238 MR. ROBERT GURNEY ON THE TIDES OF 
was 2 h. 15 m. later there than at the Pier, which is 44 minutes 
more than the mean. The level of high water was 9 ft. 10J in., 
and of the succeeding low water 3 ft., showing that normal 
conditions were not so rapidly restored here as at the 
Pier. 
Many similar examples could be given of the effect of 
Northerly winds. A very curious example is found in the 
tides of Januar}' 31st, 1905. Low water on January 30th was 
at 11.40 p.m. with a height of 4 in. on the scale. The wind 
during early morning of January 31st rose to a N.W. gale, 
and from 2 a.m. the water ran continuously into the harbour 
until 6 p.m., or 16 hours in all. The morning tide at 6 a.m. 
reached 6 ft. 11 in., and the level of water fell only 2 inches 
during the ensuing 5 h. 50 m. It might have been expected 
that the tide would then have risen another full 4 feet and 
have reached 11 feet at high water. As a matter of fact 
the wind fell and turned to West and the next tide reached 
7 ft. 9 in., which was only a rise of one foot from low water. 
These two examples among many show clearly the influence 
of Northerly winds on the tide at Yarmouth, but they do not 
show how that influence is felt in the river. The following 
case illustrates the effect of unusual tides in the river itself. 
On September 2nd, 1910, a tide gauge was set up at Stokesby. 
On that day, and up to at least 12.30 p.m. on September 3rd, 
the floating fauna of the river was that characteristic of quite 
normal fresh water, and there were considerable quantities 
of Diatoms present. On September 3rd (full moon) the wind, 
which was North-west, began to rise and, probably as a con- 
sequence, the level of high water was about 10 inches higher 
than on the previous night ; the ebb current also flowed 
only 5 h. 43 m., which is much less than the normal 
time, the flood current beginning only 43 m. after low 
water. 
During the night the wind rose, and during the whole of 
September 4th a North-west gale blew. High water at noon 
was then 14 in. higher than on September 2nd (see Fig. 6). 
The ebb, however, after this high water lasted 7 h. 40 m., 
and the next flood began 1 h. 50 m. after low water, the 
