Spent the weekend with the family on the cape and one day we hit Nauset. One thing I noticed was how steep the beach is near the water compared with Rhody beaches. I figure this must be do to the big tide differental compared with Rhody. So it got me thinking why is there such a big differental on the Outer Cape vs. Rhody? Just a thought maybe something to do with the shape of the ocean floor? Anyone know what causes the big difference?

I had not been to Nauset since I was a kid, what a beautiful beach!

Tide height is related to distance from the Equator. The farther from the Equator, the greater the difference between high and low water.

The latitude difference between RI and Nauset is too small to account for the difference. Here is NOAA's info on it.


Q: It appears that the range of the tides gets larger the further the location from the equator. What causes this?

If you only consider a few locations, this may seem to be true; but it is not the case. Literally hundreds of locations in the extreme north and south latitudes have small tidal ranges, and a number of stations closer to the equator have large tidal ranges. For example, Korea is at roughly the same latitude as most of the U.S. coast. Numerous stations in Korea have a tidal range of more than 20 feet, most of the U.S. coast has a tidal range of 3-6 feet. A number of locations very near the equator which have a tidal range of 15-17 feet.

The tidal range of a particular location is dependent less on it position north/south of the equator than on other physcial factors in the area; topography, water depth, shoreline configuration, size of the ocean basin, and others. For example, let's consider the southern coast of Alaska and British Columbia. The configuration of this coastline is very similar to a funnel, with the narrow end at Cook Inlet. The tides travel as a "wave" across the oceans, and in many other respects act as a "wave"; this type of configuration tends to accentuate the "wave" at the narrow end of the funnel. This is part of the reason for the large tidal ranges, 30+ feet, in the area of Cook Inlet. If you look at the tidal ranges for stations on the Bering Sea, outside this funnel but at the same latitude, you will find a tidal range of 5-7 feet.

Another factor is the size of the ocean basin in which the tides are located. The Pacific Ocean is by far the largest of the world's oceans. This means that the moon's gravity has a large area of water to work on; therefore, its effect tends to be greater. Compare this to stations in the Baltic Sea. Many stations in the Baltic are as far north as any station in Alaska. However, due to the small size and shallow depth of the ocean basin, the tidal ranges in this area are relatively small.

I was there on Sunday night at about 5:00 pm with the wife and kids. I wanted to try out my new rod. However, I had to wait a while, for most of the beach to clear out. It was a beautiful night and not a cloud in the sky. Didn't catch anything....But, I did manage to cast a few times and learn a few things. I think I had too much line on the reel. And initially the reel was maybe not wound tight enough. When I was leaving, there were two older gents(45-55ish) that were walking down the beach, in waders, rods over the shoulders that looked liked they knew what they were doing. I picked up a 9 foot rod, some lures, a lure bag, and a few other things. I still have to pick up some waders. Will look in a week or so. I might go back down the cape for Columbus day weekend to help replace my wifes grandmothers porch in Dennis. In one of the Magazines it mentioned that then is a good time to fish the canal. is this true?

Waves were not that big this past Sunday at Nauset.

Oh....I was headed down 495 on Saturday afternoon and saw a black f-250 with some rods in the back and two bikes equipt with metal panniers and some rod holders attached to the panniers. Is this someone on the board? I know it's most likely a shot in the dark, but I know it couldn't hurt to ask.

Mike

I was at a place in RI on an island at sunset today and the waves were easily 8-10 ft in random intervals at the point coming in from two different directions.Took a wave over the head and got knocked down.Rough water couldn't get an eel down or a swimmer to swim.Frustrating and didn't stay all that long.I'd say that wave height has something to do with geographic location and structure.Some of the largest waves I've see were in Lake Eerie in Canada.

mikebanks
the bikes are canal bikes you put rods in the holder tackle bags in the side and peddle your seat of to your honey spot

I figured that one out by myself.... and figured it out real quickly.....

Karl F - Yes I do remember it being wider. I guess errosion has taken its toll.

When I was leaving, there were two older gents(45-55ish) that were walking down the beach
Mike

i was there as well

The latitude difference between RI and Nauset is too small to account for the difference. Here is NOAA's info on it.


Q: It appears that the range of the tides gets larger the further the location from the equator. What causes this?

If you only consider a few locations, this may seem to be true; but it is not the case. Literally hundreds of locations in the extreme north and south latitudes have small tidal ranges, and a number of stations closer to the equator have large tidal ranges. For example, Korea is at roughly the same latitude as most of the U.S. coast. Numerous stations in Korea have a tidal range of more than 20 feet, most of the U.S. coast has a tidal range of 3-6 feet. A number of locations very near the equator which have a tidal range of 15-17 feet.

The tidal range of a particular location is dependent less on it position north/south of the equator than on other physcial factors in the area; topography, water depth, shoreline configuration, size of the ocean basin, and others. For example, let's consider the southern coast of Alaska and British Columbia. The configuration of this coastline is very similar to a funnel, with the narrow end at Cook Inlet. The tides travel as a "wave" across the oceans, and in many other respects act as a "wave"; this type of configuration tends to accentuate the "wave" at the narrow end of the funnel. This is part of the reason for the large tidal ranges, 30+ feet, in the area of Cook Inlet. If you look at the tidal ranges for stations on the Bering Sea, outside this funnel but at the same latitude, you will find a tidal range of 5-7 feet.

Another factor is the size of the ocean basin in which the tides are located. The Pacific Ocean is by far the largest of the world's oceans. This means that the moon's gravity has a large area of water to work on; therefore, its effect tends to be greater. Compare this to stations in the Baltic Sea. Many stations in the Baltic are as far north as any station in Alaska. However, due to the small size and shallow depth of the ocean basin, the tidal ranges in this area are relatively small.

You learn something new on the internet every day. :think:
I would have said proximity to the equator was the factor too. The canal is very interesting in that respect as you can have 10' plus tides at the east end, and 4' tides at the west end.
I'm enlightened.