They can turn off AIS with ease, but can they live without their cell phones?
got a notice from canada coast guard today.
- Thread starter magna 6882
- 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.
I don't understand why anyone would buy a gizmo for their boat called "A- Identification - S " and then complain that they were Identified.
In Canada, you can complain about invasion of your privacy only in situations where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
IMHO when out boating, using AIS, there, by definition, is no such expectation. I expect that in the US, the rules are similar, though they go by much different names.
In Canada, you can complain about invasion of your privacy only in situations where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
IMHO when out boating, using AIS, there, by definition, is no such expectation. I expect that in the US, the rules are similar, though they go by much different names.
Not transmitting AIS wouldn't help. Friends of mine don't have AIS and didn't have their radio on. Not purposefully trying to transit through but just unaware. A month or so later they got a letter in the mail. The coast guard was reasonable, no fines but they tell you what the fines are. I wouldn't worry about it. Keep the AIS on. It's a small area to avoid and now you know you can avoid going through it. It definitely shows up on our electronic Navionics and Open CPN charts.
Still, always feel welcome! We welcome our cruising friends but whale safety and awareness is gathering momentum as well as no-fishing conservation areas so it pays to keep up on the notices.
Cheers
Tania Black
Sea Witch 42' North Pacific
Still, always feel welcome! We welcome our cruising friends but whale safety and awareness is gathering momentum as well as no-fishing conservation areas so it pays to keep up on the notices.
Cheers
Tania Black
Sea Witch 42' North Pacific
BruceK
Moderator Emeritus
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 13,500
- Vessel Name
- Sojourn
- Vessel Make
- Integrity 386
Would fitting whales with AIS help?
Considering the disregard frequently shown for area WG ( despite the frequency of broadcast notices when it is active), enforcement of the whale sanctuaries is going to be a tough ask.
But certainly- turn off your AIS, at least when Winchelsea Control sends the helicopter out...
Or, take a deep breath, take advantage of the safety benefits of AIS, and try to pay attention to what is expected of you as the adult operator of a recreational motor vessel. Of all the problems the world is currently facing, getting chatted (but not prosecuted) because you kind of stuffed up seems a bit down the priority list.
But certainly- turn off your AIS, at least when Winchelsea Control sends the helicopter out...
Or, take a deep breath, take advantage of the safety benefits of AIS, and try to pay attention to what is expected of you as the adult operator of a recreational motor vessel. Of all the problems the world is currently facing, getting chatted (but not prosecuted) because you kind of stuffed up seems a bit down the priority list.
Not with the seas being full of people serious about protecting the whales and their habitat.
One Campbell River renegade tour operator has been assess $10,000 for twice violating the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
His peers and civilians documented via still photos, video and their own AIS positions, then reported it to DFO. DFO is much less tolerant than the CCG.
Another one was issued a warning for travelling at 30 knots through Georgeson Passage, a 600 foot wide channel. There were no other boats present and this warning was based solely on AIS tracking.
Benthic2
Guru
Lets just assume everyone has the greater good in mind. If the Coast Guard wants you to avoid an area, and the map makers want to be in demand, and boater want to help the whales.....it will all work out. The CG will give benevolent warnings, the map makers will update their maps....and boaters will obey the new rules.
The moral of this stoy is to stay abreast of local laws and obey them. You are a visitor in a new land. Please do not make the us look bad.
The moral of this stoy is to stay abreast of local laws and obey them. You are a visitor in a new land. Please do not make the us look bad.
AIS Tracking
If you have a cell phone you are already being tracked. Wouldn’t that be more creepy? Just saying…
QUOTE=RT Firefly;1136160]Greetings,
Mr. S. "Retaining a record of the movement of vessels is downright creepy." 1984 is NOT a novel by George Orwell. It's a user manual.
[/QUOTE]
If you have a cell phone you are already being tracked. Wouldn’t that be more creepy? Just saying…
QUOTE=RT Firefly;1136160]Greetings,
Mr. S. "Retaining a record of the movement of vessels is downright creepy." 1984 is NOT a novel by George Orwell. It's a user manual.
Mark Laurnen
Senior Member
I am a “rule follower” … I did obtain the FCC StationLicense to comply with international VHF rules, I did pay for an MMSI for international registration. I was ignorantly in the zone outside of Pender last summer. Consequently, I was boarded by local Canadian enforcement officers. All personnel were very professional, very cordial, very helpful. It is reassuring to know that these people are out and about should serious assistance ever be needed. I believe that I am now probably a “registered offender”, but as a rule follower I will never offend again.
Interestingly, the officers represented several agencies; Canadian CG, Canadian Fish & Game, local PD. They were in disagreement about Canadian fishing regulations, and even argued a little between themselves. The local jurisdiction police officer initially espoused that all salmon fishing was closed in all Canadian waters. Our polite contention that he was absolutely incorrect was supported when the F & G officer stepped up. They were in agreement, however, that we should not have been where we were. As much as some may paint all law enforcement with a broad brush, we do need to remember that these are typically great people doing a difficult and dangerous job for very little pay.
Interestingly, the officers represented several agencies; Canadian CG, Canadian Fish & Game, local PD. They were in disagreement about Canadian fishing regulations, and even argued a little between themselves. The local jurisdiction police officer initially espoused that all salmon fishing was closed in all Canadian waters. Our polite contention that he was absolutely incorrect was supported when the F & G officer stepped up. They were in agreement, however, that we should not have been where we were. As much as some may paint all law enforcement with a broad brush, we do need to remember that these are typically great people doing a difficult and dangerous job for very little pay.
Northern Spy
Guru
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,092
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Northern Spy
- Vessel Make
- Nordic Tug 26
Thanks Jim. I was too lazy to fire up my laptop and check out Coastal Explorer. And I actually do have up to date charts (this year).
SteveK
Guru
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2019
- Messages
- 5,759
- Location
- Gulf Islands, BC Canada
- Vessel Name
- Sea Sanctuary
- Vessel Make
- Bayliner 4588
Jim, the chart does not show boundaries we have shown in this thread. It refers you to Notice to mariners A2 section 5 but No where does it show the boundaries of the No Go Zone. Previous monthly notices A2 section 5 showed stay 100m/yds away from whales. The chart you show is not for the Interim no go zone.
The annual chart link below on page 38 speaks about it and gives lat/long but no pictorial view. Not sure how the majority of pleasure boaters will avoid a lat/long boundary
Here is the link.
The annual chart link below on page 38 speaks about it and gives lat/long but no pictorial view. Not sure how the majority of pleasure boaters will avoid a lat/long boundary
Here is the link.
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
Apologies for the delay. I have just put this together on Coastal Explorer....
Note that the shoreline along Saturna is just "dotted in". It does not represent the actual boundary which is defined as the shore for motor and sail vessels.
I want to take a bit more time to reaffirm the off-shore boundary points.
This is the document of reference, page 34:
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2022/mpo-dfo/Fs151-4-2022-eng.pdf
Jim
Attachments
Last edited:
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
Okay. I have verified the points but with the disclaimer "Not for Navigation" LOL! It visually matches the map on Post 20.
I will reply with a "more fulsome" post later. Needless to say, this @#!%$#@% me off!
Jim
I will reply with a "more fulsome" post later. Needless to say, this @#!%$#@% me off!
Jim
Mark, I’m puzzled by your post.
I find it odd that three agencies, and I assume you mean DFO and RCMP, when you say F&G and local PD, would not only all be on the same vessel, but would all board you for what would have normally been a friendly reminder. If they were in there own respective vessels, I wonder what drew all of them to you.
Were you fishing? If not I don’t see why there would have been a debate about fishing regulations and I give a side eye to them getting into a disagreement, in front of you when clearly the CCG and RCMP should have quietly deferred to DFO.
Likewise, if it was an infraction of the sanctuary zone, DFO should have taken the lead.
It just all seems very odd. Can you describe the vessel(s)?
I find it odd that three agencies, and I assume you mean DFO and RCMP, when you say F&G and local PD, would not only all be on the same vessel, but would all board you for what would have normally been a friendly reminder. If they were in there own respective vessels, I wonder what drew all of them to you.
Were you fishing? If not I don’t see why there would have been a debate about fishing regulations and I give a side eye to them getting into a disagreement, in front of you when clearly the CCG and RCMP should have quietly deferred to DFO.
Likewise, if it was an infraction of the sanctuary zone, DFO should have taken the lead.
It just all seems very odd. Can you describe the vessel(s)?
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
NO! This is a Transport Canada Regulation. DFO is not the lead on this!
Furthermore! Fishery regulations are enforce by the police, Coast Guard and DFO officers. The fact they cannot agree speaks volumes on their competency.
Jim
Mark Laurnen
Senior Member
Hi Jim. We had just started trolling, right ion the edge of the zone. It should have been a clue when the other boat which had been fishing abruptly departed. Being ignorant we saw no reason to quit. It was a typical CG patrol boat (Safe or Steelshark or equivalent). It appeared out of nowhere with blue lights flashing . We shut down and were with them for about 45 min while they went through the boat and all documents. The agencies represented are more correctly identified by your names. They indicated that they commonly carry officers from associated agencies upon the CG patrol boats. The game officer was generous in giving advice regarding locations and tackle he favored. He did say he was going easy on us because we hadn’t caught any fish. The local RCMP officer was also nice, but had no idea about current fishing refs.
Mark Laurnen
Senior Member
Come to think of it … they didn’t even check to see if we had Canadian non-resident fishing licenses. The RCMP officer was mostly interested to see if we had any firearms aboard. All told, there were 5 or 6 people on the boat. I personally would have liked to have a career in Fish & Game … just doesn’t pay enough.
I might agree with you, if any one of those “agencies” were on scene independently, but these are DFO Regulations and they are the de facto enforcers.
From earlier posts in this thread:
DFO Management Measures:
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp...s-baleines/srkw-measures-mesures-ers-eng.html
DFO Sanctuary Areas.
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp...hales-baleines/docs/srkw-ers-5x7-pub-eng.html
Last edited:
Northern Spy
Guru
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 4,092
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Northern Spy
- Vessel Make
- Nordic Tug 26
Also, as a reminder for our US readers, the Canadian Coast Guard is not a military or para-military organization; unlike the USCG.
In this case, they are merely driving the boat to support those who are doing the enforcement.
In this case, they are merely driving the boat to support those who are doing the enforcement.
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
I'm shocked with this! On so many levels! My sympathies with the OP and others who have been confronted with what was overwhelming heavy-handedness and unnecessary overreach on the part of the Canadian Authorities.
Soin2la, in particular please take note:
Permit me to provide the forum with my "Bonafides" as pertaining to Salmon Management and Orcas over the past 35 some-odd years and my professional interactions with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada. Since 1986 I was a Management Biologist employed with the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC), retiring in 2013. Prior to that I was a biologist with the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission (IPSFC), 1978-1985. These are International Salmon Management Agencies, the involved Parties being Canada and the United States of America. I was a Quantitative Biologist and was "Head, Stock Monitoring" on retirement. I interacted directly with Biologists, managers and representatives with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, First Nations, the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC), Washington Department of Fish and Game (WDFW), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
My first job with the IPSFC was as an observer on a gillnet test fishing vessel in 1978, operating in Washington Statistical Area 7 off San Juan and Lopez islands. It was a dream job for a 21-year-old, fresh out of university. Needless to say, we encountered Orcas on numerous occasions, particularly off San Juan Point and Eagle Point. From that experience, I am certain that Southern Resident Orcas most definitely eat sockeye and pink salmon. To contend that Orcas, feeding in situations where several hundred thousand sockeye and pinks are swimming by, single out only Chinook to the exclusion of everything else is plain hubris and frankly just bad biology!
I oversaw the Test Fisheries for the PSC, and we developed programs in Canadian Stat Area 29 on the sockeye salmon that delay in that area. On some years, north of 6,000,000 sockeye were situated just off the drop¬-off of the Fraser River. Again, the Whale Biologists would have you believe, that the Orcas I saw magically appear at high slack water off Sandheads WERE NOT EATING THE ZILLIONS OF SOCKEYE AVAILABLE, BLACKING OUT THE SOUNDER, BUT SINGLING OUT INSTEAD THE LONE CHINOOK! Hmmm!
In 2007, the Test Fishing Program operated a research project aimed at using Weak Electric Fields to deter the predation by seals on salmon caught in gillnets in freshwater. The research was ground breaking and unequivocal: Seals would avoid a gillnet that had a weak electric field deployed. This work was published in the peer-reviewed North American Journal of Fisheries Management “Evaluation of an Electrical Gradient to Deter Seal Predation on Salmon caught in Gillnet Test Fisheries.”
My point with this is, our team had experience with studies on marine mammals and their interaction with salmon.
In 2007 we attended a Workshop at NMFS in Seattle on Orcas. At the time I was stunned with just how little Orca biologists knew about the salmon biology and the interactions between whales and fish. And also, just how little they were willing to learn from salmon biologists who had first-hand knowledge of the feeding behaviour of whales on salmon—in my own particular experience, southern residents and Fraser River sockeye and pink salmon. The killer whale biologists had undertaken “zero” sampling off the Fraser River of whale poop for the indication of sockeye in “said poop”.
My point with the above diatribe? I’m sorry, but my experience with DFO has not been always the best. Some individuals I have worked with have been brilliant and great to work with. But others, not so much. And as an Agency, it is burdened with incompetency and mismanagement. It is a high-handed agency that hides behind policy that is over-reaching and draconian and lacking in adequate research. People on the water are having to contend with “a thousand cuts” of restrictive policies that are becoming nearly impossible to navigate.
On the issue of Restricted Zones, quite frankly the authorized agencies in Canada already have the “tools” required to enforce vessel/whale interactions with regulations pertaining to and I quote:
“…The Marine Mammal Regulations remain in effect year-round. This requires staying:
200 metres away from all killer whales in Canadian Pacific waters other than those described above
200 metres away from all whales, porpoises and dolphins when in resting position or with a calf
100 metres for other whales, porpoises and dolphins…”
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp...s-baleines/srkw-measures-mesures-ers-eng.html
Anything further was just unnecessary.
Instead, they put this particular restricted area off Saturna Island, that squeezes recreational mariners between the proverbial “Rock” (the Restricted Zone) and a “Hard Place”, the very busy pinch point for commercial vessels, the Vessel Traffic System.
I have transited this area numerous times and during specific tides and weather it is a tricky area to transit, particularly East Point and Boiling Reef. To restrict a Captain’s ability to navigate their vessel to ensure safe passage is negligence on the part of the Agency responsible: That being Transport Canada.
Furthermore, time and again I have contacted DFO and CHS pertaining to the need for add-ons to the charts, both their own as well as making this available third parties (Nobeltech, Navionics, etc) for download overlays for restricted areas, fishing boundaries, sponge reefs, RCA’s, First Nations exclusion areas, to name just a few. Why in this day and age of Charting Software, this is not available is inconceivable, and in fact bordering on gross neglect by these agencies. Even the Fishery Officers have to put this into their Charting software. Ridiculous!
Let me reiterate: The letter sent to the OP was completely unnecessary!
Rant Mode Off!
Time for another letter to the Ministers of Transport Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans!
Jim
Soin2la, in particular please take note:
Permit me to provide the forum with my "Bonafides" as pertaining to Salmon Management and Orcas over the past 35 some-odd years and my professional interactions with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada. Since 1986 I was a Management Biologist employed with the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC), retiring in 2013. Prior to that I was a biologist with the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission (IPSFC), 1978-1985. These are International Salmon Management Agencies, the involved Parties being Canada and the United States of America. I was a Quantitative Biologist and was "Head, Stock Monitoring" on retirement. I interacted directly with Biologists, managers and representatives with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, First Nations, the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC), Washington Department of Fish and Game (WDFW), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
My first job with the IPSFC was as an observer on a gillnet test fishing vessel in 1978, operating in Washington Statistical Area 7 off San Juan and Lopez islands. It was a dream job for a 21-year-old, fresh out of university. Needless to say, we encountered Orcas on numerous occasions, particularly off San Juan Point and Eagle Point. From that experience, I am certain that Southern Resident Orcas most definitely eat sockeye and pink salmon. To contend that Orcas, feeding in situations where several hundred thousand sockeye and pinks are swimming by, single out only Chinook to the exclusion of everything else is plain hubris and frankly just bad biology!
I oversaw the Test Fisheries for the PSC, and we developed programs in Canadian Stat Area 29 on the sockeye salmon that delay in that area. On some years, north of 6,000,000 sockeye were situated just off the drop¬-off of the Fraser River. Again, the Whale Biologists would have you believe, that the Orcas I saw magically appear at high slack water off Sandheads WERE NOT EATING THE ZILLIONS OF SOCKEYE AVAILABLE, BLACKING OUT THE SOUNDER, BUT SINGLING OUT INSTEAD THE LONE CHINOOK! Hmmm!
In 2007, the Test Fishing Program operated a research project aimed at using Weak Electric Fields to deter the predation by seals on salmon caught in gillnets in freshwater. The research was ground breaking and unequivocal: Seals would avoid a gillnet that had a weak electric field deployed. This work was published in the peer-reviewed North American Journal of Fisheries Management “Evaluation of an Electrical Gradient to Deter Seal Predation on Salmon caught in Gillnet Test Fisheries.”
My point with this is, our team had experience with studies on marine mammals and their interaction with salmon.
In 2007 we attended a Workshop at NMFS in Seattle on Orcas. At the time I was stunned with just how little Orca biologists knew about the salmon biology and the interactions between whales and fish. And also, just how little they were willing to learn from salmon biologists who had first-hand knowledge of the feeding behaviour of whales on salmon—in my own particular experience, southern residents and Fraser River sockeye and pink salmon. The killer whale biologists had undertaken “zero” sampling off the Fraser River of whale poop for the indication of sockeye in “said poop”.
My point with the above diatribe? I’m sorry, but my experience with DFO has not been always the best. Some individuals I have worked with have been brilliant and great to work with. But others, not so much. And as an Agency, it is burdened with incompetency and mismanagement. It is a high-handed agency that hides behind policy that is over-reaching and draconian and lacking in adequate research. People on the water are having to contend with “a thousand cuts” of restrictive policies that are becoming nearly impossible to navigate.
On the issue of Restricted Zones, quite frankly the authorized agencies in Canada already have the “tools” required to enforce vessel/whale interactions with regulations pertaining to and I quote:
“…The Marine Mammal Regulations remain in effect year-round. This requires staying:
200 metres away from all killer whales in Canadian Pacific waters other than those described above
200 metres away from all whales, porpoises and dolphins when in resting position or with a calf
100 metres for other whales, porpoises and dolphins…”
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp...s-baleines/srkw-measures-mesures-ers-eng.html
Anything further was just unnecessary.
Instead, they put this particular restricted area off Saturna Island, that squeezes recreational mariners between the proverbial “Rock” (the Restricted Zone) and a “Hard Place”, the very busy pinch point for commercial vessels, the Vessel Traffic System.
I have transited this area numerous times and during specific tides and weather it is a tricky area to transit, particularly East Point and Boiling Reef. To restrict a Captain’s ability to navigate their vessel to ensure safe passage is negligence on the part of the Agency responsible: That being Transport Canada.
Furthermore, time and again I have contacted DFO and CHS pertaining to the need for add-ons to the charts, both their own as well as making this available third parties (Nobeltech, Navionics, etc) for download overlays for restricted areas, fishing boundaries, sponge reefs, RCA’s, First Nations exclusion areas, to name just a few. Why in this day and age of Charting Software, this is not available is inconceivable, and in fact bordering on gross neglect by these agencies. Even the Fishery Officers have to put this into their Charting software. Ridiculous!
Let me reiterate: The letter sent to the OP was completely unnecessary!
Rant Mode Off!
Time for another letter to the Ministers of Transport Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans!
Jim
SteveK
Guru
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2019
- Messages
- 5,759
- Location
- Gulf Islands, BC Canada
- Vessel Name
- Sea Sanctuary
- Vessel Make
- Bayliner 4588
great post Jim 
JDCAVE, no point in quoting your entire piece, because while it is an impressive resume, it doesn’t address my point that it is DFO, not TC which enforces the whale protection regulations and do in fact, have a dedicated BC Whale Protection Unit.
https://tc.canada.ca/en/initiatives...ive-protecting-southern-resident-killer-whale
The Government of Canada is also expanding and strengthening Fisheries and Oceans Canada's compliance and enforcement capacity through an $11.4 million investment. New fishery officers will be on the water verifying compliance with fisheries management measures, updated Marine Mammal Regulations, and will enforce the disturbance and harassment provisions of the regulations and the Species at Risk Act.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...for B.C.'s whale,keep humans and whales apart.
DFO officers based on Annacis Island in Vancouver and Victoria monitor whale habitat, and enforce the Marine Mammal Regulations, Species at Risk Act and the Fisheries Act.
Chung says the main responsibilities are making sure boats don't get too close — either inadvertently or on purpose — and that people stay out of areas designated as "no-go zones" due to their popularity among marine mammals.
Recently, a diver who deliberately got up close and personal with a pod of killer whales was fined $12,000.
https://youtu.be/sRUH5Coq95Y
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
Agreed. However who can go where and how has to go through
Transport Canada. You will note that that the above is a TC Canada website. This is their communication.
I still contend that the Restricted Area at East Point poses a safety concern for navigation and should be repealed. I have Local Knowledge of the area.
This is a conflict between what some contend is necessary for whale conservation, verses what I contend is necessary for Safe Transit of this area, and based on my own experience at this location.
I have made my points here and have nothing more to say on the matter on this thread. I will take my concerns to Paul Cottrell. I don’t expect to get anywhere on the matter. DFO has been typically intransigent on similar matters.
Jim
Ok, fair enough, but that opens another door. What do you perceive as a safety concern for navigation at East Point? Lots of people have local knowledge of the area and this is the first I’ve heard of a navigational hazard, beyond the usual.
Are you aware BCF Swartz Bay to Tsawwassen have been using a southern route around East Point for 2 months and will be doing so for many more months? Not that it is an issue, I just wondered if you knew.
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
No. I was not. Undoubtedly, if they were, they would be in the Traffic Separation Scheme. This is an area that I would prefer to avoid at this location. They also have the capability to transit at 24 kts. I travel at 7.5 kts in the water. And although “they claim” that commercial traffic is slowing down in these areas, I haven’t noticed this is the case, through my examination of the received AIS transmissions.
The recreational boater attempting to transit past East Point will be pinched between the westbound traffic lane and the restricted area, all the while contending with the tides coming around the corner at East Point.
I have concerns. You may not. But then you’re not driving my boat and I’m not driving yours.
Jim
JDCAVE
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,010
- Location
- Canada
- Vessel Name
- Phoenix Hunter
- Vessel Make
- Kadey Krogen 42 (1985)
From the CHS Sailing Directions 2021, 3-7 Para 73: "East Point, the east extremity of Saturna Island, is moderately steep-to but should be given a wide berth because of heavy tide rips, overfalls and eddies. "
Jim
Ok again. I misread that you believed it to be a navigational hazard for all traffic, not just you. I’m not sure that is grounds for repeal, though. Slowing is voluntary between Ucluelet and Campbell River and if there are no whales present, it isn’t neeessary. Georgeson Passage might be a less stressful course for you.
You seem very anxious about East Point and prefer to avoid it. I won’t judge, but surely you transited many similar, or even worse areas of concern in your hundreds of hours cruising the BC coast to Haida Gwaii.
If southbound or westbound to Tumbo, East Point shouldn’t be a concern. If traveling from inside the Gulf islands, Georgeson, or even Boat Passage are alternatives to rounding East Point.
And to return to topic, even the free version of Marine Traffic AIS shows the No Go Area ATONs.
Attachments
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
New battery Charger with batteries in parallel- Latest: Delta Riverat
-
-
-
-
