Author Topic: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.  (Read 3207 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,846
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« on: November 08, 2016, 10:56:16 »
I am not the Liberals biggest fan. I also recognize that in Canada there really is only one party that can get away with doing the unpopular.  I applaud this move.  Some will argue it is too little.  Some will argue it shouldn't be done if it is just to permit oil. I like it.

http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2016/11/07/prime-minister-canada-announces-national-oceans-protection-plan

Lease a couple new deep water tugs.
Add new response stations.
Engage and hire new native response teams.
Add rescue capability in the Arctic.
Add some research into spills and spill management.

All in all it is good news.  A better starting point than a finishing point but still, good news.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Online Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,525
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,330
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2016, 11:19:26 »
Agreed.  This is long overdue.

We'll really know though once we see results. 

But yes, a very good move. 
Optio

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2016, 11:51:54 »
I got to read before the announcement, a lot of it appears to be re-packaging, CCG  has been upgrading for a while under the “World Class” stuff started by the CPC, including radar for Prince Rupert and CCG just installed 44 new or upgraded nav aids in the central coast areas. I know CHS has been upgrading it’s equipment and getting out more. For the new stuff, the release does not exactly say where the tugs will go, now is a good time to lease such equipment, hopefully they find a vessel that can do more than just sit waiting for a call. Hopefully with a A-frame so it can so some buoy work. As for upgrading the towing capacity of existing ships. The simplest fix is to give them some modern towing lines and upgrade the ones equipped with winches. However most are not designed for towing, so it’s unclear what can be done there. As for the new ER base at Port Hardy, there is already a 47’ there,  not sure what they put extra there, a boat, skimmer and some containers of response equipment. As for the 4 more SAR stations. Possibly Comox, Hartley Bay, Victoria and likely up the West Coast of the Island.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,846
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2016, 12:16:44 »
Any takers on the notion of a North Coast Tanker Moratorium being extended from Port Hardy to Dixon Entrance but excluding Dixon Entrance? 

Quote
Dixon Entrance (Alaska / British Columbia) contains two water areas that are mutually claimed by Canada and the U.S. A line known as the "A-B" Line[3] was defined in a 1903 arbitration decision on the Alaska/Canada boundary.[5] The court specified the initial boundary point (Point "A") at the northern end of Dixon Entrance[6] and also designated Point "B" 72 NM to the east.[7] Canada relies on the "A-B" line as rendering nearly all of Dixon Entrance as its internal waters. The U.S. does not recognize the "A-B" line as an official boundary, instead regarding it as allocating sovereignty over the land masses within the Dixon Entrance,[3] with Canada's land south of the line. The U.S. regards the waters as subject to international marine law, and in 1977 it defined an equidistant territorial line throughout Dixon Entrance, mainly to the south of the "A-B" line.[3][8] The intersecting lines create four separate water areas with differing claim status. The two areas south of the "A-B" line (about 2,789 km2 (1,077 sq mi) and 51.5 km2 (19.9 sq mi) in size) are claimed by both countries. The other two water areas are north of the "A-B" line and are not claimed by either country. The two unclaimed areas are about 72 km2 (28 sq mi) and 1.4 km2 (0.5 sq mi) in size.[3] In addition, Nunez Rocks is a low-tide elevation ("bare at half-tide"[9]) that lies south of the "A-B" Line, surrounded by the sea territory claimed by the U.S.[3] The United States has not ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty, although it adheres to most of its principles as customary international law. Under the treaty, LTEs may be used as basepoints for a territorial sea, and the U.S. uses Nunez Rocks as a basepoint. As a non-signatory, however, there is nothing preventing the U.S. from claiming areas beyond the scope of the Law of the Sea Treaty. The fact remains that, for about half of each day, above-water territory that Canada regards as Canadian is surrounded by sea territory that the U.S. has declared to be American.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_areas_disputed_by_Canada_and_the_United_States
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2016, 12:35:59 »
The “betrayed” class feel they are going to make the Moratorium only apply to the shipment of crude oil out of Northern portion of the Canadian west coast, attempting to apply it to disputed waters will be dicey. This would leave Kinder Morgan free to export. Kitimat Clean Energy would get around the ban by partially refining the oil.
The big issue right now is the American tug that sank, and on Monday a US flagged gravel barge flipped over and sank about 86km North of the other one. Currently the US tugs work under waivers that exclude them from pilotage, however that is likely to change for awhile. That will drive the costs up and I have to wonder if we have enough pilots to maintain that level, tugs are slow and would require 2 pilots. The current cleanup has blown through the US legislated liability cap, but the US tugboat association appears to be backing the company to maintain goodwill.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,846
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2016, 13:38:04 »
I thought the whole point of the exercise was "jobs, jobs, jobs".  Time to start making new sailors who can eventually become pilots.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2016, 10:29:44 »
I am always suspicious of Liberals promises, from the last Liberal government I was under. I suspect they give the Pacific region 50% of the new funds required to make all of the promises work, so they will have to cut elsewhere. A new tug on this coast means 3 new Captain positions along with 3 Chief Mates and 3 Chief Engineers, along with 3 mates/3 engineers and about 5 deckhands/3oilers.  Won't hurt, but won't make a big difference. A new LNG facility would though as you be looking at 3-4 new good size tugs.   

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,846
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2016, 12:24:08 »
I am always suspicious of Liberals promises, from the last Liberal government I was under. I suspect they give the Pacific region 50% of the new funds required to make all of the promises work, so they will have to cut elsewhere. A new tug on this coast means 3 new Captain positions along with 3 Chief Mates and 3 Chief Engineers, along with 3 mates/3 engineers and about 5 deckhands/3oilers.  Won't hurt, but won't make a big difference. A new LNG facility would though as you be looking at 3-4 new good size tugs.   

The question in my mind is whether the work will go to Vancouver Shipyards, which have a long history with tugs,  or will it go to Davie, which apparently has a backlog of OSV hulls to manage.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 94,040
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,816
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2016, 12:47:22 »
Actually, for escort tugs, I would bet on these guys more than on Davie:

http://www.groupocean.com/en/services/view/8

And I wouldn't be surprised if they put in a bid for the RCN tug services program currently out for tenders. After all, they just finished building the most powerful harbour tug ever on the eastern shore of N.A. and it is twice as big as the requirements of the RCN.

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 33,680
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,444
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2016, 13:36:16 »
Wouldn't that be the best thing to do? give small ships like tugs to those smaller yards which will help grow our shipbuilding industry as a whole rather then just the big three?
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #10 on: November 09, 2016, 15:21:05 »
My understanding is they will lease the tugs, but have them run by CCG. Likely one on each coast. I know on this coast large vessel towing has not been a priority for CCG, our 1100 class Tender looked like a toy when we were preparing to hook up a line to the Exxon San Francisco which had broken down, thankfully a proper salvage tug arrived before we got to try our makeshift towing gear. Another issue is that very few CCG skippers have experience towing anything large and you can have bad things happen. Also these will be similar to escort tugs and it would be good if they have a crane or A frame on the back so they can do some useful day to day work while waiting for a call that will be a long time coming.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,846
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #11 on: November 09, 2016, 16:49:17 »
What about something like the 3200 tonne Barentshav?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barentshav-class_offshore_patrol_vessel


At one end of the spectrum there is the 6400 tonne Svalbard

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoCGV_Svalbard


And at the other there is the 761 tonne Nornen

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nornen-class_patrol_vessel


All of them are targeted at environmental response, tug duties, search and rescue and offshore patrol.

And leasing is a preferred supply route.

Meanwhile at Davie
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/davie-shipyard-irving-shipyard-coast-guard-vessels-1.3484670

Or working with people like these:

http://www.secunda.ca/fleet.php

Edit to modify linked Nornen picture





« Last Edit: November 10, 2016, 10:50:19 by Chris Pook »
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2016, 10:19:17 »
The Secunda fleet, the cranes are marginal for the work we do, they could work, but your working at the maximum. As I recall the 1100 class uses a 20ton Speed crane.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,440
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,846
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2016, 13:04:53 »
Could the cranes be retro-fitted?

But not wanting to get bogged down in the weeds - there are other fleets out there, and other agents, capable of supplying similar civil infrastructure at market rates.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 103,170
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,904
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: New Coastal Policy From the Liberals.
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2016, 13:46:17 »
Could the cranes be retro-fitted?

But not wanting to get bogged down in the weeds - there are other fleets out there, and other agents, capable of supplying similar civil infrastructure at market rates.

Money solves many problems, I would not want to see and I doubt the fleet mangers want a dock queen that can only do one thing. They could use it for some small SAR work as well, George Darby was a ex-off shore supply vessel, it was not the best choice at the time. One that has good seakeeping, endurance, good large vessel towing should be the primary choices. But no doubt it will boil down to who knows who. I hear Davie is offering up their semi-finished offshore vessels, they appear to have a large crane, not sure of their towing capacity or if they are to big for the CCG budget. http://www.davie.ca/case-studies/#/project-01


I think this is one of them being offered
 
« Last Edit: November 10, 2016, 13:49:29 by Colin P »