Nick
Voyager 
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080 
|
Post by Nick on Mar 13, 2008 15:37:10 GMT -8
Just for the record, Sidney BC was named after Sidney Island, which was named by Capt. George Richards of the Royal Navy, when he was sent to survey the 49th parallel in 1859. It was named after his friend, Lt. (later Captain) Frederick William Sidney. For more information, see here. It is often confused with Sydney NS and Sydney Australia, but has no relation historically. The difficulty is compounded by the fact that there is a Sidney, Manitoba as well. |
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Mar 13, 2008 20:08:35 GMT -8
I drove by the WSF Sidney terminal a week or so ago and I happened to see a BC Ferries trailer parked inside. Dont know if it is still there but was wondering why it was parked there. Exactly like the one that used to carry the BC Ferries float.
|
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Mar 13, 2008 20:46:17 GMT -8
Just remember this: The anagram of "Sidney" in BC is "Disney".
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080
|
Post by Nick on Mar 13, 2008 21:12:42 GMT -8
I drove by the WSF Sidney terminal a week or so ago and I happened to see a BC Ferries trailer parked inside. Dont know if it is still there but was wondering why it was parked there. Exactly like the one that used to carry the BC Ferries float. The Sidney terminal is now (as of September/07) managed by BCFS. They are probably doing some kind of work in preparation for the resumption of the WSF run, or using it as storage. |
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 14, 2008 16:46:21 GMT -8
3-year lease expected for Sidney terminal before run starts
Kimberly Jacobson
Anacortes American
March 14, 2008 - 08:00 AM
Washington State Ferries expects to have a three-year lease to land boats at the Sidney, British Columbia, terminal by the time the international run from Anacortes resumes later this month.
WSF has been in negotiations with BC Ferries, which took over management of the terminal in September 2007. The two ferry operators are batting around a final draft of the agreement.
“We’ll have it completed and signed before we come in on March 30,” said Jayne Davis, WSF regional operations manager.
According to the lease, WSF will pay $370,000 a year to use the landing and $125,000 a year for maintenance, security and other user charges.
WSF pays about $223,000 a year to the Port of Anacortes to lease the land where the Anacortes terminal is.
Davis said WSF managers worked hard to get the best deal for the taxpayers but were unable to negotiate a lower price with BC Ferries.
She said WSF will continue to promote the route and encourage tourists in the United States and Canada to use the run.
“If we’re going there, we want that boat as full as possible,” Davis said. “My hope is that we can continue to work with our partners in Anacortes to market the route better and try to get ridership up. If we can show we’re getting ridership up and the route starts making money, we could talk about expanding it.”
WSF had an interim license with BC Ferries to land boats at the terminal for $1,700 per landing until the season ended Jan. 5. The season will start again March 30.
The two agencies have previously worked through a lot of other issues for a long-term contract, including allowing WSF to have an agent on site.
Ferry officials had been uncertain of the run’s future after the Town of Sidney entered into a long-term lease with one of its competitors, BC Ferries.
Under the 40-year lease between the Town of Sidney and BC Ferries announced in February 2007, there are several provisions for WSF, including a docking agreement based on the 2006 schedule with accommodation for long-term future use.
An international ferry terminal has operated out of Sidney for about 50 years under Washington State Ferries. Most recently they’ve been on a month-to-month lease at the terminal.
BC Ferries does not have any immediate plans to operate any of its 36 ships out of the Sidney terminal, but may do so in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by piller on Mar 19, 2008 18:21:19 GMT -8
The Peninsula Review (a local newspaper serving the Sidney, BC and peninsula area) has announced in today's edition that Anacortes-Sidney service will resume on Sunday March30 with the Elwha scheduled to arrive at 10:50 am. Aboard will be 60 dignitaries from Anacortes and Friday Harbor to particpate in a ceremony with various Saanich Peninsula officials. The Elwha will stay in Sidney 45 minutes before returning.
This looks to be the start of the spring/summer sailing schedule. The WSF site still does not list anything after March 29
|
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Mar 19, 2008 18:30:10 GMT -8
I think that article may be in error. The 6 month SOLAS waiver for the Elwha will expire before March 30.
|
|
|
|
Post by piller on Mar 19, 2008 18:42:03 GMT -8
I'll try to get to the Sidney terminal but my timeline is quite tight. I may get to see it depart.
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 20, 2008 6:32:21 GMT -8
I think that article may be in error. The 6 month SOLAS waiver for the Elwha will expire before March 30. The Elwha got an extension to November. I think the CG took pity on WSF after all the other problems they've been dealing with. ;D That being said, the Chelan is scheduled to start the run on Sunday the 30th. She will be leaving this Sunday (3/23) for a week of maintenance at Eagle Harbor then will be back for the Sidney run on the 30th. Unfortunately this means we won't be able to stock the store until Monday, so no Duty Free until Tuesday the 1st.  Ugh...they even have a photo of the wrong boat... www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/peninsulanewsreview/news/16798796.html |
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Mar 20, 2008 11:14:00 GMT -8
Things look a little more sure, if you can believe the PR stuff coming out of the new guy's mouth...... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New ferries chief needs more funds to float all boatswww.goskagit.com/index.php/opinion/article/new_ferries_chief_needs_more_funds_to_float_all_boats/Anacortes American Editorial March 18, 2008 - 08:00 AM At long last, it appears Washington State Ferries will get a three-year lease to land boats at the Sidney, British Columbia, dock operated by rival BC Ferries. That’s encouraging news, and perhaps calms fears a little here that the international run between Anacortes and Sidney will be a casualty of the state ferry system’s funding, budgeting and management morass. The run is set to resume March 30 after a three-month winter hiatus. WSF will be paying more now that the Town of Sidney is leasing the dock to BC Ferries, but the run continues to be an economic engine and tourist pipeline that deserves the state’s full support. New ferries chief David Moseley, on the job for just a few weeks, says he understands the Sidney run is an important issue for the Anacortes business community. And, understandably, he says there also are a lot of competing interests, and the run “is an issue we’ll have to deal with.” We’ll take that in a positive light — that dealing with the Sidney run won’t slide down the priority list, and that the overall solutions needed for better ferry funding, management and operations will indeed float all boats. Moseley said the challenges are one reason why he took the position. Well, he certainly has his work cut out for him. As he uses his considerable skills to restore public confidence in the agency, Anacortes will be right in the middle of some major issues. The Sidney run, the stalled renovation of the Anacortes terminal and the erratic service to the San Juans are among the many things in front of WSF. Money, of course, is the key to any real progress. Moseley can’t just conjure up long-term solutions given the current fiscal landscape. As lawmakers in Olympia review the situation and press for change, the need to find funding options to replace the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax money voters axed eight years ago is job one. |
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Jun 26, 2008 16:35:11 GMT -8
Just wondering how this route is being impacted by the high gas prices? Would it likely experience a sharper decline in ridership than other WSF routes?
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jun 26, 2008 20:36:01 GMT -8
I would be surprised, frankly. It's been my experience in the past that the patrons of that run are Here To See It And Price Be Hanged. But, I've been wrong before.
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Jun 27, 2008 6:38:30 GMT -8
We'll know more after Independence Day weekend. Summer traffic on the run usually takes a big leap after the 4th.  |
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jul 4, 2008 23:07:31 GMT -8
At long last, it appears Washington State Ferries will get a three-year lease to land boats at the Sidney, British Columbia, dock operated by rival BC Ferries. If they're such "rivals", why don't they compete with them and try and take over the route completely? I bet WSF would be glad to get a route that operates at a loss off their hands and free up some vessels with their current fleet shortage. Imagine an Anacortes-Sidney run with a gift shop, Seawest Lounge, video arcades, notebook carrels and possibly even a buffet. Which jurisdiction does that route benefit more anyways? BC or Washington? Shouldn't both sides chip in, like they do with cross-border highways? |
|
|
|
Post by tempest on Jul 5, 2008 7:06:36 GMT -8
Q. Why don't they compete with them head to head?
A. Because they hold all the cards on that run. Now that they signed a 40 year lease with the Town of Sidney, they're in the drivers seat.
BCFS are hedging their bets. If you become the terminal operator you set the price. Quotes are that WSF is paying a LOT more for the use of that terminal than in the past. Why would BCFS want the terminal. Control. Period. So WSF blow their brains out trying to make a go of it, grinding away, promoting the service and growing the market. And then....bang! Their LANDLORD sets up a new terminal, funded by a bottomless pit, known as the province of bc and start COMPETING with them.
BCFS have shown in the past that they will do exactly that. Supposedly on the Gibsons Vancouver run, poor George Slade, the operator of the Georgia Master had to find out first hand that BCFC intended to start their own pax only ferry to downtown.
If a Nanaimo run was successful, how long would it take for BCFS to plunk their own boat in the water? They have a terminal. They have plenty of parking in Nanaimo. They would only have to dump a float in the water slide their boat into service and away they go!
I hope it doesn't sound cynical, BUT, I can't believe the town of sidney would sign a deal with BCFS, without at least exhausting all avenues of discussion with WSF. If I were WSF, I would be feeling very uneasy about my new landlord on the Sidney run.
What's next? BCFS building a new Bellvue Terminal and becoming the landlord? Wouldn't be surprised if they're working on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jul 5, 2008 7:14:24 GMT -8
We'll know more after Independence Day weekend. Summer traffic on the run usually takes a big leap after the 4th. Upward, or off the cliff? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jul 5, 2008 7:17:37 GMT -8
At long last, it appears Washington State Ferries will get a three-year lease to land boats at the Sidney, British Columbia, dock operated by rival BC Ferries. If they're such "rivals", why don't they compete with them and try and take over the route completely? I bet WSF would be glad to get a route that operates at a loss off their hands and free up some vessels with their current fleet shortage. Imagine an Anacortes-Sidney run with a gift shop, Seawest Lounge, video arcades, notebook carrels and possibly even a buffet. Which jurisdiction does that route benefit more anyways? BC or Washington? Shouldn't both sides chip in, like they do with cross-border highways? We've been over this before, so I'm not going to explain the 'why.' I suggest you have a look around this sub-board. It's here in at least three different places. |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jul 5, 2008 7:20:14 GMT -8
I hope it doesn't sound cynical, BUT, I can't believe the town of sidney would sign a deal with BCFS, without at least exhausting all avenues of discussion with WSF. If I were WSF, I would be feeling very uneasy about my new landlord on the Sidney run. It's pretty much come to light that WSF never intended to sign a long-term lease. The person who was 'responsible' (if that is the correct word) for failing to secure a lease received an 'Excellence Award' for job performance last year. That person is also no longer part of WSF, having fallen victim to the housecleaning. |
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jul 5, 2008 15:04:25 GMT -8
Q. Why don't they compete with them head to head? A. Because they hold all the cards on that run. Now that they signed a 40 year lease with the Town of Sidney, they're in the drivers seat. BCFS are hedging their bets. If you become the terminal operator you set the price. Quotes are that WSF is paying a LOT more for the use of that terminal than in the past. Why would BCFS want the terminal. Control. Period. So WSF blow their brains out trying to make a go of it, grinding away, promoting the service and growing the market. And then....bang! Their LANDLORD sets up a new terminal, funded by a bottomless pit, known as the province of bc and start COMPETING with them. BCFS have shown in the past that they will do exactly that. Supposedly on the Gibsons Vancouver run, poor George Slade, the operator of the Georgia Master had to find out first hand that BCFC intended to start their own pax only ferry to downtown. If a Nanaimo run was successful, how long would it take for BCFS to plunk their own boat in the water? They have a terminal. They have plenty of parking in Nanaimo. They would only have to dump a float in the water slide their boat into service and away they go! Which they never get around to doing anyways. If they did, they may save all these private companies the hardship of setting up and having their businesses go under. It seems they're more intent on funneling all the pax traffic onto the car ferries, to recover as much of their operating costs as possible. I hope it doesn't sound cynical, BUT, I can't believe the town of sidney would sign a deal with BCFS, without at least exhausting all avenues of discussion with WSF. If I were WSF, I would be feeling very uneasy about my new landlord on the Sidney run. What's next? BCFS building a new Bellvue Terminal and becoming the landlord? Wouldn't be surprised if they're working on it. What does BCFS have to gain from blowing WSF out of the water though? It's not like they compete on any overlapping routes. If they're going to blow away their "rivals", they should at least take responsibility for the routes previously served by them. Or do they just want to siphon them for the rent? |
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jul 5, 2008 15:28:52 GMT -8
It wouldn't free up any vessels because the vessel assigned to the international route also carries traffic between Anacortes and the various islands, something BCFS would not be able to do unless they got a waiver to the Jones Act. The vessel also makes stops between Sidney and Anacortes.
Even if they did, what vessel would they use? The only vessels they have that are SOLAS compliant are the Coastals (which are way too large for the route) and the Northern Adventurer (which wouldn't the docks on either end of the route).
|
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jul 5, 2008 16:33:48 GMT -8
It wouldn't free up any vessels because the vessel assigned to the international route also carries traffic between Anacortes and the various islands, something BCFS would not be able to do unless they got a waiver to the Jones Act. The vessel also makes stops between Sidney and Anacortes. They could take over the nonstop Sidney-Anacortes route and the Sidney-Friday Harbor segment of the interisland route. Even if they did, what vessel would they use? The only vessels they have that are SOLAS compliant are the Coastals (which are way too large for the route) and the Northern Adventurer (which wouldn't the docks on either end of the route). Could they make the necessary SOLAS upgrades to some vessels they're looking to retire? It would also be cool if they could do some trial runs with the Coastal Celebration on it. A two-hour cruise through the San Juans with full on-board amenities is something that I'd kill for if I were a tourist. Its scenery beats that of BCF Route 1 going through the Gulf Islands anyday. A better schedule, better advertising/promotion for it, and a system to redirect American Route 1 traffic through it may fill a couple of daily sailings each way. |
|
|
|
Post by Coastal Canuck on Jul 5, 2008 17:24:10 GMT -8
what does SOLAS mean  |
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jul 5, 2008 17:45:58 GMT -8
what does SOLAS mean Acronym for Safety Of Life At Sea. |
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080
|
Post by Nick on Jul 5, 2008 17:51:21 GMT -8
what does SOLAS mean Safety of Life at Sea It's an international seafaring standard that any ships (in 1st world countries at least) crossing international boundaries must abide to. |
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jul 5, 2008 18:16:52 GMT -8
what does SOLAS mean Safety of Life at Sea It's an international seafaring standard that any ships (in 1st world countries at least) crossing international boundaries must abide to. Why can't the countries sailed between set the standards between themselves? Why do we need an international bureaucracy to set the rules for us? |
|
