document_title: Panama Canal

question_text: who was the president during the building of panama canal

question_tokens: who was the president during the building of panama canal

root

text: Panama Canal

text: History[edit]

text: Early proposals in Panama[edit]

text: The earliest mention of a canal across the Isthmus of Panama dates back to 1534, when Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain, ordered a survey for a route through the Americas that would ease the voyage for ships traveling between Spain and Peru. Such a route would have given the Spanish a military advantage over the Portuguese.[4]

tag: p

text: In 1668 the English physician and philosopher Sir Thomas Browne speculated in his encyclopaedic endeavour Pseudodoxia Epidemica - some Isthmus have been eat through by the Sea, and others cut by the spade: And if policy would permit, that of Panama in America were most worthy the attempt: it being but few miles over, and would open a shorter cut unto the East Indies and China.[5]

text: In 1788, Thomas Jefferson suggested that the Spanish should create it since it would be a less treacherous route than going around the southern tip of South America, which tropical ocean currents would naturally widen thereafter.[6] During an expedition from 1788 to 1793, Alessandro Malaspina outlined plans for its construction.[7]

text: Given the strategic location of Panama and the potential offered by its narrow isthmus separating two great oceans, other trade links in the area were attempted over the years. The ill-fated Darien scheme was launched by the Kingdom of Scotland in 1698 to set up an overland trade route. Generally inhospitable conditions thwarted the effort and it was abandoned in April 1700.[8]

text: Another effort was made in 1843. According to the New York Daily Tribune, August 24, 1843, a contract was entered into by Barings of London and the Republic of New Granada for the construction of a canal across the Isthmus of Darien (Isthmus of Panama). They referred to it as the Atlantic and Pacific Canal and it was a wholly British endeavor. It was expected to be completed in five years, but the plan was never carried out. At nearly the same time, other ideas were floated, including a canal (and/or a railroad) across Mexico's Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Nothing came of that plan either.[9]

text: In 1846 the Mallarino–Bidlack Treaty, negotiated between the U.S. and New Granada, granted the United States transit rights and the right to intervene militarily in the isthmus. In 1849, the discovery of gold in California created great interest in a crossing between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The Panama Railway was built by the United States to cross the isthmus and opened in 1855. This overland link became a vital piece of western hemisphere infrastructure, greatly facilitating trade and largely determining the later canal route.

text: An all-water route between the oceans was still seen as the ideal solution, and in 1855 William Kennish, a Manx-born engineer working for the United States government, surveyed the isthmus and issued a report on a route for a proposed Panama Canal.[10] His report was published as a book entitled The Practicability and Importance of a Ship Canal to Connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.[11]

text: In 1877 Armand Reclus, an officer with the French Navy, and Lucien Napoléon Bonaparte Wyse, both engineers, surveyed the route and published a French proposal for a canal.[12] French success in building the Suez Canal, while a lengthy project, encouraged planning for one to cross the isthmus.[13]

text: French construction attempts, 1881–1894[edit]

text: The first attempt to construct a canal through what was then Colombia's province of Panama began on January 1, 1881. The project was inspired by the diplomat Ferdinand de Lesseps, who was able to raise considerable finance in France as a result of the huge profits generated by his successful construction of the Suez Canal.[14] Although the Panama Canal would eventually have to be only 40% as long as the Suez Canal, the former would prove to be far more of an engineering challenge, due to the tropical rain forests, the climate, the need for canal locks, and the lack of any ancient route to follow.

text: De Lesseps wanted a sea-level canal as at Suez but only visited the site a few times, during the dry season which lasts only four months of the year.[15] His men were totally unprepared for the rainy season, during which the Chagres River, where the canal started, became a raging torrent, rising up to 10 meters (35 feet). The dense jungle was alive with venomous snakes, insects and spiders, but the worst aspect was the yellow fever and malaria (and other tropical diseases) which killed thousands of workers: by 1884 the death rate was over 200 per month.[16] Public health measures were ineffective because the role of the mosquito as a disease vector was then unknown. Conditions were downplayed in France to avoid recruitment problems,[17] but the high mortality rate made it difficult to maintain an experienced workforce.

text: Workers had to continually widen the main cut through the mountain at Culebra and reduce the angles of the slopes to minimize landslides into the canal.[18] Steam shovels were used in the construction of the canal, and they were purchased from Bay City Industrial Works, a business owned by William L. Clements in Bay City, Michigan.[19] Other mechanical and electrical equipment was limited in its capabilities, and steel equipment rusted rapidly in the climate.[20]

text: In France, de Lesseps kept the investment and supply of workers flowing long after it was obvious that the targets were not being met, but eventually the money ran out. The French effort went bankrupt in 1889 after reportedly spending US$287,000,000 and losing an estimated 22,000 lives to disease and accidents, wiping out the savings of 800,000 investors.[17][21] Work was suspended on May 15, and in the ensuing scandal, known as the Panama affair, various of those deemed responsible were prosecuted, including Gustave Eiffel.[22] De Lesseps and his son Charles were found guilty of misappropriation of funds and sentenced to five years' imprisonment, though this was later overturned, and the father, at 88, was never imprisoned.[17]

text: In 1894, a second French company, the Compagnie Nouvelle du Canal de Panama, was created to take over the project. A minimal workforce of a few thousand people was employed primarily to comply with the terms of the Colombian Panama Canal concession, to run the Panama Railroad, and to maintain the existing excavation and equipment in salable condition. The company sought a buyer for these assets, with an asking price of US$109,000,000. In the meantime they continued with enough activity to maintain their franchise. Phillipe Bunau-Varilla, the French manager of the New Panama Canal Company, eventually managed to persuade de Lesseps that a lock-and-lake canal was more realistic than a sea-level canal.[23]

text: United States acquisition[edit]

text: At this time, the President and the Senate of the United States were interested in establishing a canal across the isthmus, with some favoring a canal across Nicaragua and others advocating the purchase of the French interests in Panama. Bunau-Varilla, who was seeking American involvement, asked for $100 million, but accepted $40 million in the face of the Nicaraguan option. In June 1902, the U.S. Senate voted in favor of pursuing the Panamanian option, provided the necessary rights could be obtained, in the Spooner Act.[24]

text: On January 22, 1903, the Hay–Herrán Treaty was signed by United States Secretary of State John M. Hay and Colombian Chargé Dr. Tomás Herrán. For $10 million and an annual payment it would have granted the United States a renewable lease in perpetuity from Colombia on the land proposed for the canal.[25] The treaty was ratified by the U.S. Senate on March 14, 1903, but the Senate of Colombia did not ratify it. Bunau-Varilla told President Theodore Roosevelt and Hay of a possible revolt by Panamanian rebels who aimed to separate from Colombia, and hoped that the United States would support the rebels with U.S. troops and money. Roosevelt changed tactics, based in part on the Mallarino–Bidlack Treaty of 1846, and actively supported the separation of Panama from Colombia and, shortly after recognizing Panama, signed a treaty with the new Panamanian government under similar terms to the Hay–Herrán Treaty.[26]

text: On November 2, 1903, U.S. warships blocked sea lanes for possible Colombian troop movements en route to put down the rebellion. Panama declared independence on November 3, 1903. The United States quickly recognized the new nation.[27] On November 6, 1903, Philippe Bunau-Varilla, as Panama's ambassador to the United States, signed the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty, granting rights to the United States to build and indefinitely administer the Panama Canal Zone and its defenses. This is sometimes misinterpreted as the "99-year lease" because of misleading wording included in article 22 of the agreement.[28] Almost immediately, the treaty was condemned by many Panamanians as an infringement on their country's new national sovereignty.[29][30] This would later become a contentious diplomatic issue among Colombia, Panama, and the United States.

text: President Roosevelt famously stated that "I took the Isthmus, started the canal and then left Congress not to debate the canal, but to debate me." Several parties in the United States called this an act of war on Colombia: The New York Times called the support given by the United States to Bunau-Varilla an "act of sordid conquest." The New York Evening Post called it a "vulgar and mercenary venture." It is often cited as the classic example of U.S. gunboat diplomacy in Latin America, and the best illustration of what Roosevelt meant by the old African adage, "Speak softly and carry a big stick [and] you will go far." After the revolution in 1903, the Republic of Panama became a U.S. protectorate until 1939.[31]

text: Thus in 1904, the United States purchased the French equipment and excavations, including the Panama Railroad, for US$40 million, of which $30 million related to excavations completed, primarily in the Gaillard Cut (then called the Culebra Cut), valued at about $1.00 per cubic yard.[32] The United States also paid the new country of Panama $10 million and a $250,000 payment each following year.

text: In 1921, Colombia and the United States entered into the Thomson-Urrutia Treaty, in which the United States agreed to pay Colombia $25 million: $5 million upon ratification, and four-$5 million annual payments, and grant Colombia special privileges in the Canal Zone. In return, Colombia recognized Panama as an independent nation.

text: United States construction of the Panama canal, 1904–1914[edit]

text: The U.S. formally took control of the canal property on May 4, 1904, inheriting from the French a depleted workforce and a vast jumble of buildings, infrastructure and equipment, much of it in poor condition. A U.S. government commission, the Isthmian Canal Commission (ICC), was established to oversee construction[33] and was given control of the Panama Canal Zone, over which the United States exercised sovereignty. The commission reported directly to Secretary of War William Howard Taft and was directed to avoid the inefficiency and corruption that had plagued the French 15 years earlier.

text: On May 6, 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt appointed John Findley Wallace, formerly chief engineer and finally general manager of the Illinois Central Railroad, as chief engineer of the Panama Canal Project. Overwhelmed by the disease-plagued country and forced to use often dilapidated French infrastructure and equipment,[34] as well as being frustrated by the overly bureaucratic ICC, Wallace resigned abruptly in June 1905.[35] He was succeeded by John Frank Stevens, a self-educated engineer who had built the Great Northern Railroad.[36] Stevens was not a member of the ICC; he increasingly viewed its bureaucracy as a serious hindrance, bypassing the commission and sending requests and demands directly to the Roosevelt Administration in Washington.

text: One of Stevens' first achievements in Panama was in building and rebuilding the housing, cafeterias, hotels, water systems, repair shops, warehouses, and other infrastructure needed by the thousands of incoming workers. Stevens began the recruitment effort to entice thousands of workers from the United States and other areas to come to the Canal Zone to work, and tried to provide accommodation in which the incoming workers could work and live in reasonable safety and comfort. He also re-established and enlarged the railway that was to prove crucial in transporting millions of tons of soil from the cut through the mountains to the dam across the Chagres River.

text: Colonel William C. Gorgas had been appointed chief sanitation officer of the canal construction project in 1904. Gorgas implemented a range of measures to minimize the spread of deadly diseases, particularly yellow fever and malaria which had recently been shown to be mosquito-borne following the work of Dr. Carlos Finlay and Dr. Walter Reed.[37] There was investment in extensive sanitation projects, including city water systems, fumigation of buildings, spraying of insect-breeding areas with oil and larvicide, installation of mosquito netting and window screens, and elimination of stagnant water. Despite opposition from the Commission (one member said his ideas were barmy), Gorgas persisted and when Stevens arrived, he threw his weight behind the project. After two years of extensive work, the mosquito-spread diseases were nearly eliminated.[38] Nevertheless, even with all this effort, about 5,600 workers died of disease and accidents during the U.S. construction phase of the canal.

text: In 1905, a U.S. engineering panel was commissioned to review the canal design, which still had not been finalized. It recommended to President Roosevelt a sea-level canal, as had been attempted by the French. However, in 1906 Stevens, who had seen the Chagres in full flood, was summoned to Washington and declared a sea-level approach to be "an entirely untenable proposition". He argued in favor of a canal using a lock system to raise and lower ships from a large reservoir 85 ft (26 m) above sea level. This would create both the largest dam (Gatun Dam) and the largest man-made lake (Gatun Lake) in the world at that time. The water to refill the locks would be taken from Gatun Lake by opening and closing enormous gates and valves and letting gravity propel the water from the lake. Gatun Lake would connect to the Pacific through the mountains at the Gaillard (Culebra) Cut. Stevens successfully convinced Roosevelt of the necessity and feasibility of the alternative scheme.[39]

text: The construction of a canal with locks required the excavation of more than 170,000,000 cu yd (130,000,000 m3) of material over and above the 30,000,000 cu yd (23,000,000 m3) excavated by the French. As quickly as possible, the Americans replaced or upgraded the old, unusable French equipment with new construction equipment that was designed for a much larger and faster scale of work. About 102 new large, railroad-mounted steam shovels were purchased from the Marion Power Shovel Company and brought from the United States. These were joined by enormous steam-powered cranes, giant hydraulic rock crushers, cement mixers, dredges, and pneumatic power drills, nearly all of which were manufactured by new, extensive machine-building technology developed and built in the United States. The railroad also had to be comprehensively upgraded with heavy-duty, double-tracked rails over most of the line to accommodate new rolling stock. In many places, the new Gatun Lake flooded over the original rail line, and a new line had to be constructed above Gatun Lake's waterline.

text: West Indian labor migration to Panama (1850–1914)[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text: Emancipation in the British West Indies in 1838 freed over one-half million slaves, transforming the islands’ societies and economies. Most freedmen preferred not to do plantation work anymore, and the sugar industries gradually declined. The white colonial elites and mulatto middle classes managed to reconstruct the social hierarchy so that the blacks remained at the bottom. In such a precarious position, black freedmen had to take any jobs that appeared, including those abroad. Thus, began the trans-Caribbean migration phase of the diaspora.

text: The California gold rush of 1849 rekindled interest in a modern transportation route across Central America and spurred larger migrations of these freedmen. Two crossings were developed, Vanderbilt’s steamship and stage line in Nicaragua and the New York-based Panama Railroad. Both enterprises used imported labor, largely Jamaican. Some 5,000 eventually worked on the Panama railroad line. The projects proved that the West Indian blacks resisted tropical diseases better than other workers and they were available in large numbers due to the islands’ depressed economies.

text: Caribbean migration on a large scale would resume again in the 1880s as a result of two developments, the French canal project and the spread of banana cultivation. The French company employed over 50,000 West Indians (again mainly Jamaicans) during its unsuccessful bid to build the canal across the isthmus.

text: Banana cultivation also proved a boon to the region’s economy after the 1880s, expanding commercial agriculture and inducing thousands more to migrate. By the early twentieth century, the United Fruit Company operated a string of banana ports, including Puerto Limon (Costa Rica) and Bocas del Toro (Panama).

text: During the construction of the Panama Canal by the Americans (1904-1914), the West Indian migrations to Panama constituted a demographic tidal wave, the largest yet in Caribbean history. Officially, canal authorities brought over 31,000 West Indian men and a few women. But in fact, contemporaries estimated that between 150,000 and 200,000 men and women must have migrated during the decade 1904-1914. Most did not plan to stay in Panama. Eventually though, tens of thousands remained on the isthmus because the islands offered few opportunities that could compete with the pay and benefits available in Panama. The West Indians settled, married, had children, and became the largest immigrant group in the sparsely populated country. The descendants of these immigrants are known today as Afro-Panamanians.

text: George Washington Goethals replaces John Frank Stevens as chief engineer[edit]

text: In 1907, Stevens resigned as chief engineer.[40] His replacement, appointed by President Theodore Roosevelt, was U.S. Army Major George Washington Goethals of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (soon to be promoted to lieutenant colonel and later to General), a strong, United States Military Academy–trained leader and civil engineer with experience of canals (unlike Stevens). Goethals would direct the work in Panama to a successful conclusion in 1914, two years ahead of the target date of June 10, 1916.[41]

text: Goethals divided the engineering and excavation work into three divisions: Atlantic, Central, and Pacific. The Atlantic Division, under Major William L. Sibert, was responsible for construction of the massive breakwater at the entrance to Limon Bay, the Gatun locks and their 3½ mi (5.6 km) approach channel, and the immense Gatun Dam. The Pacific Division, under Sydney B. Williamson (the only civilian member of this high-level team), was similarly responsible for the Pacific 3 mi (4.8 km) breakwater in Panama Bay, the approach channel to the locks, and the Miraflores and Pedro Miguel locks and their associated dams and reservoirs.[42]

text: The Central Division, under Major David du Bose Gaillard of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, was assigned one of the most difficult parts: excavating the Culebra Cut through the continental divide to connect Gatun Lake to the Pacific Panama Canal locks.[43]

text: On October 10, 1913, President Woodrow Wilson sent a signal from the White House by telegraph which triggered the explosion that destroyed the Gamboa Dike. This flooded the Culebra Cut, thereby joining the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.[44] Alexandre La Valley (a floating crane built by Lobnitz & Company, and launched in 1887) was the first self-propelled vessel to transit the canal from ocean to ocean. This vessel crossed the canal from the Atlantic in stages during construction, finally reaching the Pacific on January 7, 1914.[45] SS Cristobal (a cargo and passenger ship built by Maryland Steel, and launched in 1902 as SS Tremont) was the first ship to transit the canal from ocean to ocean on August 3, 1914.[46]

text: The construction of the canal was completed in 1914, 401 years after Panama was first crossed by Vasco Núñez de Balboa. The United States spent almost $500,000,000 (roughly equivalent to $9,169,650,000 now[47]) to finish the project. This was by far the largest American engineering project to date. The canal was formally opened on August 15, 1914, with the passage of the cargo ship SS Ancon.[48]

text: The opening of Panama Canal in 1914 caused a severe drop in traffic along Chilean ports due to shifts in the maritime trade routes.[49][50][51]

text:
A Marion steam shovel excavating the Panama Canal in 1908

The Panama Canal locks under construction in 1910

The first ship to transit the canal, the SS Ancon, passes through on 15 August 1914

text: Throughout this time, Ernest "Red" Hallen was hired by the Isthmian Canal Commission to document the progress of the work.

text: Later developments[edit]

text: By the 1930s it was seen that water supply would be an issue for the canal; this prompted the building of the Madden Dam across the Chagres River above Gatun Lake. Completed in 1935, the dam created Madden Lake (later Alajeula Lake) which provides additional water storage for the canal.[52] In 1939, construction began on a further major improvement: a new set of locks for the canal, large enough to carry the larger warships that the United States was building at the time and planned to continue building. The work proceeded for several years, and significant excavation was carried out on the new approach channels, but the project was canceled after World War II.[53][54]

text:
Statement on the Panama Canal Treaty Signing

Jimmy Carter's speech upon signing the Panama Canal treaty, 7 September 1977

Problems playing this file? See media help.

text: After World War II, U.S. control of the canal and the Canal Zone surrounding it became contentious; relations between Panama and the United States became increasingly tense. Many Panamanians felt that the Canal Zone rightfully belonged to Panama; student protests were met by the fencing-in of the zone and an increased military presence there.[55] Demands for the United States to hand over the canal to Panama increased after the Suez Crisis in 1956, when the United States used financial and diplomatic pressure to force France and the UK to abandon their attempt to retake control of the Suez Canal, previously nationalized by the Nasser regime in Egypt. Unrest culminated in riots on Martyr's Day, January 9, 1964, when about 20 Panamanians and 3–5 U.S. soldiers were killed.

text: A decade later, in 1974, negotiations toward a settlement began and resulted in the Torrijos–Carter Treaties. On September 7, 1977, the treaty was signed by President of the United States Jimmy Carter and Omar Torrijos, de facto leader of Panama. This mobilized the process of granting the Panamanians free control of the canal so long as Panama signed a treaty guaranteeing the permanent neutrality of the canal. The treaty led to full Panamanian control effective at noon on December 31, 1999, and the Panama Canal Authority (ACP) assumed command of the waterway. The Panama Canal remains one of the chief revenue sources for Panama.[56][57]

text: Before this handover, the government of Panama held an international bid to negotiate a 25-year contract for operation of the container shipping ports located at the canal's Atlantic and Pacific outlets. The contract was not affiliated with the ACP or Panama Canal operations and was won by the firm Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong–based shipping interest owned by Li Ka-shing.[citation needed]

text: Canal[edit]

text: Layout[edit]

text:
[hide]
[

v
t
e

]
Panama Canal

Legend

km

mi

Atlantic Ocean(Caribbean Sea)

0
Atlantic Entrance,Manzanillo Bay Breakwater entrance

8.7

5.4

[show]Port of Colón (Cristóbal)

Colón, cruise terminal, MIT, Free Trade Zone, airport

Cristóbal harbor,Atlantic passenger station

Third Bridge or Atlantic bridge

1.9

1.2

Gatun Locks3 chambers, +26 m (85 ft)

new Agua Clara Locks(3 chambers; water saving basins)

Gatun Dam,Chagres River hydroelectricity (22.5 MW)[58], spillway

24.2

15.0

Gatun Lake

Gatún River, causeway, Monte Lirio bridge

8.5

5.3

Gamboa

Chagres River,Madden Dam, Alajuela Lake

with hydroelectricity (36 MW)[58]

12.6

7.8

Culebra Cut(Gaillard Cut)

Continental watershed, summit

Centennial Bridge (Pan-American Highway, via Panama City)

1.4

0.9

Pedro Miguel Locks1 chamber, +9.5 m (31 ft)

new Cocoli Locks(3 chambers; water saving basins)

1.7

1.1

Miraflores Lake

1.7

1.1

Miraflores Locks2 chambers, +16.5 m (54 ft); spillway

13.2

8.2

[show]Port of Balboa

Diablo, Corozal passenger station, Airport, Rail terminal

Balboa

total

Bridge of the Americas (Arraiján–Panama City)

77.1

47.9

Pacific Entrance

Pacific Ocean(Gulf of Panama)

 Legend

Navigable canal(maximum draft: 39.5 feet (12.0 m))

Non-navigable water

Dock, industrial or logistical area

Water flow direction

Panama Canal Railway(passenger station, freight station)

City, village or town

text: While globally the Atlantic Ocean is east of the isthmus and the Pacific is west, the general direction of the canal passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific is from northwest to southeast. This is because of a local anomaly in the shape of the isthmus at the point the canal occupies. The Bridge of the Americas (Spanish: Puente de las Américas) at the Pacific side is about a third of a degree east of the Colón end on the Atlantic side.[59] Still, in formal nautical communications, the simplified directions "Southbound" and "Northbound" are used.

text: The canal consists of artificial lakes, several improved and artificial channels, and three sets of locks. An additional artificial lake, Alajuela Lake (known during the American era as Madden Lake), acts as a reservoir for the canal. The layout of the canal as seen by a ship passing from the Atlantic to the Pacific is as follows:[60]

text:
From the formal marking line of the Atlantic Entrance, one enters Limón Bay (Bahía Limón), a large natural harbor. The entrance runs 5½ mi (8.4 km). It provides a deepwater port (Cristóbal), with facilities like multimodal cargo exchange (to and from train) and the Colón Free Trade Zone (a free port).
A 2 mi (3.2 km) channel forms the approach to the locks from the Atlantic side.
The Gatun Locks, a three-stage flight of locks 1¼ mi (1.9 km) long, lifts ships to the Gatun Lake level, some 87 ft (27 m) above sea level.
Gatun Lake, an artificial lake formed by the building of the Gatun Dam, carries vessels 15 mi (24 km) across the isthmus. It is the summit canal stretch, fed by the Gatun River and emptied by basic lock operations.
From the lake, the Chagres River, a natural waterway enhanced by the damming of Gatun Lake, runs about 5¼ mi (8.5 km). Here the upper Chagres River feeds the high level canal stretch.
The Culebra Cut slices 7¾ mi (12.4 km) through the mountain ridge, crosses the continental divide and passes under the Centennial Bridge.
The single-stage Pedro Miguel Lock, which is ⅞ mi (1.4 km) long, is the first part of the descent with a lift of 31 ft (9.4 m).
The artificial Miraflores Lake 1⅛ mi (1.7 km) long, and 54 ft (16 m) above sea level.
The two-stage Miraflores Locks is 1⅛ mi (1.7 km) long, with a total descent of 54 ft (16 m) at mid-tide.
From the Miraflores Locks one reaches Balboa harbor, again with multimodal exchange provision (here the railway meets the shipping route again). Nearby is Panama City.
From this harbor an entrance/exit channel leads to the Pacific Ocean (Gulf of Panama), 8¼ mi (13.2 km) from the Miraflores Locks, passing under the Bridge of the Americas.

tag: ul

text: Thus, the total length of the canal is 50 miles.

text: Navigation[edit]

text:
[show]Map this section's coordinates using OSM
Map this section's coordinates using Google

Export this section's coordinates as KML

Export this section's coordinates as GPX

Map all microformatted coordinates

Place data as RDF

text:
Point
Coordinates
(links to map & photo sources)
Notes

Atlantic Entrance
9°23′15″N 79°55′07″W / 9.38743°N 79.91863°W / 9.38743; -79.91863 (Atlantic Entrance)

Gatún Locks
9°16′20″N 79°55′22″W / 9.27215°N 79.92266°W / 9.27215; -79.92266 (Gatún Locks)

Trinidad Turn
9°12′36″N 79°55′27″W / 9.20996°N 79.92408°W / 9.20996; -79.92408 (Trinidad Turn)
In "The Cut"

Bohío Turn
9°10′42″N 79°52′00″W / 9.17831°N 79.86667°W / 9.17831; -79.86667 (Bohío Turn)
In "The Cut"

Orchid Turn
9°11′03″N 79°50′42″W / 9.18406°N 79.84513°W / 9.18406; -79.84513 (Orchid Turn)
In "The Cut"

Frijoles Turn
9°09′33″N 79°48′49″W / 9.15904°N 79.81362°W / 9.15904; -79.81362 (Frijoles Turn)
In "The Cut"

Barbacoa Turn
9°07′14″N 79°48′14″W / 9.12053°N 79.80395°W / 9.12053; -79.80395 (Barbacoa Turn)
In "The Cut"

Mamei Turn
9°06′42″N 79°46′07″W / 9.11161°N 79.76856°W / 9.11161; -79.76856 (Mamei Turn)
In "The Cut"

Gamboa Reach
9°07′04″N 79°43′21″W / 9.11774°N 79.72257°W / 9.11774; -79.72257 (Gamboa Reach)

Bas Obispo Reach
9°05′46″N 79°41′04″W / 9.09621°N 79.68446°W / 9.09621; -79.68446 (Bas Obispo Reach)

Las Cascadas Reach
9°04′36″N 79°40′30″W / 9.07675°N 79.67492°W / 9.07675; -79.67492 (Las Cascadas Reach)

Empire Reach
9°03′40″N 79°39′47″W / 9.06104°N 79.66309°W / 9.06104; -79.66309 (Empire Reach)

Culebra Reach
9°02′51″N 79°39′01″W / 9.04745°N 79.65017°W / 9.04745; -79.65017 (Culebra Reach)

Cucaracha Reach
9°02′01″N 79°38′14″W / 9.03371°N 79.63736°W / 9.03371; -79.63736 (Cucaracha Reach)

Paraiso Reach
9°01′33″N 79°37′30″W / 9.02573°N 79.62492°W / 9.02573; -79.62492 (Paraiso Reach)

Pedro Miguel Locks
9°01′01″N 79°36′46″W / 9.01698°N 79.61281°W / 9.01698; -79.61281 (Pedro Miguel Locks)

Miraflores Lake
9°00′27″N 79°36′09″W / 9.00741°N 79.60254°W / 9.00741; -79.60254 (Miraflores Lake)

Miraflores Locks
8°59′48″N 79°35′31″W / 8.99679°N 79.59182°W / 8.99679; -79.59182 (Miraflores Locks)

Balboa Reach
8°58′22″N 79°34′40″W / 8.97281°N 79.57771°W / 8.97281; -79.57771 (Balboa Reach)

Pacific Entrance
8°53′18″N 79°31′17″W / 8.88846°N 79.52145°W / 8.88846; -79.52145 (Pacific Entrance)

text: Gatun Lake[edit]

text: Artificially created in 1913 by damming the Chagres River, Gatun Lake is an essential part of the Panama Canal, providing the millions of gallons of water necessary to operate the Panama Canal locks each time a ship passes through. At the time it was formed, Gatun Lake was the largest human-made lake in the world. The impassable rainforest around the lake has been the best defense of the Panama Canal. Today these areas remain practically unscathed by human interference and are one of the few accessible areas where various native Central American animal and plant species can be observed undisturbed in their natural habitat.

text: The largest island on Gatun Lake is Barro Colorado Island. It was established for scientific study when the lake was formed, and is operated by the Smithsonian Institution. Many important scientific and biological discoveries of the tropical animal and plant kingdom originated here. Gatun Lake covers about 470 square kilometres (180 sq mi), a vast tropical ecological zone and part of the Atlantic Forest Corridor. Ecotourism on the lake has become an industry for Panamanians.

text: Gatun Lake also provides drinking water for Panama City and Colón. Fishing is one of the primary recreational pursuits on Gatun Lake. Non-native peacock bass were introduced by accident to Gatun Lake around 1967[61] by a local businessman,[62] and have since flourished to become the dominant angling game fish in Gatun Lake. Locally called Sargento and believed to be the species Cichla pleiozona,[63] these peacock bass originate from the Amazon, Rio Negro, and Orinoco river basins, where they are considered a premier game fish.

text: Lock size[edit]

text: The size of the locks determines the maximum size ship that can pass through. Because of the importance of the canal to international trade, many ships are built to the maximum size allowed. These are known as Panamax vessels. A Panamax cargo ship typically has a deadweight tonnage (DWT) of 65,000–80,000 tonnes, but its actual cargo is restricted to about 52,500 tonnes because of the 12.6 m (41.2 ft) draft restrictions within the canal.[64] The longest ship ever to transit the canal was the San Juan Prospector (now Marcona Prospector), an ore-bulk-oil carrier that is 296.57 m (973 ft) long with a beam of 32.31 m (106 ft).[65]

text: Initially the locks at Gatun were designed to be 28.5 m (94 ft) wide. In 1908, the United States Navy requested that an increased width of at least 36 m (118 ft) to allow the passage of U.S. Naval ships. Eventually a compromise was made and the locks were built 33.53 m (110.0 ft) wide. Each lock is 320 m (1,050 ft) long, with the walls ranging in thickness from 15 m (49 ft) at the base to 3 m (9.8 ft) at the top. The central wall between the parallel locks at Gatun is 18 m (59 ft) thick and over 24 m (79 ft) high. The steel lock gates measure an average of 2 m (6.6 ft) thick, 19.5 m (64 ft) wide, and 20 m (66 ft) high.[66] It is the size of the locks, specifically the Pedro Miguel Locks, along with the height of the Bridge of the Americas at Balboa, that determine the Panamax metric and limit the size of ships that may use the canal.

text: The 2006 third set of locks project has created larger locks, allowing bigger ships to transit through deeper and wider channels. The allowed dimensions of ships using these locks increased by 25% in length, 51% in beam, and 26% in draft, as defined by New Panamax metrics.[67]

text: Tolls[edit]

text: Tolls for the canal are set by the Panama Canal Authority and are based on vessel type, size, and the type of cargo.[68]

text: For container ships, the toll is assessed on the ship's capacity expressed in twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs), one TEU being the size of a standard intermodal shipping container. Effective April 1, 2016, this toll went from US$74.00 per loaded container to $60.00 per TEU capacity plus $30.00 per loaded container for a potential $90 per TEU when the ship is full. A Panamax container ship may carry up to 4,400 TEU. The toll is calculated differently for passenger ships and for container ships carrying no cargo ("in ballast"). As of April 1, 2016[update], the ballast rate is US$60.00, down from US$65.60 per TEU.

text: Passenger vessels in excess of 30,000 tons (PC/UMS), known popularly as cruise ships, pay a rate based on the number of berths, that is, the number of passengers that can be accommodated in permanent beds. The per-berth charge since April 1, 2016 is $111 for unoccupied berths and $138 for occupied berths in the Panamax locks. Started in 2007, this fee has greatly increased the tolls for such ships.[69] Passenger vessels of less than 30,000 tons or less than 33 tons per passenger are charged according to the same per-ton schedule as are freighters. Almost all major cruise ships have more than 33 tons per passenger; the rule of thumb for cruise line comfort is generally given as a minimum of 40 tons per passenger.

text: Most other types of vessel pay a toll per PC/UMS net ton, in which one "ton" is actually a volume of 100 cubic feet (2.83 m3). (The calculation of tonnage for commercial vessels is quite complex.) As of fiscal year 2016[update], this toll is US$5.25 per ton for the first 10,000 tons, US$5.14 per ton for the next 10,000 tons, and US$5.06 per ton thereafter. As with container ships, reduced tolls are charged for freight ships "in ballast", $4.19, $4.12, $4.05 respectively.

text: On 1 April 2016, a more complicated toll system was introduced, having the neopanamax locks at a higher rate in some cases, natural gas transport as a new separate category and other changes.[70] As of October 1, 2017, there are modified tolls and categories of tolls in effect.[71] Small (less than 125 ft) vessels up to 583 PC/UMS net tons when carrying passengers or cargo, or up to 735 PC/UMS net tons when in ballast, or up to 1,048 fully loaded displacement tons, are assessed minimum tolls based upon their length overall, according to the following table (as of 29 April 2015):

text:
Length of vessel
Toll

Up to 15.240 meters (50 ft)
US$800

More than 15.240 meters (50 ft) up to 24.384 meters (80 ft)
US$1,300

More than 24.384 meters (80 ft) up to 30.480 meters (100 ft)
US$2,000

More than 30.480 meters (100 ft)
US$3,200

INTRA MARITIME CLUSTER - Local Tourism
More than 24.384 meters (80 ft)
US$2,000
plus $72/TEU

text: Morgan Adams of Los Angeles, California, holds the distinction of paying the first toll received by the United States Government for the use of the Panama Canal by a pleasure boat. His boat Lasata passed through the Zone on August 14, 1914. The crossing occurred during a 6,000-mile sea voyage from Jacksonville, Florida, to Los Angeles in 1914.

text: The most expensive regular toll for canal passage to date was charged on April 14, 2010 to the cruise ship Norwegian Pearl, which paid US$375,600.[72][73] The average toll is around US$54,000. The highest fee for priority passage charged through the Transit Slot Auction System was US$220,300, paid on August 24, 2006, by the Panamax tanker Erikoussa,[74] bypassing a 90-ship queue waiting for the end of maintenance work on the Gatun Locks, and thus avoiding a seven-day delay. The normal fee would have been just US$13,430.[75]

text: The lowest toll ever paid was 36 cents, by American Richard Halliburton who swam the Panama Canal in 1928.[76]

text: In the Warner Bros. cartoon, Eight Ball Bunny, Bugs Bunny attempted to bring a penguin "home" to the South Pole. Going through the canal in a handmade canoe, Bugs complained, "Twenty-five cents to go tru DIS ting? Nah, we'll walk foist!"

text: Issues leading to expansion[edit]

text: In the 100+ years since its opening, the canal continues to enjoy great success. Even though world shipping—and the size of ships themselves—has changed markedly since the canal was designed, it continues to be a vital link in world trade, carrying more cargo than ever before, with fewer overhead costs.[citation needed] Nevertheless, the canal faces a number of potential concerns.

text: Efficiency and maintenance[edit]

text: Opponents to the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaties feared that efficiency and maintenance would suffer following the U.S. withdrawal from the Panama Canal Zone; however, this has been proven not to be the case. Capitalizing on practices developed during the American administration, canal operations are improving under Panamanian control.[77] Canal Waters Time (CWT), the average time it takes a vessel to navigate the canal, including waiting time, is a key measure of efficiency; according to the ACP, since 2000, it has ranged between 20 and 30 hours. The accident rate has also not changed appreciably in the past decade, varying between 10 and 30 accidents each year from about 14,000 total annual transits.[78][79][80] An official accident is one in which a formal investigation is requested and conducted.

text: Increasing volumes of imports from Asia, which previously landed on U.S. West Coast ports, are now passing through the canal to the American East Coast.[81] The total number of ocean-going transits increased from 11,725 in 2003 to 13,233 in 2007, falling to 12,855 in 2009. (The canal's fiscal year runs from October through September.)[82] This has been coupled with a steady rise in average ship size and in the numbers of Panamax vessels passing through the canal, so that the total tonnage carried rose from 227.9 million PC/UMS tons in fiscal year 1999 to a then record high of 312.9 million tons in 2007, and falling to 299.1 million tons in 2009.[59][82] Tonnage for fiscal 2013, 2014 and 2015 was 320.6, 326.8 and 340.8 million PC/UMS tons carried on 13,660, 13,481 and 13,874 transits respectively.[83] The Panama Canal Authority (ACP) has invested nearly US$1 billion in widening and modernizing the canal, with the aim of increasing capacity by 20%.[84] The ACP cites a number of major improvements, including the widening and straightening of the Gaillard Cut to reduce restrictions on passing vessels, the deepening of the navigational channel in Gatun Lake to reduce draft restrictions and improve water supply, and the deepening of the Atlantic and Pacific entrances to the canal. This is supported by new equipment, such as a new drill barge and suction dredger, and an increase of the tug boat fleet by 20%. In addition, improvements have been made to the canal's operating machinery, including an increased and improved tug locomotive fleet, the replacement of more than 16 km (10 mi) of locomotive track, and new lock machinery controls. Improvements have been made to the traffic management system to allow more efficient control over ships in the canal.[85]

text: In December 2010, record-breaking rains caused a 17-hour closure of the canal; this was the first closure since the United States invasion of Panama in 1989.[86][87] The rains also caused an access road to the Centenario Bridge to collapse.[88][89][90][91]

text: Capacity[edit]

text: The canal is currently handling more vessel traffic than had ever been envisioned by its builders. In 1934 it was estimated that the maximum capacity of the canal would be around 80 million tons per year;[92] as noted above, canal traffic in 2015 reached 340.8 million tons of shipping.

text: To improve capacity, a number of improvements have been made to the current canal system. These improvements aim to maximize the possible use of current locking system:[93]

text:
Implementation of an enhanced locks lighting system;
Construction of two tie-up stations in Gaillard Cut;
Widening Gaillard Cut from 192 to 218 meters (630 to 715 ft);
Improvements to the tugboat fleet;
Implementation of the carousel lockage system in Gatun locks;
Development of an improved vessel scheduling system;
Deepening of Gatun Lake navigational channels from 10.4 to 11.3 meters (34 to 37 ft) PLD;
Modification of all locks structures to allow an additional draft of about 0.30 meters (1 ft);
Deepening of the Pacific and Atlantic entrances;
Construction of a new spillway in Gatun, for flood control.

text: These improvements enlarged the capacity from 300 million PCUMS (2008) to 340 PCUMS (2012). It should be noted that these improvements were started before the new locks project, and are complementary to it.

text: Competition[edit]

text: Despite having enjoyed a privileged position for many years, the canal is increasingly facing competition from other quarters. Because canal tolls have risen as ships have become larger, some critics[94] have suggested that the Suez Canal is now a viable alternative for cargo en route from Asia to the U.S. East Coast.[95] The Panama Canal, however, continues to serve more than 144 of the world's trade routes and the majority of canal traffic comes from the "all-water route" from Asia to the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts.[citation needed]

text: On June 15, 2013, Nicaragua awarded the Hong Kong-based HKND Group a 50-year concession to develop a canal through the country.[96]

text: The increasing rate of melting of ice in the Arctic Ocean has led to speculation that the Northwest Passage or Arctic Bridge may become viable for commercial shipping at some point in the future. This route would save 9,300 km (5,800 mi) on the route from Asia to Europe compared with the Panama Canal, possibly leading to a diversion of some traffic to that route. However, such a route is beset by unresolved territorial issues and would still hold significant problems owing to ice.[97]

text: Water issues[edit]

text: Gatun Lake is filled with rainwater, and the lake accumulates excess water during wet months. The water is lost to the oceans at a rate of 101,000 m3 (26,700,000 US gal; 22,200,000 imp gal) per downward lock cycle. Since a ship will have to go upward to Gatun Lake first and then descend, a single passing will cost double the amount; but the same waterflow cycle can be used for another ship passing in the opposite direction. The ship's submerged volume is not relevant to this amount of water.[98][99] During the dry season, when there is less rainfall, there is also a shortfall of water in Gatun Lake.[citation needed]

text: As a signatory to the United Nations Global Compact and member of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the ACP has developed an environmentally and socially sustainable program for expansion, which will protect the aquatic and terrestrial resources of the canal watershed. After completion, expansion will guarantee the availability and quality of water resources by using water-saving basins at each new lock. These water-saving basins will diminish water loss and preserve freshwater resources along the waterway by reusing water from the basins into the locks. Each lock chamber will have three water-saving basins, which will reuse 60% of the water in each transit. There are a total of nine basins for each of the two lock complexes, and a total of 18 basins for the entire project.[citation needed]

text: The mean sea level at the Pacific side is about 20 cm (8 in) higher than that of the Atlantic side due to differences in ocean conditions such as water densities and weather.[100]

text: Third set of locks project (expansion)[edit]

text: As demand is rising for efficient global shipping of goods, the canal is positioned to be a significant feature of world shipping for the foreseeable future. However, changes in shipping patterns —particularly the increasing numbers of larger-than-Panamax ships— necessitated changes to the canal for it to retain a significant market share. In 2006 it was anticipated that by 2011, 37% of the world's container ships would be too large for the present canal, and hence a failure to expand would result in a significant loss of market share. The maximum sustainable capacity of the original canal, given some relatively minor improvement work, was estimated at 340 million PC/UMS tons per year; it was anticipated that this capacity would be reached between 2009 and 2012. Close to 50% of transiting vessels were already using the full width of the locks.[101]

text: An enlargement scheme similar to the 1939 Third Lock Scheme, to allow for a greater number of transits and the ability to handle larger ships, had been under consideration for some time,[102] was approved by the government of Panama,[103][104] The cost was estimated at US$5.25 billion, and the expansion allowed to double the canal's capacity, allowing more traffic and the passage of longer and wider Post-Panamax ships. The proposal to expand the canal was approved in a national referendum by about 80% on October 22, 2006.[105] The canal expansion was built between 2007 and 2016, though completion was originally expected by the end of 2014.[1]

text: The expansion plan had two new flights of locks built parallel to, and operated in addition to, the old locks: one east of the existing Gatun locks, and one southwest of the Miraflores locks, each supported by approach channels. Each flight ascends from sea level directly to the level of Gatun Lake; the existing two-stage ascent at Miraflores and Pedro Miguel locks was not replicated. The new lock chambers feature sliding gates, doubled for safety, and are 427 m (1,400 ft) long, 55 m (180 ft) wide, and 18.3 m (60 ft) deep. This allows the transit of vessels with a beam of up to 49 m (160 ft), an overall length of up to 366 m (1,200 ft) and a draft of up to 15 m (49 ft), equivalent to a container ship carrying around 12,000 containers, each 6.1 m (20 ft) in length (TEU).

text: The new locks are supported by new approach channels, including a 6.2 km (3.9 mi) channel at Miraflores from the locks to the Gaillard Cut, skirting Miraflores Lake. Each of these channels are 218 m (720 ft) wide, which will require post-Panamax vessels to navigate the channels in one direction at a time. The Gaillard Cut and the channel through Gatun Lake were widened to at least 280 m (920 ft) on the straight portions and at least 366 m (1,200 ft) on the bends. The maximum level of Gatun Lake was raised from 26.7 m (88 ft) to 27.1 m (89 ft).

text: Each flight of locks is accompanied by nine water reutilization basins (three per lock chamber), each basin being about 70 m (230 ft) wide, 430 m (1,400 ft) long and 5.50 m (18 ft) deep. These gravity-fed basins allow 60% of the water used in each transit to be reused; the new locks consequently use 7% less water per transit than each of the existing lock lanes. The deepening of Gatun Lake and the raising of its maximum water level also provide capacity for significantly more water storage. These measures are intended to allow the expanded canal to operate without constructing new reservoirs.

text: The estimated cost of the project is US$5.25 billion. The project was designed to allow for an anticipated growth in traffic from 280 million PC/UMS tons in 2005 to nearly 510 million PC/UMS tons in 2025. The expanded canal will have a maximum sustainable capacity of about 600 million PC/UMS tons per year. Tolls will continue to be calculated based on vessel tonnage, and in some cases depend on the locks used.

text: An article in the February 2007 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine described the plans for the canal expansion, focusing on the engineering aspects of the expansion project.[106] There is also a follow-up article in the February 2010 issue of Popular Mechanics.[107]

text: On September 3, 2007, thousands of Panamanians stood across from Paraíso Hill in Panama to witness a huge initial explosion and launch of the Expansion Program. The first phase of the project was the dry excavations of the 218 meters (715 feet) wide trench connecting the Gaillard Cut with the Pacific coast, removing 47 million cubic meters of earth and rock.[108] By June 2012, a 30 m reinforced concrete monolith had been completed, the first of 46 such monoliths which will line the new Pacific-side lock walls.[109] By early July 2012, however, it was announced that the canal expansion project had fallen six months behind schedule, leading expectations for the expansion to open in April 2015 rather than October 2014, as originally planned.[110] By September 2014, the new gates were projected to be open for transit at the "beginning of 2016."[111][112][113][114]

text: It was announced in July 2009 that the Belgian dredging company Jan De Nul, together with a consortium of contractors consisting of the Spanish Sacyr Vallehermoso, the Italian Impregilo, and the Panamanian company Grupo Cusa, had been awarded the contract to build the six new locks for US$3.1 billion, which was one billion less than the next highest competing bid due to having a concrete budget 71% percent smaller than that of the next bidder and allotted roughly 25% less for steel to reinforce that concrete. The contract resulted in $100 million in dredging works over the next few years for the Belgian company and a great deal of work for its construction division. The design of the locks is a carbon copy of the Berendrecht Lock, which is 68 m wide and 500 m long, making it the largest lock in the world. Completed in 1989 by the Port of Antwerp, which De Nul helped build, the company still has engineers and specialists who were part of that project.[115]

text: In January 2014, a contract dispute threatened the progress of the project.[116][117] There was a delay of less than two months however, with work by the consortium members reaching goals by June 2014.[118][119]

text: In June 2015, flooding of the new locks began: first on the Atlantic side, then on the Pacific; by then, the canal's re-inauguration was slated for April 2016.[120][121][122] On March 23, 2016, the expansion inauguration was set for June 26, 2016.[123]

text: The new locks opened for commercial traffic on 26 June 2016, and the first ship to cross the canal using the third set of locks was a modern New Panamax vessel, the Chinese-owned container ship Cosco Shipping Panama.[1] The original locks, now over 100 years old, allow engineers greater access for maintenance, and are projected to continue operating indefinitely.[101]

text: The total cost is unknown since the expansion's contractors are seeking at least an addition US$3.4 billion from the canal authority due to excess expenses.[124]

text: Rival Colombia rail link[edit]

text: China is investigating a proposal to construct a 220 km (137 mi) railway between Colombia's Pacific and Caribbean coasts.[125][126][127][128]

text: Rival Nicaragua canal[edit]

text: On July 7, 2014, Wang Jing, chairman of the HK Nicaragua Canal Development Investment Co. Ltd. (HKND Group) advised that a route for Nicaragua's proposed canal had been approved. The construction work was projected by HKND to begin in 2014 and take 5 years.[129], although there has been little progress whilst a series of environmental impact assessments are being made[130]. The Nicaraguan parliament has approved plans for the 173-mile canal through Nicaragua, and according to the deal, the company will be responsible for operating and maintaining the canal for a 50-year period. The government of Nicaragua hopes this will boost the economy; the opposition is concerned with its environmental impact. According to the independent impact assessment by British firm ERM[130], some 30,000 local residents will be displaced by the canal, although opposition leaders and Amnesty International claim the figure will be in the hundreds of thousands. Supporters and the environmental impact study claim there will be net environmental benefits, but critics argue that nearly a million acres of delicate ecosystems will be destroyed by the time construction is completed.[130][131][132]

text: Other projects[edit]

text: Individuals, companies, and governments have explored the possibility of constructing deep water ports and rail links connecting coasts as a "dry canal" in Guatemala, Costa Rica, and El Salvador/Honduras. However, plans to construct these sea-rail-sea links have yet to materialize.[133]

text: Panama Canal Honorary Pilots[edit]

text: During the last one hundred years, the Panama Canal Authority has appointed a few "Panama Canal Honorary Pilots". The most recent of these were Commodore Ronald Warwick,[134] a former Master of the Cunard Liners RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 and RMS Queen Mary 2, who has traversed the Canal more than 50 times, and Captain Raffaele Minotauro, an Unlimited Master Senior Grade, of the former Italian governmental navigation company known as the "Italian Line".


document_title: Legality of polygamy

question_text: when was polygamy made illegal in the united states

text: Legality of polygamy

text: Continents that recognize polygamous marriages[edit]

text: Africa[edit]

text:
Algeria[1]
Cameroon[2]
Chad[3]
Central African Republic[4]
Republic of the Congo[5]
Djibouti[6]
Egypt[7]
Gabon:[8] Both men and women can join in polygamous marriage with the other gender under Gabonese law. In practice, the right to multiple spouses is reserved for men only.[9]
The Gambia[10]
Guinea[11]
Libya[12][13][14]
Kenya: Polygyny legal under legislation passed in 2014.[15]
Mali[16]
Mauritania[17]
Morocco[18]
Nigeria (only in some states)[19]
São Tomé and Príncipe[20]
Senegal[21]
Somalia[22]
South Sudan[23]
Sudan[24]
Swaziland[25]
Togo[26]
Tanzania[27]
Uganda[28]
Zambia[29]

text: Asia[edit]

text:
Afghanistan[30]
Bahrain[31]
Bangladesh[32]
Bhutan[33][34]
Brunei[35]
Indonesia[36]
Iran[37]
Iraq (except for in Iraqi Kurdistan)[38]
Jordan[39]
Kuwait[40]
Lebanon[41]
Maldives[42]
Myanmar[43]
Oman[44]
Qatar[45]
Pakistan[46]
Saudi Arabia[47]
Sri Lanka[48][49][50]
Syria (except in Syrian Kurdistan)[51]
United Arab Emirates[52]
Yemen[53]

text: Oceania[edit]

text: Solomon Islands[54]

text: Countries that only recognize polygamous marriages for Muslims[edit]

text: Note: These countries are included separately because they have specific legislation aimed only at Muslims.

text: Asia[edit]

text:
India
Malaysia[55]
Philippines[56]
Singapore
Sri Lanka[57]

text: Countries that do not recognize polygamous marriages[edit]

text: Africa[edit]

text:
Benin[58]
Côte d'Ivoire: Polygamy may be punishable by six months to three years imprisonment, or a fine of CFA 50,000 to CFA 500,000 (US$80 to US$800).[59]
Eritrea: Illegal since 1977, after 2015 polygamy is punishable with "a definite term of imprisonment of not less than 6 months and not more than 12 months, or a fine of 20,001 – 50,000 Nakfas."[60]
Ethiopia[61][62]
Seychelles
Tunisia, where it has been banned since 1956[63]

text: Under customary law[edit]

text:
Botswana[64]
Lesotho[65]
Liberia[66]
Malawi[67]
Namibia[68]
Niger[69]
Nigeria (only in some states):[70] Recognized in all northern Sharia states
Sierra Leone[71]
South Africa:[72] Recognized under customary law, and recognised for civil purposes in terms of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act.
Zimbabwe[73]

text: Illegal de jure but still practiced[edit]

text:
Angola[74]
Burkina Faso [75]
Burundi[76]
Cabo Verde[77]
Democratic Republic of the Congo[78]
Equatorial Guinea[79][80][81]
Ghana[82][83]
Guinea-Bissau[84]
Madagascar[85]
Mauritius
Mayotte (French territory) (not criminalized): Considered to be de facto illegal since a referendum sponsored by France in March 2009, forcing the island to comply with the French laws.[86][87] However, pre-existing Muslim marriages are currently still valid.
Mozambique[88]
Rwanda[89]

text: Americas[edit]

text:
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Bahamas
Barbados
Belize
Bolivia
Brazil
Canada: All forms of polygamy, and some informal multiple sexual relationships, are illegal under section 293 of the Criminal Code.[90] Bigamy is banned by section 290.[91] However, for a long time, the law banning polygamy has not been efficient. As of January 2009, no person had been successfully prosecuted, i.e. convicted, in over sixty years.[92] In 2009, two acquittals on polygamy charges, arising out of the town of Bountiful, British Columbia, prompted the government of British Columbia to pose a reference question to the Supreme Court of British Columbia (i.e., the superior trial court). The reference questions asked if criminalisation of polygamy was consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and, if so, under what circumstances could people be legally punished for polygamy.[93] In November 2011 the court released its 335 page long decision, which was that the criminal offence of polygamy is indeed constitutional, but that it should not be used to prosecute minors for having taken part of a polygamous marriage.[94] Chief Justice Robert Bauman conceded that there is a conflict between this law and some civil right principles, but stated that there are other and "more important" issues which in this case take precedence. He wrote (as quoted by CBC news[94]): "I have concluded that this case is essentially about harm. More specifically, Parliament's reasoned apprehension of harm arising out of the practice of polygamy. This includes harm to women, to children, to society and to the institution of monogamous marriage." Bauman argued that there are cases where the "wives" (who may be rather young; sometimes as young as 12 years) are abducted and abused, but because they believe in a faith promoting polygamy, they are not willing to bring complaints to the authorities. He reasons that these offences sometimes may be stopped by applying anti-polygamy legislation. The decision was welcomed by the Attorney General of British Columbia, and by a representative for the group Stop Polygamy in Canada. Likewise, according to the CBC news,[94] some polyamorous groups in Canada expressed their relief, since Bauman had stated that the law shouldn't apply to them unless they decide to formalize their unions. Women's rights were central to decision.[94]
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Grenada
Guatemala
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Jamaica
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and The Grenadines
Suriname
Trinidad and Tobago

text:
United States: Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states but not federally.[95] From about 1847 to 1857, in what is now the state of Utah, many Mormons practiced polygamy, which was widely condemned in the rest of the US. The US federal government threatened The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) and made polygamy illegal through the enforcement of Acts of Congress such as the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act. The LDS Church formally outlawed the practice in 1890, in a document labeled 'The Manifesto'.[92][96] Small splinter groups from the LDS Church, such as Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Apostolic United Brethren still practice polygamy and awareness has been increased through television dramas such as Big Love and reality shows such as Sister Wives. Among American Muslims, a small minority of around 50,000 to 100,000 people are estimated to live in families with a husband maintaining an informal polygamous relationship.[95]
Uruguay
Venezuela

text: Asia[edit]

text:
Armenia
Azerbaijan
China: Polygamy is illegal under Marriage Law passed in 1980. This replaced a similar 1950 prohibition.[97] In Hong Kong, polygamy ended with the passing of the Marriage Act of 1971.
Georgia
Japan
Kyrgyzstan
Mongolia
North Korea
South Korea
Taiwan: Polygamy is illegal by the 1930 ROC civil law.[98]
Tajikistan
Turkey: Polygamy was criminalized in 1926 with the adoption of the Turkish Civil Code, part of Atatürk's secularist reforms. Penalties for illegal polygamy are up to 5 years imprisonment.[99] Turkey has long been known for its promotion of secularism,[100][101][102] and has introduced measures establishing stricter bars against polygamy; these were passed by the ruling moderate Islamist AK Parti as well. In March 2009, AK Parti effectively banned polygamists from entering or living in the country.[103]
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Vietnam

text: Under customary law[edit]

text:
Cambodia[105]
Israel: While polygamy is forbidden according to the criminal law of the State of Israel, polygamous marriages contracted abroad are recognized, and polygamous marriages are legally valid for Jews and Muslims if they are valid according to Jewish law or Islamic, respectively. Adult consensual polygamy is not in fact prosecuted, though it is only widely practiced by Muslims.
Kazakhstan[106]
Laos
Nepal:[107][108][109] Criminalized with sentence of one to three years and fine up to Rs 25,000. However, the second marriage is not annulled and once the completion of the sentence, the second wife carries equal footing as the first one. Even the government pension provided to the wife of the retired government employee after his death is split by the government.[110]
Russia:[111][112] Factual polygamy and sexual relationships with several adult partners are not punishable in accordance with current[timeframe?] revisions of Criminal Code of Russia and Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses. But multiple marriage can't be registered and officially recognised by Russian authorities because Family Code of Russia (section 14 and others) prohibits registration of marriage if one of person is in another registered marriage in Russia or another country. Polygamy is tolerated in predominantly Muslim republics such as Chechnya, Ingushetia, and Dagestan.[113][not in citation given]
Thailand[114]
Timor-Leste[115]

text: Europe[edit]

text:
Albania
Andorra
Austria
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria: Illegal and punishable with up to three years imprisonment.[116]
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland: The official prosecutor is obliged to take all cases to a court where more two persons are married to each other and such relationships cease to exist after the court has decided it.[117] Polygamic marriages performed abroad may be recognized only in narrow occasions, for instance in child custody matters.[118]
France: Civil marriage registry illegal.
Germany: Illegal, punishable with fine or prison time up to three years.[119]
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland:[120] The Catholic Church in Ireland allowed someone with a church annulment but no civil annulment to remarry in church; such a marriage was legally null and bigamous but no prosecutions were brought.[121][122] The practice ended after the 1996 legalisation of divorce.[121] In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled that if someone had two legal marriages abroad, only the first was legal in Ireland, though 'that did not necessarily mean [the second] marriage "can never have legal consequences [in Ireland]"'.[123]
Italy
Kosovo
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Malta
Moldova
Monaco
Montenegro
Netherlands: Marriage between more than two individuals prohibited; however, a samenlevingscontract may include more than two partners. It legally accepts immigrants who are in such a union from a country where it is legal; e.g. if a man with two wives immigrates to The Netherlands, all three will be legally recognized.[124]
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania: Bigamy, defined as marriage conducted by a person which is already married, is punishable by up to 2 years in prison or fine. Knowingly marrying a married person is punishable by up to 1 year in prison or by fine.[125]
Russian Federation
San Marino
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden: Sweden recognizes polygamous marriages performed abroad, and all spouses are subsequently registered as spouses in the population register, but other spouses than the first spouse may not always be recognized in all occasions.[126][127][128] Only the first spouse is recognized as a spouse when decisions are made on residence permits and social security.[126] A Swede may have four spouses registered at most.[127]
Switzerland: Polygamy is illegal by law. But polygamous marriage conducted in another country may be accepted or rejected on a case-by-case basis.[129]
Ukraine
United Kingdom: Foreign polygamous marriages grant some welfare benefits only, but this is being phased out with the introduction of Universal Credit.[130] Polygamy is treated as bigamy if a second marriage (or civil partnership) is contracted in the United Kingdom. No legal recognition is extended to spouses of subsequent marriages after the first marriage is recognised even when subsequent marriages are contracted abroad.
Vatican City (Holy See)

text: Oceania[edit]

text:
Australia: Polygamous marriages cannot be performed in Australia, but polygamous relationships are still common within some indigenous Australian communities.[131][132] Polygamous marriages entered into abroad are recognised for limited purposes[which?] only.[133]
Fiji
Kiribati
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Nauru
New Zealand: Polygamous marriages cannot be performed in New Zealand, but are permissible if they are legally performed in a country that permits polygamy.
Palau
Papua New Guinea
Samoa
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu

text: Current legislation[edit]

text: In most countries, a person who marries a person while still being lawfully married to another commits bigamy. In all such cases, the second marriage is considered legally null and void. Besides the second and subsequent marriages being void, the bigamist is also liable to other penalties, which vary between jurisdictions.

text: The United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand permit some benefits for spouses of polygamous marriages performed in other countries. On a case by case basis Sweden recognizes polygamous marriages performed abroad but without giving residence or social security rights to other spouses.[126][127] In Switzerland polygamous marriages conducted in another country may be accepted or rejected on a case-by-case basis.[134] see § Europe. In the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, which allows simultaneous, additional marital rights and obligations for already married persons, prior to married persons becoming divorced from their existing spouse.[135]

text: The vast majority of Muslim majority sovereign states recognize polygamous marriages: these states span from West Africa to Southeast Asia. Exceptions to the legality of polygamy in the Middle East occur in Israel, Turkey and Tunisia.[136] The Palestinian territories — consisting of West Bank and Gaza Strip — permit polygamous unions for Muslim citizens of the territories.[137]

text: Predominantly Christian nations usually do not allow polygamy, with a handful of exceptions such as the Republic of the Congo, Uganda, and Zambia. Myanmar (formerly known as Burma) is also the only predominately Buddhist nation to allow for civil polygamous marriages.[138]

text: Almost a dozen countries that do not permit polygamous civil marriages recognize polygamous marriages under customary law. All the northern states in Nigeria governed by Islamic Sharia law recognize polygamous marriages. The autonomous regions of Somaliland and Puntland in northern Somalia also recognize polygamy, as does the country's Transitional Federal Government itself, since the country is governed by Sharia law. The recently independent country of Southern Sudan also recognizes polygamy.

text: Polyandry is de facto the norm in rural areas of Tibet, although it is illegal under Chinese family law. Polygamy continues in Bhutan[34] in various forms as it has since ancient times. It is also found in parts of Nepal,[107] despite its formal illegality in the country.[108]

text: Debates of legalizing polygamous marriages continue in Central Asian countries.[citation needed]

text: Civil unions[edit]

text: Brazil – A legally married person or a married couple cohabiting with one or more sexual partner(s) is prohibited by law as bigamy, which is punishable by two to six years of imprisonment,[139] and is valid for every Brazilian citizen, including naturalized ones.

text: In 5 May 2011 long-term cohabitation between non-married persons, known as união estável ("stable union"), was extended to same-sex couples, recognized as a family entity and granted all 112 rights of married couples – its only legal difference from marriage is that it does not change individual civil status from single to married.[citation needed]

text: One of such uniões estáveis, in Tupã, São Paulo, was registered involving a man and two women, as reported in August 2012.[140] A second união estável-bound trio took place in the city of Rio de Janeiro, this time between three women, in October 2015.[141][142]

text: International law[edit]

text: In 2000, the United Nations Human Rights Committee reported that polygamy violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), citing concerns that the lack of "equality of treatment with regard to the right to marry" meant that polygamy, restricted to polygyny in practice, violates the dignity of women and should be outlawed.[143] Specifically, the reports to UN Committees have noted violations of the ICCPR due to these inequalities[144] and reports to the General Assembly of the UN have recommended it be outlawed. [145][146] Some states where polygamy is legal are not signatories of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, Malaysia, Brunei, South Sudan and Myanmar; therefore the UN treaty doesn't apply to these countries.[147] It has been argued by the Department of Justice of Canada that polygyny is a violation of International Human Rights Law.[148]

text: Notable legislation[edit]

text: The tables below cover recent pieces of legislation that have been either debated, proposed or voted on; all of which concern a form of polygamous union.

text: To permit polygamy[edit]

text:
Country
Date
Polygamous union
Upper House
Lower House
Head of State
Final
outcome

Yes
No
Yes
No

 Iraq
1963
Polygamous civil marriage (revoke of prohibitions)[149]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 United Kingdom
1987 or earlier
Foreign marriages may receive benefits payments, being phased out[130]

 Malawi
1994
Customary law (recognizes polygamous unions)[150]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Libya
1998
Polygamous civil marriage [151]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 South Africa
1998
Customary marriage (civil recognition)[152]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Namibia
2003
Customary law (recognizes polygamous unions)[153]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Namibia
2004
Pension benefits to wives of a deceased president[154]
-
Failed
-
 No

 Uganda
2005
Polygamous civil marriage (easing of laws; plus restrictions)
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Kyrgyzstan
2007
Polygamous civil marriage[155]
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Kazakhstan
2007
Polygamous civil marriage[155]
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Uzbekistan
2007
Polygamous civil marriage
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Tajikistan
2007
Polygamous civil marriage
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Turkmenistan
2007
Polygamous civil marriage
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Kazakhstan
June 2008
Polygamous civil marriage[156]
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Iran
September 2008
Polygamous civil marriage (easing of laws)[157]
Failed
-
-
-
 No

 Namibia
July 2009
Polygamous civil marriage[158]
Proposed
-
-
-
-

 Russia
2009
Polygamous civil marriage
Proposed
-
-
-
-

 Kenya
March 2014
Polygamous civil marriage
Passed[15]
-
-
-
 Yes

text: To outlaw polygamy[edit]

text:
Country
Date
Prohibition type
Upper House
Lower House
Head of State
Final
outcome

Yes
No
Yes
No

 United States
July 1862
Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act, which made polygamy a misdemeanor offense in US territories and other areas where the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction.
'
'
Signed
 Yes

 United States
March 1882
Edmunds Act, which reinforced Morrill by making polygamy a felony in the jurisdictions covered by Morrill; also prohibited "bigamous" or "unlawful cohabitation" as a misdemeanor offense, which removed the need to prove that actual marriages had occurred in order to obtain convictions on polygamy related charges.
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Turkestan ASSR (modern Kyrgyzstan)
October 1921
Outlaws polygamy[159]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Thailand
October 1935
Outlaws polygamy; polygamous marriage[160]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 North Vietnam (modern Vietnam)
October 1950
Outlaws polygamy
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Syria
1953
Restrictions on polygamous marriage[149]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 India
1955
Outlaws polygamy and polygamous marriages for Hindus only[161]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Tunisia
1956
Ban on polygamy; polygamous marriages[162]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Iraq
1959
Ban on polygamy; polygamous marriage[149]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Revoked

 Côte d'Ivoire
1964
New penal code outlaws polygamy; polygamous marriages (upholds existing)
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 British Hong Kong (modern Hong Kong)
1971
Outlaws polygamy[163]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Eritrean People's Liberation Front (modern Eritrea)
1977
Outlaws polygamy; polygamous marriage (districts under Sharia exempt)[164]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Egypt
1979
Restrictions on polygamous marriage; ease of divorce laws[162]
Passed; abrogated
-
-
-
 No

 Egypt
1985
Restrictions on polygamous marriage (less liberal)[162]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 France
1993
Outlaws family reunion for polygamist immigrants[165]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Uganda
December 2003
Outlaws polygamy[166]
Failed
-
-
 No

 Morocco
2003
Restrictions on polygamous marriage[162]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Benin
August 2004
New penal code outlaws polygamy; polygamous marriages (upholds existing)[167]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Morocco
February 2005
Restrictions on polygamous marriage (heavy restrictions)[168]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Uganda
July 2005
Outlaws polygamy[169]
Failed
-
-
 No

 Indonesia
2007
Bans civil servants from living polygamously[170]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Morocco
May 2008
Restrictions on polygamous marriage (heavy restrictions)[citation needed]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Uganda
June 2008
Outlaws polygamy[166]
Failed
-
-
 No

 Iraqi Kurdistan
Nov. 2008
Outlaws polygamy except in selective circumstances[171]
Passed
Passed
Signed
 Yes

 Mayotte
March 2009
Mahoran status referendum, 2009 (passage outlaws polygamy)[172]
Territory-wide referendum
 Yes

 Turkey
May 2009
Disallows polygamists from immigrating into the country[173][not in citation given]

 Yes

 Indonesia
July 2009
Restrictions on polygamous marriage[174]
Pending
Pending
-
-

 Namibia
July 2009
Ban on polygamy and polygamous customary marriages
Proposed
-
-
-
-