More AICW distress....
 

The rest of the population is getting tired of footing the bill to subsidize
a few. Wy don't you take up a collection from the local boaters and see if
you can put together 3/4 million dollars? Start things off with 5 or 10k of
your own money.

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
"A divided New Hanover County Board of Commissioners Monday declined
to join the state and spend nearly $781,000 to help maintain the
Intracoastal Waterway near Carolina Beach."

"The move means that the Carolina Beach Inlet crossing of the
waterway, which now has just 4 1/2 feet of draft at low tide, much
less than its authorized depth of 12 feet, could become an impediment
to boaters in the near future."

I suppose that they didn't want to do what the Corps of Engineers is
charged with doing.... can't say I blame them...

...anyway, if you transit that area be advised. It will likely get
much shallower before it gets deeper.

Quoted portions were taken from an article published November 14. 2006
in the Wilmington, NC, Star-News, authored by Gareth McGrath, a Staff
Writer.

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

More AICW distress....
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote
"A divided New Hanover County Board of Commissioners Monday declined
to join the state and spend nearly $781,000 to help maintain the
Intracoastal Waterway near Carolina Beach."


They should have kicked in something, even a token amount.
Maybe held a bake sale.

"The move means that the Carolina Beach Inlet crossing of the
waterway, which now has just 4 1/2 feet of draft at low tide, much
less than its authorized depth of 12 feet, could become an impediment
to boaters in the near future."

Especially those with more than 4 1/2 feet of draft, and who
can't read a tide table.


James wrote:
The rest of the population is getting tired of footing the bill to subsidize
a few. Wy don't you take up a collection from the local boaters and see if
you can put together 3/4 million dollars? Start things off with 5 or 10k of
your own money.

I'll be glad to, when the gov't quits taking my money &
using it to subsidize other things that are NOT in the
Constitution (interstate commerce, which is what the ICW's
purpose, is) and which I disagreew with, like subsidies to
int'l oil & pharmaceutical conglomerates.

DSK

More AICW distress....
 

James wrote:
The rest of the population is getting tired of footing the bill to subsidize
a few. Wy don't you take up a collection from the local boaters and see if
you can put together 3/4 million dollars? Start things off with 5 or 10k of
your own money.



I'll be glad to, when the gov't quits taking my money &
using it to subsidize other things that are NOT in the
Constitution (interstate commerce, which is what the ICW's
purpose, is) and which I disagreew with, like subsidies to
int'l oil & pharmaceutical conglomerates.



Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
I'll admit, I don't know much about the AICW, but when it was at it's
designed depth and width, how much commercial traffic did it handle?

Lots & lots & lots.

It's also more fuel efficient to ship by barge than by
truck; and barges can carry objects that are too large &
heavy to transport by train.

Another object of the ICW is to have a shipping route during
WW2 that was safe from U-boats. Not much of a priority
today; unless you count reduced concern about port security.

I just spent some time googling and I can't find any cites
at the moment, but I'ves seen figures that money spent on
the ICW is less than the increased insurance rates for
shipping ICW vs offshore. The commercial interests *do*
spend a lot of their own money on ICW dredging, BTW, but I
think over the last few years they've seen the writing on
the wall and given up.

DSK

More AICW distress....
 

The rest of the population is getting tired of footing the bill to subsidize
a few. Wy don't you take up a collection from the local boaters and see if
you can put together 3/4 million dollars? Start things off with 5 or 10k of
your own money.


I'll be glad to, when the gov't quits taking my money &
using it to subsidize other things that are NOT in the
Constitution (interstate commerce, which is what the ICW's
purpose, is) and which I disagreew with, like subsidies to
int'l oil & pharmaceutical conglomerates.



Gene Kearns wrote:
Certainly, you are free to disagree with this, but as long as the law
is on the books, we can't cherry pick what we like and disregard the
rest.

Sure we can. A merry system that was begun under Andrew
Jackson! Unfortunately it doesn't really apply to individual
taxpayers, but we can hope...


Do you feel the same way about the Interstate Road System?


Of course not. I was driving on it just yesterday. Besides
much of the road system, interstate & otherwise, is
maintained by states thru taxes on road vehicle fuel.

If the ICW is supported by taxes & fees paid by commercial
shipping, where the heck is the money going? Maybe we should
lobby Halliburton to get into the dredging business?

DSK

More AICW distress....
 

I'm thinking it is safe to say that none of that fuel tax went to
Hanover county. So how come they are being asked to cough up 3/4 mil
for icw maintenance? Hanover county's revenue, like any other county
in nc, is most likely about 3/4 property tax. The overwhelming
majority of that property tax is from people that do not have a boat
and do not have a home on the icw. So why is it that you think these
taxpayers should be paying to maintain the icw?

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 02:59:00 GMT, James penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

The rest of the population is getting tired of footing the bill to subsidize
a few. Wy don't you take up a collection from the local boaters and see if
you can put together 3/4 million dollars? Start things off with 5 or 10k of
your own money.


Where did you get the idea that "The rest of the population " (whoever
that is) is "footing the bill to subsidize a few?" It seems that you
have posted without all of the facts!

Commercial shippers already foot the bill, by Federal Fuel Tax, for
the ICW through The Inland Waterways Trust Fund
http://www.americanwaterways.com/ind...xes/index.html

The ICW was built, primarily for the purpose of carrying commercial
traffic, which it can do much more economically than, say 18-wheelers.

Federal Law *requires* that it be kept dredged to a depth of 12 feet
for almost all of its length and, again, Federal Law makes this the
job of the Corps of Engineers.

If you'd like to learn mo
http://www.atlintracoastal.org/

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

More AICW distress....
 

DSK wrote:
Maybe we should
lobby Halliburton to get into the dredging business?

DSK

They probably are.....

More AICW distress....
 

I spent 4 years going back and forth on the intercoastal between the SC
state Line and Portsmouth, Virginia (it was a great job by the way) and
most people do not realize how much commercial and military traffic
travels the intercoastal. It is as vital a link for commerce and
security these days as much as it was years ago. Not everything can
just be trucked in on the back of an 18 wheeler and a lot of things we
would not want to travel our highways anyway. Plus there is the matter
of clearance under bridges I don't recall to many overpasses that
allowed a load over 60 ft high to pass under it. Also if people
actually knew what was traveling on the water behind some of those
million dollar homes they might not want to live there.

Marty

More AICW distress....
 

If it was a waterway going into a local marina or park I would say that
they needed to chip in but to ask them to pay for dredgeing in an area
that is on the intercoastal only they should not have to chip in
anything. Maybe if we could get the Corps of Engineers to sit down at
Short Sugars in Reidsville and get a good BBQ dinner in them they would
think more clearly.

Marty


Gene Kearns wrote:
On 18 Nov 2006 13:47:16 -0800, penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

I spent 4 years going back and forth on the intercoastal between the SC
state Line and Portsmouth, Virginia (it was a great job by the way) and
most people do not realize how much commercial and military traffic
travels the intercoastal. It is as vital a link for commerce and
security these days as much as it was years ago.....

snips

Good point. Here's a local example of shippers and goods that benefit
from the AICW... and, oddly enough, these users pay no taxes or user
fees....

http://tinyurl.com/ybubf4

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

More AICW distress....
 

Getting them interested is not the problem. Getting the money is.
There has been a trend in the federal government that has slowly
shifted towards a fee for use mechanism to pay for a lot of federal
services. The corp runs the dam and shore operations at Kerr Lake
where I have a vacation house. 5 years ago I purchased a 5 year
floating dock/vegitation modification permit that allows me to keep a
dock on the lake and clear the brush on my piece of the lake shore.
The corp sends someone out who basically just looks at where you are
proposing to put a dock and a path to the dock and tells you if he
likes it or not. Takes about 10 minutes. I paid $50. The 5 years
have passed and I got my renewal notice last month. It's $250 now.
There is a new "administrative cost" for renewals of $200. It gets
better, new dock permits have a $400 "administrative" fee.

Gene Kearns wrote:
On 19 Nov 2006 14:21:07 -0800, penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

If it was a waterway going into a local marina or park I would say that
they needed to chip in but to ask them to pay for dredgeing in an area
that is on the intercoastal only they should not have to chip in
anything. Maybe if we could get the Corps of Engineers to sit down at
Short Sugars in Reidsville and get a good BBQ dinner in them they would
think more clearly.

That might just work! At least they'd have had pretty decent food....
I had breakfast there this morning!

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

More AICW distress....
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On 20 Nov 2006 10:12:10 -0800, jamesgangnc penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Getting them interested is not the problem....

If I read your response correctly, you missed my point. The money for
the ICW is being collected from commercial shippers through fuel use
taxes... the money has already been "collected," it just isn't being
spent where is was earmarked.... and the ICW, required to be
maintained to a certain level by Federal Law, is being left to wither.

They are digging in your pockets at Kerr Lake because there isn't a
"usage" fee for the owners of the lake. "Administrative costs" are a
lot like a "handling fee" for shipping an item... you are buying
nothing but blue sky.

Wait until the idiots in Raleigh start going after your pocketbook
with toll roads. It isn't enough to have the 4th highest state tax on
fuel... now they need to find an extra $900,000,000.00+ to build a
toll bridge in Wilmington.

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

Just listening to a discussion on toll roads Saturday while returning from
fishing. The Public to Private partnership on privately built toll roads
also prevents the public (Government in newspeak) from being in competition,
so they will not maintain the parallel roads. Forcing you on to the toll
road.