Van Isle boat fire

[twistedtree]

Is insurance required by law in BC? I assume Van Isle requires it if you want to stay there.

This may be a good example of why marines want to be designated as an Additionally Insured party on your boat policy. I think it would allow them to initiate a wreck removal claim on your policy.

 

[rslifkin]

This may be a good example of why marines want to be designated as an Additionally Insured party on your boat policy. I think it would allow them to initiate a wreck removal claim on your policy.

It's exactly why they want to be listed. If something happens to your boat (like a fire) and damages the marina (such as burning a dock) it makes it easier for the marina and their insurance to claim things against your insurance.

 

[Patemey]

It's exactly why they want to be listed. If something happens to your boat (like a fire) and damages the marina (such as burning a dock) it makes it easier for the marina and their insurance to claim things against your insurance.

In that sense, should I be listed as an additionally insured party on my slip neighbors insurance policies to make it easier for me to claim against their insurance in the event of a claim?

I think its absurd for the marina to be listed as an additionally insured party on my policy and have my insurance co. remove them. IMO, if my boat causes a claim, they can get in line with everyone else.

 

[ranger58sb]

I think its absurd for the marina to be listed as an additionally insured party on my policy and have my insurance co. remove them. IMO, if my boat causes a claim, they can get in line with everyone else.

Boaters are free to refuse.

Marinas that ask to be listed as additional insured are free to deny dockage.

FWIW, we've only had to do the additonal insured thing for long-term dockage, not for transient movements.

-Chris

 

[Patemey]

Boaters are free to refuse.

Marinas that ask to be listed as additional insured are free to deny dockage.

FWIW, we've only had to do the additonal insured thing for long-term dockage, not for transient movements.

-Chris

Yes, for marinas that require being listed as additionally insured that’s their prerogative. For mine, their policies and procedures for moorage do not require it. Yet it occasionally pops onto my policy. So they’re doing it behind the scenes without notification.

 

[rslifkin]

Yes, for marinas that require being listed as additionally insured that’s their prerogative. For mine, their policies and procedures for moorage do not require it. Yet it occasionally pops onto my policy. So they’re doing it behind the scenes without notification.

It might be the insurance company doing it, not the marina. Insurance companies usually want to know where your "home slip" is if you have one. Being that a lot of marinas do require being listed as additional insured for seasonal / long-term dockage, insurance companies may list them by default unless you ask them not to.

 

[twistedtree]

In that sense, should I be listed as an additionally insured party on my slip neighbors insurance policies to make it easier for me to claim against their insurance in the event of a claim?

I think its absurd for the marina to be listed as an additionally insured party on my policy and have my insurance co. remove them. IMO, if my boat causes a claim, they can get in line with everyone else.

Your choice, but in my experience it will be required for anything other than transient moorage.

 

[twistedtree]

Yet it occasionally pops onto my policy. So they’re doing it behind the scenes without notification.

I'd talk to your broker or insurance company about that. Only you should be able to authorize an additional insured.

 

[ranger58sb]

I'd talk to your broker or insurance company about that. Only you should be able to authorize an additional insured.

Yeah, our policy guys haven't been pro-active in any way. We've always had to initiate the additional insured...

-Chris

 

[GLee]

The Marguis is the first to be lifted.

 

[JackConnick]

The Marguis is the first to be lifted.View attachment 172140

Well, the anchor and chain might ok…

 

[AlaskaProf]

Well, the anchor and chain might ok…

Can you tell which kind?

 

[Steve DAntonio]

BTW, great articles (as usual) Steve!

Do you have specific make/model recommendations for smoke detectors (specifically RF or WiFi interconnected ones)?

They change so often it's hard for me to do this. Instead I share my recommendations for specifications. The article includes these but basically smoke/Co for all accommodation spaces, stand alone smoke for engineering spaces, wirelessly interlinked, ideally with an app so you will be alerted if you aren't aboard, assuming you have internet, photo-electric sensing or photo-electric and ionizing, but not ionizing alone. Alternatively, you can use a central station type system, like Maretron, but there are others, for remote alerting.

 

[luna]

On the 27th of December 2025, five 40' +/- boats went up in flames at Reed Point Marina and were sunk in their slips by the local Fire Department. Likely the best thing to do.

Reed Point sent an email out advising that "the salvage and clean up crews have been hired by the insurance companies for the affected boat owners." All 5 boats were gone within a week. Clean up took a few more days and I think the docks have all been replaced.

The Marina requires full current market value Hull & Machinery Insurance as well as $3,000k Liability Insurance for annual moorage customers. They do not require to be named on the policy as additional insureds.

 

[Frosty]

@luna
On the 27th of December 2025, five 40' +/- boats went up in flames at Reed Point Marina and were sunk in their slips by the local Fire Department. Likely the best thing to do.

I'm curious why the fire department would sink five boats, and also why that would be the best thing to do? Something about avoiding them drifting? I've just never heard of that (not that I'm any fire expert).

I have heard of boats sinking simply due to the amount of water that gets pumped aboard trying to put the fire out; but never that that was the goal.

 

[slowgoesit]

$3,000k . . . . That's 3 million in liability . . . . That's quite a bit more than we're seeing here in Florida

 

[Serene]

I'm curious why the fire department would sink five boats, and also why that would be the best thing to do? Something about avoiding them drifting? I've just never heard of that (not that I'm any fire expert).

I know nothing about the fire or marina in question, but would it be to stop fire spreading to adjacent boats? i.e. get the ones on fire underwater as quickly as possible to minimise risk of damage to marina and adjacent vessels.

 

[luna]

Fibreglass is difficult to put out once it is fully involved, particularly with bad access.

Although I don't know whether the FD would divulge their tactics, but it seems that what always happens is "get the ones on fire underwater as quickly as possible to minimise risk of damage to marina and adjacent vessels"

Likely the best thing to do.

 

[Frosty]

@Serene That sounds plausible. I guess I've just never heard it stated as a purpose. Usually seems like they are trying not to sink the boat, so they are balancing the amount of water they put aboard with also putting out the fire. But then I just read about these things occasionally and am not a subject expert.

 

[JackConnick]

$3,000k . . . . That's 3 million in liability . . . . That's quite a bit more than we're seeing here in Florida

Canadian pesos. x .65 or so.

 

[luna]

$3,000k . . . . That's 3 million in liability . . . . That's quite a bit more than we're seeing here in Florida

The Canadian Marine Liability Act for vessels less than 300 gross tons, limits the liability for personal injury and property damage to a total of $2,250k. As the responsible party, you simply can't be sued for more.

By the time that the insurers add on the court and other costs they seem to have largely settled on the $3,000K figure as the minimum that they will sell you. The marinas just follow suit requiring the same thing as they seem to always have a winning hand.

Lloyds (my insurer) will have none of this.

The minimum that Lloyds will sell me (a boater of 40 years with no claims and a customer of theirs for 12 years) is $10,000,000 which includes S & R charges, Fire Dept costs, Uninsured Boater Coverage, etc.
I'm not too upset about this as in an insurance package that costs $7,500 a year, the cost of this Liability Insurance is shown on the invoice as $304.00 Canadian, 73¢ dollars. The rest is Hull & Machinery Insurance.

Go figure!

 

[SteveK]

I know nothing about the fire or marina in question, but would it be to stop fire spreading to adjacent boats? i.e. get the ones on fire underwater as quickly as possible to minimise risk of damage to marina and adjacent vessels.

They use water to fight fire which fills the boat and unlike a house has no where to drain

 

[Serene]

They use water to fight fire which fills the boat and unlike a house has no where to drain

Yeah I get that, but the question was related to purposely sinking the boats, not just as a result of fighting the fire with water.

i.e. it was a strategic move to sink the boats as quickly as possible.

 

[klee wyck]

I did get the impression from a first-hand witness that is a former fire department employee that sinking boats that are engulfed was a core strategy to limit other losses.
I do not know this for a fact.

 

[twistedtree]

Yeah I get that, but the question was related to purposely sinking the boats, not just as a result of fighting the fire with water.

i.e. it was a strategic move to sink the boats as quickly as possible.

I suspect the person was just being facious/dramatic. It makes sense that sinking is a likely consequence of all the water applied to control the fire. I'd be surprised if purposeful sinking is a fire fighting objective.

 

[guy with a boat]

The fire fighters poured water on those boats for quite a while and the fires only went out when the boats sank. I was watching on web cams and while I didn’t watch the clock, my guess would be 90 minutes to 2 hours. It made me wonder if the realistic objectives weren’t to limit the heat output and prevent the fire from spreading further, rather than actually putting out the fire.

It isn’t a stretch to think that once the vessels are fully engulfed, putting out the fire is unlikely so you do the next best thing which is fill the boat up with water and let it sink. Haz mat output is probably no worse than letting it fall apart on the surface,

 

[sunchaser]

On board fuel for wintertime is recommended to be plus 75% to lessen the chances of water entrapment. That could easily be plus 1,000 gallons per vessel. Keeping the fuel tanks cool and or submerged is a common fire fighting strategy.

With the three ablaze vessels and Van Isle’s good fire fighting dockside hoses and piping, this is a situation the Sidney fire department is well trained for. Our vessel was docked within 100’ of these ablaze vessels for 20 years. Having traveled the US East and West coast marinas for over +60 years, I’d place Van Isle’s and Sidney’s emergency response capability and overall design at or near the top.

In 2006 I witnessed the fire aftermath of 15 housed vessels at a Portland marina. The overall fire response and marina layout was poor and took two nearly new vessels off our potential purchase list. It also caused us to place vessel storage safety as high up on the list as the classic boat desirements.

 

[twistedtree]

It made me wonder if the realistic objectives weren’t to limit the heat output and prevent the fire from spreading further, rather than actually putting out the fire.

As I understand it, those are indeed the priorities in fire fighting 1) containment, 2) extinguish. Sometime all you can do is #1 and wait for the core to burn out, or in this case, sink.