March 2nd Nav Buoy Meeting St Croix River

From Rivertowns.net

Coast Guard sets buoy tender meeting — may remove buoys from St. Croix

By Jon Echternacht

[email protected]

A proposal by the U.S. Coast Guard to remove the buoys it maintains on the St. Croix River may not be in place by the coming navigational season.

Earlier this month the Coast Guard said since the stretch of the St. Croix between Prescott and Stillwater is not used for commercial traffic and is not dredged by the Army Corps of Engineers, it would remove the buoys.

“The proposal is to look at how to be more fiscally responsible with the taxpayer’s money,” said Chief Warrant Officer Justin Coder at the USCG headquarters in St. Louis. There is also the problem of navigating the river with the CG Cutter Wyaconda since the channel is not dredged anymore.

“The problem is the river is so shallow that the cutter can’t get to the buoys,” Coder said, but he doubted the full review process would be completed to affect the St. Croix this summer.

The cutter that works the area is based in Dubuque, Iowa. Coder said it may never be able navigate the local waters again on the 25.5 mile stretch of river.

However, recreational boaters have become accustomed to buoys to mark the shallow spots and danger points.

The Coast Guard has set up a public meeting on the subject for March 2 in Stillwater, Minn. When the final arrangements for the public meeting are set, it will be published in the Federal Register and in the local notice to mariners.

“If it is determined that federal aids to navigation are needed we are looking into all options to maintain them within the safe operating limits of USCG resources,” said Ensign Austin T. Glass of the USCG 8th District.

“During the last visit to the area the CGC Wyaconda did touch bottom several times, which is the main reason for beginning the review of the aids to navigation system in the area,” Glass said.

Anyone who desires to contribute feedback can e-mail concerns to [email protected] or [email protected] the local notice to mariners can be accessed at http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/lnm/ d8mrs/default.htm

Thanks for the update BK Do you plan on attending the meeting?

I hope they do leave the buoys out, this way I can watch the big boats beach themselves while I’m out there fishing. Seriuosly though the owners of the bigger boats that are more prone to running aground just need to take a course to learn how to read the GPS it came with. It is also a river and things are always changing so you still need to be careful.

I’m planning on it Jesse. Not so much for me but to support…ummm life. I’m convinced by removing these there will be accidents that will cause serious injury and could include death.

I do have two questions.

Quote:

---

During the last visit to the area the CGC Wyaconda did touch bottom several times, which is the main reason for beginning the review of the aids to navigation system in the area,” Glass said

---

I don’t boat on the St Croix as much as I use to, but I’m trying to think where the CGC Wyaconda would “touch” while placing these AToNs IF they stayed in the channel while placing them?

Call me uninformed, I’ll accept that.

The obvious question is…if they are “touching” wouldn’t that mean it’s a more serious risk to the pleasure craft using the river?

I’m sure there’s some weight to the cement anchors, so maybe they should place those last so the CGC Wyaconda doesn’t draft as much water?

First it was cost and safety of the crew (10 or less people that are trained), now it’s because they are using too large of a boat?

I call BS.

It wasn’t 5 years ago when I watched them place the channel marker in Afton. I sure wish I would have written the name of the boat they used down, but I know for a fact is was a smaller vessel than the CGC Wyaconda.

IMHO if government agencies would stop putting their own spin on issue and level with the public, they would find much more support.

I’m with you BK! B as in B and S as in S! That rig probably draughts somewhere around 5-6′ I would guess? So let’s see, keep it in the channel by the Kinni (marked by bouys), stay to the left of Afton sandbar (marked by bouys), go around catfish point/St. Mary’s (marked by bouys) and then just watch out for the 94 bridge? I mean come on….

I have also witnessed tending too, I agree the boat was much smaller!

I wonder if the USCG has seen the amount of snow we have on the ground in the Midwest right now. I’m just sayin’ I don’t think water depth is gonna be a problem. But they are the experts!

If water depth is the actual issue :::coughcoughBScoughcough::: then why doesnt the USCG utilize the services of a local company to place the bouys? Who places the “NO WAKE” bouys? Couldnt that agency place the channel markers as well (for a price) ? Seems to me there is more to the story than what is actually being stated. If the USCG had any concerns or regards for people’s safety this issue wouldnt have even made it out of the USCG office and into the opinion of the public. Seems to me like someone found a way to save $$$$ here so they could make more $$$$ there.(imho)

It would be great if someone from the USCG was a member here at IDO so we could get opinions from that side of the table.

Judging by that picture BK, even if that is the boat they use there is NO WAY that there is 8′ of tug and barge under the waters surface. Maybe if they had paid better attention to the navigational aids they wouldnt have hit bottom. They have just as much if not more of a likelihood to hit bottom on the Mississippi as well. The depth excuse is already old and washed up

Quote:

---

“If it is determined that federal aids to navigation are needed we are looking into all options to maintain them within the safe operating limits of USCG resources,” said Ensign Austin T. Glass of the USCG 8th District.

---

Taking another look at this with an open mind…

I’m guessing the problem with “touching” is more when they take the aids out than when the drop them. If they move shallower, I can see there being a problem.

By that last quoted statement I’ll place a 25 cent bet that one or more of the local marinas will be taking care of them in the future. That would be a win/win compromise and what the CG wanted all along.

Man, I need to lay off the coffee.

I was out there last fall when they were pulling them out. They were just using an oversized john boat and would take one out and take off somehwere with it. They could only fit one in that boat.

This would be one more reason for me not to fish the Croix. I fear for my life as it is when I’m in the no wake zones with the big boats crawling through. Can’t wait until they come thru with little reason so slow down. They will have to change it from recreation to wreckreation.

Quote:

---

They were just using an oversized john boat and would take one out and take off somehwere with it.

---

If I’m not mistaken, they are put up on shore.

“The problem is the river is so shallow that the cutter can’t get to the buoys,” Coder said

So they motor from the Miss to the Croix THEN the water is too shallow??!! BS

The St. Croix is deeper than the Mississippi? That comment on “shallow water” doesn’t hold water.

Has anyone looked into the reason why the green flashing marker at Andersen point was not running this summer?
Could that have had anything to do with someone losing their way in the fog while driving across at night? Could be a real safety concern if that person wound up taking a wrong turn and went through thin ice, say, perhaps down by the railroad swing bridge?
It is a bit beyond me that the Coast Guard can attempt to justify not working the bouys with the observation that there’s no longer commercial traffic on the Croix when the
packet tour boats are still operating and the CG is trying to LICENSE COMMERCIAL GUIDES! (Wonder what the guy with the gandola at Stillwater thinks about all this?)
The bouy at Black Bass Point south of Afton marks a shifting, dangerous bar. Last fall I saw the tender come through there on a Saturday–suppose all that overtime figures into the cost of servicing our public waterway?

I see all the day/night markers are working when I come across the river at 2:30am every night. The one by the bridge is working and same with the one on Houlden point. I dont recall any day/night markers at Anderson point.

PDL, I’m with you on the markers and I’m trying to get my schedule adjusted to be at the meeting in support of keeping them.

I do have a copy of the letter that both the Governor of WI and MN signed and sent to the CG explaining why they felt the markers should stay. That’s a good thing.

As a side note, the CG can’t be everywhere all the time watching these markers. It’s really up to us to help in this area. In class they point out The Navigational Notices that tells of any navigational hazards. Many that we boaters have called in. The link is at the bottom of the page in case anyone would like to use it.

Here’s the number to call if you see a aid out of place or not working 314-269-2610. I’ve used it twice since I received my license.

Also, it’s not a requirement to be licensed to run a gondola. Well, unless it has a motor.

Nav Notice<<<

I’m interested in how this turns out… personally a few places I fish will be helped because I will be able to stay on them better without bumber boats.

It will be a problem for most… lots of hang ups… maybe I can start a tow service (bad joke).

BK – a tow service is another endorsement that we can get on our OUPV license isn’t it? Did you get a tow endorsement?

Turk

Originally I didn’t because I didn’t think I would ever need it.

Gary from ExplorersGuideLLC offers it with his class…or like me, make arrangements for getting it later.

PS for the cabin fever people out there, a person does not need an endorsement to tow someone if they are not charging for it.

Good Afternoon to all,

The details for the Coast Guard Public Meeting have been finalized. The meeting will be held in Stillwater MN at Stillwater Junior High School, 523 Marsh Street West, Stillwater MN, 55082-5700. The meeting will take place in the auditorium from 6:30pm to 8:30pm on Tuesday March 2, 2010. Parking is available in the main lot on the north side of the building.

The meeting notice has been published in the Local Notice to Mariners on the second page.

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/lnm/d8mrs/lnm0806r2010.pdf

Information regarding the meeting can also be found on the Coast Guard’s 8th District External Affairs page under the news tab.

http://www.d8externalaffairs.com/go/doc/425/455751/

Feel free to email me if there are any questions regarding the meeting.

Respectfully,

Austin Glass, ENS
USCG District 8

Thanks BK.

Did anyone read the last issue of Outdoor News? There was an OUPV story in there, and it said essentially that certain state legislators were looking into the TWIC requirements as being over bearing and irrelevant to port security? (you think?)

Then the USCG area supervisor (STL, MO)was quoted with a different stand than they have been previously presenting. Sketchy on the details here, but it sounded a bit different than their current stand. Wondering if anyone else saw this, it was informative, but my memory is a bit poor.

Turk

We can’t afford maintenance for safety on the Croix? Perhaps someone would like to explain why “visual mitigation” justifies earmarking $1.1 MILLION to remove the King Plant coal unloading structures at Bayport in the plans for the new crossing bridge.

Could the private sector maintain the buoys cheaper than the Coast Guard?

I heard the cost estimate is around $1k per marker to maintain.

I personally watched the cost guard pull the marker from Beanie’s point in November-09. Here’s what I observed:

o A barge type boat (which appeared to be the Wyaconda) drove up the river towards Hudson.

o A minimum of 8 people were on board the boat, all were dressed in a red/orange coast guard suites.

o They pulled up to the buoy on Beanie’s point. It took around three minutes for the crane operator and two others to hookup the buoy, lift it from the water, and place it on the deck of the boat.

It appeared to be a simple procedure that only took a few minutes. Three people were involved in the operations. Five people watched.

While observing this, the person I was fishing with asked why most of the people on deck were just standing around and watching. I didn’t have an answer.

This is a goverment job, 5 people watching is standard procedure.

Shale,

Good post. Agree on your logic.

Turk

Anyone have a meeting update?

I saw a report on the news the morning after the meeting that there seemed to be agreement that the buoy’s need to remain but need to be maintained differently. I think the report said by a group other than the Coast Guard (smaller boats) or possibly use buoys that could stay in year round. I wasn’t able to find this report online now though.

Quote:

---

Shale,

Good post. Agree on your logic.

Turk

---

Same here. Living on the River my whole life, i’ve seen them year after year pulling them in. It’s not that difficult!

I only wish they could put them in the same place year after year…. Otherwise just leave them in year round!

Was among about 150 people at the meeting…wondering why they called this at Stillwater junior high, which can be difficult to find in the dark even if you live here.
There was a microphone for comments or questions but very few people used it so couldn’t hear about half of it. Have been watching for news accounts but haven’t seen much, though apparently channels 4 and 5 had crews there and carried summaries. Two coast guard boats involved, including the Sangamon, which came up on a Saturday past Afton. Anyone seen a press release or summary of findings?

I’ve been looking on-line and have only found the announcements of the meeting. Not everyone updates frequently so I was going to give it a week or so and check again.