in the right center-distance, but the breakwaters are completely sub- 

 merged. From Figure 89 we infer that prequake levels, allowing for land 

 subsidence of 5.8 feet, would have been such as to ensure submergence at 

 this time. 



We refer now to Figure 90. Clearly the photographic evidence pro- 

 duced here would not relate to the time of 5:^5 p.m. A flooding so 

 extensive would have been apparent to all, whereas the level of the first 

 wave cited by Tilley, Jones and Fremlin (according to Chance), could not 

 have been much higher than the high spring tide. Our observation of about 

 IT feet is therefore plotted on the 'second' wave, according to Tilley, 

 and also Chuck Powell and Commander Miller (Chance, I968). According 

 to Madsen, whom the writers interviewed at Kodiak in I966, this was the 

 first wave, rising gently from a situation of no prior recession, and 

 causing the first damage only on withdrawal. It is inconceivable that 

 Madsen could have equipped himself with camera and lenses and gained 

 a vantage point for his photography at 5:^5 p.m. so that what he photo- 

 graphed was definitely the wave that crested at about 6:30 p.m. accord- 

 ing to the evidence of City Engineer Jim Barr and Commander Miller 

 (Chance, I968). We note too that the color slide of Figure 95 clearly 

 shows a sunset light in the clouds on the righthand side. Since the 

 view was south, this would have been light from the west. Sunset at 

 the latitude of Kodiak would have been at 6:30 p.m. on March 27, 196*+ 

 (Nautical Almanac for 196^+). 



It now becomes clear that the times reported by Jones (cf. Chance, 

 1968) must be in error and would account for the anomaly already men- 

 tioned. Chance says that Jones reported the first rise in water was 

 " 'like a high tide - about 10 feet higher than it should have been'", 

 (therefore about 13 feet above MLLW) , at about 5:^5 p.m. (probably 6:20 

 p.m.). "Then" , quoting Chance (1968), "the water receded 'way far out', 

 (7:20 p.m., according to Figure 90 ) and a wave struck 'with much force, 

 tossing buildings and boats around - making a complete mess of the water- 

 front' ", (presumably at about 8:30 p.m., according to other evidence in 

 Figure 90). Comments in parentheses are ours. 



Confusion also stems from the evidence of Mr. and Mrs. Fremlin 

 (Chance, I968). Quoting Chance, 



"Mr. and Mrs. Fremlin watched the water rising rapidly in the 

 small boat harbor immediately after the quake. The water rose 

 to the top of the pilings, fouling the lines of boats tied to 

 the dock. The water rose so fast most of the boats were unable 

 to cut loose in time to escape. Fart of the breakwater sluffed 

 away and 'the whole thing went dock and all - and swept into 

 town'. The water then began receding rapidly - 'it was just 

 sucking right out of the harbor' - until it was almost dry." 



Since the photographic evidence of Figures 91 through 95 now timed 

 for 6:20 - 6:30 p.m. clearly disproves that the dock swept into town at 

 6:30 p.m., the Fremlins must have been talking of the wave of about 



144 



