Category: Norfolk

Navy graphic

The Navy commissioned the newest Virginia-class submarine, USS Washington (SSN 787), during a ceremony aboard the Navy to assist submarine sponsor Elisabeth Mabus, daughter of 75th Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus Naval Station Norfolk on October 7.

Washington, named for the 42nd state, is the 14th Virginia-class rapid attack submarine to join the Navy’s operational fleet. Elisabeth Mabus expressed how proud she was of the crew and their families.

“I know, while you are all eager to leave for Washington, like any sea service, you must be long distances away from your families. Thank you families,” Mabus said. “You are also the plank owner of this ship in the truest sense of the word.”

Mabus gave the order “to man our ship and bring it to life” before the crew of about 130 men ran over their foreheads onto the ship.

Washington is the fourth of eight Block III Virginia-class submarines to be built. The Block III submarines will be built with new Virginia Payload Tubes to reduce costs and increase missile launch capabilities. The first 10 Virginia-Class Block I and Block II submarines have 12 individual 21-inch diameter vertical launch tubes that can be used to fire Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMS). Block III’s submarines are built with two larger pipes, 87 inches in diameter, each of which can accommodate six TLAMs.

“We won’t know what challenges we will face as a nation 10, 15 or 20 years from now, but we do know from the work that is now being done at Newport News and Electric Boat and by the seafarers who call this ship home “USS Washington will be prepared for whatever is to come,” said Mabus.

Navy photo of Seaman Patrick T. Bauer

Sailors bow their heads in prayer during the commissioning ceremony for the Virginia-class submarine USS Washington (SSN 787) at Naval Station Norfolk. Washington is the US Navy’s 14th Virginia-class attack submarine and the fourth US Navy ship to be named after Washington State.

Commanding Officer, USS Washington, Cmdr. Gabriel Cavazos highlighted Washington’s ability to dominate the underwater domain and enable military success in any engagement.

“As I have told the crew many times before, they are the most important part of the ship. They give the ship its personality and fighting spirit. Without the occupation, Washington would not be the war platform for which it was built. However, combine the two and together we are the black fish, ”said Cavazos.

Today the USS Washington is alive and ready for the mission.

“Thank you for being here to celebrate this momentous occasion with us,” said Cavazos.

Washington is the fourth ship in the US Navy and the first submarine to be named in honor of Washington State. The previous three ships were an armored cruiser (ACR 11) that served from 1905 to 1916, the Battleship (BB 47), a Colorado-class battleship launched in 1921 and sunk as a target in 1924 after its construction was stopped in Dem Battleship (BB 56) has been credited with sinking more enemy tonnage than any other U.S. Navy battleship during World War II, which served from 1941 to 1947.

Washington is a flexible, multi-mission platform designed to fulfill the seven core competencies of the submarine force: anti-submarine combat; Anti-surface warfare; Delivery of special forces; Strike war; irregular warfare; Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; and mine warfare. Their inherent stealth, stamina, mobility and firepower directly enable them to support five of the six core competencies of the maritime strategy: maritime control, energy projection, forward presence, maritime safety and deterrence.

The submarine is 377 feet long, 34 feet wide, and can dive to depths greater than 800 feet and operate underwater at speeds greater than 25 knots. It has been operated without refueling for over 30 years.

Construction in Washington began in September 2011; The keel of the submarine was authenticated during a ceremony on November 22, 2014. and the submarine was christened during a ceremony on March 5, 2016.

The newest Virginia-class submarine in the US Navy, the USS Washington (SSN 787), officially entered service on October 7th during a ceremony aboard Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia.

Washington, named for the 42nd state, is the 14th Virginia-class rapid attack submarine to join the Navy’s operational fleet. Elisabeth Mabus, daughter of the 75th Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, acted as sponsor of the submarine.

Washington is the fourth of eight Block III Virginia-class submarines to be built. The Block III submarines will be built with new Virginia Payload Tubes to reduce costs and increase missile launch capabilities. The first 10 Virginia-Class Block I and Block II submarines have 12 individual 21-inch diameter vertical launch tubes that can be used to fire Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMS). Block III’s submarines are built with two larger pipes, 87 inches in diameter, each of which can accommodate six TLAMs.

Commanding Officer, USS Washington, Cmdr. Gabriel Cavazos emphasized Washington’s ability to dominate the underwater domain and enable military success in every mission: “As I have told the crew several times, they are the most important part of the ship. They give the ship its personality and fighting spirit. Without the crew it would be Washington doesn’t have the war platform it was built for. Combine the two, however, and together we’re the black fish. “

Washington is the fourth ship in the US Navy and the first submarine to be named in honor of Washington State. The previous three ships were an armored cruiser (ACR 11) that served from 1905 to 1916, the Battleship (BB 47), a Colorado-class battleship launched in 1921 and sunk as a target in 1924 after its construction was stopped in Dem Battleship (BB 56) has been credited with sinking more enemy tonnage than any other U.S. Navy battleship during World War II, which served from 1941 to 1947.

Washington is a flexible, multi-mission platform designed to fulfill the seven core competencies of the submarine force: anti-submarine combat; Anti-surface warfare; Delivery of special forces; Strike war; irregular warfare; Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; and mine warfare. Their inherent stealth, stamina, mobility and firepower directly enable them to support five of the six core competencies of the maritime strategy: maritime control, energy projection, forward presence, maritime safety and deterrence.

The submarine is 377 feet long, 34 feet wide, and can dive to depths greater than 800 feet and operate underwater at speeds greater than 25 knots. It has been operated without refueling for over 30 years.

Construction in Washington began in September 2011; The keel of the submarine was authenticated during a ceremony on November 22, 2014. and the submarine was christened during a ceremony on March 5, 2016.

FORMER CORONADAN, ROBIE ROBESON

– Advertisement –

Born to gentry on the eve of the Great Depression, Robert Holmes Robeson observed helplessly as his father’s hard-earned wealth disappeared.

He watched as his father reinvented and humbled himself over and over again just to feed his family. The experience left the younger Robeson with a motivation that can’t be taught in school, unless, of course, it’s from the school of hard of knocks.

– Advertisement –

Those lessons served the younger Robeson his entire life, as he worked and saved, knowing that, based on his own father’s experiences, at any time one’s fortunes could disappear.

In the end, his proudest assets weren’t of the financial sort. He referred to them as “Blessings,” and those Blessings arrived in the form of pride in serving his country, and in love for his family.

– Advertisement –

Robie Robeson, first year Plebe at the Naval Academy, 1942.

Near the end, this father of two and recipient of a Bronze Star, a Legion of Merit Award, and two Presidential Citations, summed it up succinctly while talking about his life:

“I would just like to be remembered as having been a good naval officer to my men, a good husband to my wife, and a good father to my children,” he said.

Robie Robeson died from natural causes November 19. He was 94 years old. Family surrounded him at the time of his passing, and his final moments were happy ones, as he had made his peace with the Lord.

Known as “Robie” to family and friends, Robert Robeson was the middle child of three born to RH Robeson and Edna Stape, of Rochester, New York – a well-to-do, upper middle class family. He was born September 3, 1923.

He was very close to his sisters growing up, even though he took great joy in torturing them by chasing them around the farm with garter snakes and playing other tricks on them.

His grandfather had purchased and opened a camp from the British government in Canada, and the family spent most of their summers there until 1939.

Robie’s father owned a knife factory in Rochester and was quite successful. When World War I came, half the plant was modified to make ammunition shells for the Army.

In 1925, his father borrowed money from the bank and rebuilt the factory again, taking it back to a knife factory. A self-made man, the elder Robeson earned nearly a million dollars through his business acumen – a lot of money in those days.

Then, a series of unfortunate events put him out of business. The unions went on strike and his workers refused to work. He couldn’t pay the bank so his business was foreclosed on. The bank kept all his money. Then the stock market crashed and the world was thrust into turmoil. Robie’s father was broke.

“My father went from being one of the town’s respected and elite leaders, to practically being a beggar,” remembered the younger Robeson. The same men he played golf with and shared private men’s club benefits with now turned their backs on him.”

Blessed with an envious work ethic, the senior Robeson worked a number of odd, minimum wage jobs before taking hot water heater sales door-to-door, which made his boss a lot of money in a business that had been struggling.

He did bookkeeping for a couple of restaurants so his family could eat free there. No one went hungry in the Robeson family, no matter how bad times got.

The wedding party.

“I watched my father survive in the toughest of times. I figured if he could do it, I better do it,” recalled Robie.

His mother was of German decent. She worked for George Eastman, of Eastman Kodak fame in the 1920s. They became good friends, and he taught her everything he knew. Had she not married and had children, she might have used those photographic talents on a grand scale.

Robie’s childhood was a happy one. He played basketball, baseball and football. He never played music, but wished he had until his dying day.

“My mother wanted me to play piano. We had a nice one, but I wanted to play violin because I had a crush on the violin teacher. She was awfully cute. One day she quit, and that was the end of my violin lessons.”

Still, music was in his blood. He loved to sing and was blessed with a marvelously high soprano voice as a child. He couldn’t read music, but would memorize songs and sing at any opportunity that presented itself – school functions, area church gatherings, or just along with the radio.

“I never sang at home. My parents weren’t really interested in my singing. But we had a radio and I remember listening to the Lone Ranger, the Shadow, and of course we always listened when Joe Lewis had a fight. I remember I’d get all bundled up to look like a fighter and dance around throwing ghost punches during the fights.”

After the crash Robie’s family had absolutely no money. “If I wanted money I had to go work for it. For a while I sold newspapers on the street corner near our house. My folks didn’t like that because their friends could see their son was hocking newspapers on the street corner.

“As I grew older and stronger, I could cut lawns. I was the only guy in the neighborhood who had an extension ladder (because our house was so big) so I could do outside windows for other folks as well.

A very young Jim Robeson, parents and grandparents.

“I used to shovel snow too. Once we had a snowstorm and I worked for eight hours to clean the sidewalks. Just as I went to get paid for it, the snowplow went by and blew snow all over my clean walks. I had to work another hour and a half before I could get paid.”

To earn extra money, Robie would milk the neighbor’s cows, but valuable lessons lurked just around that corner. “I remember the neighbor was an alcoholic,” said Robie.

“I had a front row seat watching him hit the bottom with his drinking, and then come to grips with his alcoholism. He was quite a guy. From then on he was against drinking. It was something of an inspiration to me, at such a young age, to watch a man come to grips with his demons. I never forgot that.”

Robie’s youth was made up of family trips to Canada for the summers. He attended a high school with 360 other students. Even though he was only 12 at the time, he remembered seeing President Franklin Delano Roosevelt drive by, and all the excitement it created.

Father and son. This is Robie’s oldest son, Jim Robeson. The photo was taken in Key West, Florida, 1952.

One rainy day, a friend’s aunt took Robie and two friends down to visit the Naval Academy. He was so impressed that he collected all the information he could carry. When he got home, he announced to his parents that he was going into the Navy.

At the age of 14 he had just made Eagle Scout. He decided, however, to cut out the scouting and focus on school, basketball, football and baseball instead.

From the Naval Academy he learned an important clue. The more things he had on his resume – sports, community work and the like – the better his chances were for admission. That led to a lifetime of community work through such groups as Rotary (he was a local member since 1973).

“When my time came to go to the Naval Academy, I was a stand-by because my congressman had already chosen someone. So I enrolled at the University of Rochester.”

Key West, Florida, 1952. Robie is now the proud father of two sons. Scott and Jim.

His first and only year at University of Rochester (1941), Winston Churchill gave the commencement address via a ten-minute radio communication directed specifically at the graduating seniors at the University of Rochester.

Robie didn’t remember that, but he did remember seeing Tommy Dorsey and Frank Sinatra perform at the Spring Ball. “I remember thinking, hey, that Sinatra guy is skinny as a rail, but he sure does have a good voice.”

The next year he was accepted into the Naval Academy, but not before the Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor.

What that did was cut the term at the Naval Academy down from four years to three, as more officers were needed, and quickly. The cadets received assignments the moment they left the academy. Robie graduated as a midshipman in 1945.

Scotty, Jimmy and Robie; Norfolk, Virginia, 1953.

He was flown to Guam to take command of decommissioning the light cruiser Columbia, (CL-56), which had fought during WWII and survived a Kamikaze attack earlier that year. He moved up quickly from there.

Being the green kid fresh from the Academy, at first he was taken advantage of by more veteran officers and crew – many who had just come through the war.

Freshly “grown” officers almost always had to fight for respect in the Navy, but more so for the Class of ’45. They were rushed through a three-year program, instead of the traditional four-year curriculum at the Naval Academy.

Soon, however, Robie learned to stand his ground and in time became a respected leader of men, with an immaculate military career. Although he saw no action in World War II, he served on, or commanded, more than half a dozen ships, and survived storms at sea that sent many a ship and crew to their doom.

Robie, posing with his sister Shirley and mother Edna.

His first duty station was Long Beach, CA. The following year he reported to duty in Key West, FL to take control of decommissioning of an LSM (medium sized landing ship).

He served as captain aboard the USS Rochester (1947), USS Wilke (1949), USS Strickland (1960), USS Haverfield (1961), and the USS Bradley (1964). Duty stations included Key West, Norfolk, Washington, DC, Honolulu, Guam, San Francisco and San Diego.

Once, 100 miles south of Adak, Alaska, the radar ship he was commanding was caught in a vicious typhoon. With waves 30-50 feet crashing over the decks, the ship fought to hold course.

As the crew fought to keep the ship steady, a gun was swept off the bow. The bunk areas were flooded, and one of the two ships’ generators was damaged. They spent 50 hours at ten knots trying to steer through the storm. Had they lost the other generator, the ship wouldn’t have survived.

Aboard the SS Lurline, from San Francisco to Honolulu.

In December 1945, Robie married the love of his young life – Mary Stephens. He was 22 years of age; she was 23. Before long they had two sons – Jim and Scott.

Being a typical Navy family, the Robesons had to pick up and move every six months to two years (they moved nearly a dozen times, recalled son Jim), the family rolled with the changes and became vital to the successful transitions that only a family could provide.

Mary died in 1984, after 39 years of marriage. Three years later, in 1987, Robie met Louanna Reithner. When he discovered they shared the same birthdate, he proposed marriage to her. Louanna became his second wife, and a major part of the Robeson family of children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. Robie and Louanna were married 30 years and were as much in love when he died as they were when they met.

After the Navy, Robie volunteered for a civilian-run organization designed to educate young people about the Navy. He was hired to train new agents, and sold life insurance at New York Life for a time. They lived comfortably in Hawaii for many years – his favorite place on the planet, he would often say. But it was Coronado his children grew to call home. They spent many years on the island, where Jim and Scott attended Coronado High School.

Family photo, taken in Hawaii.

There were many inspirational people throughout Robie’s long and storied life. They ranged from neighbors struggling during the Great Depression to commanding officers and leaders in business. But he always felt the thing that most helped shape his character was seeing his father lose all his money, and realizing that as he grew up, he had to work the rest of his life.

Watching how his father never let anything or anyone defeat him ran deep inside young Robie, like blood itself, for the rest of his life.

Shortly before his passing, Robie sat down with a biographer. When asked about his legacy, he became pensive – thoughtful. “If I could write my own legacy,” he said, “it would be that I was successful in life and took care of my family. And I got out of the way when it was necessary to be gone.”

Another question that came up was about God. “The fact that I might die some day doesn’t bother me one bit,” said Robie. “I absolutely do believe in God. I talk to Him for sometimes half an hour every night before I go to sleep.

“There is a certain set of prayers I go through every night before I go to bed. I name everyone in the family that I want to talk to God about; I talk to him about friends who need help. I ask God to help them all.

Enjoying music in Hawaii.

“It’s just a matter of getting the things out that I’ve been thinking about – getting them out and in front of God. Prayer is a wonderful thing and it’s key to my having a good night’s sleep, and living well into my 90s.”

While talking about his life, Robie reflected frequently upon his children. He was very pleased with the men his boys had grown to be: “I just want to let my boys know that I’m very proud of them,” he said.

Robie Robeson is survived by his second wife, Louanna Robeson, of Laguna Niguel. Also surviving him are sons Jim (Rebecca) of San Diego and Scott (Karen) of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Four grandchildren and five great grandchildren also survive him, as well as three loving stepchildren and their spouses.

Services and a Celebration of Life will be held Saturday, November 25 at noon. Services will be held at El Niguel Country Club in Laguna Niguel (23700 Clubhouse Drive).

In lieu of flowers, the family asks that donations be made, “In Memory of R.H. Robeson” to Laguna Niguel Rotary and/or the Laguna Niguel Presbyterian Church.

 

States are starting to ease restrictions on outside sporting events, and one of the first two-day east coast camps will be held this weekend.

The GAME Academy will host the event at the Virginia Beach (Va.) Sports Complex and introduce one of the best players in the country.

Five-star cornerback Tony Grimes will visit the camp. The # 1 cornerback and # 7 player in the industry-generated 247Sports Composite will announce their college pick on Tuesday. Its finalists are North Carolina, Georgia, Texas A&M, and Ohio State.

According to the camp’s director, Virginia Beach (VA), Princess Anne’s assistant coach Deon Glover, the idea is to give players a chance to be seen after the coronavirus pandemic marks the spring evaluation period for all and the spring and summer camp evaluation time has been canceled for all colleges.

“The college evaluation season is over, so no one has had the opportunity to be evaluated by a college coach to watch them train,” said Glover. “That window has closed. We are unlikely to have anyone who can come to college campus to train. There are no college camps, so this is a prime opportunity.

“We’ll be videotaping the exercises, the workouts, and the individual exercises. Any child who missed their opportunity has the opportunity to show off their stuff and get it right into the hands of the colleges.”

Glover said that each session is limited to 100 players, with 50 on each side of the field.

“We’re going to have an ongoing record with the times and lasers and measurements and all that stuff,” he said. “Then we’ll split it up into groups of 50.

“There will be a combination style of registration for the kids to take tests. They will get all of the verified data.”

The idea then is to share this information with the recruiting departments so the schools have new metrics to work with not only for potential clients in Class 2021 but also for sub-classes.

“I think it’s great for athletes who are looking for excitement,” he said. “I think it’s great for athletes who want to consolidate their verbal offerings.”

A healthy number of the best players from the Tidewater area are expected, according to Glover.

He said Virginia Beach Green Run four-star defensive end George Wilson (Penn State, North Carolina, South Carolina, Arizona State) as well as Virginia Beach Ocean Lakes four-star defensive end / linebacker Naquan Brown (LSU, Virginia Tech , Miami, Pittsburgh) and Class 2022 four-star recipient Tychaun Chapman (Oklahoma, Auburn, Oregon, North Carolina, states of Michigan, Tennessee, USC, and Virginia among his offerings) will each be there.

Per Glover are also Princess Anne Defensive Tackle Marquise Brunson (East Carolina, NC State, Georgia Tech) and Zaakir Brown (Maryland, Virginia, Virginia Tech), Suffolk, Va., Nansemond-Suffolk Academy, in attendance class of 2022 running back George Pettaway (Alabama, Florida, Maryland, Michigan State, Nebraska, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Texas A&M, Virginia, West Virginia) and Green Run Cornerback Tayon Holloway (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida State, Syracuse, Tennessee, Pittsburgh, Texas A & M, Virginia and Virginia Tech), Pittsburgh Commit and Ocean Lakes athlete Myles Alston, Pitt Commit and Norfolk (Va.) Lake Taylor running back Malik Newton, Pitt Commit and Norfolk Washington athlete Rodney Hammond, Virginia Beach Cox athlete and NC State Commitment Nate Evans and Class of 2022 Norfolk Maury athlete Ahmarian Granger (Arkansas, Georgia Tech, Nebraska, Pitt, Virginia).

By Dr. Frank A. Blazich Jr., Historian, U.S. Navy Seabee Museum

William P.S. Sanger served the U.S. Navy for over half a century as both a civilian and an officer. As the first commissioned Civil Engineer Corps (CEC) officer, and the first civil engineer for the Bureau of Navy Yards and Docks (BuDocks), Sanger witnessed the transformation of the role and importance of civil engineers and the Navy shore establishment.[i]

 

Capt. William P.S. Sanger, CEC, USN, c. 1870s. (Source: U.S. Navy Seabee Museum, Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, California)

 

Unfortunately, little is known of the early years of Sanger’s life. On May 26, 1810, William was born to Samuel Sanger and Mary Hart of Ward 10 in Boston, Massachusetts.  Samuel was the son of a seafarer, Capt. Samuel Sanger Sr., and served as the city health commissioner for Ward 10.[ii] William presumably continued to live with his parents during this time, possibly assisting his father with his work.[iii]

On May 24, 1824, days before Sanger’s 14th birthday, Massachusetts Sen. James Lloyd submitted a resolution requesting that the Secretary of the Navy provide information to the Senate “relative to the expediency of constructing, at one of the navy yards of the United States, a dry dock … and to report on the usefulness, economy, and necessity, of a dry dock; the best location therefore, and the probable expense of construction of such dry dock. …”[iv] The resolution was agreed upon by the Senate. Navy Secretary Samuel L. Southard responded in January 1825 and recommended construction of two dry docks, one at Charlestown (Boston), Massachusetts, and the other at Gosport (Norfolk), Virginia, at an estimated cost of $700,000, as calculated by Colonel Loammi Baldwin.[v]

Plans for the dry docks materialized in 1826. On May 8, 1826, Congress resolved that President John Quincy Adams task engineers to examine and survey sites for dry docks at the navy yards of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Charlestown, Massachusetts, Brooklyn, New York, and Gosport, Virginia. On July 26, the Navy Department appointed Baldwin to conduct the necessary surveys.[vi] He submitted his examinations and surveys to the Navy on Dec. 28, 1826, and Southard thereafter recommended to Adams that, funds permitting, the docks be constructed in order of descending priority at Charlestown, Gosport, Brooklyn and Portsmouth.[vii] After reviewing Baldwin’s work and the Navy’s assessment, on March 3, 1827, Congress authorized the president to construct dry docks at Charlestown and Gosport.[viii]

After Congressional approval, the Navy swiftly requested and secured Baldwin’s agreement to serve as the superintendent engineer for the dry docks’ construction in March 1827.[ix] At some point from spring to summer 1827, the 17-year old Sanger entered into an apprenticeship with Baldwin, the exact circumstances of which remain hazy.[x] Samuel Sanger’s work as a health commissioner may have positioned him to contact Baldwin, either directly or through a mutual acquaintance, to try and find William a suitable profession. Civil engineering in the early 19th century followed a pattern established in Europe. There were no formal academic programs in the United States in the 1820s. The first civil engineering degrees were awarded by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, but not until 1835.[xi] Sanger would have paid a premium, approximately $200 a year for two years of apprenticeship, while collecting some compensation from field work.[xii] In addition to having available financial resources, Sanger clearly demonstrated education and aptitude worthy of Baldwin’s stature to accept him as an apprentice. In 1826, he graduated from English High School in Boston, being named a Franklin Medal Scholar for meritorious scholarship for finishing at or near the top of his senior class.[xiii] In regards to the timing of the apprenticeship, in July 1827 Baldwin wrote to William Strickland, an accomplished Philadelphia architect, and inquired about “the terms upon which young men are taken as pupils in the profession of Engineers.”[xiv] Perhaps Baldwin needed advice in the apprenticing of Sanger, but this is only conjecture.

Construction of the dry dock at Charlestown began in June. Capt. Alexander Parris, a talented architect-engineer from Massachusetts, served as the Charlestown project’s assistant superintendent, accompanying Baldwin on his surveys and inspections of the work.[xv] Parris’ association with the Charlestown Navy Yard dated back to the spring of 1824, when he prepared plans for a wall at the yard paralleling the Salem Turnpike.[xvi] With work underway in Charlestown, on September 8, 1827 Baldwin wrote Tobias Watkins, the fourth auditor of the U.S. Treasury, regarding his finances. The engineer noted that additional commitments requested by the Navy Board of Commissioners for surveying and drawing of plans obliged him “to employ others to assist in this department. …”[xvii] When work in Gosport began in November, Sanger served as Baldwin’s resident engineer.[xviii] It is thus postulated that Sanger began his civil engineer apprenticeship under Baldwin between March and November 1827, with his work centered on Gosport, accompanying Baldwin on occasion. Parris served as Baldwin’s main assistant, and joined the engineer during his visits at both dry docks during the period of their construction.[xix]

Sanger worked under Baldwin until completion of the Gosport dry dock in 1833. He assisted in surveys of the yard and waters before continuing as resident engineer overseeing the actual construction.[xx] Baldwin lost his notebooks recording the work on the dry docks when the steamboat William Penn ran aground on the Delaware River and burned near Philadelphia on March 4, 1834, so exact details of Sanger’s work remain nebulous.[xxi] On June 17, 1833, the dry dock opened to admit the USS Delaware, the first vessel ever to enter an American dry dock. Less than a year later, the dry dock was turned over to the yard’s commandant on March 15, 1834, and was built at a total cost of $974,356.65.[xxii]

 

The day of careening vessels to repair them ended at Gosport June 17, 1833 when sailors powering a capstan slowly drew the 74-gun Delaware into Drydock 1. Designed by a famed civil engineer, Colonel Loammi Baldwin, the dry dock could then host the nation’s largest ships. Thousands of excited spectators watched as a powerful steam engine pumped the dock dry. (Source: Naval History and Heritage Command)

 

Following completion of the dry dock, Sanger remained in Norfolk. In the late summer and early fall of 1833, he surveyed the area between Great Bridge in Norfolk County and North Landing in Princess Anne County for the purpose of determining the cost of building a canal for the Virginia Board of Public Works.[xxiii] He wrote to Baldwin in May 1834 regarding leaks in the docks at the Navy Yard, and suggested that his mentor be named the yard’s engineer.[xxiv] Instead, with his apprenticeship complete, Sanger remained at Gosport and became civil engineer for the yard. Serving essentially as a public works officer for the yard’s commandant, Commodore Lewis Warrington, he improved facilities at the yard, oversaw completion of a smithery, iron store, timber sheds, mast shop, boat shop, commandant’s house and assorted other structures.[xxv] On February 20, 1834, Sanger married Martha Webb in Norfolk, Virginia.[xxvi] He continued his work at the yard until July 8, 1836, when the Board of Navy Commissioners employed him as a civil engineer.[xxvii]

The reason for this employment is not entirely clear, but it appears to once more involve Baldwin. In June 1836, Secretary of the Navy Mahlon Dickerson wrote Baldwin to request a survey for the practicality of establishing a navy yard either near Great Barn Island, Perth Amboy, or Jersey City in New York and New Jersey. In his report of October 17, 1836, Baldwin remarks that he proceeded “after having obtained the necessary assistants” to survey the ground at the three locations. In a report of July 11, 1836, the Board of Navy Commissioners listed an additional clerk. Sanger, quite possibly, came into employment for the purpose of assisting Baldwin, who would be able to request his services.[xxviii] Whatever the case, Sanger’s employment by the board did not change his work at Gosport, as he continued to hold the position of civil engineer of the yard into 1842.[xxix]

 

Some of the first CEC officers (left to right): Benjamin F. Chandler, Franklin C. Prindle, William P.S. Sanger, Franklin A. Stratton, and Charles Hastings, c. 1870. (Source: U.S. Navy Seabee Museum, Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, California)

 

The Establishment of BuDocs

The reorganization of the Navy and the creation of BuDocks would pave the way for Sanger to become the bureau’s first civil engineer. An expanding fleet, with requisite increasing duties, overtasked the Navy commissioners, and in 1839, the House of Representatives charged Navy Secretary James K. Paulding to devise a plan to reorganize the Navy under a bureau system. Paulding proposed a bureau to handle shore facilities, commanded by a line officer, with a staff including a civil engineer.[xxx] On August 31, 1842, President John Tyler signed the subsequent bill reorganizing the Navy into a series of five bureaus, including authorization for a civil engineer in the new Bureau of Navy Yards and Docks [xxxi] (now NAVFAC). Warrington, appointed as the first BuDocks chief, wrote to Sanger on September 7, 1842 and offered him appointment as civil engineer for the bureau. Sanger accepted the offer on the ninth, and on September 15, 1842, officially became the first civil engineer for BuDocks at an annual salary of $2,000.[xxxii]

Sanger’s duties as BuDocks civil engineer in the 1840s kept him busy managing the improvement and expansion of the Navy’s shore facilities. Among his body of work during the decade, he personally inspected the conditions of the yards at Portsmouth, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Gosport, Pensacola and Brooklyn. Commencing in the fall of 1843 and continuing into the next decade, Sanger either directly surveyed, oversaw construction of or reviewed plans for construction of new dry docks in New York and Pensacola, and for the establishment of a new navy yard in Memphis, Tennessee. He traveled to Memphis with a board of officers to select the site and draft a diagram of the future yard. Following this trip, he accompanied another board of officers to examine and report on the advantages of dry docks and floating docks at the harbors of Pensacola and Portsmouth, finishing this work in early 1845. Unfortunately, soil conditions at the New York dry dock and at the Memphis Navy Yard caused delays, cost overruns and headaches for Sanger and BuDocks.[xxxiii] Following Memphis, Sanger took over as chief engineer for construction of the stone dry dock at the New York Navy Yard in March 1845, remaining until February 1846 when he returned to BuDocks.[xxxiv] Problems aside, in 1850 Sanger and civil engineers at navy yards became part of the civil establishment, thereafter classified as civil officers in the federal government.[xxxv]

With the discovery of gold in California, westward expansion necessitated the establishment of a navy yard in the west. Completion of the New York dry dock in 1851 ended one area of concern for Sanger and ensured available dry dock facilities at all seven navy yards. Selection of a naval yard in California thereafter became the principle focus for the BuDocks engineer, notably after Congressional approval for a floating dry dock in that state in March 1851.[xxxvi] In early 1852, Sanger accompanied a naval commission, which traveled to the Golden State to survey and select a site for the new yard. Returning in August, the commission recommended Mare Island, 20 miles from San Francisco, as the desired location.[xxxvii] The Navy purchased the land in March 1853 and the yard began operations the next year.[xxxviii] A sectional floating dry dock, the object of Congress’ initial desire, was completed in 1855.[xxxix] Back east, the unstable soil and erosion issues at the Memphis Navy Yard inhibited further development, and Congress authorized the ceding of the yard and property to the city in 1854.[xl]

The work of Sanger and other civil engineers at the yards began to attract the attention of Navy Secretary James C. Dobbin. In 1853 in his annual report, Dobbin noted discord between sea and civil officers, and commented that he saw “no objection to the assignment of a proper rank to the civil officers of the Navy; not merely as a gratification of pride, but to prevent discord.”[xli] Two years later, he wrote that “After much reflection and attentive observation of the practical working of the present system, I am very favorably inclined to … establishing a distinct corps in the Navy, whose duty shall be confined to hydrography, ordnance, civil engineering, and other scientific duties.”[xlii] Dobbin’s ideas and views, however, did not stir Congress to action.

For the remainder of the decade, Sanger confined his travels to inspections or visits of navy yards along the East Coast. Prior to the outbreak of the Civil War, the navy yards predominantly expanded existing works, modernized with the introduction of gas light and enhancements in the area of steam propulsion, or repaired existing structures.[xliii] These projects required the services of additional civil engineers, and beginning in the late 1840s, Sanger began to hire men for the yards. By the outbreak of war in April 1861, the Portsmouth, Boston, New York, Norfolk, Pensacola and Mare Island Navy Yards all employed a civil engineer.[xliv] In 1858, Sanger prepared formal regulations defining the duties and responsibilities of the civil engineer at a navy yard as part of the proposed revised Code of Regulations for the Government of the Navy.[xlv]

Initially, the commencement of hostilities placed Sanger and BuDocks in a precarious situation. Prior to the outbreak of war, rebels captured the Pensacola Navy Yard with its floating dry dock on January 12, 1861.[xlvi] Even worse was the fall of the Norfolk Navy Yard in April 1862. On the 20th, Union forces abandoned and hurriedly attempted to destroy what they could at the yard in the face of Confederate forces. Over a thousand cannons, one of the nation’s finest dry docks, tools and facilities to construct and repair large warships fell into Confederate hands. Upon reaching the yard, the rebels found the dry dock undamaged and the scuttled hulls of the USS Merrimack, Germantown, Plymouth and Dolphin. The Merrimack would soon enter the dry dock in May, emerging as the ironclad CSS Virginia.[xlvii] Both yards would be thoroughly destroyed (and the Virginia blown up) by the Confederates on May 10, 1862 following the surrender of Norfolk, with orders to withdraw forces from the coast.[xlviii] In his annual report, BuDocks Chief Commodore Joseph Smith deemed the yards to be in states of ruin, fire having reduced buildings to mere masonry shells.[xlix]

The phoenix of a modern Navy rose from the ashes of Norfolk and Pensacola, one clad in iron. Sanger, however, was initially slow to grasp the technological shift and its impact on the shore establishment. The clash of the CSS Virginia and USS Monitor on March 9, 1862 demonstrated the advantages of this revolutionary class of warship, and henceforth yards had to adapt and transform for this new “iron age.” After the recapture of the ruined yards, from August to October 1862, Sanger served on a board to examine League Island in the Delaware River near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the harbor of New London, Connecticut, and the waters of Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, as sites for a new navy yard intended to build and support ironclads. Sanger personally surveyed the three areas, and together with the majority of the board recommended New London, with the minority in favor of League Island.[l] Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles agreed that New London possessed good qualities for a navy yard, “provided it be the intention of Congress to establish another similar to those we now have for the construction of wooden vessels.”[li] Welles rejected the conservative selection of New London and instead chose League Island for its characteristics conducive to ironclads.[lii]

But before ironclad or iron-hulled ships could dominate the waters, the war remained to be won. Repairs at Norfolk commenced in earnest beginning in late 1862, whereas work at Pensacola remained minimal, confined to only those buildings necessary to service vessels of the gulf squadron. Elsewhere the shore establishment expanded to meet exigencies from war, with temporary navy stations established at Ship Island, Mississippi; Memphis, Tennessee; Port Royal, South Carolina; Key West, Florida, and Mound City, Illinois.[liii] The latter three stations grew notably during the war as coaling stations and repair bases for the respective naval squadron in the area of operations.[liv] Despite the wartime growth, Welles deemed the nation’s navy yards “of limited area, and wholly insufficient for our present navy.”[lv] He advocated enlargement of the yards at Boston and New York, completion of Mare Island, rebuilding the destroyed yards, and building of a yard at League Island to handle iron and steam-powered vessels in an efficient manner.[lvi]

The First Civil Engineer Corps Officers

Meeting Welles’ expectations would necessitate increased resources. As with most postwar military budgets, fiscal resources shrank and navy yard operations were substantially reduced. Yards needed to be expanded for iron and steam facilities and shops and manage the larger fleet and ironclads.[lvii] All of this required competent civil engineers to manage the technical requirements amidst tight budgets. On February 20, 1867, Congress debated legislation to establish the offices of civil engineer and master mechanic in the navy yards via presidential appointment.[lviii] The intent of the bill was to ensure that the supervisory head of certain navy yard departments remained a trained, competent individual able to appoint or discharge personnel as required. Since line officers began to take command of such departments during the war, this removed men such as Sanger from exercising their supervisory role.[lix] On March 2, 1867, the legislation passed into law providing for Navy civil engineers to be appointed by the president, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.[lx]

Commissions came swiftly. Sanger received his as the first officer of the Civil Engineer Corps on March 3rd.[lxi] Weeks later on the 28th, Benjamin F. Chandler, Charles Hastings, Franklin A. Stratton and Wallace M. Spear received commissions as the next members of the CEC.[lxii] On July 15, 1870, civil engineers finally received pay fixed with that of other naval officers.[lxiii] The following year, Sanger and his fellow civil engineers received relative rank with officers of the line and precedence with officers of the line in accordance with their length of service.[lxiv] Unfortunately, the legislation did not clarify exactly how relative rank would be distributed or affixed to Sanger and his fellow CEC officers, at least not for any foreseeable future. The men received the title of “Civil Engineer,” with Sanger’s listed as “Chief Civil Engineer.”[lxv]

Limited appropriations for the naval shore establishment did not curtail the work of BuDocks. In February 1867, Congress authorized the Secretary of the Navy to accept League Island for development as a navy yard, and to dispose of the existing Philadelphia Navy Yard site.[lxvi] Work on this site began in earnest in 1871, and from 1872 to 1873, Sanger presided over a board to shape the future development of the yard.[lxvii] After completing this report, Sanger returned to Mare Island in September 1873 to head a board preparing plans to improve that yard.[lxviii] Elsewhere, the Naval Appropriations Act of 1868 authorized the gift of land from Connecticut for establishment of a naval station at New London, and work commenced in 1869 for what soon became a coaling station.[lxix] After his journey to Mare Island, Sanger apparently remained in Washington to oversee the CEC for BuDocks. A board of civil engineers assembled to plan improvements for the New London naval station in 1875 would be headed up by Chandler, and not Sanger.[lxx]

The year 1881 would leave the chief civil engineer a lasting legacy for the CEC and the Navy. Throughout the latter part of the 1870s, Congressmen had introduced numerous pieces of failed legislation to clarify the issue of relative rank for civil engineers.[lxxi] On February 24, 1881, however, Navy Secretary Nathan Goff Jr. issued General Order No. 263 conferring relative rank by presidential authority on CEC officers, with the relative rank of captain conferred on Sanger.[lxxii] In June, U.S. Attorney General Wayne MacVeagh established that Navy civil engineers were officers belonging to the Navy’s staff corps, entitled to be retired from active duty and placed on the retired list.[lxxiii] Thereafter on July 14, 1881, the Navy Department issued new regulations governing the appointment of civil engineers in the Navy, requiring future candidates to be between the ages of 25 and 37, have pursued civil engineering at a professional institution, and pass a rigorous examination prior to acceptance.[lxxiv] Lastly, on August 23, 1881 the Navy authorized CEC officers to wear the line officers’ uniform, albeit with light-blue velvet inset between the rank stripes on the sleeves and on the shoulder straps, the latter bearing the letters “CE” in Old English script.[lxxv]

With the CEC’s future in the Navy secure, Sanger could at last step away. He retired from the Navy on October 15, 1881, after 54 years of service as a civilian, civil servant and commissioned officer.[lxxvi] He remained in Washington with his second wife, Lucy Martha Darrell, having remarried following the death of his first wife on March 4, 1877.[lxxvii] The Navy’s first civil engineer died on the morning of February 16, 1890, at age 81, and was interred in Oak Hill Cemetery, Georgetown, Washington, D.C., two days later.[lxxviii] Although Sanger remains a somewhat enigmatic figure, his service as a civil engineer for the U.S. Navy contributed to a tremendous expansion and modernization of the naval shore establishment. He began his career as a civilian for the Board of Navy Commissioners and rose to a commissioned officer with the Bureau of Yards and Docks. One can safely state that the foundation of today’s Civil Engineer Corps firmly rests upon Sanger’s lifetime of service, having transformed a civil engineering apprenticeship into an established branch of the Navy’s staff corps.

William P.S. Sanger Chronology

May 26, 1810: Born, Ward 10, Boston, Massachusetts

1826: Graduates from English High School, Boston, Massachusetts; named Franklin Medal Scholar for meritorious scholarship

March – November 1827: Enters civil engineering apprenticeship under Loammi Baldwin, Boston, Massachusetts

November 1827 – March 1834: Serves as resident engineer for Gosport Navy Yard dry dock construction site, Norfolk, Virginia

May – September 1833: Surveys parts of Norfolk County and Princess Anne County, Virginia, for Board of Public Works

Feb. 20 1834: Marries Martha Webb in Norfolk, Virginia

March 1834 – September 184: Civil engineer for Gosport Navy Yard, Virginia

Jul.8, 1836: Employed by Board of Navy Commissioners as civil engineer; remains civil engineer of Gosport Navy Yard

Late Summer – Fall 1836: Possibly accompanies Loammi Baldwin for surveys in New York and New Jersey

Sept. 15, 1842: Appointed civil engineer for Bureau of Navy Yards and Docks, Washington, D.C.

July – August 1844: Surveys and maps Memphis Navy Yard, Tennessee

November 1844 – January 1845: Surveys and examines harbors at Pensacola, Florida and Portsmouth, New Hampshire regarding construction of dry docks and floating docks

March 1845 – February 1846: Serves as chief engineer for construction of New York Navy Yard dry dock

Early 1852 – Aug. 31, 1852: Travels to California to survey site for Mare Island Navy Yard

August – October 1862: Surveys League Island in the Delaware River near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the harbor of New London, Connecticut, and waters of Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island as site for new navy yard

Mar. 3. 1867: Commissioned as chief civil engineer in U.S. Navy

September 1872 – March 1873: Heads planning board for improvement of League Island Navy Yard, Pennsylvania

September – November 1873: Heads planning board for improvement of Mare Island Navy Yard, California

Jul. 10, 1877: Marries Lucy Martha Darrell, Washington, D.C.

Feb. 24, 1881: Recognized with relative rank of captain in U.S. Navy

Oct. 15, 1881: Retires from U.S. Navy at relative rank of captain

Feb. 16, 1890: Dies at home, 3809 Prospect Avenue, Georgetown, Washington, D.C.

Feb. 18, 1890: Interred at Oak Hill Cemetery, Georgetown, Washington, D.C

[i] The “Navy” part of the title was dropped in July 1862. See Act to Reorganize the Navy Department of the United States, Public Law 134, 37th Cong., 2d sess. (5 July 1862), 510-11.
[ii] “For Sale or to Be Let,” Columbian Centinel (Boston, MA), 26 March 1817, 4; “Married,” Boston Daily Advertiser, 21 April 1817, 2; “Health Commissioners,” Boston Commercial Gazette, 23 May 1822, 2; “Died,” Essex Register (Salem, MA), 9 October 1822, 3; “Notice,” Columbian Centinel, 9 November 1822, 1; “Health Office,” Independent Chronicle and Boston Patriot, 9 August 1823, 4; U.S. Census, 1810: Boston Ward 10, Suffolk, Massachusetts, NARA roll 21, 391; headstone for W.P.S. Sanger, Oak Hill Cemetery, Georgetown, Washington, DC, Chapel Hill section, Lot 533.
[iii] U.S. Census, 1820: Boston Ward 10, Suffolk, Massachusetts, 303; NARA roll M33-53, 151.
[iv] Annals of Congress, 18th Cong., 1st sess., 776-77.
[v] Annals of Congress, 18th Cong., 1st sess., 782; Department of the Navy, Dry Docks, 18th Cong., 2d sess., 1825, Naval Affairs Doc. 252. Baldwin, son of a Revolutionary War colonel, was one of the nation’s preeminent civil engineers in the early nineteenth century. A Massachusetts native, he graduated from Harvard in 1800 and after further study opened a law office in Cambridge, MA in 1804. Law, however, did not suit his interests and Baldwin closed the office in 1807, having instead decided to devote his energies to civil engineering. Following a journey to England to examine various public works, he opened an office in Charlestown, MA and proceeded in 1814 to construct Fort Strong on Noddle’s Island in Boston Harbor. The fort proved a success and thereafter Baldwin’s services found demand in Massachusetts, Virginia, and Pennsylvania for the design and supervision of canals and public works projects. He traveled to Europe in 1824 and spent a year examining public works in France and Belgium, notably the docks at Antwerp.This experience aided Baldwin in regards to plans and estimates for a dock at Charlestown, as communicated to Southard in November 1824. See George L. Vose, A Sketch of The Life and Works of Loammi Baldwin, Civil Engineer, Read Before the Boston Society of Civil Engineers, Sept. 16, 1885 (Boston: Geo. H. Ellis, 141 Franklin St., 1885), 6-15; House Committee on Naval Affairs, Docks for Repairing Ships of War, 19th Cong., 1st sess., 1826, H. Doc. 143, 14-23.
[vi] Cong. Deb. 2605-6 (1826); Edward P. Lull, History of the United States Navy-Yard at Gosport, Virginia (Near Norfolk) (Washington, DC: GPO, 1874), 30; “Selected Summary,” Boston Traveler, 15 September 1826, 2.
[vii] House Committee on Naval Affairs, Dry Docks – Portsmouth, N.H., Charlestown, Mass., &c., 19th Cong., 2d sess., 1827, H. Doc. 125, 5-46.
[viii] Lull, Gosport, 30; “We understand that a commission. . . ,” Pittsfield Sun (MA), 24 May 1827, 1.
[ix] Department of the Navy, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 23d Cong., 2d sess., 1835, S. doc. 63, 2-3.
[x] Vose, Sketch, 28. Vose interviewed Sanger in 1885, then 75 years of age, and reported that Sanger “entered Mr. Baldwin’s office in 1827, and was employed upon the dry docks from that date until their completion. . . .” No other records have been located to confirm or deny this date.
[xi] Palmer C. Ricketts, History of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1824 – 1934, 3d ed. (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1934), 70-81.
[xii] Vose, Sketch, 26.
[xiii] Boston School Committee, Annual Report of the School Committee of the City of Boston, 1875 (Boston: Rockwell and Churchill, 1876), 324. The Franklin Medal, named in honor of Benjamin Franklin, was an honorary reward awarded annually in the 19th century “to a number of the most meritorious scholars in the highest class of each public school for boys, above the primary grade. See Boston School Committee, The Association of Franklin Medal Scholars (Boston: Geo. C. Rand and Avery, 1858), 2-12.
[xiv] William Strickland to Loammi Baldwin, 22 July 1827, Loammi Baldwin Papers, Box 1, folder 11, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library, Chicago, IL.
[xv] Vose, Sketch, 17-18.
[xvi] Edwin C. Bearss, Historic Resource Study: Charlestown Navy Yard 1800 – 1842, Boston National Historical Park, Massachusetts (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1984), 459-60; Helen W. Davis, Edward M. Hatch, and David G. Wright, “Alexander Parris: Innovator in Naval Facility Architecture,” IA. The Journal of the Society for Industrial Architecture 2, no. 1 (1976): 4-5.
[xvii] Department of the Navy, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 23d Cong., 2d sess., 1835, S. doc. 63, 5.
[xviii] Lull, Gosport, 32.
[xix] Davis, Hatch, and Wright, “Alexander Parris,” 5-6n8; Vose, Sketch, 17-18; Charles B. Stuart, The Naval Drydocks of the United States (New York: Charles B. Norton, 1852), 65. Davis, Hatch, and Wright note that contrary to Stuart, citing Vose, Parris served as Baldwin’s assistant superintendent at both dry dock projects. Sanger, however, traveled with Baldwin as well, having received $102.48 in reimbursement in 1830 “for traveling from Boston to New York with Mr. Baldwin, Engineer, to survey, make plans, &c. and for board while there.” Also listed with Sanger is Benjamin Franklin Perham, another apprentice (age 21) to Baldwin at this time. The autobiography of Calvin Brown, who later served under Sanger as a civil engineer at Norfolk and Mare Island, CA before commissioning as a member of the Civil Engineer Corps, writes that Parris “had been superintendent of the Charlestown dry dock and also of that of Norfolk, Virginia, under the direction of Colonel Loammi Baldwin, the engineer. . . .” Brown later notes how Sanger “was professionally educated in the service of Colonel Loammi Baldwin and was his assistant in the building of the dry dock at that Norfolk Navy Yard.” See Department of the Navy, Pay, &c. of Naval Officers and Agents, 21st Cong., 1st sess., 1830, H. Doc. 121, 49; Vose, Sketch, 26; Calvin Brown, Autobiography (California: 1890 – 1895?), 112, 171, original in possession of U.S. Navy Seabee Museum, Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, CA (USNCBM).
[xx] Lull, Gosport, 31-32.
[xxi] Voss, Sketch, 18.
[xxii] Lull, Gosport, 36. The Charlestown dry dock, by comparison, cost $677,089.78. See Schedule of Papers Accompanying Report of the Secretary of the Navy to President of the United States, 24th Cong., 2d sess., 1836, S. Doc. 1/8, 502.
[xxiii] “Report of William P.S. Sanger, Civil Engineer, on the Survey and Plan of the Country Between Great Bridge and North Landing,” in Virginia Board of Public Works, Seventeenth Annual Report of the President and Directors of the Board of Public Works, to the General Assembly of Virginia, January 17, 1833 (Richmond, VA: Samuel Shepherd and Co., 1833), 222-23.
[xxiv] William P.S. Sanger to Loammi Baldwin, 1 May 1834, Personal Papers collection, Library of Virginia, Richmond, VA.
[xxv] Lull, Gosport, 38-39.
[xxvi] No definitive, primary documentation has been located to verify this information. Sanger’s headstone lists Martha as his wife, but without any indication as to the date of marriage. The Bready Family Tree on Ancestry.com lists this date of marriage but without documentation. In the 1840 U.S. Census, Sanger’s household lists two free white women from ages 20 to 29. As Martha was born in 1813, this would make her one of the two (the other remains unknown, but may have been a midwife). See Bready Family Tree, “William P.S. Sanger,” AncestryLibrary.com (accessed 3 February 2014); U.S. Census, 1840: Portsmouth, Norfolk, Virginia, roll 570, 126.
[xxvii] “Chiefs of Bureau of Yards and Docks,” Bureau of Yards and Docks News – Memorandum 4, no. 80 (1 July 1933): 1390
[xxviii] House Committee on Naval Affairs, Navy Yards – Great Barn Island, Perth Amboy, &c., 24th Cong., 2d sess., 1836, 1-2; Office Secretary of the Senate, Report in Compliance with the “Act to Authorize the Appointment of Additional Paymasters, and for other Purposes,” approved July 4, 1836,” 24th Cong., 1st sess., 1836, 6.
[xxix] Lull, Gosport, 38-39. The 1840 U.S. Census also lists Sanger as living in Norfolk and owning two female slaves, possibly as cooks or housekeepers. See U.S. Census, 1840: Portsmouth, Norfolk, Virginia, roll 570, 126.
[xxx] House Committee on Naval Affairs, Reorganization of the Navy Department, 26th Cong., 1st sess., 1839, H. Doc. 39, 1-4.
[xxxi] Act to Reorganize the Navy Department of the United States, Public Law 286, 27th Cong., 2d sess., (31 August 1842), 579-81.
[xxxii] Department of the Navy, Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States including Officers of the Marine Corps, Corrected from Authentic Sources, to the 15th September 1842 (Washington, DC: Alexander and Barnard, printers, 1842), iii; excerpts from letters of William P.S. Sanger as transcribed by Helen W. Fairbanks from originals in files of BuDocks, National Archives, unlabeled folder, Record Group (RG) 4, Series III, Box 1, USNCBM; Department of the Navy, Schedule of Papers Accompanying the Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 27th Cong., 3d sess., 1842, H. Doc. 29, 562.
[xxxiii] Senate Committee on Naval Affairs, Report of Secretary of the Navy on Plans and Estimates for Construction of a Permanent Wharf and Dry Dock at Pensacola, 29th Cong., 1st sess., 1844, S. Doc. 134, 1-21; Department of the Navy, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 28th Cong., 1st sess., 1844, S. Doc. 1/6, 522-23; House Committee on Naval Affairs, William P.S. Sanger and George F. De La Roche, 29th Cong., 1st sess., 1846, H. Rep. 367, 1; House Committee on Naval Affairs, A Report of Officers and Engineers Relative to the Properties and Advantages of a Dry Dock, &c., 28th Cong., 2d sess., 1845, H. Doc. 163, 1-79; House of Representatives, Dry Dock at Brooklyn, and Land Between Naval Hospital and Navy Yard, Brooklyn, 30th Cong., 1st sess., 1848, Mis. Doc. 71, 1-8; Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 19 November 1844; report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 14 November 1846; report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 4 November 1848; report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 17 October 1849, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (1 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 2, USNCBM; Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 12 October 1850, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (2 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[xxxiv] Charles B. Stuart, The Naval Dry Docks of the United States (New York: Charles B. Norton, 1852), 9-15, 119.
[xxxv] “History of the Civil Engineer Corps, United States Navy,” undated, 2, folder labeled “RG3 – General, History of the Civil Engineer Corps, United States Navy; Publication, [1950s],” RG3, Series 1, Box 6, USNCBM; Act Making Appropriations for the Naval Service for 1851, Public Law 80, 31st Cong., 1st sess. (28 September 1850), 513-17.
[xxxvi] Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 16 October 1851, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (2 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[xxxvii] “Naval,” Daily National Intelligencer (Washington, DC), 2 September 1852, 3; Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 14 October 1852, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (2 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM. As fate would have it, the same day Sanger and the commission arrived back in Washington, DC, Congress authorized and directed the Secretary of the Navy to select the site for a navy yard and naval depot in and /or around San Francisco Bay. See Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 31 October 1853, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (2 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[xxxviii] Senate, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 33d Cong., 1st sess., 1853, S. Ex. Doc. 1/10, 304; Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 1 November 1854, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (2 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[xxxix] Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 12 October 1855, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (2 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[xl] Stanley K. Adamiak, “A Naval Depot and Dockyard on the Western Waters: The Rise and Fall of the Memphis Naval Yard, 1844 – 1854,” International Journal of Naval History, 1, no. 1 (April 2002): 1-12.
[xli] Senate, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 33d Cong., 1st sess., 1853, Ex. Doc. 1/10, 306.
[xlii] Senate, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 34th Cong., 1st sess., 1855, Ex. Doc. 1, 20-21.
[xliii] This statement is a condensed summary from the Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 1 December 1856; 15 October 1857; 22 November 1858; 1 October 1859; and 22 November 1860, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1842 to 1860 (3 of 3),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[xliv] The exact circumstances as to how Sanger was able to hire additional civil engineers is not entirely known, although it can safely be stated that necessity for supervision of repairs and various projects, combined with budgetary allowances justified the expansion of Navy civilian civil engineers. See Department of the Navy, Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States, including Officers of the Marine Corps and Others, for the Year 1861 (Washington, DC: George W. Bowman, 1861), 98-101.
[xlv] House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 35th Cong, 2d sess., 1858, Ex. Doc. 2, 193-94. Sanger may have drafted the civil engineer portion of the code in 1857, but this is not entirely clear. See also “History of the Civil Engineer Corps, United States Navy,” undated, 2, folder labeled “RG3 – General, History of the Civil Engineer Corps, United States Navy; Publication, [1950s],” RG3, Series 1, Box 6, USNCBM.
[xlvi] Edwin C. Bearss, “Civil War Operations in and Around Pensacola,” Florida Historical Quarterly 36 no. 2 (October 1857): 132-33. The dock itself was later scuttled by the Confederates. See Edwin C. Bearss, “Civil War Operations in and around Pensacola, Part II,” Florida Historical Quarterly 39, no. 3 (January 1961): 248-49.
[xlvii] The loss of the yard at Norfolk with so much usable war material captured would be deemed the “Gosport Affair,” as federal officials sought to determine how the yard’s capture could have been so badly bungled. Many of the captured guns would be put into use across the Confederacy. See John Sherman Long, “The Gosport Affair, 1861,” Journal of Southern History 23, no. 2 (May 1957): 155-72; William N. Still, Jr., “Facilities for the Construction of War Vessels in the Confederacy,” Journal of Southern History 31, no. 3 (August 1965): 299-300; Lull, Gosport, 44-59; Senate Committee on Printing, Circumstances Attending Surrender of Navy Yard at Pensacola, and Destruction of Property at Navy Yard at Norfolk and at Armory at Harper’s Ferry, 37th Cong., 2d sess., 1862, S. Rep. 37, 1-21.
[xlviii] Lull, Gosport, 60-61; Edwin C. Bearss, “Civil War Operations in and Around Pensacola, Part III,” Florida Historical Quarterly 39, no. 4 (April 1961): 338-39, 349-52.
[xlix] Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 4 November 1862, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1861 to 1880 (1 of 4),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[l] “The Secretary of the Navy has appointed…,” Harford Daily Courant (CT), 15 August 1862, 2; Kenneth W. Munden and Henry P. Beers, Guide to Federal Archives Relating to the Civil War (Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Service, General Services Administration, 1962), 479. During this time away from Washington, William J. Keeler represented Sanger as the resident civil engineer at BuDocks. Keeler is listed in the Navy’s Register of Commissioned, Warrant, and Volunteer Officers from 1862 to January 1863, with date of appointment listed as 9 July 1862. See Department of the Navy, Register of the Commissioned, Warrant, and Volunteer Officers of the Navy of the United States, including Officers of the Marine Corps and Others, to September 1, 1862 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1862), 9; Department of the Navy, Register of the Commissioned, Warrant, and Volunteer Officers of the Navy of the United States, including Officers of the Marine Corps and Others, to January 1, 1863 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1863), 9.
[li] House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 37th Cong., 3d sess., 1862, Ex. Doc. 1, 33.
[lii] House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 37th Cong., 3d sess., 1862, Ex. Doc. 1, 33-35; Senate Committee on Naval Affairs, Majority and Minority Reports of Board of Officers to Accept Title to League Island, Delaware River, for Naval Purposes, 37th Cong., 3d sess., 1862, Ex. Doc. 9, 1-29. It must be noted that the city of Philadelphia offered the island to the Navy and Congress authorized the Secretary of the Navy to accept the island if approved by a board of officers on 15 July 1862. The factor of acquiring the island versus purchasing tracts of land in New London factored considerably into Welles’ decision to choose the minority opinion. See also Secretary of the Navy, Reports of the Secretary of the Navy, and the Commission by him Appointed, on the Proposed New Iron Navy Yard at League Island (Philadelphia, PA: Collins, 1863).
[liii] Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 15 October 1864, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1861 to 1880 (2 of 4),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[liv] Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 12 October 1865, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1861 to 1880 (2 of 4),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[lv] House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 39th Cong., 1st sess., 1865, Ex. Doc. 1, xvii.
[lvi] Ibid., xvii-xviii.
[lvii] House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 39th Cong., 2d sess., 1866, Ex. Doc. 1, 24-29.
[lviii] An Act to Establish the Offices of Civil Engineer and of Master Mechanics and Master Laborer in Navy Yards of the United States, HR 1186, 39th Cong., 2d sess. (20 February 1867), 1-2.
[lix] Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 2d sess. 1401-02 (1867).
[lx] Naval Appropriation Act of 1868, Public Law 172, 39th Cong., 2d sess. (2 March 1867), 490.
[lxi] Department of the Navy, Register of the Commissioned, Warrant, and Volunteer Officers of the Navy of the United States, including Officers of the Marine Corps and Others, to January 1, 1880 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1880), 77.
[lxii] Department of the Navy, Register of the Commissioned, Warrant, and Volunteer Officers of the Navy of the United States, including Officers of the Marine Corps and Others, to January 1, 1873 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1873), 73.
[lxiii] Naval Appropriation Act of 1871, Public Law 295, 41st Cong., 2d sess. (15 July 1870), 331-32.
[lxiv] Naval Appropriation Act of 1872, Public Law 117, 41st Cong., 3d sess. (3 March 1871), 536-37. Relative rank was a practice from 1871 to 1899 for the early CEC and other Navy staff corps officers whereby a rank relative to that for an officer’s experience, competency, and service was recognized commiserate with an officer of the line, but it was not a permanent rank. A civil engineer held the actual rank and address of “Civil Engineer,” even if possessing the relative rank of lieutenant or commander.
[lxv] Department of the Navy, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Report of the Board of Civil Engineers Appointed to Prepare a Plan for the Improvement of the Navy-Yard at League Island, Pennsylvania (Washington, DC: GPO, 1873), 3.
[lxvi] An Act to Authorize the Secretary of the Navy to Accept League Island, Public Law 46, 39th Cong., 2d sess. (18 February 1867), 396.
[lxvii] Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 27 October 1871; 1 November 1872, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1861 to 1880 (3 of 4),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM; Department of the Navy, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Report of the Board of Civil Engineers Appointed to Prepare a Plan for the Improvement of the Navy-Yard at League Island, Pennsylvania (Washington, DC: GPO, 1873), 6-16.
[lxviii] Department of the Navy, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Report of the Board of Civil Engineers, Appointed to Prepare a Plan for the Improvement of the Navy-Yard at Mare Island, California (Washington, DC: GPO, 1873), 3-22.
[lxix] Naval Appropriation Act of 1868, Public Law 172, 39th Cong., 2d sess. (2 March 1867), 489; House of Representatives, Report of the Secretary of the Navy, 41st Cong., 2d sess., 1869, Ex. Doc. 1/4, 19; Report of the Chief, Bureau of Yards and Docks to the Secretary of the Navy, 25 October 1870, folder labeled “Reports: Chiefs Annual Report to SecNav 1861 to 1880 (3 of 4),” RG 16, Series 3, Box 3, USNCBM.
[lxx] Department of the Navy, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Report of the Board of Civil Engineers Appointed to Prepare a Plan for the Improvement of the Naval Station at New London, Connecticut, June 17, 1875 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1875), 3.
[lxxi] See A Bill Fixing the Relative Rank of Civil Engineers in the Navy, HR 4299, 43d Cong., 2d sess. (11 January 1875), 1; A Bill Fixing the Pay and Rank of Civil Engineers in the Navy, S 1074, 43d Cong., 2d sess. (5 January 1875), 1; A Bill Fixing the Rank and Pay of Civil Engineers in the Navy, HR 1164, 44th Cong., 1st sess. (17 January 1876), 1; A Bill Fixing the Relative Rank of Civil Engineers in the United States Navy, HR 5672, 45th Cong., 3d sess. (16 December 1878), 1; A Bill Fixing the Rank of Civil Engineers in the United States Navy, HR 2216, 45th Cong., 2d sess. (14 January 1878), 1; A Bill to Reduce the Number and Fix the Relative Rank of Civil Engineers in the Navy, HR 5917, 45th Cong., 3d sess. (20 January 1879), 1-2; A Bill to Reduce the Number and Fix the Relative Rank of the Civil Engineers of the Navy, S 1730, 45th Cong., 3d sess. (29 January 1879), 1-2.
[lxxii] Department of the Navy, General Order No. 263, 24 February 1881. The order fixed the size of the CEC at ten officers, one with relative rank of captain, two with the relative rank of commander, three with relative rank of lieutenant commander, and four with the relative rank of lieutenant.
[lxxiii] Department of the Navy, General Order No. 274, 1 November 1881. The general order republishes the Attorney General’s reply to an inquiry from Navy Civil Engineer Benjamin F. Chandler, dated 17 June 1881.
[lxxiv] Department of the Navy, “Regulations Governing the Appointment of Civil Engineers in the U.S. Navy,” 14 July 1881.
[lxxv] Lewis B. Combs, “Civil Engineer Corps, U.S. Navy,” The Military Engineer 35, no. 209 (March 1943): 106-07; James C. Tily, “The U.S. Navy CEC Device,” U.S. Navy Civil Engineer Corps Bulletin 13, no. 1 (January 1959): 3.
[lxxvi] Cong. Rec., 47th Cong., 1st sess., 1882, 13, pt. 6: 6289. Sanger was joined in retirement with Benjamin F. Chandler, Calvin Brown, and Norman Stratton, thereby opening up four new slots in the CEC. See “Civil Engineers in the Navy,” Engineering News, 3 December 1881, 487.
[lxxvii] Bready Family Tree, “William P.S. Sanger,” AncestryLibrary.com (accessed 3 February 2014); U.S. Census, 1880: Georgetown, Washington, District of Columbia, roll 121, family history film 1254121, 233D. Lucy Martha Darrell Sanger would remarry in 1892 to Conrad J. Cooper of Philadelphia. She died on 2 September 1909. See “Marriage Licenses,” Washington Post, 28 September 1892, 7; “Died,” Washington Post, 4 September 1909, 2.
[lxxviii] “Death of a Former Naval Officer,” Washington Post, 17 February 1890, 2.

Seen from a pedestrian footbridge overlooking Myrtle Park — a sliver of land that Norfolk, Virginia is allowing to revert to wetlands — the panorama of surrounding homes illustrates the accelerating sea level rise that has beleaguered this neighborhood along the Lafayette River.

A grey house, among the first raised in the area, is slightly elevated on cinderblocks, standing 2 feet off the ground. Nearby, owners of a white-sided house with black shutters have lifted their dwelling about 4 feet above ground level. And on the right, a brick house resting on cinderblocks rises incongruously 11 feet above the street.

The roads circling Myrtle Park are cracked and disintegrating due to frequent flooding. Tidal grasses like Spartina are springing up. The boulevard a block away, which leads to the world’s largest naval base, floods several times a year and the frequency is increasing.

“Things are getting worse,” says William “Skip” Stiles, executive director of Wetlands Watch, a local advocacy group. “We’re now requiring you to go even higher in Norfolk because we get it.”

From 2011 to 2015, sea levels rose up to 5 inches in some locales from North Carolina to Florida.

What Norfolk gets is that while sea level is rising globally at about a tenth of an inch per year, cities along the Eastern Seaboard of the United States — including Norfolk; Baltimore; Charleston, South Carolina; and Miami, among others — have suffered “sunny day” flooding from seas rising far faster than the global average. One study published last year shows that from 2011 to 2015, sea level rose up to 5 inches — an inch per year — in some locales from North Carolina to Florida. Given growing concerns over the flooding, scientists are now working to unravel the mystery of why some parts of the globe are experiencing so-called “sunny day” flooding that had not been expected for decades under conventional sea level rise projections.

Along the southeastern coast of the U.S., researchers have zeroed in on three factors that have made this shoreline a regional hot spot of sea level rise. They include a slowing Gulf Stream, shifts in a major North Atlantic weather pattern, and the effects of El Niño climate cycles.

“These coastal areas are more vulnerable than they realize to short-term rapid acceleration of sea level rise,” says Andrea Dutton, a University of Florida geologist who studies the history of sea level fluctuations. “If they’re hanging their hat on sea level rise projections looking at the potential over decades, they need to refocus and think about the potential for short-term variability in that rate.”

Around the world, sea levels are not rising equally like water in a bathtub. The oceans are more akin to a rubber kiddie pool where the water sloshes around unevenly, often considerably higher on one side than another.

The average number of days per year in which U.S. coastal waters rose above the local threshold for minor flooding.
NOAA

Scientists from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), for example, have found that sea levels in the northern Indian Ocean are rising more rapidly than the global average and threatening densely populated shores, particularly along the coastlines of the Bay of Bengal, the Arabian Sea, Sri Lanka, and Sumatra. Scientists say that shifting monsoon patterns have significantly warmed the north Indian Ocean, causing unusually rapid thermal expansion of the region’s seawater and thereby increasing sea levels.

In a paper published earlier this year, those NCAR scientists modeled sea level rise for 20 cities worldwide. They found that cities like Boston and New York might experience twice the global mean increase, while San Francisco and Buenos Aires will likely be 15 to 25 percent below the mean.

Sunny day flooding — what one researcher calls “high tide on steroids” — has increasingly disrupted coastal cities in the southeastern U.S. coast. In Charleston, tidal flooding increased to 50 days in 2016, up from four days annually 50 years ago, causing millions of dollars in damage and disrupting travel to the city’s hospital district. In Miami, flooding during unusually high tides, what local forecasters call “king tides,” is becoming an increasingly severe problem, with clear-weather flooding accelerating to nearly 20 days a year. But much worse is to come.

A report earlier this year from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said that “by 2100, high tide flooding will occur every other day (182 days/year) or more often” under an “intermediate low” scenario along the Atlantic coast and the western Gulf of Mexico. Scientists have been steadily increasing their estimates of how much sea level overall will rise this century from melting glaciers and polar ice sheets. The current best estimates are in the range of 3 to 6 feet.

The problem of variable sea level rise along the eastern U.S. seaboard gained widespread attention in the summer of 2009, when dozens of communities suffered from unexpected flooding during clear weather. City and state officials reached out to NOAA seeking answers. What, they asked, was going on? 

The role of the slowing Gulf Stream has been the focus of much research by scientists.

William Sweet, a NOAA oceanographer, began to investigate. He examined tide gauge data, wind data from buoys, and the speed of the Gulf Stream, which has been tracked since 1982 using an abandoned telephone cable that snakes for 55 miles from West Palm Beach, Florida, to Grand Bahamas Island. He discovered that a prevailing northeasterly wind and a slowing Gulf Stream — coupled with a full moon tide, above-normal summer high tides, and decades of sea level rise — created the conditions for sunny day flooding that summer. 

“That really was the first time I was able to connect several different atmospheric and oceanic factors that contributed to impacts that really were concerning to folks,” Sweet says. “What I’ve set out to do since then is to explain the flooding folks are seeing and the underlying causes.”

The role of the slowing Gulf Stream has been the focus of much research by scientists such as Sweet and Tal Ezer, an oceanographer at Norfolk’s Old Dominion University who has examined the effects of currents and weather patterns on sea levels. Ezer has been studying the Gulf Stream for 30 years. Though he’s never actually been out in the Gulf Stream, he creates computer models simulating the stream using information from tide gauges, the abandoned cable, satellite data recording sea-surface heights, and coastal radar that measures surface currents. 

WATCH: A visualization of the Gulf Stream as it moves up the U.S. East Coast (in gray, upper left). Credit: NASA

Beginning in 2012, he published a series of papers matching long-term slowing of the Gulf Stream with increased sea level rise. The Gulf Stream — about 60 miles wide, a half-mile deep, and generally flowing 100 to 200 miles off the U.S. East Coast — transports warm water from the Gulf of Mexico into the North Atlantic, all the way to Western Europe. A rapidly flowing Gulf Stream in effect whisks water away from the eastern U.S. seaboard. Using satellite altimetry, Ezer has found that the sea-surface elevation across the width of the Gulf Stream has a slope. On the coastal side, sea level can be 3, 4, or 5 feet lower than on the east side. When the current is stronger, the slope is steeper, aided by the Earth’s rotation. But when the Gulf Stream flow slows, that slope decreases, pushing more water up against the land, causing flooding during high tides. 

Abrupt sea level rise looms as an increasingly realistic threat. Read more.

Oceanographers say that the Gulf Stream could well slow even more in coming decades as the melting of Arctic Ocean ice and the Greenland ice sheet dump huge quantities of fresh water into the North Atlantic and disrupt longstanding ocean circulation patterns.

Other evidence underscoring the role of the Gulf Stream in sea level rise anomalies along the East Coast has surfaced in recent years. In 2015, Hurricane Joaquin hovered over the Bahamas for days, more than 800 miles from Norfolk, yet tides as much as 3 feet higher than expected flooded the city. A year later, Hurricane Matthew missed the Norfolk area but caused massive flooding, power outages, and more than $35 million of damage throughout the state thanks to relentless rainfall and a high sea level that blocked drainage. In both cases, Ezer says, the storms slowed the Gulf Stream. That’s because strong winds near the surface weaken the Gulf Stream flow, contributing to high sea levels farther north in places like Norfolk.

Scientists hope to help localities prepare for years when sea levels and high tide flooding increase dramatically.

“This is a relatively new phenomenon,” says Ezer. “Sea level rise is changing all the time and the Gulf Stream is changing all the time. But only in the last few years have we found this nice correlation between the measurement of the Gulf Stream offshore and coastal sea level.”

Ezer and other researchers have been examining additional factors that create sea level anomalies. Building upon Sweet’s earlier work, Dutton and Arnoldo Valle-Levinson, her University of Florida colleague, noticed unexpected changes in tide gauge data near Cape Canaveral, Florida that prompted them to look at the effects of the North Atlantic Oscillation and the El Niño Southern Oscillation. They discovered rapidly rising sea levels from 2011 to 2015 along the coast from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina south to Miami. In some cases, sea levels rose nearly 5 inches in five years.

What was happening? El Niño occurs in the Pacific Ocean but spreads its effects across North America, changing wind patterns and causing water to build up along the Eastern Seaboard. Meanwhile, changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation, a major weather pattern, alter the jet stream, prevailing winds, and storm tracks, which affects the distribution of water in the North Atlantic and can increase sea levels along the U.S. East Coast.

The study by Dutton and her colleagues determined that El Niño controls the timing of increases — and decreases — in waters along the coast. The North Atlantic Oscillation, Dutton says, acts as a seesaw that serves as a steering mechanism, focusing increased sea level rise either north or south of Cape Hatteras. She is now looking at potential hot spots for sea level rise along the Gulf of Mexico.

High-tide flooding overflowed streets in Norfolk, Virginia in July 2017. 
Skyler Ballard/Chesapeake Bay Program

Dutton says that variability makes sea level rise like global warming. “It pulses up and down as it’s going up,” she says. “It means we’re going to hit 2 feet (in sea level rise) before 2060 during extreme events or periods of high water where we get these hot spots.”

With sea levels changing dramatically in such short time spans, Sweet has turned to providing coastal communities with actionable science, creating annual reports that recap flooding from the year before and make projections for the year ahead. NOAA also issues two- to four-day flooding forecasts based on tides and computer models. The goal is to help localities prepare and budget for years when sea levels — and high tide flooding — increase dramatically.

How rising seas and coastal storms drowned the U.S. flood insurance program. Read more.

The most recent report, issued in June 2017, notes that Charleston and Savannah, Georgia broke records for days with high tide flooding. Due to El Niño conditions, the report projected flooding 25 percent above average in 2017-2018 in locations including Atlantic City, New Jersey; Wilmington, North Carolina; Norfolk; Washington, D.C.; and Baltimore. For Wilmington, the report predicted 52 days of flooding. For Charleston, it was 28, and for Norfolk, 11.

Sweet talks about understanding the “envelope of variability” in a location. He likens living in cities threatened by sea level rise to living near an active volcano and being aware of possible eruptions. The costs of more frequent, sunny-day flooding are eventually expected to overtake those of major, but rarer, events like hurricanes, NOAA says. A few decades ago, it took a big storm or perfectly aligned smaller forces to cause flooding. Now, says Sweet, one or two variables are more likely than ever before to send waters washing over the land.

Receive weekly climate policy updates by Grist
Subscribe to the first 100

Our readers ask Umbra questions here and then vote for the question they’d like to answer the most. That was last week’s winning question.

Question: F.I’m not giving up … but if I moved where in the US could I go to minimize climate disruption?

– Uncomfortable in a U-Haul

ON.Dear uncomfortable man,

So you want to escape climate change. This is a reasonable impetus – climate change is competing with nuclear war for the greatest threat to human life in the history of our species’ existence. Every survival instinct we’ve cultivated so far should understandably lead us to get away from it.

Get Grist in your inbox
Always free, always fresh

The first 100 other options

Ask your climate researcher if Grist is right for you. See our privacy policy

Let’s start by assessing the regions of the United States based on the basics of what we expect from climate change. We know the seas will swell and temperatures will rise. This particularly endangers a large number of coastal cities with relatively warm climates, especially in summer – i.e. Miami, New Orleans, Norfolk, Washington DC, New York, Los Angeles. A 2017 paper in Nature Climate Change estimated that the 13.1 million people displaced from these cities by sea level rise could head for more inland areas such as Atlanta, Houston and Phoenix.

So there you have it, uncomfortable! Let’s all go to Atlanta, Houston and Phoenix.

But wait a minute: Hurricane Harvey gave an alarming preview of how Houston will fare in a climate-changing future. Phoenix is ​​in the middle of a desert with no reliable water source, where temperatures can rise to 120 degrees Celsius in summer. And Atlanta is the third fastest metropolitan area in the country.

Forget these cities. What is a beautiful, temperate place? Does it never get too hot or too cold, does it have a lot of water? Aha – the Pacific Northwest. Umbra’s home! After all, it is part of the rainforest.

But it’s a rainforest that has seen bigger, hotter, deadlier, and more unpredictable forest fires in recent times. Even a slight increase in temperature has a detrimental effect on the moisture of plants and soil, which means that the forests dry out and become real tinder boxes. And we had warmer winters, which means less snow cover in the mountains and thus a less reliable water source for the region. (Oh, and we’re overdue for a really devastating earthquake, but that’s separate from climate change.)

Hmmm … how about Alaska? Tons of snow. Very cold. Well, except that a rise in average temperatures has already begun to displace thousands of the state’s indigenous people along the coast. In addition, millions of ancient viruses and bacteria that humans have lost immunity to will be discovered when the permafrost becomes less permanent.

That’s hard math. Or maybe hard geography? I called Jesse Keenan, climate adaptation specialist and faculty member at Harvard Graduate School of Design, for a more informed perspective on where to limit their exposure to climate change.

His suggestion: places whose water does not depend on snow cover, aquifers or reservoirs. Specifically, these are typically rural, forested northern areas with plenty of wells for clean water – that is, the upper Midwest (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan Upper Peninsula) and possibly parts of Montana. Justin Timberlake was on something!

But if everyone moves to rural areas, changes the forested landscape, and tax all these pristine wells, they won’t last long as strongholds of the climate.

“Well, exactly,” said Keenan. “You have nowhere to hide. I think you have to put up with what you think you are running away from. Are you trying to hit people at something? Are you trying to run because there is danger and you are at risk? Are you running for your health or for your well-being? Then you have to put up with the fact that you are trying to make an economical investment decision about where to put your limited resources to use. “

Limited or large resources are the deciding factor here. I imagine when you ask this question you have some means to pick up and move around. This is not the case for many people – you could say most people, considering nearly two-thirds of Americans have less than $ 1,000 in savings and the average long-distance move costs around $ 5,000.

But even if you put the money aside, moving is no small change. You have to start a whole new life, form a new social circle. “You can try moving to one of these places,” said Keenan, “but you have to learn the position you put yourself in and you have to become part of these new communities.”

Keenan said he gets versions of your question almost every day – usually from “people at big institutional real estate funds, rich people who want to buy or already own land, or survivor types.” And acquire the ability to answer the question, “Which country will survive climate change?” is already a lucrative undertaking.

Not to shame you, but the fact that the unholy trifecta of insurance companies, real estate investors, and Silicon Valley is raising those concerns should give you a little respite.

If you realize that climate change is a big, terrible problem, and you have the resources to at least try to escape it, why wouldn’t you use those resources to fix it instead, especially when you know it is impossible is to escape it? By “fix it” I mean that you are trying to make the place where you live, where you have found your home, where you have a certain sense of ownership and responsibility – and let’s call it investment – more resilient to climate change . Maybe provide a more storm-resistant infrastructure, local transport and green spaces.

Because the future is not certain, but running away from the problem ensures that it will be.

Permanent,

umbra

PS If you want a preview of the effects of climate change on every region of the US, check out the map my colleagues have put together here.

Ben Linfoot selects 10 sires whose progeny could light up Royal Ascot 2019 as he looks at their meeting and overall course strike-rates ahead of the five-day extravaganza.

SCAT DADDY

• Royal Ascot record: 8/23 @34.78% Percentage Rivals Beaten 77.79%
• Overall Ascot record: 8/26 @30.77% PRB 74.36%
• Scat Daddy progeny: Sergei Prokofiev (King’s Stand), Qabala (Coronation Stakes), So Perfect (Commonwealth Cup, Jersey Stakes), Beatboxer (Britannia)

Scat Daddy blitzed out of the starting stalls when it came to how his progeny acted at Royal Ascot, having eight winners from his first 15 runners at the meeting thanks to the likes of Lady Aurelia, Caravaggio, No Nay Never and Acapulco. Sire of Triple Crown winner Justify, Scat Daddy is sadly no longer with us and he didn’t add to his Royal Ascot tally last year where he was 0/8. His final crop look set to be well-represented at this year’s meeting, however, with Sergei Prokofiev and Qabala likely to be prominent in the King’s Stand and Coronation betting if they make their respective targets. Incidentally, Scat Daddy’s son, No Nay Never, could well enjoy his first Royal Ascot success as a sire with Ten Sovereigns holding the ante-post favourite position for the Commonwealth Cup.

STARSPANGLEDBANNER

• Royal Ascot record: 2/7 @28.57% PRB 73.81%
• Overall Ascot record: 6/25 @24% PRB 64.72%
• Starspangledbanner progeny: Chasing Dreams (Queen Mary)

It’s nine years since Starspangledbanner took Royal Ascot by storm when he landed the Golden Jubilee on just his second European start for Aidan O’Brien. Already a Group One winner in Australia at the time, he went onto July Cup glory before finishing second in a Nunthorpe. One more start in the Haydock Sprint Cup came and went before he began his career as a stallion, when it soon became clear he was subfertile. An unsuccessful return to the track followed, before trying his luck as a stallion again in Australia. At that point it seemed a career of any sort at stud was unlikely, given his fertility issues, but then two horses from his first crop, The Wow Signal and Anthem Alexander, won at Royal Ascot in 2014. To cut a long story short, those two wins were enough evidence that he was worth persevering with in the breeding world and he’s still standing at Coolmore now for a fee of €17,500. Chasing Dreams is an apt name for a daughter of this sire, then, and she looks to have an excellent chance in the Queen Mary judging by how her debut win at Newmarket is working out. She won by five lengths, easily, from subsequent Marygate winner Good Vibes, while almost eight lengths in arrears was Kemble, who won by five lengths at Windsor on her next start. A 750,000gns yearling and a half-sister to Ascot winner Mrs Gallagher, Chasing Dreams could well be the third Royal Ascot winner for Starspangledbanner.

CAMELOT

• Royal Ascot record: 2/8 @25% PRB 60.21%
• Overall Ascot record: 2/17 @11.76% PRB 51.11%
• Camelot progeny: Pink Dogwood (Ribblesdale), Hunting Horn (Hardwicke)

Wins for Arthur Kitt in the Chesham Stakes and Hunting Horn in the Hampton Court at Royal Ascot 2018 ensured a good start for Camelot progeny at the meeting. Hunting Horn has been globetrotting ever since his hugely impressive win 12 months ago, running at Belmont Park (twice), Longchamp (twice), Arlington, Churchill Downs, Gulfstream, Doha and Meydan subsequently. He could well run in the Hardwicke Stakes this year, although he has several options. The most high-profile Camelot kid, though, would be Pink Dogwood if she turns up in the Ribblesdale. Runner-up to Anapurna in the Investec Oaks, she could well bid to follow in the hoofprints of stablemate Magic Wand, who won at Royal Ascot for Aidan O’Brien last year having been beaten at Epsom.

SIYOUNI

• Royal Ascot record: 2/8 @25% PRB 79.72%
• Overall Ascot record: 2/18 @11.11% PRB 68.36%
• Siyouni progeny: Le Brivido (Queen Anne), Laurens (Queen Anne), City Light (Diamond Jubilee), Maqsad (Coronation), Straight Right (Hunt Cup)

Just eight previous runners for Siyouni at Royal Ascot but a high percentage of rivals beaten tells you that his progeny are well worth monitoring at this meeting. The worst result of all his stock so far has been Straight Right’s seventh-placed effort in the 2017 Commonwealth Cup, a hot race in which Caravaggio beat Harry Angel. Ervedya’s 2015 Coronation Stakes success over Found stands out amongst his progeny while Le Brivido won the 2017 Jersey Stakes when trained by Andre Fabre. He edged out an Aidan O’Brien-trained horse that day, but is now under the care of the great man and could kick off the meeting in style for both sire and trainer in the Queen Anne. Fellow Siyouni Laurens might have something to say about that, while Maqsad (Coronation Stakes) and City Light (Diamond Jubilee) are others that could make a mark in their respective assignments.

ZOFFANY

• Royal Ascot record: 4/20 @20% PRB 58.54%
• Overall Ascot record: 6/51 @11.76% PRB 47.42%
• Juveniles at Royal Ascot record: 4/8 @50% PRB 68.71%
• Zoffany progeny: Coase (Hugo Palmer), Albigna (filly, Jessica Harrington)

A good record for Zoffany progeny at Royal Ascot can be upgraded to an outstanding one when you drill down to his juveniles. He’s had four juvenile winners at the meeting from eight representatives thanks to Illuminate in the Albany, Waterloo Bridge in the Norfolk, Washington DC in the Windsor Castle and Main Edition in last year’s Albany. Clearly, his juveniles demand respect and if Hugo Palmer’s hugely impressive Carlisle winner Coase turns up for the Coventry Stakes he’d be well worth consideration. However, an even more intriguing runner would be Jessica Harrington’s Zoffany filly Albigna if she’s pointed at the Albany. Harrington was a neck away from winning the Albany with Alpha Centauri in 2017, and, like that filly, Albigna is owned by the Niarchos family. Zoffany fillies are 2/2 in that race, as mentioned above, and Albigna made a big impression in a hot race when winning on debut at the Curragh.

Super Sires: Best Bets

??? – ALBIGNA in the Albany Stakes at 20/1

?? – CHASING DREAMS in the Queen Mary at 9/2

? – BERINGER in the Royal Hunt Cup at 25/1

SEA THE STARS

• Royal Ascot record: 5/36 @13.89% PRB 50.28%
• Overall Ascot record: 16/84 @19.05% PRB 54.15%
• Sea The Stars progeny: Sea Of Class (Prince of Wales’s) Crystal Ocean (Hardwicke/Prince of Wales’s), Stradivarius (Gold Cup), Beringer (Hunt Cup), Sextant (Duke Of Edinburgh)

Two winners at Royal Ascot last year for Sea The Stars in the shape of Stradivarius and Crystal Ocean and those two will be among his progeny running at the meeting again this time around. They will be joined by Sea Of Class, last year’s Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe runner-up, in the Prince Of Wales’s Stakes, so the son of Cape Cross looks to have a very strong team this year, so much so that his Royal Ascot strike-rate could well look more like his overall Ascot strike-rate come the end of the meeting. In the handicaps, Sextant would be a very interesting runner in the Duke Of Edinburgh. A huge son of Sea The Stars, owned by the Queen, Epsom wouldn’t have suited him last time but he ran well from off the pace in fourth in a race that suited those that ran prominently. That Epsom contest also found last year’s Duke Of Edinburgh winner as Dash Of Spice won both races. And finally, a word for Beringer in the Hunt Cup. He’s been in great form this season and Sea The Stars progeny are five from 11 (46 per cent) in mile handicaps with field sizes of 12 or more including a winner at Royal Ascot (Bless Him in the Britannia).

FRANKEL

• Royal Ascot record: 4/31 @12.90% PRB 68.74%
• Overall Ascot record: 14/60 @23.33% PRB 68.23%
• Frankel progeny: Dream Castle (Queen Anne), Elarqam (Prince of Wales’s), Mehdaayih (Ribblesdale), Frankellina (Ribblesdale), Mirage Dancer (Hardwicke), Baghdad (Duke of Edinburgh)

Three wins from 18 goes at last year’s Royal Ascot for Frankel thanks to Without Parole, Monarchs Glen and Baghdad. The latter’s success came in the King George V Stakes and handicaps could well be his best route to success this year as established Group One performers look surprisingly thin on the ground. Elarqam bounced back to winning form at Goodwood on his latest start, but that was only at Listed level and it requires a leap of faith to fancy him for the Prince Of Wales’s, if, indeed, he turns up there. Frankel did win a first Classic recently with Anapurna in the Oaks and he had Mehdaayih and Frankellina in behind in that race, too. Perhaps the Ribblesdale will be on the agenda for one or more of those fillies, while Mirage Dancer made a pleasing winning reappearance at Goodwood and his trainer, Sir Michael Stoute, has a magnificent record in the Hardwicke, winning it on 11 occasions.

DUBAWI

• Royal Ascot record: 13/105 @12.38% PRB 58.01%
• Overall Ascot record: 53/297 @17.85% PRB 59.72%
• Dubawi progeny: Too Darn Hot (St James’s Palace Stakes), Old Persian (Hardwicke), Ghaiyyath (Prince Of Wales’s), Space Blues (Jersey), Seniority (Hunt Cup).

Old Persian was a sole winner for Dubawi at last year’s Royal Ascot, his win in the King Edward VII Stakes a 13th for progeny of his sire. He could well attempt to win at the meeting two years running if he goes for the Hardwicke, while Ghaiyyath and Space Blues are other Dubawi-bred Godolphin hopefuls. The most interesting son of Dubawi that could run at the meeting, though, is Too Darn Hot in the St James’s Palace Stakes. Beaten into second in both the Dante Stakes and Irish 2,000 Guineas this season, he’ll be hoping to recapture the form that saw him crowned Champion Two-Year-Old in 2018. When it comes to the handicappers, the Queen’s Seniority shaped quite nicely on his first race post-Meydan at Epsom. He wasn’t disgraced in last year’s Hunt Cup when sent off favourite and it’s likely he’ll be pointed at that contest once again.

GALILEO

• Royal Ascot record: 23/217 @10.60% PRB 56.73%
• Overall Ascot record: 53/425 @12.47% PRB 54.41%
• Galileo progeny: Magical (Prince of Wales’s), Hermosa (Coronation Stakes), Japan (King Edward VII Stakes), Pablo Escobarr (King Edward VII Stakes)

There have been just three blank years at Royal Ascot for Galileo since his progeny began racing at the meeting and in the last five years he hasn’t missed with two more added to his overall tally last season. As ever, his big guns are being prepared at Ballydoyle with Magical and Hermosa two fillies with high hopes of gaining Royal Ascot glory next week. Japan is likely to be popular for the King Edward VII if he gets the green light for the race, while William Haggas’ Pablo Escobarr, second to subsequent Derby winner Anthony Van Dyck in the trial at Lingfield, is being aimed at the same contest after he gave the Epsom Classic a swerve. If you think Galileo juveniles might have a poor record at the meeting given their tendency to improve over further at three, think again. He’s three from 12 at 25% with his Royal Ascot juveniles, the winners being Maybe, Cuis Ghaire and Churchill.

KINGMAN

• Royal Ascot record: 1/1 @100% PRB 100%
• Overall Ascot record: 2/2 @100% PRB 100%
• Kingman progeny: King Of Comedy, Sangarius (St James’s Palace Stakes), Private Secretary (King Edward VII Stakes), Headman (Hampton Court), Nausha (Ribblesdale)

The new kid on the block, Kingman, has only ever had one runner at Ascot, Calyx, who is two from two at the track after his blistering Coventry Stakes win and his seasonal reappearance victory in the Pavilion Stakes. Unfortunately he won’t be bidding to keep his 100 per cent record in the Commonwealth Cup due to injury, but Kingman is sure to be well represented at the meeting. Headman is particularly one to look forward to after his victory in the always-hot London Gold Cup at Newbury, while Musidora winner Nausha will be eyeing some big scalps in the Ribblesdale after skipping the Investec Oaks.

First-Season Sire To Watch

AMERICAN PHAROAH

• American Pharoah progeny: Monarch Of Egypt, Maven

There are few more exciting stallions worldwide than Triple Crown and Breeders’ Cup Classic winner American Pharoah. His first crop are hitting the track this year and a few of them will be heading to Royal Ascot on the back of impressive debuts. $750,000 yearling Monarch Of Egypt looked a colt of immense potential at Naas for Aidan O’Brien and he could be a fascinating contender in the Coventry Stakes. Meanwhile, Wesley Ward’s Maven won the first two-year-old race of the year in New York over four-and-a-half furlongs at Aqueduct and he is reportedly being aimed at the Norfolk.

Three to be wary of….

DARK ANGEL

• Royal Ascot record: 2/77 @2.60% PRB 51.57%
• Overall Ascot record: 21/256 @8.20% PRB 53.17%
• Dark Angel progeny: Battaash (King’s Stand), Khaadem (Commonwealth Cup)

LOPE DE VEGA

• Royal Ascot record: 1/25 @4.00% PRB 53.96%
• Overall Ascot record: 5/73 @6.85% PRB 52.3%
• Lope De Vega progeny: Phoenix Of Spain (St James’s Palace Stakes), Zabeel Prince (Queen Anne)

INVINCIBLE SPIRIT

• Royal Ascot record: 5/109 @4.59% PRB 48.14%
• Overall Ascot record: 22/298 @7.38% PRB 45.67%
• Invincible Spirit progeny: Magna Grecia (St James’s Palace Stakes), Invincible Army (Diamond Jubilee)

There are a few established sires that don’t have a great record at the meeting and I’ve selected three that have some well-fancied horses running at this year’s Royal Ascot. Firstly Dark Angel has won just two Royal Ascot races from 77 runners at 2.6%, a percentage Battaash and Khaadem will be aiming to improve next week. Both of those horses are trained by Charlie Hills who will also saddle up Phoenix Of Spain in the St James’s Palace Stakes. The Irish 2,000 Guineas winner is by Lope De Vega who has won just one race at Royal Ascot from 25 goes. And finally Invincible Spirit is five from 109 at Royal Ascot at 4.59%, with Magna Grecia and Invincible Army two of his high-profile sons that are set to run at this year’s meeting.

Related horse racing links

Saxophonist Kamasi Washington will begin a month-long winter tour in early 2020. Washington and his band are currently on the road from February 14th to March 12th.

Kamasi starts on February 14th at The Fillmore Charlotte. From there, Washington will make stops in Asheville, Nashville, Norfolk, Washington, DC, Brooklyn, Northampton, Massachusetts, Boston, Portland (Maine), Burlington, and Ithaca from February. In March, the acclaimed musician will take his band to Buffalo, Detroit, East Moline, Illinois, St. Paul, Omaha and Oklahoma City. The tour concludes in Texas with performances in Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio.

Tickets will be available from Friday, December 6th.