<p>In a cost cutting move, the U.S. Coast Guard has proposed removing 31 navigation buoys from waters surrounding Martha’s Vineyard.</p>
In a cost cutting move, the U.S. Coast Guard has proposed removing 31 navigation buoys from waters surrounding Martha’s Vineyard. The Coast Guard proposes removing the sound devices such as bells, gongs and whistles from 10 others, while leaving the buoys in place.
Some of the changes would affect familiar aids to navigation (ATON) for mariners navigating near the Island, and in local harbors. Reaction to the proposed changes ranges from indifference to puzzlement to anger.
In a marine safety information bulletin issued May 16, the Coast Guard wrote that it evaluated approximately 450 buoys in Vineyard Sound, Nantucket Sound and Buzzards Bay.
“We carefully evaluated these reasonably limited measures that will maintain or improve navigation safety, while increasing the efficiency and cost effectiveness of our overall ATON program,” wrote Coast Guard captain J.T. Kondratowicz. “Our review suggests that 43 aids identified in the proposal consume Coast Guard (and taxpayer) resources that exceed any navigation safety benefit delivered to the boating public.”
Among the buoys the Coast Guard proposes to “disestablish and remove” is the green number 9 buoy in Edgartown Harbor, which marks a sharp southward turn in the navigation channel.
“We use it a lot to direct people to our mooring fields,” said Edgartown harbor master Charlie Blair. “It’s in our radio discussion with almost every boat that comes into the harbor. It marks the turn in the channel. The channel goes from west to south right there, a hard 90 degree turn.”
Mr. Blair said that more than a decade ago the Coast Guard removed green buoys numbers 11 and 13, which marked the channel further down the harbor toward Katama Bay. The town thought the aids to navigation were so important it replaced them at town expense, and maintains them every year. He said he will recommend the town do the same with green buoy number 9.
Mr. Blair estimates a new buoy and tackle will cost about $800, and the cost of maintaining it each year will be about $400.
“They’re going to eliminate it, take it off their budget, and it’s going to cost me more to do the same job,” he said. “It’s a lot cheaper if the government does it. They come in once a year with a buoy tender, they haul it right on deck, clean it, paint it and put it right back in.”
Mr. Blair said he has notified the Coast Guard of his objections to removing the buoy, and asked them to reconsider the decision.
Another familiar buoy slated for removal is the red number 4 buoy off West Chop, which marks shoal, rocky water a considerable distance offshore. That mark is part of almost every race course sailed by the Holmes Hole Sailing Association, which stages popular summer racing on Thursday evenings and Sunday mornings throughout the summer. Roger Becker, who oversees the racing, said removing the buoy would cause more than an inconvenience for competitors.
“That’s big trouble,” Mr. Becker said. “It keeps people away from Douglas Rock and the other rocks in there. There’s one half the distance from the shore, it’s right up there around three feet. If you’ve ever been out there in fog, you’re trying to determine how close you can get to West Chop before you should get nervous. You want something like a buoy to show up. Distances can become very obscure in the fog. Things that look far away can be very close.
In Oak Bluffs, harbor master Todd Alexander is less concerned about the proposal to remove green buoy number 1 off Inkwell Beach. Navigation charts show the buoy guards a small spot about four feet deep, directly out from the jetty.
“In my boating days, I was always more concerned about hitting it than if it was doing me any actual good,” Mr. Alexander said. “If they’re going to remove one, I would choose that one. There may be people who disagree with that.” He said he did have concerns about other buoys that may be removed, which mariners rely on to stay out of shoal water.
Among the buoys on the Coast Guard list which leave some Island boaters scratching their heads is the large bell (CH) outside Cuttyhunk Harbor. Many boaters navigate to that mark, visible from miles away, in their approach to the popular cruising destination. From there, they enter the tricky channel that leads into the harbor.
Also generating concern are seven buoys that mark a narrow and treacherous channel through Robinson’s Hole, one of the passages through the Elizabeth Islands regularly used by Vineyard boaters. All the buoys are targeted for removal.
Bruce Almeida sails his catboat from Padanaram to Martha’s Vineyard often in the summer, but if there are no buoys there, he is not likely to make the passage. “If there’s any kind of current running, you would be foolish,” Mr. Almeida said. “I’ve gone through there two or three times a season forever. It gives the navigator a sense of relative position. You’re not going to learn that from your GPS (Global Satellite Positioning). If you see an object in the water you’re going to have a sense of what’s happening based on you moving and that not moving.”
The Coast Guard also proposes removing sound devices from several buoys, while leaving the buoys in place. Among these are most of the large buoys used by everyone from recreational boaters to cargo barge captains to guide their vessels through safe water. The bells, gongs, and whistles provide confirmation of safe position for those navigating in fog or at night.
“The whole thing of trying to save money by removing gongs and bells is even more hideous,” Mr. Almeida said. “When you need to find a gong, when you hear it you feel great, you work your way toward it, you’ve established your position.”
The Coast Guard is asking for comments on its proposal to remove or modify the aids to navigation.
“We will carefully consider all comments submitted and adjust our proposal if warranted,” wrote Mr. Kondratowicz in the safety information bulletin.
Edward LeBlanc, chief of waterways management at the Coast Guard, is compiling the responses. He said comments are already coming in.
“We’ve had a few, probably a dozen, a dozen and a half,” Mr. LeBlanc said. “We’re getting good feedback and we appreciate it.”
If the proposed changes are finalized, the Coast Guard would not begin making changes to the aids to navigation system before Nov. 1, 2016.
To contact Mr. LeBlanc, email [email protected] or call (401) 435-2351. Comments will be accepted until June 30.

Comments
I don't understand the
P Jones EdgqartownI don't understand the economics of this. The cost to the Coast Guard of responding to just one extra grounding with a fuel spill each summer should total much more than the maintenance of these buoys.
It's astounding how the
Ron Taub NEKOOSA, WIIt's astounding how the federal government tries to abdicate it's legitimate functions of a common defense, insuring navigable waters etc.., , while at the same time is spending billions on functions that were supposed to be left to the states. Obviously working mariners, and pleasure craft operators are not a favored constituency. We have a federal government that has no regard for the common good, only intent on rewarding it's political base.
Spot on Ron
Michael Richardson Marshfield MaSpot on Ron
Make sure to tell your
JoshMake sure to tell your congressman that the coast Guard needs more money. It is one of the most underfunded government organizations and yet still opperationally effective. If they are cutting bouys it isnt beacuse they want too.
I think we can thank the
Nathalie Woodruff Oak BluffsI think we can thank the Republican-dominated House, which controls the budget. Buoys are taking their place along with school food programs, infrastructure repair, and a host of other functions necessary for the common good.
Keep the bouys...to save
susan H.K..Keep the bouys...to save lives
Time tested and time honored.
Adrienne DohertyTime tested and time honored..the buoys should simply stay where they have always been, performing
perfectly through good economic times and bad.
Perhaps it's a good time for M.V. to get it's priorities right side up.
Maybe not covering large swaths of M.V. with plastic artificial turf and adding to environmental
degradation is a good place to start saving money!
Federal waterways equal
Jeff Sherman Ocean springs, msFederal waterways equal federal responsibility - nothing more, nothing less
The bouts are placed there for sage navigation per federal requirements
I hope the buoys in Robinson
Martin Waine 78 Naushon Ave. South Dartmouth, MAI hope the buoys in Robinson's hole are left there.
Transiting Robinson's at night, or even in daytime, without them would be risky due to being wept sideways by the current, and making the turn in navigable water.
Yup
Steve FakmouthYup
The USCG thought all those
Sandy Lockwood TisburyThe USCG thought all those AIDS TO NAVIGATION were important when they 1st placed them in those positions. Proposing removing the Robinson's Hole ATONs , especially, is pretty insane.
Keep the buoys. Remove the commander who supports their removal.
They shut down the reliable
deshandra brown mvThey shut down the reliable land based Loran-C years ago, forcing boaters to spend money on GPS to replace the loran-c. The GPS satellite signals can be compromised, so someday if that happens there will be no reliable back-up navigation systems. What a shame the dummies in the federal govt have accomplished.
I'm all for efficient
Rick FloridaI'm all for efficient government, but removal of the Robinson's Hole buoys is shocking. Does anyone out there know any Kennedys or Kerrys? That's probably the quickest route to reverse this proposal. However, we all need to write the Coast Guard POC and our Congressional Reps if we feel strongly about this. If enough people provide logical and coherent feedback, the Coast Guard might listen. Feedback to the CG is due by June 30.
How does it save money to
Spike Ramsden GloucesterHow does it save money to remove the sound features from bouys, especially when you factor in the cost doing the alteration?
When a buoy goes discrepant
Stephen NewportWhen a buoy goes discrepant the Coast Guard is required to service that buoy in order to bring it back up to full operations. Whenever they don't the aid is considered to be "degraded" in reliability. After a long enough time the aid begins to effect the overall aid availability for the region, which in turns dictates the nation's standing with IALA.
The USCG has a responsibility to go out and fix those discrepant buoys to ensure that the information Mariners have on their charts and in their Coast Pilots is accurate. Every time a buoy tender has to get underway to go fix a broken aid it costs money... a lot of taxpayer money. The average per hour operating cost of a 225' buoy tender is 40,000$/hour.
The single most common discrepancy on a buoy is the sound signal. A tapper falls off a gong, a bell is vandalized for the scrap metal, a whistle gets clogged with sea life. These sound signals then require an expensive response from the Coast Guard. By removing the source of the most common discrepancies and maintaining the Aid, you reduce the overall cost to prolong the service life of a buoy, while minimally reducing the impact on local mariners. Its a win-win.
I would also add, that one of
Bobby NewportI would also add, that one of the big problems with today's navigators is that when aids go discrepant the people who the Coast Guard rely on to report the aid not watching properly (merchant, recreation, commercial waterway users) they don't....if an aid to navigation is so vital why don't people report them when they are discrepant? As I've seen through several of the comments on this article, people want the nostalgia of an aid but the truth of the matter is that if it is so vital it would be reported when not watching properly but it isn't. As far as the added cost I'm not sure which assets service these aids but I know that $40000 is less than $1200 which is about the cost that the harbor master quoted for him to do the job....not trying to rant here but I think people need to think of the second, third and fourth order consequences....by all means call your congressman or senator tell them to increase the CG's budget and then we don't have to priortize...the CG's budget is about 10B a year....didn't we give Iran 100B....that's ten years of funding for the coast guard....I digress.
for the local towns to send
Nybor Portsmouthfor the local towns to send out a small boat of perhaps 3 people at most to services them is a lot less of a cost than sending out a whole crew of 20+- men/women to fix a long list of buoys/bells all while the Old boats they are on are constantly breaking down. If the tax payers want to pay more money for a fleet of new boats so they can work more efficiently that would be great. stinks when that many crew members of the CG are underway for weeks on end to fix a bell. I think it should be more local on a few of the buoy /bells. always about money and how everyone wants the government to pay for it but never thinking of their limits.
This sure looks like another
Shocked TisburyThis sure looks like another good example of neglecting the domestic infrastructure.
What is the difference between highways and bridges falling apart, residents of Flint getting a lead-laden cocktail out of their taps, and coastal waters becoming unnavigable---all because maintenance of those systems is just not funded while huge sums of money flow to the Pentagon.
But this move by the Coast Guard really is a shocker because the Coast Guard is itself part of the national defense system.
What in the world are the USCG higher-ups smoking???
http://www.maritime-executive
Very Annoyed Vineyard Havenhttp://www.maritime-executive.com/article/proposed-2017-budget-includes…
The link above explain it, Obama is cutting the USCG budget for 2017!!!!
The U.S. House of
Nathalie Woodruff Oak BluffsThe U.S. House of Representatives controls the budget, not the President.
Bad idea
Capt Pope Buzzards BayBad idea
this will end up with Boaters in trouble.
They are an aide to
Elizabeth Leduc Buzzards BayThey are an aide to navigation, period!!
Pulling the marks out of
Gary Leduc Padanaram Ma.Pulling the marks out of Robinson's is crazy .
If the coast guard pulls those Marks , they should be held responsible for any damage to vessels caused by the lack of marks .
its their responsibility to make sure water ways are navigable and safe .
that would render Robinson's dangerous !
The buoy removal in the
David Brodeur So. Dartmouth, MaThe buoy removal in the approach to Cutty hunk as well as Robinson Hole, will cause more mariners to go aground and need rescue. We all know that is much more costly than maintaining buoys to begin with.
I think anyone commenting to
David Stanwood West TisburyI think anyone commenting to the CG needs to refer to the actual aforementioned document. I cannot find the Marine Safety Bulletin of May 16, 2016 online. However Mr. LeBlanc has sent me a copy and I've made it available at this Dropbox link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/fgxf91eloi51lcz/MSIB%2005-16%20SE%20MASS%20AT…
I hope this works and helps.
Mr. LeBlanc sent me this link
David Stanwood West TisburyMr. LeBlanc sent me this link to access the actual document we are discussing:
https://homeport.uscg.mil/mycg/portal/ep/portDirectory.do?tabId=1&cotpI…
It's under the New and Events section "MSIB 05-16 Proposed Changes to Federal ATON in Southeastern MA"
I suspect massive government
Ken Edg.I suspect massive government pensions must be paid for some way. more cuts to come.
Let's start a Friends Of
Laurie Welch Oak BluffsLet's start a Friends Of Vineyard Buoys campaign on Go Fund Me if they refuse to reconsider. I will make a donation! :)
Pass the expense along to
K NYCPass the expense along to those who dock in Vineyard waters. Not the fishermen, but the pleasure craft.
Add new comment