FOOTNOTES:
^{1 "Anchors Selection and Use" 2nd ed. (1983).}

^{2 It is recognized that anchor size may vary the result, e.g., a 750 lb. Navy anchor will have substantially better penetration characteristics than a 75 lb. Navy anchor, although data does not support the conclusion that there is constant efficiency with size.  "Interaction of Anchors With Soil and Anchor Design" R.J. Taylor (1983).}

³ Prior to the tests, each anchor was individually weighed.  The actual weights are as follows: West Marine Performance 35-40 lbs.; Luke 50-53 lbs.; CQR 45-47 lbs.; Davis 45-45 lbs.; MAX 17-43 lbs.; Fortress FX 37-24 lbs.; Delta 35-35 lbs.; Bruce 44-45 lbs.

⁴ Kelp grows in the Spring and Summer.   By late summer the kelp here is visible on the surface.

⁵ "Mud is obviously a generic term when used on charts.  Mud strength varies considerably.  "Interaction of Anchors With Soil and Anchor Design" R.J. Taylor (1983).

⁶ These are:
               Point Monroe:  uneven bottom, sand, eel grass, kelp;
               Port Madison:  sticky mud, shells, weed, eel grass;
               Blake Island:  sand, clay, eel grass.

⁷ If holding power as a factor of weight was considered, the CQR and MAX would change positions. 

⁸ Data supplied by West Marine Products.  Note the anchor weights are somewhat different than those recorded in the Puget Sound tests.

⁹ This study in Biscayne, Florida, was reported in Sail June 1990 and in a report by Nav-X Corporation dated February 28, 1990.  Nav-X manufactures the Fortress.  The tests were conducted in coarse grain coral sand.

¹⁰ A prototype MAX anchor tested only two times at San Francisco held to 800 lbs. on both occasions.  Its promise in those tests led to its selection for the Puget Sound tests.

¹¹ Source "Anchors Selection and Use" R. A. Smith, 2d ed. (1983).

¹² Ibid Table 15.

¹³ The ABYC (American Boat and Yacht Council) values are higher and are discussed infra.  Some observers, Wilber Andrews included, do not agree that veering will affect load.

¹⁴ However, the Delta did exhibit a tendency to drag and pick up weed on the veering tests.  The Luke which was generally unsatisfactory also tended to foul the chain on the stock during the veering.

¹⁵ Source - Robert A. Smith.  Based upon observation, Smith would also rate the holding power of the Performance 35 second to the FX 37.

¹⁶ The Luke 50 and Davis 45 are not listed as they failed to have minimum holding capacity.

¹⁷ Andy Peabody who manufactures the MAX suggests that the anchor was at a disadvantage during the tests because the Reliable of 83,000 lbs. displacement was substantially heavier than Comfort and Portage Bay.

¹⁸ Jim Davis, manufacturer of the Davis 45, reported that the anchor had been furnished to the Sailing Foundation with the wrong stock and that this was the reason for its failure.

¹⁹ The author has also recently interviewed two ocean cruisers, one returning from the South Pacific, another who has just returned from Patagonia, the Falklands and South Georgia, who both report the Bruce was reliable as a storm anchor in the areas encountered.

^{APPENDIX 1}

^{Diver Debrief and Video Review}

^{Diver Montgomery reported as follows:
1.  Point Monroe Area.  Mostly sand, some scattered kelp and eel grass.  Bottom uneven in places and when anchors pulled downhill they become unstable.  When set on even bottom the Fortress was completely buried.  When strain applied the chain lifted off the floor with very slight camber.  In one section of bay with compact sand Montgomery couldn't set Davis anchor manually in the sea bed.}

^{2.  Wing Point.  Small fist-size rock, lots of kelp on top of hard glacial clay.  Anchors skipped over rocks and rocks prevented flukes from digging into surface on most occasions.  Large fluke anchors became clogged with leafy kelp and other weed.}

^{3.  Port Madison.  Large areas of sticky mud, some debris on bottom.  At entrance some weed and eel grass.}

^{4.  Jefferson Head.  More and larger rocks than at Wing Point but bottom sand.  Again most anchors had flukes deflected by rocks and could not get to the sand.  The large fluke anchors became clogged with kelp.}

^{5.  Blake Island.  More sand, less eel grass than noted on the April 22 reconnaissance.  Tests done in 15' of water at minus tide.  The hard clay eel grass noted on reconnaissance was inshore at 7' depths.  Chart indicates sand at deeper water (1946 survey).  More flat than Pt. Monroe and easier setting.  Both CQR and Delta pulled furrows with their shanks lying above floor.  A longer scope (8 or 10:1) might have helped.  The Fortress and Performance 35 buried completely in the sand.}

^{APPENDIX 2}

^{Other Anchor Tests Reviewed and Summarized as Follows:}

^{French Anchor Test}

^{A report issued in 1987 summarized tests conducted at Quiberon Bay, France, examined the holding power of 12 kg. (30 lbs.) anchors on bottoms reported to be mud, sand and hard.  The results include the following:}

^{MAX Anchor Tests}

^{On August 1, 1991, Underwriter Capabilities, Inc., issued a report to Creative Marine regarding tests of Creative's MAX anchor near Pensacola, Florida.  The bottom is stated to be light mud to medium soft sand.}

^{The results are summarized as the average results of three sets for each anchor in each area.}

^{Dutch Anchor Test}

^{A Dutch anchor test was reported in the Wk 12, 1990, Watersport Journal.  Anchors were tested in boxes 6 meters in length and filled with sand covered with water.   The results of holding power measurements:}