|
|
Post by ruddernut on May 12, 2008 13:05:18 GMT -8
I am not talking about past ideas or mistakes. I am however saying that the places you are saying should have passenger only ferry service are all places that there really is no point because they have and need CAR FERRIES. Because people have become so accustomed to their cars. Here is an example of a city with a good network of foot ferries: www.sydneyferries.info/maps.htmI'm not saying abolish car ferries altogether, but if you can reduce their sailings and the freaking huge load they have to haul by substituting foot ferries whenever possible, that is a good thing, right? |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on May 12, 2008 14:08:55 GMT -8
Passenger-only ferries, such as those in Sydney, or what we should have on the heavy commuter routes near Seattle, work well for urban areas where you have commuters travelling on a daily basis, and where the population warrants a decent level of transit service. The islands DO NOT qualify for such a system. There just aren't enough walk-ons to justify it, nor is there the need.
|
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on May 12, 2008 16:15:47 GMT -8
ruddernut, You clearly do not understand the areas of what you speak and the logistics of any the ideas you have.
|
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on May 13, 2008 0:56:53 GMT -8
In looking around the internet, I found today a new blog article on passenger ferries on Puget Sound. I will say that these people have a more well thought out idea for how something like this would work. However, I see so many small inaccurate items in their post that I would question just how viable the whole plan really is. It makes me wonder whether they might benefit somehow from the sale of these fast ferries. I actually agree that the Puget Sound area will grow to the point in the next 30 years that it will become important to coordinate some of the public transportation services on both sides of, and across, Puget Sound. There is no need, though, to have it all in place this week or even next year, but it is good to think about what might happen in this direction. The passenger ferries will be here someday. It will happen when there is a demand for them, and not the other way around. We will not ever get people into passenger ferries by closing off car ferries or other similar means. And I can't see a $50 car tax for every car in Washington to finance just ferries getting off the ground anytime soon. The post even mentions 4 million more people in the area by 2100. I figure that I will start worrying about that in 2050 or so. Or my grandchild will.  And the native peoples didn't call the waterway the Salish Sea. I just knew I would see that somewhere! |
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on May 13, 2008 5:26:32 GMT -8
Passenger-only ferries, such as those in Sydney, or what we should have on the heavy commuter routes near Seattle, work well for urban areas where you have commuters travelling on a daily basis, and where the population warrants a decent level of transit service. The islands DO NOT qualify for such a system. There just aren't enough walk-ons to justify it, nor is there the need. Actually, the idea to serve the San Juans with pax ferries was partly inspired by this post: ferriesbc.proboards20.com/index.cgi?board=nwf&action=display&thread=2276&page=2#77764I figured an arrangement to reduce fuel usage and cost with reduced sailings and substitution with smaller vessels would be a good compromise. As for lacking walk-ons, wouldn't the people rather leave their cars behind and avoid paying $20 for a casual trip to Friday Harbor or $38 to Anacortes? I wonder if enough foot passengers could be had with 1) a good sailing schedule, 2) a good network of land transit feeding these boats that don't charge $6 a ride, and 3) expanded parking facilities where possible. I realize you know the islands and their people better than I do, but I figure it is a drastic and revolutionary idea whose outcome can only be determined by trial and error. |
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on May 13, 2008 5:34:02 GMT -8
The passenger ferries will be here someday. It will happen when there is a demand for them, and not the other way around. We will not ever get people into passenger ferries by closing off car ferries or other similar means. And I can't see a $50 car tax for every car in Washington to finance just ferries getting off the ground anytime soon. I wonder where they get the money to finance the big ferries, that cost tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to build, use up a lot more fuel, and employ a lot more costly staff, without a big controversial tax to support it. |
|
|
|
Post by In Washington on May 13, 2008 8:44:15 GMT -8
Ruddernut,
Have you noticed what WSF is asking for the Chinook/Snohomish? $4.5 million. A new version would cost about $10-15 million.
The Chinook/Snohomish carried 350 passengers were fuel guzzlers. The Issaguah class boats use less fuel and haul 1100-1200 passengers, along with 124 cars.
The Chinook/Snohomish had a crew of two deck officers, two deckahands and an Engineer. Slightly smaller crew than an Issaquah.
What you can expect to see coming out of Kitsap Transit as an example is an Operator (not to be confused with a Master) and two deckhands (Ordinarys I think). 149 passenger capacity and slightly better fuel consumption than the Chinook/Snohomish. It takes a lot of horsepower to go the 35+ knots to get to Seallt from Bremerton in a half hour.
My opinion? Why run a foot passenger boat where an auto ferry route already exists. If you want foot ferries you better make sure the riders of these boats want to pay the full cost to run them.
|
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on May 13, 2008 10:14:48 GMT -8
Ruddernut, Have you noticed what WSF is asking for the Chinook/Snohomish? $4.5 million. A new version would cost about $10-15 million. The Chinook/Snohomish carried 350 passengers were fuel guzzlers. The Issaguah class boats use less fuel and haul 1100-1200 passengers, along with 124 cars. Would it help if you toned down the speed and didn't run such a lemon? Sounds like you got a raw deal on those boats. The one featured in the KOMO report was quoted at $3.5 million. (Capacity of only about 147 and don't know its fuel consumption though.) |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on May 13, 2008 11:28:26 GMT -8
I don't think the Chinook and Snohomish were ever considered lemons. For the few years they ran the Seattle-Bremerton route they worked just fine. BTW: their passenger capacity was listed at 350, not 147 (this comes from Evergreenfleet's site). The issues surrounding the PO boats were the wake when going through Rich Passage, and they weren't particularly cost effective.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on May 13, 2008 20:40:04 GMT -8
Would it help if you toned down the speed and didn't run such a lemon?Sounds like you got a raw deal on those boats. The one featured in the KOMO report was quoted at $3.5 million. (Capacity of only about 147 and don't know its fuel consumption though.) The 147-person capacity is a hangover from Port Townsend and an issue that probably isn't appropriate for me to comment on publicly. The Chinook and Snohomish are 350-passenger boats. The speed was a necessity to get the boat up on plane to reduce wake. |
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on May 13, 2008 21:06:23 GMT -8
The 147-person capacity is a hangover from Port Townsend and an issue that probably isn't appropriate for me to comment on publicly. If the reduced capacity of the Chinook and Snohomish had something to do with a hangover you got in Port Townsend, I can understand why you wouldn't want to comment publicly. That sort of thing doesn't look good on peoples' employment file. Oh. Wait a minute. I read that too quickly... |
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on Mar 29, 2010 14:27:24 GMT -8
Things are getting too staid here, so here's another for us to debate. I am a proponent of Marine Transportation, especially vessels that carry cars, to me the way to prosperity is to increase commerce, water or vehicle borne.
What Ferry routes do you think ought to be added, by the State or Local Government or Private Ferry Systems.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 29, 2010 16:07:41 GMT -8
What Ferry routes do you think ought to be added, by the State or Local Government or Private Ferry Systems. Just the ones that have already been proposed, such as Kingston-Seattle passenger-only, which is going to happen again in the fall with the Spirit of Kingston vessel. As we have discussed on other threads, there are significant hurdles for them to overcome to make this a viable venture, most notably the lack of parking in Kingston and higher fares, unless they have figured a way to keep fares more nominal with WSF's walk-on rates. It may be even more problematic for them now that WSF is proposing adjustments to the Edmonds-Kingston schedule to align better with the Sounder trains. Still, I would like to see it succeed. I always thought that would be a good passenger ferry route. Aqua Express couldn't make a go of it, so we shall see. The other route that would be good to have is a direct Seattle (Colman Dock) - Southworth connection, whether it's passenger-only or car ferry service. Both have been proposed in years past. If the state had continued forward with the passenger-only ferry program, we may have seen a PO dock at Southworth several years ago. And, more recently, one of the WSF long-range plans showed the Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth route being split apart, and the introduction of car-ferry service to Colman Dock from Southworth. The former would be easier to implement from a facilities and infrastucture standpoint, and Kitsap Transit did recently expand the Harper Church park and ride lot, so a passenger-only operation would probably be more feasible at that location. The car ferry idea is total "pie-in-the-sky" and not likely to happen, but the ferry geek in me would love to see a new car ferry route Outside of that, I can't think of any other routes that would be feasible or needed. |
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on Mar 29, 2010 16:44:17 GMT -8
My favorite is the re-establishment of the old Gooseberry Point to North Orcas route. It operated out of the Mainland Lummi Island Ferry Terminal and landed at the end of the Terill Beach Road on the North side of Orcas. I know it was operated by an agreement between Whatcom and San Juan Counties in the summer of 1941, locals tell me the run was successful. However, WWII got in the way and it was not re-established after.
Orcas Islanders would love it, they like going to Bellingham area, Canadians would love it also, would cut their time to the Islands in less than half. I would think one or two trips a day would be appropriate in the winter, continuous trips in season from 5 am to Midnight. However, the problem would be getting the Lummi Indians on board to let it land on their Reservation, we are still having a time keeping our Ferry there. The Gooseberry area has grown up willy-nilly and there is a bona fide traffic problem there, a better road situation needs to be addressed to make it work.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 29, 2010 19:34:22 GMT -8
The other problem would be finding a suitable docking site on the north shore of Orcas. The end of Terrell Beach road would no longer work as it is all private property and houses now. The end of North Beach Road could possibly work as there is direct beach access from the road, and it's level access (i.e. no bank), although the adjacent house and property are right on the road, so that would probably have to be bought out, and the folks running Smuggler's Villa Resort on the other side of the road may have something to say about it, too. But, North Beach Road is a direct line into downtown Eastsound, and they actually have a nice walking/bike path next to the road. This idea would never fly, especially given today's economic and environmental hurdles, but it's always interesting to muse over the possibilities, even if they're not realistic.
|
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on Mar 29, 2010 19:48:09 GMT -8
Their Public Works director say that San Juan County still owns the end of Terrel Beach Road to deep water. I think the end North Beach Road has a depth problem and I do not know if the County owns it.
Fun to think about, and something that needs to be explored.
Jim
|
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on May 10, 2010 11:41:21 GMT -8
I'm taking this back to the top due to an experience I had on Saturday.
I was down the road visiting my neighbor when he invited me to go along on a boat ride to the eastern side of Orcas to pull some of his Shrimp Pots. It took us about 15 minutes to cross the about 6 miles from half way down Legoe Bay on Lummi to about 200 yards from Orcas near Raccoon Point. Yes, we did get some Shrimp.
From that point, it was an absolutely beautiful day, I could see many Islands, up into Canada, the Refineries at Cherry Point, Lummi of course, along Chuckanut Drive and South Bellingham. The experience really brought it home to me that, we are so close, a few miles away from each other, but the current road based paradigm in transportation, puts huge impediments in between us. Of course the impediments are the expanses of water.
To the old timers, this was no big deal, there were boats going everywhich direction one could ride on, Steamers, Launches, and yes, Car Ferries. now we only have a few. To me this is a huge failure of our Governments and Leaders to foster growth in Marine Transportation and Commerce that would help us all thrive. If I had the resources, I would be down at Freeland ordering a Ferry right now.
What a loss of opportunity.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on May 10, 2010 20:39:39 GMT -8
Well, Black Ball apparently determined the Gooseberry Point-Orcas Island route to be unfeasible, unless the run was "temporarily discontinued" in February 1935 (never to appear again on the schedule that I know of) for reasons other than financial, i.e., damage to the slip. It was replaced by a Chuckanut Drive-Obstruction Pass run for summer 1935, served by the Rosario. By 1939 it was operated by the Chuckanut Inter Island Ferry Company, and that's the last reference to the run I can find.
And remember, like some of your neighbors on Lummi, the Orcas Islanders might not want more traffic on their island. ;D
|
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on May 10, 2010 22:10:34 GMT -8
Sure there are those who want to shut the door, just after they went thorough it, likely more so on Lummi than Orcas. The San Juans are highly dependent on Tourists and from what some of my friends out there say, right now business is terrible.
I would hope things are different than the 1930s, but, even back then, the County run from Goosebery to Orcas in the summer of 1941 was a success. I cannot see why it would not be today.
My ex wife's sister lived near Eastsound about 20 years ago. By the time we left Lummi, which was easy, drove to Annacortes, waited in line several hours, rode the Ferry, it took us at least six hours to get to her house. When we left we usually had to wait in line for most of a day to get off the Island, and then had to drive home. To put it mildly, it was a real pain, we didn't go too often.
I doubt if a "Bellingham" (Gooseberry-Fairhaven) to Orcas run would increase the overall traffic too much, it would just make it easier to go there and I for one would love to do it more often, I do have fiends there. It's a fact that once there, you have to get around, so for most of us, having a car is almost a necessity, which does in the thought of a walk-on boat.
For those of us around the Bellingham area, it's easier to go to Seattle than the San Juans, and Orcas is less than 10 miles away. There's just something the matter with this picture.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on May 11, 2010 7:26:57 GMT -8
Sure there are those who want to shut the door, just after they went thorough it, likely more so on Lummi than Orcas. The San Juans are highly dependent on Tourists and from what some of my friends out there say, right now business is terrible. This situation is hardly unique to Orcas Island. Business is down everywhere. Can't have been all that successful--it isn't in operation now. Success would have indicated a continuing run. Obviously if it had been, such a run would still be around today. Its absence of over half a century is rather telling. Okay, I'm confused--do you or do you not want more traffic to Orcas? If it isn't going to "increase overall traffic too much" then you've just shot yourself in the foot for sustainability. Any private operation ( and lets face it, it would have to be private as the state is stretched too thin as it is and Whatcom County just voted down an expansion of public transportation for their bus system. I can't see them hopping into a tourist run between Orcas and Bellingham) to the Orcas from Bellingham would have to make a profit. And if you're already saying that it wouldn't increase traffic all that much, then profit and sustainability go right out the window. And if it isn't going to increase traffic that much, why bother at all? Kind of a disingenuous comparison, don't you think? Seattle is a major metropolitan area and draws (not to mention a major interstate highway running through the middle of it)and not an island. Not to mention people go to Seattle for totally different reasons from what brings people to the islands. People do not come to the San Juan Islands for nightlife, clubbing, or going to the ballet or theater. They go for the bucolic atmosphere, the peace and quiet, the natural beauty --to kayak, hike, fish, whale watch and enjoy the outdoors. You can't really compare access to the two areas because they offer completely different things and geographically are totally different. I'm not trying to shoot the idea down completely here, it just seems that it has been tried and failed multiple times--and that if there had been a true need for such a service, it would have arisen some time between 1941 and now. While the idea may be nice, without the traffic to back it up, and without a cost lower than what it costs to take a state ferry out to Orcas and back, you're not going to get the business. People will be remarkably stubborn when it comes to saving a few bucks, and will happily stay in line for hours to do so. Allegedly the reservation system going in to Anacortes is going to cut that waiting around time as well. People knowing for sure that they can secure a spot on a sailing to Orcas will likely drum up business too--we'll have to see. Admittedly I am no fan of the idea of a reservation system for WSF but in the San Juans it just might work. We'll have to wait and see... |
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on May 11, 2010 9:02:08 GMT -8
1. Yes, business is down everywhere, more so in the San Juans. Perhaps it's because of the cost and difficulty of getting there, it's just easier to go somewhere else.
2. Maybe things are different now than they were 70 years ago, has not the population increased, just a bit? Might be worth a try.
3. You are right, it probably will increase traffic somewhat. It would also likely take some of the load off Anacortes and shift it to the north which is OK, it just makes it easier for those on both ends. What do we want, a Balkanization of our area which will ultimately result in system failure, as we are seeing now, or a reasonable expansion of commerce which will result in increased prosperity?
Our County voted down a substantial tax increase to just supposedly maintain the bus system which has a huge cash reserve. The voters did not want to keep supporting what they consider a top heavy, bloated, unaccountable, money wasting operation which could easily maintain and even expand the services they already have without more taxes. This is not a viable comparison.
4. Seattle is about 100 miles away, I can get there in under two hours. Orcas is 10 miles away, I can get there in 6 hours. I know it's a water trip, but if I could get there in three hours I might just go and enjoy the place, six hours, sorry, too much. So I and others don't go, fare box drops, tourism drops , fares raise due to less passage, even less people go there, then runs get reduced. The no-growthers love it, the State loves it on one level, they have to spend less on the Ferries, but then don't get the tax revenue, so they increase taxes, business drops even more- a death spiral of fare-tax increases ensues resulting in loss of services. Finally, it even gets to the no-growthers, they can no longer afford to live in the Islands. It's happening here on Lummi. You should see the huge increases of the number of For Sale signs as people anticipate possible coming fare increases and loss of service, and we do not know if it will really happen.
5. The whole system needs to be rethought. We need either a lower cost or more availability, perhaps both if we want to succeed. Other ways need to be looked at, perhaps a private operation is in order. No, I don’t know the answer, I just know there is a problem and am willing to look at other ideas. I’d love to spend more time interacting with other Islanders, I just know that the current situation makes it extremely difficult.
6. To me the reservation system is just a band-aid to the problem, somehow it worked before without one.
Maybe I’ll just get a boat and bypass the whole deal.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on May 11, 2010 10:34:15 GMT -8
2. Maybe things are different now than they were 70 years ago, has not the population increased, just a bit? Might be worth a try. It might, but even as a "good liberal" I don't want to see taxpayer money wasted upon it. You can't truly control commerce, and "reasonable" is a very subjective term. Sure it is. The voters of this state passed I-695 despite all the warnings of what would happen when it did pass; i.e. increase of fares and reduction of services well beyond just the highway system and DOT. I would be inclined to suspect the voters turned down the substantial tax increase because it was a substantial tax increase, regardless of what it was funding. But then, given my experience with I-695, I also think the voters of this state are mind-bogglingly short-sighted. Getting there in three hours isn't too difficult. Just don't try it between noon on Friday and 4 PM on Saturday in the summer. Actually the maintenance costs on a ferry don't decrease much whether you run it eight or sixteen hours a day. And steel-replacement costs, for example, are fairly static whether it runs or it's mothballed. Ditto paint, not that WSF is spending money on that these days. But Lummi folk have consistently turned down the option to buy a bigger boat, even when the Hiyu was available. Which goes directly against the voter-mandated I-695, but I concur. However, I don't think it's possible to run an auto-ferry system profitably. Passenger-only could be achieved in theory, but it necessitates (1) people giving up their cars, which doesn't seem to happen and (2) good public transportation on both sides, which at least Whatcom County isn't able to provide. Which refused to run its boats at a loss in the post-WWII era, thus eventually necessitating the state taking over from Black Ball. I agree that the current situation is difficult, but the Voters Of Washington really seem to have forgotten that they made their own bed. It's easy to vote for tax decreases in times of prosperity (November 1999) and then complain when the income stops (January 2000). I concur wholeheartedly. Moreover, the terminals of WSF simply aren't set up for it--we don't have anywhere to stage the different traffic, and a fifteen-minute pre-arrival cut-off isn't long enough to sell the tickets to fill the boat unless the holding lot is huge, like Anacortes or Colman Dock. I don't understand how (according to Senator Ranker) a system that costs $25 million to install and gathers no additional income (no extra charge for sthe service/privilege) is somehow supposed to save in excess of $200 million. I predict a riot at Colman Dock during commute hours. |
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on May 11, 2010 14:44:19 GMT -8
Ok, we differ philosophy about what to do here. I think the sytem needs to be rethought and changed, make it more attractive for people to ride the Ferries, buy new boats that actually will do the job properly and cost-effectively.
How about shifting one of the Anacortes boats to the Bellingham area, maybe to the Fairhaven Cruise Terminal, which would better serve us here on this end? The terminal is built, publically owned and already set up. This is just one of the ideas that might have some merrit.
I agree about your take on some of those on Lummi, now the chickens are coming home to roost. I also find the County complicit in not replacing the boat, it was simply easier for them to put it off until ----later. The same is happening all over, the simple deal is that there must be changes if these operations are to survive, the taxpayers are not going to continue to pony up, they don't have the money.
Our local Bus system, the WTA has about 10 employees that get paid over 100K, for a bus outfit! New buses all the time, new custom paint jobs every few months, busses running empty most of the time are only a few of the issues the locals saw. The raise they asked for was 50%, while they had at least two years reserve in the bank! Times are not good here, a good manager could reduce the budget by 20% and keep the same level of service, they refused to look at any economies and just went back to the well for more money.
Perhaps the Ferry Service ought to be made to run with a few less people, without compromising safety, on each run and shift them to another new run which would serve the public better and keep the same number of people working, just an idea.
I agree with your take on the Reservation System.
Simply, I want to expand water transportation, make it easier for the public to get around, grow the capacity to a better economy of scale. While we may differ on the way to do it, we are ultimately on the same page.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on May 11, 2010 17:06:32 GMT -8
Our local Bus system, the WTA has about 10 employees that get paid over 100K, for a bus outfit! New buses all the time, new custom paint jobs every few months, busses running empty most of the time are only a few of the issues the locals saw. The raise they asked for was 50%, while they had at least two years reserve in the bank! Times are not good here, a good manager could reduce the budget by 20% and keep the same level of service, they refused to look at any economies and just went back to the well for more money. Okay, I'll concede that that is nuts. The problem with that is our manning levels are already mandated by the USCG, and on most of our vessels we're running with the crew "at certificate." We can't hardly sail any shorter than we already are, with a very few exceptions. The people that can be spared by certificate--and there aren't many--are all Ordinary Seamen. We'd have to muster up some Captains, Mates, and Able-bodied Seamen somewhere, and WSF vessel personnel are spread nearly as thinly as its vessels. Yes. But I'm at a loss for how to do it, because I can't see where scale can be used to our advantage, except maybe to build bigger boats rather than the Chetzemoka-class or 'K'-class Steilacoom IIs, which is apparently not the direction Mary Margaret Haugen wants us to go in. |
|
lifc
Voyager
Posts: 471
|
Post by lifc on May 12, 2010 8:54:51 GMT -8
Barnacle,
Thank you for the thoughtful reply.
I found out a very interesting bit of information the other day from one of our retired Ferry Captains. In 1962 after 30+ years of six car wood wonders, when the County built the Whatcom Chief, we on the Island considered it huge. For at least 30 years, it was hardly ever fully loaded, as long as one got to the dock on time, you were on.
It seems that the County had it built larger-than-needed because they were going to enter into an agreement with San Juan County to make two round trips to Orcas a day as well as also operating the rest of the day at Lummi. I do not know where the Chief was supposed to have landed on Orcas, I would guess a reactivated Terrill Beach Landing. For some reason, San Juan County never provided the dock and the service never happened. I also wonder if the lost Lummi runs were to be covered by the old six car Chief Kwina as the County kept it for about eight years as a spare.
Last night, when I told this to a friend, he thought it was a great idea. I'm not so sure the Chief would have done so well on this, sure in good weather it would have been fine, but, in bad weather it would have been horrible. Just imagine bouncing around out there between Lummi and Orcas in either good South or North Easter, in that little crate! I also predict the Orcas run would have been instantly in overload.
Now, I so think that an extended STII K class Ferry does have some merit in some places. This run would be a perfect placement for a 66 or 72 car version, something the MMH does not seem to know is possible to be built. The cross Island weather is not near as bad as Admiralty, or the "triangle" of Bellingham Bay. I personally know this as I live on Lummi's West Beach and see the weather, every day. The boat would likely require a crew of five and be much more fuel efficient than the Chetzemoka Class. Even the standard 54 car version could stand the weather, it's just too small for the Orcas traffic.
I wonder if a new version of the County’s old plan would be an interim step today. We already need a new Ferry, the Chief could sub on the missed runs, and we could find out if the route would get any traffic. just an idea.
Jim
|
|
