal before the Shinnecock Inlet was opened by
the Hurricane of '38.



So what did you say the purpose of a lock is, jeffies?


Here's a quote I'll repeat from a local magazine. If you have trouble
with the big words we can help you:

"This problem [erosion in the canal] was solved by building tide gates
and, in 1919, a lock in the canal. The one-way tide gates -- pushed open
by high tides running south from Peconic Bay and pushed closed by high
tides running from the opposite direction -- ensure that enough water
flushes out of Peconic Bay into Shinnecock Bay to carry all the sand and
silt that would otherwise accumulate and block the canal. The lock,
rebuilt about 30 years ago, allows boats to be floated up or down to
meet the differing water levels at either end."

http://www.newsday.com/community/gui...6,0,6426268.st

ory?coll=ny-lihistory-navigation

JAXAshby wrote:
jeffies, *you* have never seen that canal and never will, not even from the
highway.

You're right. I've never seen it. Neither have you.


I am well aware you have never seen it and never will. If you had seen it, you
wouldn't make the fumb duck statements about it being a "lock" you do.

I have seen it, jeffies, many times. Up close and personal.
You're clearly lying. Or you don't know what a lock is. Or more likely
both. Which is it, jaxie?

Just to be clear, here's a picture of the lock in the Shinnecock Canal:
http://www.sv-loki.com/shinnecock.jpg
Why do you say this in not a lock?

JAXAshby wrote:
and
because the water is shallow in the bay and the channel is too winding for

you

to follow.

Yes - very shallow. Not like the shallow water we had in Florida Bay.


really? Florida Bay is more shallow? How shallow is that, jeffies? Keep in
mind, jeffies, that the dredged channel from the Shinnecock canal to the ocean
outlet is often less than six feet. That is the dredged channel, you fumb
duck. The water either side is often less.

jeffies, attempting rational discussion with you is like attempting same with a
dog pile.

Jaxie, you've just shown us yet another area where you are completely
ignorant. There are large areas of Florida Bay less than 3 feet deep.
The "inside" ICW has long stretches where the "channel" is 5 feet or less.

Shinnecock Bay is "deep water" by comparison. The channel is mostly
straight, with more than a dozen marks in its three miles. The inlet
may be subject to shoaling, but that's not uncommon. Its no surprise
that this is what you think is challenging!

JAXAshby wrote:
The CG says it is not a lock

No. They say its a lock.


no they do not. the CG knows what a lock is. So does the Corps of Eng.
You're right, that's why they call it a lock. I already posted several
references, including from the Corps and NOAA, saying its a lock.
You've posted nothing.

JAXAshby wrote:
Its a lock because it was built as a lock and continues to function as a
lock.


it does not function as a lock. it functions as a gate, which you plainly
state below (even as you fumb duckly say is "not relevant").


The fact that it is only used to when the current runs north
(as I pointed out in my first post) is not relevant.



It functions as a gate when the current runs south, as a lock when its
north. This seems to be too complex for your little mind to comprehend.

JAXAshby wrote:
wanna tell again that an inflatable doll cooks because it has the shape of

a

woman?

That's your department, jaxie.



I keep forgetting, jeffies, that you don't begin to have the intellectual
capacity to understand metaphor. attempting rational discussion with you is
like attempting same with a dog pile.
Yes - you lose to the dog pile also.

I have seen it and many times. And I -- like the CG and C of Eng -- know what
a lock is and does.

you have never seen it and never will. you do not now know what a lock is and
never will.

I am still looking for any "lock" on the East River, required by the difference
in water height on one end as compared to the other end.



From: Jeff Morris
Date: 12/11/2004 9:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

JAXAshby wrote:
jeffies, *you* have never seen that canal and never will, not even from
the
highway.

You're right. I've never seen it. Neither have you.


I am well aware you have never seen it and never will. If you had seen it,
you
wouldn't make the fumb duck statements about it being a "lock" you do.

I have seen it, jeffies, many times. Up close and personal.
You're clearly lying. Or you don't know what a lock is. Or more likely
both. Which is it, jaxie?

Just to be clear, here's a picture of the lock in the Shinnecock Canal:
http://www.sv-loki.com/shinnecock.jpg
Why do you say this in not a lock?

The "inside" ICW has long stretches where the "channel" is 5 feet or less.

The controling depth of the ICW channel is 12 feet. When any spot shallows to
less than 12 feet, the channel is dredged, assuming funds (that means money,
jeffies) are available.

Shinnecock Bay is "deep water" by comparison.

you have never been there, jeffies. If you had, you would know better that to
try to tell use that a sailboat can travel much or most or even a great deal of
that bay.

The channel is mostly
straight,

huh? "most straight"? are you on drugs, jeffies?

The inlet
may be subject to shoaling

no kidding? You read that somewhere? you certainly have never seen it and
never, so how did you guess that the inlet "may be subject to shoaling"?

btw, fumb duck, the entire bay -- including the channel -- IS "subject to
shoaling". Local sailboats of ordinary draft NEVER sail the bay, and most
usually travel the channel at dead slow speed, often coasting slowly while
staring at the depth sounder.

jeffies, you really should ask your wife to pull of some aerial photos of that
bar tosee just how much it changes over even short periods of time.

fumb duck, the gate is "open" (check the dictionary for the meaning of the
water) with the current south, **********AND********* is often open as well
when the current is north.

--------------------IN ------------------------ ADDITION
-------------------------- if there is a need for a lock (and there is not) to
move boats from one level of water to another when the current is north (that's
what you said, jeffies) then there is also a need to move boats from one water
level to another when the current is south. If that were not true, then the
bay would fill with water and never empty. It doesn't, jeffies, fill with
water to overflowing flooding all the land in Riverhead and other towns until
so much water is in the Bay it finaling floods across and empties into Long
Island Sound.

geesh, jeffies. do you read what you write?

From: Jeff Morris
Date: 12/11/2004 9:40 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

JAXAshby wrote:
Its a lock because it was built as a lock and continues to function as a
lock.


it does not function as a lock. it functions as a gate, which you plainly
state below (even as you fumb duckly say is "not relevant").


The fact that it is only used to when the current runs north
(as I pointed out in my first post) is not relevant.



It functions as a gate when the current runs south, as a lock when its
north. This seems to be too complex for your little mind to comprehend.

JAXAshby wrote:
fumb duck, the gate is "open" (check the dictionary for the meaning of the
water) with the current south, **********AND********* is often open as well
when the current is north.

So you say, but your word is worthless. The Corps of Eng and the Coast
Pilot and the lock operator, and all other references say otherwise. It
your word against the world jaxie.



--------------------IN ------------------------ ADDITION
-------------------------- if there is a need for a lock (and there is not) to
move boats from one level of water to another when the current is north (that's
what you said, jeffies) then there is also a need to move boats from one water
level to another when the current is south. If that were not true, then the
bay would fill with water and never empty.

Sorry jaxie, you just showing your ignorance of the physical world here.
When the gates were put in Shinnecock Bay was polluted and they wanted
to minimize contamination to Peconic Bay. This made it impossible for
boats to go northward, so the locks were added.



It doesn't, jeffies, fill with
water to overflowing flooding all the land in Riverhead and other towns until
so much water is in the Bay it finaling floods across and empties into Long
Island Sound.

You do realize there are several opening to the ocean on both sides of
the canal, don't you?



geesh, jeffies. do you read what you write?


From: Jeff Morris
Date: 12/11/2004 9:40 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

JAXAshby wrote:

Its a lock because it was built as a lock and continues to function as a
lock.


it does not function as a lock. it functions as a gate, which you plainly
state below (even as you fumb duckly say is "not relevant").



The fact that it is only used to when the current runs north
(as I pointed out in my first post) is not relevant.



It functions as a gate when the current runs south, as a lock when its
north. This seems to be too complex for your little mind to comprehend.

JAXAshby wrote:
The inlet
may be subject to shoaling


no kidding? You read that somewhere? you certainly have never seen it and
never, so how did you guess that the inlet "may be subject to shoaling"?

btw, fumb duck, the entire bay -- including the channel -- IS "subject to
shoaling". Local sailboats of ordinary draft NEVER sail the bay, and most
usually travel the channel at dead slow speed, often coasting slowly while
staring at the depth sounder.

jeffies, you really should ask your wife to pull of some aerial photos of that
bar tosee just how much it changes over even short periods of time.
What's your point jaxie? You're tilting at windmills here - I never
said I had any desire to go there, especially not in my boat. However,
I have been in numerous places far more challenging than that.

JAXAshby wrote:
The channel is mostly
straight,


huh? "most straight"? are you on drugs, jeffies?
The channel to the inlet is three straight lines, well marked. If you
consider this a navigational challenge, you should retake that Power
Squadron course you dropped out of.

huh? "most straight"? are you on drugs, jeffies?
The channel to the inlet is three straight lines, well marked. If you
consider this a navigational challenge, you should retake that Power
Squadron course you dropped out of.

here is what the inlet looked like in October 99, last pic I found without
working at it.

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...91006_comp.jpg

october 98

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_981017
..jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=1998-10-17

may 97

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_970422
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=199 7-04-22

ten days earlier

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_970410
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=199 7-04-10

1996

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_961024
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=199 6-10-24

1989

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_890322
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=198 9-03-22

1980

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_800324
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=198 0-03-24

JAXAshby wrote:
I have seen it and many times. And I -- like the CG and C of Eng -- know what
a lock is and does.

So why does the Corps call it a lock? Why does the Coast Pilot call it
a lock? Why do the builders of it and the operators call it a lock?
Why can't you find a single reference to a site that says its not a lock?


you have never seen it and never will. you do not now know what a lock is and
never will.

Right Jaxie. I learned to sail on the Charles River and used the locks
there dozens, maybe hundreds, of times. I've gone through the Erie
Canal several times. The Troy Locks, the Dismal Swamp locks. Great
Bridge. In fact, there's only a few locks on the East Coast I haven't
been through.



I am still looking for any "lock" on the East River, required by the difference
in water height on one end as compared to the other end.


What's your point? There is a significant tide difference, but there is
no lock. Why is the impossible for you to understand?

JAXAshby wrote:
The "inside" ICW has long stretches where the "channel" is 5 feet or less.


The controling depth of the ICW channel is 12 feet. When any spot shallows to
less than 12 feet, the channel is dredged, assuming funds (that means money,
jeffies) are available.

You really don't know what you're talking about, do you Jaxie? First
of all, the "controlling depth" goes from 12 feet to 10 feet at Fort
Pierce, Florida. At Miami, it drops down to 7 feet. After Key Largo 5
feet is common. After Marathon the bayside channel sort of ends - its 2
to 3 feet much of the rest of the way to Key West and almost all boats
switch over to the outside channel there. (We won't even get into the
fact that much of the ICW hasn't been close to its "controlling depth"
in decades.) And of course the trip down the inside channel had no
meaning if you don't explore the numerous shallow bays and coves that
are off limits to boats the draw over 3 feet and inexperienced sailors
like you.


And we're talking about a total of 150 miles from Miami to Key West, not
a little channel a couple of miles long. Florida Bay is is about 100
times larger than Shinnecock Bay, and far more challenging.

jeffies, I now understand why you act so fumb duck on that bay. you have never
been there and are reading the charts from the internet. jeffies, the internet
charts don't show the channel you have to follow to get from the inlet to the
canal. the channel is NOT the channel marked to the west side. that channel is
for powerboats only. the dredged channel sailboats use to the right, starting
at the inlet, going even more right and hooking left a bit up toward land and
then more left, and then more left until near the marina and then straight to
the canal. the sailboat channel is shallow with shallow water to either side.
Any sailboat that wonders off may well be aground. that bay is NOT sailable.

too bad jeffies that you accept ancient hearsay data as reality. check the
satellite photos to see how much and how often the bay changes. "local
knowledge" is a term you might want to become familiar with, jeffies.

From: Jeff Morris
Date: 12/11/2004 11:48 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

JAXAshby wrote:
The inlet
may be subject to shoaling


no kidding? You read that somewhere? you certainly have never seen it and
never, so how did you guess that the inlet "may be subject to shoaling"?

btw, fumb duck, the entire bay -- including the channel -- IS "subject to
shoaling". Local sailboats of ordinary draft NEVER sail the bay, and most
usually travel the channel at dead slow speed, often coasting slowly while
staring at the depth sounder.

jeffies, you really should ask your wife to pull of some aerial photos of
that
bar tosee just how much it changes over even short periods of time.
What's your point jaxie? You're tilting at windmills here - I never
said I had any desire to go there, especially not in my boat. However,
I have been in numerous places far more challenging than that.

dog pile, read these words:

"The authorized depth of the ICW is 12ft but funding and budgetary cuts ..."

just as I said.

http://ccc.sailnet.com/newslt2.htm

or these words, dog pile

"The authorized project depth of the AIWW is 12 ft (at low tide) from Norfolk,
VA to Ft. Pierce, FL and 10 feet from Ft. Pierce to Miami. ..."

http://www.atlintracoastal.org/WW_Facts.htm

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 09:09:26 -0500, Jeff Morris
wrote:

... here's a picture of the lock in the Shinnecock Canal:

http://www.sv-loki.com/shinnecock.jpg

.....

Looks like the right channel is the lock with upper and lower lock
gates. The two channels on the left look like tide gates to me.

On an inland canal like the Grand Union for example,
the tide gates are replaced by a weir/barrier to hold a constant
upstream height. Here's a flight of locks I walked up, last week,
near Kenilworth which illustrates these features:

=phRIQMCBh9i7Nllq

Brian W

What's your point? Are you trying to prove you know something about the
water? Nobody is buying it!



JAXAshby wrote:
huh? "most straight"? are you on drugs, jeffies?

The channel to the inlet is three straight lines, well marked. If you
consider this a navigational challenge, you should retake that Power
Squadron course you dropped out of.


here is what the inlet looked like in October 99, last pic I found without
working at it.

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...91006_comp.jpg

october 98

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_981017
.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=1998-10-17

may 97

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_970422
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=199 7-04-22

ten days earlier

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_970410
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=199 7-04-10

1996

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_961024
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=199 6-10-24

1989

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_890322
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=198 9-03-22

1980

http://www.oceanscience.net/inletson...mg=shin_800324
_comp.jpg&inlet=Shinnecock&state=New+York&date=198 0-03-24

Jaxie, do you know where Florida Bay is? Obviously not! I even stated
the depth all the way to Key West. You're just repeating what I said,
but ignoring the important part - that Florida Bay is just as shallow as
your little puddle and 100 times larger.

Doesn't it ever embarrass you to show such stupidity?


JAXAshby wrote:
dog pile, read these words:

"The authorized depth of the ICW is 12ft but funding and budgetary cuts ..."

just as I said.

http://ccc.sailnet.com/newslt2.htm

or these words, dog pile

"The authorized project depth of the AIWW is 12 ft (at low tide) from Norfolk,
VA to Ft. Pierce, FL and 10 feet from Ft. Pierce to Miami. ..."

http://www.atlintracoastal.org/WW_Facts.htm

JAXAshby wrote:
dog pile, rational discussion is impossible with you.


For you, rational discussion is impossible with everybody!

having two gates does not make it a lock. Using to raise or lower boats makes
it a lock.

geesh. call it peanut butter and that makes it a sandwich?

... here's a picture of the lock in the Shinnecock Canal:

What's your point? Are you trying to prove you know something about the
water? Nobody is buying it!


nobody with an IQ less than 84, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe.

JAXAshby wrote:
having two gates does not make it a lock. Using to raise or lower boats makes
it a lock.

having two gates on either end of a chamber means that it was built as a
lock. Since I've posted about a dozen references that it was actually
used in that manner would seem to indicate that it really is a lock.

Now you've made a claim that the gates are kept open while the current
flows in both directions. Whether or not that's true does change the
fact that its a lock. However, you've been completely unable to
substantiate your claim. Since I've cited about a dozen references,
includes the Army Corps, NOAA, the agency the owns and operates it, the
company that repairs it, and a number of people who have gone through
recently, and all say its a lock, that mean that I win, 12 zip.



geesh. call it peanut butter and that makes it a sandwich?


... here's a picture of the lock in the Shinnecock Canal:

JAXAshby wrote:
What's your point? Are you trying to prove you know something about the
water? Nobody is buying it!



nobody with an IQ less than 84, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe.

Nor anyone with an IQ over 84. You may have convinced one person with
an IQ of 84.

One thing about ol Jacks Assbury, he is consitently a jerk!

How many JAXs does it take to milk a cow?

Twenty one
One to hold the udder and twenty to lift the cow up and down.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

"Florida Keyz" wrote in message
...
One thing about ol Jacks Assbury, he is consitently a jerk!

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
glenn, I hate to tell you this, but cows are NOT milked by pulling on
their
teats. The technique you describe would be a useless effort. No milk, no
cream, no nuthing but a ****ed off cow.

As usual, you missed the point again. :-)

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

no, glenn, I completely understood that you were trying to make a funny, and
you showed yourself ignorant.

way to go.

glenn, I hate to tell you this, but cows are NOT milked by pulling on
their
teats. The technique you describe would be a useless effort. No milk, no
cream, no nuthing but a ****ed off cow.

As usual, you missed the point again. :-)

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com