|
Post by Ferryman on May 17, 2012 23:02:26 GMT -8
|
|
piglet
Chief Steward
Posts: 138
|
Post by piglet on May 18, 2012 7:48:10 GMT -8
She looks so sad and lonely.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on May 18, 2012 16:46:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on May 18, 2012 17:27:02 GMT -8
That's.... beautiful... :')
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on May 18, 2012 17:48:56 GMT -8
Yes, it looks like she rubbed up against something there, which exposed that strip of it there. Also in this next photo, you'll notice the after most cafteria window has been kicked out. The first indication that conditions aboard are probably quickly deteriorating. Especially since her interior is probably being gutted of anything of value www.flickr.com/photos/emorey/6959134828/in/photostream/
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 2, 2012 13:03:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Jun 2, 2012 14:18:46 GMT -8
I have a pronounced hate for these 'environmental protection' societies. While their goals are positive, they often go about their actions in really iffy ways. In this case, not unlike many others, they're making statements that they cannot back up. What tells them that the Queen of Saanich (no, not Sannich, which they wrote in at least one case) is being dismantled? Removal of wiring from a ship isn't dismantling the structure. Furthermore, how on bloody Earth can they tell that the ship is structurally unsound and that there are several compromises to the ship's structure? Access holes cut into the sides of ships are an everyday occurrence, nothing to worry about. Honestly, my opinion on this society and news story is very low...
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jun 3, 2012 10:22:39 GMT -8
I have a pronounced hate for these 'environmental protection' societies. While their goals are positive, they often go about their actions in really iffy ways. In this case, not unlike many others, they're making statements that they cannot back up. What tells them that the Queen of Saanich (no, not Sannich, which they wrote in at least one case) is being dismantled? Removal of wiring from a ship isn't dismantling the structure. Furthermore, how on bloody Earth can they tell that the ship is structurally unsound and that there are several compromises to the ship's structure? Access holes cut into the sides of ships are an everyday occurrence, nothing to worry about. Honestly, my opinion on this society and news story is very low... I doubt that you know anything about them. You're aware, I'm sure, that not so long ago parts of Howe Sound were industrial toxic waste dumps with very little growing or swimming nearby. Through careful stewardship, often prompted or monitored by these hateful environmental groups, mining waste has been curtailed, sea grass beds are being restored, and herring have returned, bringing other predators along the food chain with them. None of this happened due to the resource companies acting out of the goodness of their hearts. We have an ongoing problem in our ports and waterways with derelict boats. Western Mariner ran a piece a couple of months back on the legal and practical issues involved in forcing the owners of unseaworthy hulks to clean up their messes. Perhaps you saw the photos posted some time back of the clearly derelict vessel tied up alongside the 'Saanich. Anyone in their right mind would have been concerned about that thing. It is always reasonable for any environmental group to be concerned about any unused vessel. We don't know what pollutants were left on board the 'Saanich, or what the owners have possibly done to compromise her seaworthiness, or even if there is anyone currently taking responsibility for her. Yes, the group is wrong about the boat being dismantled, but we don't know how responsibly it's being managed, so perhaps you should reserve your hate for a more worthy villain than this Howe Sound group. BC Ferries pledged when putting the Vs up for sale that they would be selling the boats to buyers planning on operating them as revenue vessels. What a crock. Chris Montgomery pointed out the possibly shady sale of the 'Esquimalt, where a more sophisticated vendor in Europe would have known that something wasn't right, and we have the ' Sidney rotting away on the Fraser, and now the 'Saanich is raising concerns and blotting the seascape in Howe Sound. BC Ferries couldn't care less who buys their boats, and old ferries seem destined, more often than not, to become burdens to the areas they previously served.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Jun 3, 2012 17:37:05 GMT -8
I have a pronounced hate for these 'environmental protection' societies. While their goals are positive, they often go about their actions in really iffy ways. In this case, not unlike many others, they're making statements that they cannot back up. What tells them that the Queen of Saanich (no, not Sannich, which they wrote in at least one case) is being dismantled? Removal of wiring from a ship isn't dismantling the structure. Furthermore, how on bloody Earth can they tell that the ship is structurally unsound and that there are several compromises to the ship's structure? Access holes cut into the sides of ships are an everyday occurrence, nothing to worry about. Honestly, my opinion on this society and news story is very low... I doubt that you know anything about them. You're aware, I'm sure, that not so long ago parts of Howe Sound were industrial toxic waste dumps with very little growing or swimming nearby. Through careful stewardship, often prompted or monitored by these hateful environmental groups, mining waste has been curtailed, sea grass beds are being restored, and herring have returned, bringing other predators along the food chain with them. None of this happened due to the resource companies acting out of the goodness of their hearts. We have an ongoing problem in our ports and waterways with derelict boats. Western Mariner ran a piece a couple of months back on the legal and practical issues involved in forcing the owners of unseaworthy hulks to clean up their messes. Perhaps you saw the photos posted some time back of the clearly derelict vessel tied up alongside the 'Saanich. Anyone in their right mind would have been concerned about that thing. It is always reasonable for any environmental group to be concerned about any unused vessel. We don't know what pollutants were left on board the 'Saanich, or what the owners have possibly done to compromise her seaworthiness, or even if there is anyone currently taking responsibility for her. Yes, the group is wrong about the boat being dismantled, but we don't know how responsibly it's being managed, so perhaps you should reserve your hate for a more worthy villain than this Howe Sound group. BC Ferries pledged when putting the Vs up for sale that they would be selling the boats to buyers planning on operating them as revenue vessels. What a crock. Chris Montgomery pointed out the possibly shady sale of the 'Esquimalt, where a more sophisticated vendor in Europe would have known that something wasn't right, and we have the ' Sidney rotting away on the Fraser, and now the 'Saanich is raising concerns and blotting the seascape in Howe Sound. BC Ferries couldn't care less who buys their boats, and old ferries seem destined, more often than not, to become burdens to the areas they previously served. I'm quite aware of all the good that this society has done in the Howe Sound area, but that still doesn't give them any excuse to shout about a ship that is being worked on. The Saanich does not appear to be derelict, at least not yet. I highly doubt anyone would just leave a backhoe in the back of a ship and let it go to waste when they're done with it. If they're after money-making opportunities, selling that hoe would be a great way to make a dime, and it seems like making a dime is the ships' owner's goal, since they're removing every bit of copper wire they can find. The society can complain when the owner is done with the boat, or once they've completed some kind of study that actually proves they're doing something wrong. Until either of those situations materialize, they should keep an eye on the situation silently. They didn't even show any evidence of malpractice by the ships' owners. No oil slicks, no ship-related debris in the water, only two boats, one of which lacks a recent paint job and has had it's superstructure removed for easier access to the neighboring vessel, which has a couple holes cut into the side to ease the removal of wiring and other goods from the vessel (a fairly standard practice, as we've seen in the past on other ships). All the evidence that these environmentalists are presenting is purely circumstantial; they have no solid proof whatsoever of malpractice, at least none that they're showing us. Even their photos don't show anything wrong. Honestly, where else do they expect to be able to park the Saanich?? If they moor it on a pier somewhere, the NIMBYers will be on them in seconds (likely some of whom are the same people involved in this group...) . If they tried to park it in the industrial areas in Port Metro Vancouver, the space-leasing costs would be way too high. The ship has to go somewhere, and Howe Sound is really the only place for it that's out of sight while not being so distant that access becomes to costly. She's only been there for a number of months. It takes at least that long to clear a ship of her electrical components and other salvageable stuff. If they had a situation on par with the Princess Jacqueline at Port Alberni, then sure, shout. But this? They're just trying to find things to huff about. Heck, the ships aren't even visible from any publicly accessible area. To me, these guys are just a bunch of complainers, who love to make things complicated for anybody trying to do anything.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jun 3, 2012 20:16:45 GMT -8
I'm quite aware of all the good that this society has done in the Howe Sound area, but that still doesn't give them any excuse to shout about a ship that is being worked on. The Saanich does not appear to be derelict, at least not yet. I highly doubt anyone would just leave a backhoe in the back of a ship and let it go to waste when they're done with it. If they're after money-making opportunities, selling that hoe would be a great way to make a dime, and it seems like making a dime is the ships' owner's goal, since they're removing every bit of copper wire they can find. The society can complain when the owner is done with the boat, or once they've completed some kind of study that actually proves they're doing something wrong. Until either of those situations materialize, they should keep an eye on the situation silently. They didn't even show any evidence of malpractice by the ships' owners. No oil slicks, no ship-related debris in the water, only two boats, one of which lacks a recent paint job and has had it's superstructure removed for easier access to the neighboring vessel, which has a couple holes cut into the side to ease the removal of wiring and other goods from the vessel (a fairly standard practice, as we've seen in the past on other ships). All the evidence that these environmentalists are presenting is purely circumstantial; they have no solid proof whatsoever of malpractice, at least none that they're showing us. Even their photos don't show anything wrong.... Honestly, where else do they expect to be able to park the Saanich?? If they moor it on a pier somewhere, the NIMBYers will be on them in seconds (likely some of whom are the same people involved in this group...) . If they tried to park it in the industrial areas in Port Metro Vancouver, the space-leasing costs would be way too high. The ship has to go somewhere, and Howe Sound is really the only place for it that's out of sight while not being so distant that access becomes to costly. Good call, CV. Let's turn Howe Sound into a recycling yard for all the boat purchasers who can't afford to store their boats properly. Hard to make an honest buck if you have to pay dock fees. And, as you say, until one actually sinks, spills pollutants, or comes loose and runs aground in a storm, these guys have nothing to complain about. But you're misrepresenting their statement. They're not 'shouting' 'huffing' or alleging proof of 'malpractise'. They're stating their position- as is their right- that Howe Sound is inappropriate for vessel salvage, or storage of derelicts, or whatever it is that's going on. They're asking for assurance that operations on the ' Saanich will not compromise the Sound's ecosystem. You have no right to tell them to be silent.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Jun 3, 2012 21:38:03 GMT -8
I'm quite aware of all the good that this society has done in the Howe Sound area, but that still doesn't give them any excuse to shout about a ship that is being worked on. The Saanich does not appear to be derelict, at least not yet. I highly doubt anyone would just leave a backhoe in the back of a ship and let it go to waste when they're done with it. If they're after money-making opportunities, selling that hoe would be a great way to make a dime, and it seems like making a dime is the ships' owner's goal, since they're removing every bit of copper wire they can find. The society can complain when the owner is done with the boat, or once they've completed some kind of study that actually proves they're doing something wrong. Until either of those situations materialize, they should keep an eye on the situation silently. They didn't even show any evidence of malpractice by the ships' owners. No oil slicks, no ship-related debris in the water, only two boats, one of which lacks a recent paint job and has had it's superstructure removed for easier access to the neighboring vessel, which has a couple holes cut into the side to ease the removal of wiring and other goods from the vessel (a fairly standard practice, as we've seen in the past on other ships). All the evidence that these environmentalists are presenting is purely circumstantial; they have no solid proof whatsoever of malpractice, at least none that they're showing us. Even their photos don't show anything wrong.... Honestly, where else do they expect to be able to park the Saanich?? If they moor it on a pier somewhere, the NIMBYers will be on them in seconds (likely some of whom are the same people involved in this group...) . If they tried to park it in the industrial areas in Port Metro Vancouver, the space-leasing costs would be way too high. The ship has to go somewhere, and Howe Sound is really the only place for it that's out of sight while not being so distant that access becomes to costly. Good call, CV. Let's turn Howe Sound into a recycling yard for all the boat purchasers who can't afford to store their boats properly. Hard to make an honest buck if you have to pay dock fees. And, as you say, until one actually sinks, spills pollutants, or comes loose and runs aground in a storm, these guys have nothing to complain about. But you're misrepresenting their statement. They're not 'shouting' 'huffing' or alleging proof of 'malpractise'. They're stating their position- as is their right- that Howe Sound is inappropriate for vessel salvage, or storage of derelicts, or whatever it is that's going on. They're asking for assurance that operations on the ' Saanich will not compromise the Sound's ecosystem. You have no right to tell them to be silent. Have you looked up moorage fees for a ship the size of the Saanich? There's no way in hell that the Saanich's owner would be able to make much money at all (if any) off her if they had to moor up at a private dock/pier. As long as a ship is not harming the environment, and won't last more than a year or two (maybe two is stretching it), let it stay. If, however, people start parking boats in our waterways in masses, then obviously something has to be done, but in the current situation, there's really nothing wrong with these goings-on. And fine, let them state their opinion, let them be heard, but let them also not make loose speculation publicized in such ways that it leaves the public questioning. It only encourages less knowledgeable folks to assume that what they read is veritable information. We've already seen many times over (even on this here forum) what happens when rumours are created by people misunderstanding dubious information sources.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jun 4, 2012 16:21:38 GMT -8
First of all, I don't care what the moorage fees for this boat might be. I'm not the one who bought it. Secondly, while I would like to be as sanguine as you regarding the predicament of the 'Saanich, I'm afraid that many more years of observing maritime matters on our coast has made me justifiably dubious about derelict looking vessels tied up where they probably shouldn't be, and in suspicious condition.
The San Mateo, Queen of Sidney, Jervis Queen, Hollyburn, Prince George, Cy Peck, Kalakala, Queen of Esquimalt, and no doubt many other sizable passenger vessels, as well as countless smaller boats that litter our shoreline, are all testament to owners who lacked either the means or the inclination to deal with aging or decrepit vessels, and left them to sink, burn, pollute, or become dockside vagrants. Experience teaches that while the 'Saanich may in fact be under competent stewardship right now, questions and concerns are perfectly reasonable, and the objection to her being moored where she is is also valid, depending on what your vision for Howe Sound is.
I'm not surprised that the owner of the San Mateo and 'Sidney stashed his hulks at Mission. That's outside of the jurisdiction of the Fraser Port authority, and Howe Sound is also outside of the Port of Vancouver. Even within port areas, it's difficult enough getting rid of derelicts.
Environmental groups play a valuable role in bringing possible problems to public and official attention. Aside from the issue of whether the 'Saanich should be where she is at all, I think the owners should be assuring all concerned that this vessel is securely moored against all possible weather, that it is still seaworthy and not in presenting any pollutant danger to the sound, and that it will be moved at the earliest possible time.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Jun 4, 2012 21:37:24 GMT -8
:)it pains me to think how most of the dogwood fleet has been trashed on our shorelines and their undignified dispersals! the sister Esquimalt's langushing at Pt. Alberni was another indignity and her renaming voyage down to the mexican boneyard, which I expect the others will follow! and I guess wacky would be turning in his grave! :'(mrdot.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jun 4, 2012 22:08:17 GMT -8
:)it pains me to think how most of the dogwood fleet has been trashed on our shorelines and their undignified dispersals! the sister Esquimalt's langushing at Pt. Alberni was another indignity and her renaming voyage down to the mexican boneyard, which I expect the others will follow! and I guess wacky would be turning in his grave! :'(mrdot. I don't know. Maybe Bennett would have been realistic enough to recognize that the fact that six of the ships constructed by 1965 were still in service in 2012, with another active in the south seas, was not a bad record.
|
|
|
Post by markkarj on Jun 22, 2012 17:49:55 GMT -8
|
|
Mayne
Voyager
I come from a long line of sinners like me
Posts: 289
|
Post by Mayne on Jun 22, 2012 19:31:03 GMT -8
As the recent pictures we have seen of her in recent I don't think she looks as good as the pictures she is being advertised with. And with where she has been parked I really don't think her interior is in that nice of shape.
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Jun 23, 2012 14:34:10 GMT -8
Those photos are rather old. It's when she was parked with the Queen of Vancouver while the pair were in Nanaimo for a few months.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Jun 23, 2012 17:02:58 GMT -8
:)with regard to Queen of Saanich, on which I served on as seaman in the late 1960's and early 70's, I am afraid she will eventually sail for the same mexican re-cycling yard as her sister! time marches on. :'(mrdot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2012 19:33:10 GMT -8
Why did the Queen of Saanich had her interior upgrade and no other V-Class's vessels had their interior upgrade?
|
|
Mayne
Voyager
I come from a long line of sinners like me
Posts: 289
|
Post by Mayne on Jun 28, 2012 21:02:37 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2012 21:09:30 GMT -8
Not Coastalised the 1995 upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jun 29, 2012 7:33:23 GMT -8
Why did the Queen of Saanich had her interior upgrade and no other V-Class's vessels had their interior upgrade? The upgrade was oriented to design the Queen of Saanich to fit in with the Spirits for constant service on Route 1, whereas the other two V's would see regular relief service on other routes. If you did pay attention to ship placement right up until the V's were retired, you'll remember that the Saanich remained on Route 1, while the other two were shifted around. The Queen of Cowichan also recieved an upgrade very similar to the Saanich in the 90's, although I think that was more of a trial, and I'm not sure what the deal was with that.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Jun 29, 2012 8:00:57 GMT -8
Just like right now with the Coastal Celebration always stays on route 1 but she is pretty much the same as the others except for the Pacific Buffet!
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 6, 2012 20:24:06 GMT -8
Does anyone know why the Queen of Saanich would not show up on the Canada ship registry... not by name or by official number?
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Jul 6, 2012 20:43:44 GMT -8
Does anyone know why the Queen of Saanich would not show up on the Canada ship registry... not by name or by official number? Did you try her pseudo name "Owen Belle" along with her official number?
|
|