A Note on the Sources of Acquisition Data

Abstract

Great Lakes ports which showed a large gain2 between I958 and I959. That increase, amounting to 214 million tons, was probably caused by diversion from the Gulf and Atlantic coast ports, as well as by creation of some new trade. Since the export volume handled by North Atlantic ports declined by I4 million tons between the two years, only 10I5 per cent of that decline can be attributed to diversion caused by the Seaway. The drop of imports arriving through North Atlantic ports was also concentrated in a few commodities. A major decline was registered in the import of fuel oil and petroleum products. While the reasons for this cut are difficult to determine, they could not have been related to the since these products are not arriving in large quantities through Great Lakes ports. Second, there was a substantial decline in the volume of iron ore and manganese entering through Virginia and Maryland ports. While this is attributed mainly to the steel strike, it may have been partly due to diversion of source (i.e. the development of Canadian ore) made possible by the Seaway. In summary it can be concluded that only a small part of decline in traffic volume handled by North Atlantic ports in I959 was a result of inroads made by the St. Lawrence Seaway. This conclusion is based on commodity statistics reported by individual ports, but must be regarded essentially as an informed judgment. Furthermore, it relates only to the first season of the Seaway's operations and cannot be extrapolated into the future without important qualifications. On the one hand, the Seaway's traffic may grow in future seasons as facilities in the Middle West are improved and more experience is gathered. On the other hand, there are some indications that conditions may prove unfavorable to future expansion of the Seaway traffic. First, operations of the new waterway have been beset by labor disputes. Second, competition from railroads is being intensified. The fact that an eastbound ship plying the Seaway needs about i o days to get through the Great Lakes compared to a two-day railroad trip between the Middle West and the eastern seaboard certainly helps that competition. Finally, many Great Lakes ports are inadequate to service ships carrying full loads.3 All these factors will no doubt affect the future operation of the Seaway. 2 See U.S. Department of Commerce, United States Waterborne Foreign Commerce, A Review of I959 (Washington, I960), Table Q. ' For fuller discussion of these points see Struggling Seaway, Wall Street Journal, May 6, I960.