Boats destroyed to save the bridge

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

FlyWright

Guru
Site Team
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
13,731
Location
California Delta
Vessel Name
FlyWright
Vessel Make
1977 Marshall Californian 34 LRC
Last edited:
Guess they don't have rope there. Wonder if they would do that if it was it large propane tank?
 
There's a launch ramp about 200 yards upriver that might have been usable.

Also, Cpseudonym's former Owens is docked about 150 yards upriver at Wimpy's. It's visible in this video (black canvas at ~00:20) which shows the 4 boats beginning their drift downstream toward the bridge. So far, the Owens appears safe.

https://www.facebook.com/kyle.springmeyer/videos/1400068650026372/
 
Last edited:
I am wondering if a boat insurance is covering this kind of things?
 
I wonder if there are any tow boats in the area. Also, what about any more bridges down river? Are they going to take responsibility for any fuel spills?
 
seems stupid to me. are there no tow boats in that area??

They just created a lot of pollution down river for someone to clean up. Fuel spill will be next.
 
Last edited:
Not a facebook member so only can see the first few seconds of the videos. Assuming the boats were intentionally sunk, wouldn't the USCG be upset about petroleum discharge and new hazards to navigation? On its face, the action taken was irresponsible.
 
Last edited:
Pretty easy to say that was remarkably stupid on someone's part. I did not see all that much current.
 
I am wondering if a boat insurance is covering this kind of things?
Insurance would cover it. The insurance company would pay the insured and might subrogate to collect from the party that made the decision to destroy the boat. The issue is "was it appropriate to destroy the boat". Was the bridge at risk? Seems that a skilled skipper with a powerful boat and competent crew could have tied on to the boat and towed it off the bridge. Or, have a skilled operator jump from bridge or rescue vessel and drive the boat off the bridge. Risky operation either way. Seems to me that deploying the heavy equipment on the bridge was a risky operation in itself.
The easiest thing to do was nothing and let nature rule. I give credit to the person in charge who made this decision. It ain't easy being the boss sometimes.
 
It's hard to cast an opinion when not privy to what had or had not already been attempted. If this was in fact the initial decision without any other attempts then I for one would question the decision.
 
Can you imagine what flooding would have occurred without all the previously-near-empty, man-made reservoirs?
 
Mark

Were not some dams removed due to lack of rain and CA's instant gratification needs to deal with global warming politics?

All will be forgotten until the next 50 year flood event.
 
Last edited:
Wow! wonder who will be responsible for debris removal and spill mitigation?
 
Two things most likely leading to the debris removal policies around these CA bridges:

First, debris accumulation is the death knell for bridges as it forces water to the abutments thus potentially washing away the cover for the support structures.

Second, few bridges are designed for significant side loads which ice, debris or runaway barges can impose. My guess is the highway department knows quite well the debris mitigation techniques to be employed during flood events.

Regarding the potential fuel spills, just like upstream sewage plant discharges during flood events - trivial and thoroughly diluted.
 
Last edited:
Two things most likely leading to the debris removal policies around these CA bridges:

First, debris accumulation is the death knell for bridges as it forces water to the abutments thus potentially washing away the cover for the support structures.

Second, few bridges are designed for significant side loads which ice, debris or runaway barges can impose. My guess is the highway department knows quite well the debris mitigation techniques to be employed during flood events.

Regarding the potential fuel spills, just like upstream sewage plant discharges during flood events - trivial and thoroughly diluted.

Agree.....

The little engine oil would be so spread out I doubt it would be more than a spot clean here and there unless animals were involved. Maybe if it collected in a pool someplace...but I doubt it.

The gasoline usually evaporates before anyone can get absorbent pads in to clean it and obviously booming isn't practical in a flood.

Even though unlikely, if a cleanup is necessary on the environmental side, the USCG used to have access to an emergency fund for clean ups. A few phone calls were made to aurhorize a certain amount for clean up. The agency holding those funds (guessing the EPA but could have been anyone) would then bill the insurance companies of all they say fit to...if it was even worth it as this one will probably go to court with a lot of finger pointing.
 
Well first, owners should have made sure their boats were properly secured. But hard to do that if the dock washes away.


Second, I'm no engineer, but the boats were a danger to the bridge? Really. Two heavy duty Excavators on the bridge? You would think the weight would be more of a concern.
 
Total insanity and the guy taking the video, did it never cross his mind to do something? Two of them temporarily were sitting right by the dock and could have just been tied. Even the first one to get stuck there could have easily been pulled away. Would have been fairly easy to board it even from the bridge. Surely though there were other boats around to help. It seems to me some were more interested in watching and filming disaster than trying to do anything to avert it.
 
Total insanity and the guy taking the video, did it never cross his mind to do something? Two of them temporarily were sitting right by the dock and could have just been tied. Even the first one to get stuck there could have easily been pulled away. Would have been fairly easy to board it even from the bridge. Surely though there were other boats around to help. It seems to me some were more interested in watching and filming disaster than trying to do anything to avert it.

B
If you watch the first video, you see a boat and its attached dock get rolled under the bridge. After seeing that, the guys taking the next video see the boats that the excavators attack coming down on the same spot. If it was me, no way would I chance going aboard.
 
B
If you watch the first video, you see a boat and its attached dock get rolled under the bridge. After seeing that, the guys taking the next video see the boats that the excavators attack coming down on the same spot. If it was me, no way would I chance going aboard.

I saw the boat and dock roll under. No issue with that. But then the nice Gibson likely could have been driven away if not pulled. My real issue is the next two which both at one point were sitting beside the dock.

Even the second boat, I wouldn't have worried about climbing aboard, it was stuck and wasn't going to break and go under in any short length of time. That's why they felt the need to batter it. I don't understand the fact there were people there watching and making no attempt to do anything. There was no reason for the last three boats to end up destroyed.
 
Insane trying to go aboard, insane trying to get a boat even close.


The boats may not have been the problem as much as they were the start to a giant beaver dam.


They could have started collecting debris and ultimately the load could have damaged the bridge.


3 knots of current and the average boat cant get away from side too....I see it all the time at my marina. That current was at least 5 maybe way more but I cant see it too well.


They may have been able to pull them into slacker water, even commented by someone in the video....but who had a line long enough or was able to lasso something strong enough on the boats?
 
Last edited:
Insane trying to go aboard, insane trying to get a boat even close.


The boats may not have been the problem as much as they were the start to a giant beaver dam.


They could have started collecting debris and ultimately the load could have damaged the bridge.


Ding ding ding winner!!!

The boats where personal property right up until the time they became engaged with the bridge, which represents critical infrastructure. They became expensive debris at that point.

Excavators and backhoes are routinely used to keep debris from side loading bridges during storms.
 
When I first looked at the videos, I thought the same..."What in the hell are they thinking? Someone could save those boats!" I think that's a normal response from any boat lover. Later, I had the benefit of listening to a radio broadcast on an outdoors show that mentioned the delay and inaction between the boats breaking loose and the heavy equipment showing up to save the bridge.

As I pondered the options and the reality of the situation, I came to the following conclusions.

1. The dock at New Hope Landing which was securing the 4 boats had broken apart from the near-record flows and the highest water we've seen in these parts in at least 20 years. We typically have floating docks here and the pilings on which the docks raise and lower are normally set to slightly above the levee top. In this case, it's conceivable that those rings that slide vertically on the pilings may have failed or just slipped off the top of the piling, releasing the entire section of dock.

2. This occurred as the flows were INCREASING so it wasn't going to get any better with time. The debris floating downstream is at a dangerous level and would only worsen a bad situation when they met the boat-jam at the bridge.

3. The boat's owners were probably elsewhere. No one has any skin in the game or owner authorization to board and attempt to rescue their boats.

4. Getting a line secured to a boat to tie it to a dock would have been difficult at best. This water is rushing at peak levels and is very treacherous.

5. Any attempt to board and save boats would come as risk of human life. Not worth it for a boat valued at $500,000, let alone some of these floating basket cases like one of them. (They mentioned on the radio show that one was in a sad state of disrepair and had been apparently ignored for a very long time.)

6. This area is not accessible by high profile boats except through a perimeter slough that was severely flooded and filled with hazards. With the high waters, even the restricted bridge clearance normally seen at the Wimpy's Bridge would have been reduced to just 5-7 feet, IMO. There was no way to get a rescue vessel to the site.

7. Once the equipment was on site for destruction, it was too late to attempt any boat rescues.

8. In total, those boats are probably worth less than $500K. Losing the bridge would impact thousands of locals who depend upon it. Replacing the bridge would run well into the millions of dollars. Mathematically, it's a no brainer.

As mentioned earlier, kudos to the man who had to make the call to destroy the boats. Not an easy decision and one fraught with Monday morning quarterbacking like we've done here. He made the right call to save the infrastructure at the expense of a few old boats.

In the end, the bridge was saved and no one was hurt. That's a very good ending if you ask me.
 
When I first looked at the videos, I thought the same..."What in the hell are they thinking? Someone could save those boats!" I think that's a normal response from any boat lover. Later, I had the benefit of listening to a radio broadcast on an outdoors show that mentioned the delay and inaction between the boats breaking loose and the heavy equipment showing up to save the bridge.

As I pondered the options and the reality of the situation, I came to the following conclusions.

1. The dock at New Hope Landing which was securing the 4 boats had broken apart from the near-record flows and the highest water we've seen in these parts in at least 20 years. We typically have floating docks here and the pilings on which the docks raise and lower are normally set to slightly above the levee top. In this case, it's conceivable that those rings that slide vertically on the pilings may have failed or just slipped off the top of the piling, releasing the entire section of dock.

2. This occurred as the flows were INCREASING so it wasn't going to get any better with time. The debris floating downstream is at a dangerous level and would only worsen a bad situation when they met the boat-jam at the bridge.

3. The boat's owners were probably elsewhere. No one has any skin in the game or owner authorization to board and attempt to rescue their boats.

4. Getting a line secured to a boat to tie it to a dock would have been difficult at best. This water is rushing at peak levels and is very treacherous.

5. Any attempt to board and save boats would come as risk of human life. Not worth it for a boat valued at $500,000, let alone some of these floating basket cases like one of them. (They mentioned on the radio show that one was in a sad state of disrepair and had been apparently ignored for a very long time.)

6. This area is not accessible by high profile boats except through a perimeter slough that was severely flooded and filled with hazards. With the high waters, even the restricted bridge clearance normally seen at the Wimpy's Bridge would have been reduced to just 5-7 feet, IMO. There was no way to get a rescue vessel to the site.

7. Once the equipment was on site for destruction, it was too late to attempt any boat rescues.

8. In total, those boats are probably worth less than $500K. Losing the bridge would impact thousands of locals who depend upon it. Replacing the bridge would run well into the millions of dollars. Mathematically, it's a no brainer.

As mentioned earlier, kudos to the man who had to make the call to destroy the boats. Not an easy decision and one fraught with Monday morning quarterbacking like we've done here. He made the right call to save the infrastructure at the expense of a few old boats.

In the end, the bridge was saved and no one was hurt. That's a very good ending if you ask me.

I guess you are right, although still question the last two. I'd guess also that your valuation is very much on the high side as older houseboats are typically in the $30-70k range. I'm assuming these were not being lived aboard which is good. I hope they were insured. Also, not being there I can't fairly judge the time anyone had to react. Clearly once they were all wedged against the bridge, they had to be eliminated.
 
Back
Top Bottom