 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Hiram M. Chittenden Locks was copied or moved into Lake Washington Ship Canal with this edit on 22:17, 23 August 2015. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
editI'm not an expert in this area - but I believe the 1902 map is inaccurate. Prior to the opening of the canal, the level of Lake Washington was somewhat higher causing (among other things) what is now the Seward Peninsula to be an island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.189.11 (talk) 02:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- I also believe this to be correct & will make notes on the original page. Foundation for these changes - a map from 1892 at the Seattle Public Library (SEAMAP G4284.S$ P53 1892 .S6, Proposed Plan of Improvement for Salmon Bay Harbor), which clearly shows an early / basic ship canal connecting Lake Washington and Lake Union, as well as a basic ship canal (beyond a stream, but earlier than the full steel canal). Jeffme (talk) 19:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
- Also - I've found no evidence that the Seward Peninsula (before that, Bailey's Peninsula) was ever an island, but am still looking for confirmation thereof. Jeffme (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
- According to Coll-Peter Thrush in his book Native Seattle, Bailey Peninsula was "almost an island": [1]. Pfly (talk) 23:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
- In my expert opinion the 1902 map is in accurate to showing the lake level change. There is a map in the Eastside Historical Society collection that better represents the lake level pre1916. Good representation on Open Historical Map Here is a link to the time and place. Us the time slider bottom right to see lake change. 22:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natfoot footnat (talk • contribs)
Its effect
editWould be nice to have a section discussing how the ship canal was actually used through the decades. Shipping airplane parts to the Boeing plant at the south end of the lake? Pleasure boats only in the last decade or so? How much tonnage goes through the canal? Was it a mistake? That sort of thing. Tempshill (talk) 02:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Also, why did the lake drop? Was that planned? Why didn't the locks stop it? Do they have to open the locks to prevent the lake re-filling?203.206.162.148 (talk) 10:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
New aerial photos
editI uploaded a couple new aerial photos including the Lake Washington Ship Canal, below. Feel free to use if useful. Dcoetzee 04:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Series of Locks a la Panama Canal?
editI reworked a sentence which referred to a "Series" of locks, and which implied there was more than one change of water level, requiring passage through more than one lock. The Hiram M. Chittenden Locks are a complex of two side-by-side locks at the same location. It is preferred to use the much smaller of the two locks during summer to reduce the amount of water released from Lake Washington during locking operation. (Inflows to the lake are much reduced during summer.) Even though there are two locks, boats only pass through one in order to navigate between the higher lake level and the Sound. Petershank (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)