Coast Guard plans removal of important navigational aid in Santa Cruz

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Coast Guard plans removal of important navigational aid in Santa Cruz

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Coast Guard plans removal of important navigational aid in Santa Cruz

andygere posted 11-20-2013 10:38 PM ET (US)
I just received the following letter from the Port Director in Santa Cruz:

quote:
Subject: USCG PROPOSING TO REMOVE MILE BUOY
Attention Santa Cruz Boaters:
The United States Coast Guard is proposing to remove the Mile Buoy and replace it with a mark on the chart. There would no longer be any buoy or other permanent marker in the waters along the Santa Cruz coastline.
The Coast Guard distributed a Local Notice to Mariners describing the proposed removal (see page 2 of the notice). They are requesting comments from all interested parties by Thursday, November 28, 2013.
Comments may be directed to Lt. Melissa Smith at (510) 437-5984 or via email at Melissa.A.Smith@uscg.mil
The Coast Guard is particularly interested in any rationale relating to why the buoy is necessary for safe navigation in spite of the current availability and affordability of electronic navigation equipment (e.g. GPS).
Sincerely,

Lisa Ekers, PE
Port Director
The mile buoy is the only navigation aid outside of the harbor jetties, and it's an important visual and audible marker for all small boaters, but especially for those without electronic navigational instruments like GPS. To me, it's insane that the Coast Guard would consider removing such an important tool for safe boating. I can not imagine that the cost of maintaining the buoy is terribly high, and since it's the only one for over 60 miles of coastline, it seems a strange way to try to shore up the operating budget. My guess is that one rescue mission for a lost boater would eat up many years of maintenance cost savings. If you are a Monterey Bay boater, or if you ever use the Santa Cruz Harbor, please take a minute to make a call or send an e-mail to Lt. Smith at the number and address noted above. Even if you are not from the area, please consider a general letter against removal of visual and audible nav aids. They serve all boaters, big and small, and if this trend catches on, your buoy may be next. Thanks in advance!
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/75001097.jpg
wezie posted 11-21-2013 09:41 AM ET (US)
Would it not be wonderful if we could replace Washington DC with a drop of ink on the map.
That would save a lot of money!
Hoosier posted 11-21-2013 10:25 AM ET (US)
Hey, they can't remove it, it's a seal habitat...
boatdryver posted 11-21-2013 10:55 AM ET (US)
Hmmm...the Coast Guard is making the assumption that every boater has a GPS that is working 100% of the time. Mine is pretty new and occasionally it loses position. And I only have one unit. I'm sure all the CG vessels have at least two.
Most of the boating takes place in the Summer months, and that is when fog is most common.
Andy, is there a CG boat station at SC?
If they remove the sea buoy I think they are going to get a little busier.
JimL
jimp posted 11-21-2013 11:21 AM ET (US)
Andy -
Can't open your .jpg, but guessing this is Santa Cruz LWB "SC" (LLNR 4080)? About a mile offshore?
Dumb to get rid of a entrance buoy. People unfamiliar with the area need a "reference" to help get their bearings off shore before heading in. All good points that you and others have mentioned too.
Sea buoys help you line up the approriate track for heading in, otherwise boaters will start cutting corners and sneaking around headlands.

Poor memo by the Port Director not referring to the offical name of the "Mile Buoy".
JimP
andygere posted 11-22-2013 12:28 AM ET (US)
JimL, there is no CG boat permanently assigned to Santa Cruz. In the summer, there is frequently a SAFE boat from Station Monterey berthed there, but not always. Santa Cruz is listed as a sub station.
17 bodega posted 11-22-2013 01:43 AM ET (US)
This is a disturbing trend. Many services previously taken for granted by ocean going mariners appear to be on the chopping block. Quality printed charts on waterproof paper is one thing to cut costs, but an offshore buoy?
Does the buoy mark a reef or breaking wave danger like half moon bay? Do they feel it's redundant?
My gut tells me that this is just the beginning. we are going to see services cut like we have never seen before. I hate to be a pessimist, but that's the reality of the twenty teens generation...
jimh posted 11-22-2013 10:23 AM ET (US)
I was wondering if perhaps the reason for taking out the aid was the water depth. I looked it up: according to NOAA charts, at that aid to navigation, "Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC", the water depth is only about 66-feet.
If the water depth there were much greater, like 1,000-feet or something like that, I could understand that it might be a problem to maintain an aid to navigation in water so deep. But 66-feet is not very deep. I can't see any reason to discontinue the aid.
What use is a mark on a chart?
Hoosier posted 11-22-2013 11:14 AM ET (US)
OK, let's see if I've got this right, they are going to remove the buoy and replace it with a icon on a chart that they are no longer are going to publish in hard copy. So we have a virtual buoy on a virtual chart? At least the spot is not much of a hazard since it's 66 feet deep. I don't know of any recreational boats with a draft that deep.
andygere posted 11-22-2013 11:28 AM ET (US)
I suggest to all boaters that they review the Local Notice to Mariners that pertains to their area. This does seem to be a cost cutting measure by the Coast Guard, and may well be occurring in other regions as well. For District 11, there are about a dozen aids to navigation (AToNs) proposed for elimination.
As JimP correctly points out, the correct designation for the Santa Cruz Mile Buoy is Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC (LLNR 4080).
Here is a pointer to the Local Notice To Mariners I am referring to in this article. The note on the Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy is on page 8. www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/lnms/lnm11462013.pdf
DVollrath posted 11-22-2013 12:50 PM ET (US)
Given the explicit invitation to comment, it seems like a good course of action would be to call or email Lt. Smith with the observations made here. Perhaps during the exchange she will offer some of the alternatives that were considered.
It might be a 2 way education.
Dennis
andygere posted 11-22-2013 12:55 PM ET (US)
DVollrath, that is exactly what I hope will happen. I have sent an e-mail to Lt. Smith describing the importance of the buoy for safety of a large variety of boaters and paddlers and have encouraged others to do so. The responses so far are just acknowledgments of the e-mails.
DVollrath posted 11-22-2013 01:27 PM ET (US)
Hi Andy,
I applaud your getting engaged in the process, and hope others with a stake in this proposed action do the same. I also hope the invitation by Lt. Smith for comment was sincere and could affect the outcome, not just to check off a box of a process step. I have been involved in both situations. The former is quite rewarding, while latter is very frustrating.
Good Luck, both in getting a meaningful exchange going as well as others with a stake to follow your lead!
Dennis
Dave Sutton posted 11-22-2013 08:51 PM ET (US)
Leutenants (O-3's) in the Coast Guard "might" be allowed to decide if they want to carry a blue ink pen, or a black ink pen, but... they probably need to carry a black ink pen. They are not decision makers. So whatever you write is just going to go into a summary that the good Leutenant will write as an addendum to whatever report she sends to the Captain who would be the lowest rank with the decision making authority to actually have anything to say about the final outcome.
With that said, why would the DHS nee "Coast Guard" be interested in maintaining an expenzive aid to navigation when that money could be better spent buying more guns for it's armed boarding parties?

Dave
.
jimp posted 11-22-2013 10:17 PM ET (US)
The LT is gathering feedback that was likely initiated with a WAMS (Waterways Analysis Management System) where the local ATON (Aids to Navigation) unit (likely a buoy tender) put together a comprehensive study a while back of the waterway around Santa Cruz (maybe it was all Monterey Bay). In the WAMS they take a look at each ATON and take a look at what it does and who comments on it. Maybe there were no comments on "SC" or maybe some users said they never use it. The LT will take the info and brief the Commander who will brief the Captain and they'll make a decision.
So, the 12th District advertises, and lets the local port director know, the letter from the port director to Andy was the forwarding of the original idea. Nothing scary here, just the CG trying to get the word out to mariners.
Here's a little note from the CCGD12 LNM:
The U.S. Coast Guard is conducting a Waterways Analysis Management System (WAMS) study of the San Francisco Bay. The study focuses on the area’s aids to navigation, waterborne commerce, marine casualty information, port/harbor resources, emergency response plans, routing and emergency communication capabilities, and future development projects. Any interested company or individual wishing to provide recommendations on existing or additional aids to navigation in this area, participate in a user survey, located here...
The U.S. Coast Guard is planning to discontinue Santa Cruz Light (LLNR 305). Santa Cruz Light is being converted to a Private Aid to Navigation (PAtoN). A timeline for this transition will be provided once scheduled. Direct any questions to LT Melissa Smith at 510-437-5984 or Melissa.A.Smith@uscg.mil
Andy's response and others' will let the CG know that "SC" is used and needed. Of course we're talking the Feds and maybe somebody else has some other idea; the Admiral, the Congressman, the rich guy, etc. You know how government works.
Years ago, and maybe still on going, the CG ATON program was "Zero-sum-gain". They didn't want more. So if you wanted to add a new aid, one had to go. In the 17th CG District we got very good with replacing buoys with lights. A buoy marks a rock outcropping? Take out the buoy and put a light on the outcropping - zero change, but a better product.
You can get on the distribution to your local notice to mariners:
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=lnmMain
JimP
andygere posted 11-23-2013 02:04 PM ET (US)
The buoy removal plan made Front page news in our local paper today:
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/santacruz/ci_24583462/ oh-buoy-possible-loss-marker-rankles-locals
Lt. Smith sounds rather dismissive of the notion that the buoy still serves a valuable safety function.
jimh posted 11-25-2013 12:08 PM ET (US)
From the cited newspaper account:

quote:
Smith said...the buoy would be replaced by a digital navigation marker, though that would require boaters to have computerized navigation equipment.
Perhaps what is being suggested as a replacement for the "Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC" is a virtual electronic aid to navigation, that would be transmitted by an AIS base station. The use of virtual aids to navigation to replace actual, physical aids to navigation has been suggested for use in situations where it would be especially difficult to construct and maintain a real, physical aid. The virtual aid to navigation is sent out by radio transmissions as part of the automatic identification system (AIS) from another location, such as a shore station. In order to "see" the virtual aid, a boat must have a chart plotter and an AIS receiver, and have them linked together. This is commonplace on commercial vessels, but I do not think too many kayakers will be able to equipment their boats with these devices.
It is too bad that the vague terms like "digital" and "computer" are employed in the article. It would have been much simpler to just describe the real intentions. If the real intention is to replace the aid to navigation with a virtual aid to navigation using AIS, perhaps the Coast Guard could just come out and say that clearly.
andygere posted 11-25-2013 12:59 PM ET (US)
The remarks in the newspaper article by Lt. Smith are a bit confusing, and as Jimh points out, seem to allude to some technological solution. What I get from the Notice to Mariners is much different. The notice says the following:
quote:
Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC and Moss Landing Harbor Entrance LBB MLA will be replaced with a mark on the chart designating the
preferred latitude and longitude to be used for an approach to the harbor.
From this, it sounds like the buoys will be removed, and the chart (which will no longer be printed by NOAA) will be amended to include instructions for navigating to the harbor. While Jimh's suggestion might make sense for a large commercial harbor, it probably doesn't for Santa Cruz. It is largely a recreational harbor, with commercial vessels limited to a handful of commercial crabbing and salmon boats. I estimate that there are fewer than 25 commercial vessels in the harbor, and none larger than 50 feet.
I know of several people who have written a comment letter on this proposal. If you have ever boated in this area, you understand the importance of this navigational aid. Please take a moment to submit a comment via e-mail before the November 28 deadline.
jma posted 11-25-2013 04:55 PM ET (US)

AndyGere,
This is my first post on this forum. We recently bought a 22' 1986 Outrage that was used to support some of the junior sailors in the santa cruz yacht clube junior program, maybe you know the boat 'big beluga' and its previous owner.
We are also relatively new sc yacht club members.
Am following this story, thanks.
John
andygere posted 11-25-2013 09:50 PM ET (US)
Thanks John. Please share this information with others at the SC Yacht Club, and encourage them to get an e-mail to Lt. Smith by the Nov. 28 deadline.
On a side note, I'll have my Outrage 22 Cuddy "Namequoit" entered into the lighted boat parade again this year, introduce yourself if you see me at the skippers meeting or the awards party in the yacht club afterwards.
jimh posted 11-26-2013 08:45 PM ET (US)
An email reply from LT Smith to an inquiry I sent confirms that there will not be an AIS virtual aid to navigation. The proposal is just to indicate the latitude and longitude of the position of the previous aid, so that those coordinates could be entered into electronic chart plotters if boaters wished to navigate to that position.
andygere posted 11-26-2013 11:41 PM ET (US)
Jimh, thanks for confirming that information.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: Coast Guard plans removal of important navigational aid in Santa Cruz
andygere	posted 11-20-2013 10:38 PM ET (US) I just received the following letter from the Port Director in Santa Cruz: quote: Subject: USCG PROPOSING TO REMOVE MILE BUOY Attention Santa Cruz Boaters: The United States Coast Guard is proposing to remove the Mile Buoy and replace it with a mark on the chart. There would no longer be any buoy or other permanent marker in the waters along the Santa Cruz coastline. The Coast Guard distributed a Local Notice to Mariners describing the proposed removal (see page 2 of the notice). They are requesting comments from all interested parties by Thursday, November 28, 2013. Comments may be directed to Lt. Melissa Smith at (510) 437-5984 or via email at Melissa.A.Smith@uscg.mil The Coast Guard is particularly interested in any rationale relating to why the buoy is necessary for safe navigation in spite of the current availability and affordability of electronic navigation equipment (e.g. GPS). Sincerely, Lisa Ekers, PE Port Director The mile buoy is the only navigation aid outside of the harbor jetties, and it's an important visual and audible marker for all small boaters, but especially for those without electronic navigational instruments like GPS. To me, it's insane that the Coast Guard would consider removing such an important tool for safe boating. I can not imagine that the cost of maintaining the buoy is terribly high, and since it's the only one for over 60 miles of coastline, it seems a strange way to try to shore up the operating budget. My guess is that one rescue mission for a lost boater would eat up many years of maintenance cost savings. If you are a Monterey Bay boater, or if you ever use the Santa Cruz Harbor, please take a minute to make a call or send an e-mail to Lt. Smith at the number and address noted above. Even if you are not from the area, please consider a general letter against removal of visual and audible nav aids. They serve all boaters, big and small, and if this trend catches on, your buoy may be next. Thanks in advance! http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/75001097.jpg
wezie	posted 11-21-2013 09:41 AM ET (US) Would it not be wonderful if we could replace Washington DC with a drop of ink on the map. That would save a lot of money!
Hoosier	posted 11-21-2013 10:25 AM ET (US) Hey, they can't remove it, it's a seal habitat...
boatdryver	posted 11-21-2013 10:55 AM ET (US) Hmmm...the Coast Guard is making the assumption that every boater has a GPS that is working 100% of the time. Mine is pretty new and occasionally it loses position. And I only have one unit. I'm sure all the CG vessels have at least two. Most of the boating takes place in the Summer months, and that is when fog is most common. Andy, is there a CG boat station at SC? If they remove the sea buoy I think they are going to get a little busier. JimL
jimp	posted 11-21-2013 11:21 AM ET (US) Andy - Can't open your .jpg, but guessing this is Santa Cruz LWB "SC" (LLNR 4080)? About a mile offshore? Dumb to get rid of a entrance buoy. People unfamiliar with the area need a "reference" to help get their bearings off shore before heading in. All good points that you and others have mentioned too. Sea buoys help you line up the approriate track for heading in, otherwise boaters will start cutting corners and sneaking around headlands. Poor memo by the Port Director not referring to the offical name of the "Mile Buoy". JimP
andygere	posted 11-22-2013 12:28 AM ET (US) JimL, there is no CG boat permanently assigned to Santa Cruz. In the summer, there is frequently a SAFE boat from Station Monterey berthed there, but not always. Santa Cruz is listed as a sub station.
17 bodega	posted 11-22-2013 01:43 AM ET (US) This is a disturbing trend. Many services previously taken for granted by ocean going mariners appear to be on the chopping block. Quality printed charts on waterproof paper is one thing to cut costs, but an offshore buoy? Does the buoy mark a reef or breaking wave danger like half moon bay? Do they feel it's redundant? My gut tells me that this is just the beginning. we are going to see services cut like we have never seen before. I hate to be a pessimist, but that's the reality of the twenty teens generation...
jimh	posted 11-22-2013 10:23 AM ET (US) I was wondering if perhaps the reason for taking out the aid was the water depth. I looked it up: according to NOAA charts, at that aid to navigation, "Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC", the water depth is only about 66-feet. If the water depth there were much greater, like 1,000-feet or something like that, I could understand that it might be a problem to maintain an aid to navigation in water so deep. But 66-feet is not very deep. I can't see any reason to discontinue the aid. What use is a mark on a chart?
Hoosier	posted 11-22-2013 11:14 AM ET (US) OK, let's see if I've got this right, they are going to remove the buoy and replace it with a icon on a chart that they are no longer are going to publish in hard copy. So we have a virtual buoy on a virtual chart? At least the spot is not much of a hazard since it's 66 feet deep. I don't know of any recreational boats with a draft that deep.
andygere	posted 11-22-2013 11:28 AM ET (US) I suggest to all boaters that they review the Local Notice to Mariners that pertains to their area. This does seem to be a cost cutting measure by the Coast Guard, and may well be occurring in other regions as well. For District 11, there are about a dozen aids to navigation (AToNs) proposed for elimination. As JimP correctly points out, the correct designation for the Santa Cruz Mile Buoy is Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC (LLNR 4080). Here is a pointer to the Local Notice To Mariners I am referring to in this article. The note on the Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy is on page 8. www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/lnms/lnm11462013.pdf
DVollrath	posted 11-22-2013 12:50 PM ET (US) Given the explicit invitation to comment, it seems like a good course of action would be to call or email Lt. Smith with the observations made here. Perhaps during the exchange she will offer some of the alternatives that were considered. It might be a 2 way education. Dennis
andygere	posted 11-22-2013 12:55 PM ET (US) DVollrath, that is exactly what I hope will happen. I have sent an e-mail to Lt. Smith describing the importance of the buoy for safety of a large variety of boaters and paddlers and have encouraged others to do so. The responses so far are just acknowledgments of the e-mails.
DVollrath	posted 11-22-2013 01:27 PM ET (US) Hi Andy, I applaud your getting engaged in the process, and hope others with a stake in this proposed action do the same. I also hope the invitation by Lt. Smith for comment was sincere and could affect the outcome, not just to check off a box of a process step. I have been involved in both situations. The former is quite rewarding, while latter is very frustrating. Good Luck, both in getting a meaningful exchange going as well as others with a stake to follow your lead! Dennis
Dave Sutton	posted 11-22-2013 08:51 PM ET (US) Leutenants (O-3's) in the Coast Guard "might" be allowed to decide if they want to carry a blue ink pen, or a black ink pen, but... they probably need to carry a black ink pen. They are not decision makers. So whatever you write is just going to go into a summary that the good Leutenant will write as an addendum to whatever report she sends to the Captain who would be the lowest rank with the decision making authority to actually have anything to say about the final outcome. With that said, why would the DHS nee "Coast Guard" be interested in maintaining an expenzive aid to navigation when that money could be better spent buying more guns for it's armed boarding parties? Dave .
jimp	posted 11-22-2013 10:17 PM ET (US) The LT is gathering feedback that was likely initiated with a WAMS (Waterways Analysis Management System) where the local ATON (Aids to Navigation) unit (likely a buoy tender) put together a comprehensive study a while back of the waterway around Santa Cruz (maybe it was all Monterey Bay). In the WAMS they take a look at each ATON and take a look at what it does and who comments on it. Maybe there were no comments on "SC" or maybe some users said they never use it. The LT will take the info and brief the Commander who will brief the Captain and they'll make a decision. So, the 12th District advertises, and lets the local port director know, the letter from the port director to Andy was the forwarding of the original idea. Nothing scary here, just the CG trying to get the word out to mariners. Here's a little note from the CCGD12 LNM: The U.S. Coast Guard is conducting a Waterways Analysis Management System (WAMS) study of the San Francisco Bay. The study focuses on the area’s aids to navigation, waterborne commerce, marine casualty information, port/harbor resources, emergency response plans, routing and emergency communication capabilities, and future development projects. Any interested company or individual wishing to provide recommendations on existing or additional aids to navigation in this area, participate in a user survey, located here... The U.S. Coast Guard is planning to discontinue Santa Cruz Light (LLNR 305). Santa Cruz Light is being converted to a Private Aid to Navigation (PAtoN). A timeline for this transition will be provided once scheduled. Direct any questions to LT Melissa Smith at 510-437-5984 or Melissa.A.Smith@uscg.mil Andy's response and others' will let the CG know that "SC" is used and needed. Of course we're talking the Feds and maybe somebody else has some other idea; the Admiral, the Congressman, the rich guy, etc. You know how government works. Years ago, and maybe still on going, the CG ATON program was "Zero-sum-gain". They didn't want more. So if you wanted to add a new aid, one had to go. In the 17th CG District we got very good with replacing buoys with lights. A buoy marks a rock outcropping? Take out the buoy and put a light on the outcropping - zero change, but a better product. You can get on the distribution to your local notice to mariners: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=lnmMain JimP
andygere	posted 11-23-2013 02:04 PM ET (US) The buoy removal plan made Front page news in our local paper today: http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/santacruz/ci_24583462/ oh-buoy-possible-loss-marker-rankles-locals Lt. Smith sounds rather dismissive of the notion that the buoy still serves a valuable safety function.
jimh	posted 11-25-2013 12:08 PM ET (US) From the cited newspaper account: quote: Smith said...the buoy would be replaced by a digital navigation marker, though that would require boaters to have computerized navigation equipment. Perhaps what is being suggested as a replacement for the "Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC" is a virtual electronic aid to navigation, that would be transmitted by an AIS base station. The use of virtual aids to navigation to replace actual, physical aids to navigation has been suggested for use in situations where it would be especially difficult to construct and maintain a real, physical aid. The virtual aid to navigation is sent out by radio transmissions as part of the automatic identification system (AIS) from another location, such as a shore station. In order to "see" the virtual aid, a boat must have a chart plotter and an AIS receiver, and have them linked together. This is commonplace on commercial vessels, but I do not think too many kayakers will be able to equipment their boats with these devices. It is too bad that the vague terms like "digital" and "computer" are employed in the article. It would have been much simpler to just describe the real intentions. If the real intention is to replace the aid to navigation with a virtual aid to navigation using AIS, perhaps the Coast Guard could just come out and say that clearly.
andygere	posted 11-25-2013 12:59 PM ET (US) The remarks in the newspaper article by Lt. Smith are a bit confusing, and as Jimh points out, seem to allude to some technological solution. What I get from the Notice to Mariners is much different. The notice says the following: quote: Santa Cruz Lighted Whistle Buoy SC and Moss Landing Harbor Entrance LBB MLA will be replaced with a mark on the chart designating the preferred latitude and longitude to be used for an approach to the harbor. From this, it sounds like the buoys will be removed, and the chart (which will no longer be printed by NOAA) will be amended to include instructions for navigating to the harbor. While Jimh's suggestion might make sense for a large commercial harbor, it probably doesn't for Santa Cruz. It is largely a recreational harbor, with commercial vessels limited to a handful of commercial crabbing and salmon boats. I estimate that there are fewer than 25 commercial vessels in the harbor, and none larger than 50 feet. I know of several people who have written a comment letter on this proposal. If you have ever boated in this area, you understand the importance of this navigational aid. Please take a moment to submit a comment via e-mail before the November 28 deadline.
jma	posted 11-25-2013 04:55 PM ET (US) AndyGere, This is my first post on this forum. We recently bought a 22' 1986 Outrage that was used to support some of the junior sailors in the santa cruz yacht clube junior program, maybe you know the boat 'big beluga' and its previous owner. We are also relatively new sc yacht club members. Am following this story, thanks. John
andygere	posted 11-25-2013 09:50 PM ET (US) Thanks John. Please share this information with others at the SC Yacht Club, and encourage them to get an e-mail to Lt. Smith by the Nov. 28 deadline. On a side note, I'll have my Outrage 22 Cuddy "Namequoit" entered into the lighted boat parade again this year, introduce yourself if you see me at the skippers meeting or the awards party in the yacht club afterwards.
jimh	posted 11-26-2013 08:45 PM ET (US) An email reply from LT Smith to an inquiry I sent confirms that there will not be an AIS virtual aid to navigation. The proposal is just to indicate the latitude and longitude of the position of the previous aid, so that those coordinates could be entered into electronic chart plotters if boaters wished to navigate to that position.
andygere	posted 11-26-2013 11:41 PM ET (US) Jimh, thanks for confirming that information.