DHeckrotte
Guru
Time to speak up, sounds like these will be pretty obtrusive.
BoatUS alarmed by Hudson River barge proposal | Trade Only Today
BoatUS alarmed by Hudson River barge proposal | Trade Only Today
Barge Anchorages on the Hudson
- Thread starter DHeckrotte
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Pgitug
Guru
With increased commerce and with the US Oil Export Ban lifted you need additional barge moorings.
HOWEVER
The two existing barge moorings that are very near and "Cover Up" the Statue Of Liberty should be removed and a 1/2 mile no anchor zone put around the lady.
HOWEVER
The two existing barge moorings that are very near and "Cover Up" the Statue Of Liberty should be removed and a 1/2 mile no anchor zone put around the lady.
FF
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 22,552
"1/2 mile no anchor zone put around the lady."
Perhaps for big commercial vessels , but anchoring right in front of the Lady is a delight.
The view of NYC is spectacular , and one is far enough out of the commercial traffic lanes to sleep well.
Perhaps for big commercial vessels , but anchoring right in front of the Lady is a delight.
The view of NYC is spectacular , and one is far enough out of the commercial traffic lanes to sleep well.
caltexflanc
Guru
Um, no... there is a marked security zone around the Lady already. The only viable anchorage for rec boats outside of that zone is well behind and wnw of the statue, still pretty cool if you find a spot. In front of the statue you are very exposed to wind and wakes from all sorts of craft through there.
cappy208
Guru
I think I'm gonna puke.....
I was anchored with one of the offending Tugboats (in one of the offending anchorages, with one of the offending barges)
On a bright Sunday morning at about 1100 a gaggle of 24' to 36' sailboats came out of Rondout Creek. It was an organized sailboat race. One of them came within 10' of the tug. My entire crew (even the off watch guys) were on the back deck, since it was a beautiful morning, and everyone was thoroughly enjoying the beautiful view, and scenery.
The guy on the sailboat was asking the crew about: What were we hauling? Was is the Bakken Crude? How could we haul it? Don't we know how bad it was for the Hudson River? Tell your office that you shouldn't be hauling it. How could 'we' do this to the Hudson River?
It took my Mate (who quite remarkably held his tongue) some control to not heave a shackle at the sailboat. BUT, all I could think of was what hypocrisy.
All this from a guy who was driving a plastic boat, with Plastic (oil) sails, with plastic (oil) life jackets, drinking coffee from a plastic (oil) mug, fueled by oil, driven to the Kingston Marina in a car (made of 50% plastic (oil), and burning oil. And he is complaining about the Bakken Crude ( that drove oil prices to the lowest price in years) that is being shipped to refineries less than 70 miles away to be refined and reshipped to him..........
Yep. I want to puke.
But, in the case of the anchorages.
These are the same anchorages that are being (have been) used for the last 34 years (that I have been in the industry) but are being challenged by the NIMBY faction who 'don't like these ugly tugs and barges'. Time to grow up and realize that these tugs and barges aren't the problem. They are the solution to removing over 3600 tractor trailers on 287 every day. Oops, There go those pesky facts again, removing the narrative for 'protecting the environment'.
To recap: These anchorages are nothing new. This is being driven by some NIMBY land owners who are looking for any reason (excuse) to restrain, prohibit, control the use of the river to their exclusive desires. These vessels being controlled are going to use the river. They are not restricted from using the river. They are simply anchoring, awaiting either berth or daylight (for running the upper river) or just laying too. None of these actions are prohibited or regulated. BUT..... This is desired to be controlled and regulated. Sounds like someone has an axe to grind.
I was anchored with one of the offending Tugboats (in one of the offending anchorages, with one of the offending barges)
On a bright Sunday morning at about 1100 a gaggle of 24' to 36' sailboats came out of Rondout Creek. It was an organized sailboat race. One of them came within 10' of the tug. My entire crew (even the off watch guys) were on the back deck, since it was a beautiful morning, and everyone was thoroughly enjoying the beautiful view, and scenery.
The guy on the sailboat was asking the crew about: What were we hauling? Was is the Bakken Crude? How could we haul it? Don't we know how bad it was for the Hudson River? Tell your office that you shouldn't be hauling it. How could 'we' do this to the Hudson River?
It took my Mate (who quite remarkably held his tongue) some control to not heave a shackle at the sailboat. BUT, all I could think of was what hypocrisy.
All this from a guy who was driving a plastic boat, with Plastic (oil) sails, with plastic (oil) life jackets, drinking coffee from a plastic (oil) mug, fueled by oil, driven to the Kingston Marina in a car (made of 50% plastic (oil), and burning oil. And he is complaining about the Bakken Crude ( that drove oil prices to the lowest price in years) that is being shipped to refineries less than 70 miles away to be refined and reshipped to him..........
Yep. I want to puke.
But, in the case of the anchorages.
These are the same anchorages that are being (have been) used for the last 34 years (that I have been in the industry) but are being challenged by the NIMBY faction who 'don't like these ugly tugs and barges'. Time to grow up and realize that these tugs and barges aren't the problem. They are the solution to removing over 3600 tractor trailers on 287 every day. Oops, There go those pesky facts again, removing the narrative for 'protecting the environment'.
To recap: These anchorages are nothing new. This is being driven by some NIMBY land owners who are looking for any reason (excuse) to restrain, prohibit, control the use of the river to their exclusive desires. These vessels being controlled are going to use the river. They are not restricted from using the river. They are simply anchoring, awaiting either berth or daylight (for running the upper river) or just laying too. None of these actions are prohibited or regulated. BUT..... This is desired to be controlled and regulated. Sounds like someone has an axe to grind.
Last edited:
FF
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 22,552
"These anchorages are nothing new. This is being driven by some NIMBY land owners who are looking for any reason (excuse) to restrain, prohibit, control the use of the river to their exclusive desires."
Come on down to FL where condo folks that could not afford the ocean side , want ICW no anchoring zones as it will ruin the view from the 10th floor!
Come on down to FL where condo folks that could not afford the ocean side , want ICW no anchoring zones as it will ruin the view from the 10th floor!
caltexflanc
Guru
Cappy, I agree with you 100%, and we dearly love cruising the Hudson. Actually though, the reference is to a proposed new set of additional of commercial anchorages. I reviewed them when the LNM came out and personally don't have an issue with them. Yes, opposition is driven by the same NIMBY selfish mentality as the referenced folks in FL.
jleonard
Guru
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2008
- Messages
- 5,063
From looking at the chart I don't think I would have an issue with the anchorages.
psneeld
Guru
Just because the anchorage circle may be large, the vessels take up only a small portion of it, and not all the time.
I have no issues either.
Usually easy enough to get around in my 40 footer, I would think if commercial traffic didn't mind, why should I.
As for landowners being pesky......hope it comes to pass and becomes another case of telling landowners to shove it.
I have no issues either.
Usually easy enough to get around in my 40 footer, I would think if commercial traffic didn't mind, why should I.
As for landowners being pesky......hope it comes to pass and becomes another case of telling landowners to shove it.
Thank you for the dose of reality Cappy! It's so easy to get spun up on these issues without knowing all the facts, especially as anchorages and moorings are such touchy subjects in some areas already.
cappy208
Guru
This is part of the hue and cry about the promotion and justification for 'new anchorages'. These are NOT new anchorages. Even the 'Coast Pilot' references these anchorages. ( and has had these references for years and years!). This is simply a 'codification' of existing use, to remove the NIMBY bitching about anchoring in the river.
There is a phenomenon of late which some COTP (captains of the port) USCG office are 'making' designated anchorages off ports. (Think Long Island Sound). These are mandated: 'for use by vessels over 300gt'.
Up to 5 Years ago tugs and tows would anchor just about anywhere they could find a Lee while awaiting either berth, weather or schedule. Now we MUST use only these anchorages. They are out in the open, at least a mile offshore, and afford no protection. Works fine for ships.... Not so well for conventional Tugs.
The proposed Hudson River anchorages are based upon choke points, Berth proximity, and winter time 'daylight only convoying' above Kingston. It is a 125 mile trip from Battery to Albany. It is 57 miles from Port Ewen to Albany. This distance is 'just doable' in winter when convoying to Albany during daylight. The ONE anchorage at Hyde Park only holds two vessels. If commercial vessels are mandated to only anchor in designated anchorages...... More space is needed.
Here's the kicker. The Hyde Park anchorage is actually 'closed' from Dec 15th to Feb 28th! So obviously the use of the river isn't 'closed' from those times. So something need to be changed.
The town of Yonkers is particularly comedic. The town and many respondents have been quite vocal 'about all the increase in tugs anchoring at Yonkers.' The anchorages off Yonkers have been on the chart and used for over the 34 years since I was a deckhand. Now all of a sudden....... Nimby.
Last edited:
OP
OP
DHeckrotte
Guru
Capt.Bill11
Guru
cappy208
Guru
That right there is SO important. Thanks for the 'past hostorical use' proof. This is taken at Jones Point, Looking towards Tomkins cove. US Ready Reserve Fleet anchorage.
FF
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 22,552
"..hope it comes to pass and becomes another case of telling landowners to shove it."
Agreed , but many still vote , and are mobile enough to make it to a county meeting.
Agreed , but many still vote , and are mobile enough to make it to a county meeting.
O C Diver
Guru
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2010
- Messages
- 12,868
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Slow Hand
- Vessel Make
- Cherubini Independence 45
I read the proposal and guess my only point would be a time limit for how long a barge could stay at the anchorage. If the purpose is to provide staging areas to move them up and down the river, that's one thing. If it morphs into a long term storage facility for less used equipment, that's very different. Think a simple requirement for all barges to leave the Hudson river once every 30 days wouldn't be unreasonable. That same type of requirement would have solved a lot of the derelict boat problems in FL also.
Ted
Ted
