IFish Fishing Forum banner
  • Are you passionate about fishing? Would you like to write about topics that interest you and get paid for it? Read all about it here!
1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
873 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
How many times have we learned of disasters on the Tillamook bay bar? Way to many. Over the years people have told me "It can be fixed" and I have to believe them. By dredging both the bar and middle grounds would allow enough water during ebb conditions into the entrance to contain swell surge to a minimum except under severe storm conditions. Over the years millions of dollars have been spent conducting studies which always indicate "dredging not necessary". I am not a marine engineer however a wave modeling software printout will show us "depth reduces swell breaks".

I believe if all of us ifish folks were to E-mail our U.S.Senators asking for them to support dredging Tillamook bay's bar, we could make a difference.

Gordon Smith (R)
[email protected]

Ron Wyden (D)
[email protected]

I hope I haven't offended anyone by this request, I just get sick to my stomach every time this happens.

Sincerely,

Sore Back
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,964 Posts
We should wait to see what the cause of this accident was before we attempt to find solutions.

Lets wait for the Coast Guard investigation to be completed
:depressed:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,053 Posts
Nothing wrong with good intentions, but you'd have to fight every environmental group and bunny-hugger on the west coast for years before dredging. :hoboy:
Did the capsizing this morning happen on an ebb tide? I didn't check. :whazzup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Sore Back,

Over the years people have told me "It can be fixed" and I have to believe them.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Don't. They are wrong. Folks have been trying to keep the ocean in check and failing for some time, particularly on US coast lines.

The "fixes" create more problems and you are literally tossing billion$ into the ocean for little or no effect.

This is particuarly true in the Pacific Northwest due to the violent nature of Pacific Ocean in this latitude.

Daily Wave Heights World Map

If you look at today's, June 14, our area has 21 to 10 foot waves rolling. That's a huge sea, toss in tidal effect and inlets are going to be dangerous, the most dangerous in the world.

Best approach is to stand back, let the inlet take it's natural form and then work with what you have.

Anyone heading into 15 foot break seas in anything but a Coast Guard roll-over rig is not being safe.

Nothing will really change the Pacific NW inlets.

Specifically to Tillamook, probably what would work to save lives is upping the length limit on boats the CG can prevent from going out the inlet.

They park the rollover boats there, they have a warning system in place. I love to ocean fish at Tillamook but I don't go out unless the CG says OK and then I wear my life jacket.

It will be interesting to see how many folks on the Taki Too were wearing their life jackets.

Brion
 
G

·
Not a time for fingers, nor am I pointing any.

I agree Brion. Those boats should have never attempted it, period.

:sick:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,370 Posts
Like I said in the other post, sometimes there isn't a boat made that is big enough for a specific condition the ocean can throw at you.

I don't believe that dredging would help, but I think we need to get some better enforcement of some kind going wether it be for PDF's or boat sizes.

Currently though, I think our thoughts need to be with the families and not over solving the problem at this time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Soreback,

This from the Coast Guard:

None of those found dead had life vests on, he said
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Probably the fix for the problem is making life jackets mandatory for all boats going into the ocean. I'd have no problem with CG and state rules making life jackets mandatory all the time. Kind of like seatbelts on cars.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,370 Posts
I think it might even be better to make it mandatory while the boat is under way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Sorry guys, but I agree with Sore Back. Dredging will help. Everything we do, from a new overpass to a sewage treatment plant, effects something. Often the good outweighs the bad. I certainly think that's the case in this instance.

I'll write the letters.

Oops, I was logged on as my wife. These are MY words.

Skein

[ 06-15-2003, 10:42 AM: Message edited by: DipSeaDiver ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
336 Posts
The dredging situation on Oregon's bar's is going to get worse as it currently stands. The FY 04 Army Corps budget eliminates dredging at almost all of Oregon's bars. I posted a link to the article in February, this time I'll post the article. It is entirely appropriate to write your congressmen if this is an issue that you feel strongly about.


EUGENE (AP) -- Port managers are upset with a Bush administration proposal that would halt federal dredging next year for most coastal ports, including those at Florence, Reedsport and five other Oregon communities.

Without the annual removal of sand by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the entrance to the river channels will grow treacherous and eventually unnavigable, the managers said.

In Florence, Siuslaw Port Manager Tom Kartrude said the absence of dredging dollars in Bush's 2004 budget proposal is devastating.

"A safe bar and navigable channel are critical to the fishing fleet," Kartrude said in a press release. "Commercial fishing is an important industry in the community, and the fleet is part of the waterfront character that draws tourism to the area."

It's not the first time the White House has threatened to cut smaller ports out of the corps' dredging program. The Bush administration tried to eliminate the work this year for ports in Brookings, Gold Beach, Bandon and Depoe Bay, but Congress restored the money in the fiscal 2003 budget.

The corps' civil works budget for fiscal 2004 cuts off funding for any port that logs less than 1 billion ton-miles a year. One ton-mile equals 1 ton of cargo shipped for a distance of one mile in port.

That would mean no dredging next year for Florence, Reedsport, Bandon, Brookings, Gold Beach, Port Orford and Tillamook. Reduced federal dredging support would be available for Coos Bay and the Port of Yaquina at Newport.

In ports such as Florence and Bandon that have attracted larger, private yachts and sailboats, the lack of dredging is a very serious concern. Kartrude said the Siuslaw is authorized for a channel 16 feet deep up to the turning basin at river mile 5.5. Changes in the channel depth could "restrict the large coastal cruisers or sailboats that have deep keels," Kartrude said.

The cuts sound much firmer than they did last year, said Penny Ryerson, the coastal manager of the Port of Umpqua in Reedsport.

"The president and Congress all say they want to see economic development and family-wage jobs," Ryerson said "How are we going to do that if they take our dredging away from us?"

The community's port was one of the key reasons that American Bridge Company is building a steel fabrication plant on Bolon Island between Gardiner and Reedsport. The plant, to open later this year, will use the channel to ship out pre-built structural steel components.

Funding has been trailing off in recent years, while jetty repairs and other maintenance work mount, said Kartrude of the Siuslaw port.

"Often when the dredge gets here, they get here just in time," he said. "The bars are getting very, very dangerous."

As the sand builds up, ocean swells turn into breaking waves in the channels. The surf reduces helm and throttle control of incoming and outgoing vessels, Kartrude said.

"At the same time, the force of the waves is pushing you off course," he said. "We've had boats slide down the face of a wave and hit the rocks on the side of the jetty."

After two years without dredging, the channel would effectively be plugged, he said.

In addition to lack of dredging, funds for survey and testing work would disappear, Kartrude said.

Changes in rainfall could do two things: Heavy rainfall could transport sediment down the tributaries and flush it out. Light rainfall could carry sediment down the tributaries but not carry enough hydraulic strength to flush it out the mouth of the river.

"We just don't know," Kartrude said.

But when the Corps' equipment dredges the channels, they also survey the river. The Corps obtains the federal permits required, samples sediment, determines specifications for the project, dredges the channel, and documents changes.

As the budget stands now, "the survey work and all the permitting fees are eliminated," Kartrude said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
cotr,

Are Jettys far less expensive and last a whole lot longer than dredging? (or make dredging more effective?)
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Channels created with jetties require dredging to stay open. So when a jetty is built, the regular dredging is a requirement to keep it working.

The problems with the natural channels is that they change all the time but it is probably cheaper to pay for updates on marking the channel than for building and maintaining the jetties and the constant dredging they require.

A tale of two channels.

Barnegat Light Channel - the 2nd most dangerous inlet in the US after Columbia Bar. Jetties, constant dredging, still very dangerous.

Little Egg Inlet - natural inlet, changes after every storm but requires no dredging, no jetties, not very dangerous...and has super fishing.

These are are on either end of Long Beach Island, NJ.

It takes more land (or more correctly less land development) for the natural inlets because they wander but they tend to be safer and don't need big infusions of dollars to keep them working.

Be fascinating to look at historical records on the shape of the Tillmook Bay channel prior to the jetties which were built in the late 1940's.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
corrirod,

Now you're stretching Brion if you don't believe the channel is safer now vs. then.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">And that "stretch" of yours is based on...? <grin>.

Jetties weren't put in until after 1948. Probably hard to get good comparable stats due to changes in boat technology, loss of fishing industry, etc. However, we can say that there was always a natural channel and that fishing was the major industry until the early 1900's when timber took over and killed off the salmon industry.

There would be no way for the coasties to keep up with moving the channel markers to keep everyone safe if we didn't have dredged channels.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Pretty easy actually especially with modern sonar technolgy not to mention plain old aerial surveying. Way cheaper than dredging, jettie maintenance etc.

It would require removing the jetties so the channel could re-establish itself.

Should be a pre-1948 aerial shot of the inlet...love to see it.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,642 Posts
Hey Jen..

In your word block, can you add:

<grin>

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

TR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,642 Posts
And as for the dredging thing, being born and raised on the Oregon Coast, I can tell you WITH CERTAINTY that a well dredged and maintained channel with jetties is a much safer place than one that doesn't get regular dredging. Pretty simple, shallow water makes bigger rollers, deeper channels don't.

Problem is, this administration has made it quite clear that it will NOT support any dredging $$ for the NW coastal communities. Maybe that way terrorists can't sail a big boat into T-bay and blow up a nuke? :rolleyes: Anyway, the reality is likely that channels will get worse before they get better.

As for tearing out the jetties and just following the channel around "like the good old days", well that's about as likely as Ifish returning to the pre-Brian Lutz "good old days" <grin>

TR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
TheRogue,

And as for the dredging thing, being born and raised on the Oregon Coast, I can tell you WITH CERTAINTY that a well dredged and maintained channel with jetties is a much safer place than one that doesn't get regular dredging.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well...I'm not sure being born on the Oregon Coast qualifies one as an expert on jetties and the unique hydrodynamics that go with them.

Probably best to look at the history and science on jetties, inlets etc.

We do know that the Tillamook harbour was working fine prior to the jetties, dredging etc.

I doubt Tillamook city or county or even the state can afford the costs of dredging without Federal tax dollars. So unless the rest of the country agrees to pay for it, an inlet that requires constant dredging might shoal up and become totally useless if the budget funding is not there.

It might cheaper in the long run to remove the jetty and let the natural channel re-establish itself. It's an easier budget pitch for a nice Army Corps construction project (restoring the natural channel) vs. having to beg for funding each year to maintain the manufactured inlet.

We can look at the historical data for what the Tillamook Inlet would be like if we restored it.

I'm sure the fishing would be better.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,642 Posts
And you'll get the money for ripping the jetties out, in the same big pot you'll get the money for tearing out the Snake River dams??

Rather spend the money on dredging and maintenace, thank you. It will last a lot longer.

AS for being born and raised on the coast, well, it doesn't make a person an expert. However, when you see the breakers in the middle of the bar get smaller for the first few months after dredging, and then gradually build back up as it fills in....sometimes you really can apply some common sense to a situation.

TR
 
G

·
TR,
You're wrong. The all knowing/all seeing Boron Klutz knows all and tells all :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

:depressed: All of Oregons harbors are in need of dredging :depressed:

[ 06-15-2003, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: Keta ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,490 Posts
Brion, are you a lawyer? Or do you just play one on Ifish? It's clear you enjoy debating and arguing. It's getting very tedious.

I've been reading your posts here for a while now, and your political slant is obvious. It's to the point now that when I see your name come up, I just skip right past your post. I already know everything you have to say; "Tear out the jetties and dams, stop the loggers, Bush lied, there are no WMD, Humans (read republicans and the corporations they own) are the cause of all that is wrong with world, let the cougars/bears/wolves/sea lions live where they want and kill what they want, blah, blah, blah."

Please don't quote me and argue every last detail of my post, it's very irritating and I'll just ignore it anyway. <grin>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,086 Posts
Oh Mr. Putz (
)-

Specifically to Tillamook, probably what would work to save lives is upping the length limit on boats the CG can prevent from going out the inlet.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">It's not the length of boat that matters, but rather the classification.

They park the rollover boats there, they have a warning system in place. I love to ocean fish at Tillamook but I don't go out unless the CG says OK and then I wear my life jacket.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">The CG did say it was ok for them to go out. Many on this board have also crossed the bar when the CG said it was ok, only to find themselves in deep do-do after committing.

Jetties weren't put in until after 1948. Probably hard to get good comparable stats due to changes in boat technology, loss of fishing industry, etc. However, we can say that there was always a natural channel and that fishing was the major industry until the early 1900's when timber took over and killed off the salmon industry.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Ya, your right, the timber industry killed off the salmon. :hoboy: Heaven for bid you should consider the handfull of other things that contributed to the demise of the salmon industry. I'd list them for you, but I'm sure you already know what they are.

I doubt Tillamook city or county or even the state can afford the costs of dredging without Federal tax dollars. So unless the rest of the country agrees to pay for it, an inlet that requires constant dredging might shoal up and become totally useless if the budget funding is not there.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">And that would do what to the salmon industry?

I'm with Woody! <grin>
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top