IE10 and below are not supported.

Contact us for any help on browser support

You need to be signed in to add your comment.

Does the Draft National Proactive Vessel Management framework provide enough guidance to manage local waterway traffic?

6 months ago

Consultation has concluded

  • tedfullerton 4 months ago
    Proactive means anticipatory, it means acting in advance, it means preventive as opposed to reactive, acting before instead of acting after the fact. Ok, that’s your title which counts nice. I dug around and found zero framework details. Maybe I missed them. I saw mention of a couple of vague pilot projects. The whole proactive vessel management framework looks like empty platitudes about managing complaints rather than actually managing vessels. The most important thing you can do is to reduce unnecessary travel and unnecessary anchoring by prohibiting early ship arrivals. If you do not proactively manage ship arrivals then we will see 21,000 anchor days per year in 2030, nearly double the 13,000 anchor days in 2018. You wouldn’t have any complaints to manage if you prohibited early arrivals and if you eliminated the 33 anchor sites in the Southern Gulf Islands. Your framework MUST include strong legislation to force and/or encourage ships to arrive just in time and to not loiter for free in fragile pristine free and dangerous waters. Container ships almost never anchor. Nearly 1/4 of all bulk cargo ships go straight to berth upon arrival. Even they can avoid anchoring some of the time. It’s the other bulk cargo ships carrying grain and coal that go straight to anchor when they arrive. I challenge you to prove that this early arrival helps anything. I challenge you to justify this early arrival with specific economic benefits. At least 75% of all anchor days occur BEFORE ships arrive at a berth. I say you cannot justify it. How can there be any benefit when no goods are moving? Anchored ships bring only harm and a small risk of catastrophe. If your vessel management framework does not tackle early arrival head on then you have wasted a lot of tax dollars on a useless complaint management system. My stats come from analysis of 140,000 ship trip records over 11 years from the Pacific Pilotage Authority. I know I’ve suggested many times that you allow me to show you my graphs. Here is yet another suggestion. At least ask me to send you an electronic file.
  • f hodges 6 months ago
    I share Dr Sutherlands concerns noted below and add that there appears to be no mechanism by which an individual or group of individuals can have a local/specific concern addressed by a single competent organisation. Free anchorage in environmentally fragile areas like Satellite Channel ( seeing less and less whale and porpoise activity) does not encourage efficient scheduling of freighter loading thus leading to longer stays. Anchorages in locations other than adjacent to residential areas need to be identified particularly for long stays.
  • dkelias69 6 months ago
    A few concerns here in Canada's Arctic, (Nunavut). One of the major concerns that we have is the ice breaking by the CCG during freeze up and during the annual caribou migration from Victoria Island back to the main land. This is an issue for the safety of the caribou and hunters traversing the sea ice. We know that in some occasions that the CCG has to break ice in times of SAR (Search & Rescue) and vessel escorts. Our coastal communities rely and the sea ice freezing properly in order for all people to safely traverse the ice. All coastal communities should be given ample time (notice) when a CCG ship will be breaking ice during freeze ups and even spring thaw. When caribou or any other migratory animal/bird does not migrate to and from their calving grounds, it will have a drastic effect on the population of each species and can create a domino affect on other species as well in terms of their food source. Another serious issue that we face is the potential for a maritime disaster, which the Arctic is not well prepared to handle. With limited emergency supplies in our communities, this will hinder and Search & Rescue efforts and or any oil spills that may happen. This will cause a major environment disaster for the Arctic costal regions. Another serious concern is the arrival of more foreign country vessels entering the local and Arctic waters, (does not include resupply ships, fuel tankers, research vessels).
  • Dr Donald Sutherland 6 months ago
    I don't see any clear discussion of a major concern of my family and my neighbours - I am concerned that the impact of freighters anchoring offshore in the southern gulf islands for prolonged periods weeks with threats to the local environment and to the local human populations - primarily from noise, lights, pollution from bilge pumpings as well as diesel engine smoke. I don't see any active description of these risks/threats and any proposed assessment of the reasons for all the anchorages, time scale and the factors that lead to having ships in the anchorages - the proposed mechanism for discussion/proposed resolution/and regulation of agreements is absent or very vague.
  • Kevin Obermeyer 6 months ago
    At present I cannot say that this statement is either true or false. What I have seen so far is a number of meetings with various communities with differing views as to how this process will be developed with each community seeing things differently. The issue is that at present we have a robust marine communications system through MCTS and an equally robust pilotage system in place and both systems operate coast wide. Getting into a system of regional needs issues and concerns (NIC's) while ignoring the coast wide system already in place is going to disrupt the smooth operation that is presently enjoyed.Where PVM would be useful and well utilized is in the form of standards of care that are discussed and jointly produced by TC, MCTS, Pilotage, industry and the affected community. This could be utilized to address the communities NIC's while ensuring a smooth coastal operation. What we do not want to have happen is that the Pilots and master on vessels not requiring pilots, are now required to call in to the local community as well as MCTS. I believe that MCTS could continue to be the federal organization monitoring vessel traffic while also overseeing the standard of care for specific areas where slow downs or specific routing for certain vessel is in effect.