I would not be surprised if the gates are, at times left open in both
directions. As I've said, there has been talk reversing the gates to
allow better flushing of the bay:
http://www.savethepeconicbays.org/cc.../appendixl.doc
However, the lock tender didn't mention this when I talked to him about
the lock.

I don't think the "reversal" was done at the recent refit of the lock
gates. Note that this was a refit of the "lock gates," not the "tide
gates" nearby. They even have a picture of the lock:
http://jmoa.com/structural/portfolio.asp?ID=139

I did find one mention of the canal in a Corps of Eng report. They say:
"This canal has a tidal gate, allowing water to enter Shinnecock Bay but
not leave it." I guess you talked to a different Corps of Engineers.
http://cirp.wes.army.mil/cirp/cetns/chetn-iv42.pdf

The issue is not whether the lock is, on occasion, left open. You have
claimed many times that there is no lock, and there is only a tide gate.
However, the picture is pretty clear and proves not only that you're
wrong, but that you've never actually been there and you've been lying
about this since the beginning.

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







JAXAshby wrote:
jeffies, a gate is used to impede fluid flow. a lock uses two gates to move a
boat from a body of water at one level to a body of water at another level.
jeffies, I know this is hard for you to understand, so ask your wife to help
you out here, but the Peconic Bay and Hampton Bay are tidal waters. Same
tides, same moon. the gates are there to impede the flow of tidal water from
Hampton Bay ***to*** Peconic Bay (which is less salty because of river flow).
the gates are often not closed and HB water flows freely into RB. I have seen
the gates open and have seen HB water flowing towards PB at what seemed to be
about 4 knots. I have also seen the gates open with PB water flowing towards
HB at what seemed to be about 4 knots. I have also talked with employees of
the marina on the canal who stated flatly that the gates were often open for
extended periods of time.

that ain't a lock, jeffies, it is a gate. Different purposes for either. The
CG and C of Eng know the difference even if you don't jeffies.

kriste but it is tough trying to talk with 80 IQ idiots.




From: Jeff Morris
Date: 11/25/2004 10:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

JAXAshby wrote:

jeffies, give it up. the damned thing is a gate, as described by both

theCG

and the C of Eng.


Where do they say that, jaxie? In a dream you had? Certainly not on
the internet or in any publication! And what involvement does the Corps
of Eng have with it? You made this up and now you're lying because
you're too much of a coward to admit your blunder.



Whats more, *IF* you had ever seen the thing *OR* talked
with anyone who works adjacent to the canal you would know (well maybe not

you,

jeffies, but the person of at least high two digit or more IQ would know)

that

the damned gate if often left open for extended periods of time, totally
negating its intended purpose of limiting the flow of seawater in Peconic

Bay.

We can all look at it Jaxie. Here's a pictu

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

Can you possibly claim this is not a lock?

As for "negating the purpose" there has been discussion about revering
the gates to allow more sea water into Peconic bay. But regardless,
that's a lock next to the tide gates. Only an idiot would claim otherwise.