RJ
11-01-2006, 12:45 PM
This all came from Big Mahi TFL's Offshore reporter....
Overview: The weekend preceding Halloween was scary indeed. Gale force winds were predicted early in the previous week, and yes, NOAA was 100% accurate this time around. Well, I think, since there is no real-time weather station in the Hudson, I have to figure that since they were right inshore, then the offshore would follow with such a widespread weather system. Winds were horrific even on land, with lots of downed trees, power lines, and ripped coverings in boat yards all along NY, and Connecticut.
There was one iffy weather window on Friday depending on how big your boat and gonads were. Although the forecast had light winds predicted for late Thursday into late Friday, how many of us were prepared to test the accuracy of the forecasts with 35 to 50 mile per hour winds around the corner?
If you had seen the ocean from the beach on Saturday, you know full well that it was a risk to go out. Not so much with the prevailing seas on Friday, but the “what if” came into play. What margin of safety was there if something went wrong? Who was going to be able to anchor up in “Victory at Sea” waves and wait for help? You couldn’t even see the cabin of a 35 footer out there in the 11 to 15 foot lashing seas.
Reports: But, guess what. Someone made it out, and back safely. Capt Mark of the “HU2” did a day trip to the Hudson area. He spent a lot of time working a few spots with not much to report. But when he went to pull lines for home at 3 in the afternoon, things popped. He brought in a beautiful 150 pound bigeye. Soon after, one of the elusive 100 pound bluefins also attacked his chunk spread. So, congrats to him and crew for making the most of the day, and beating it back home before the ghoulish weather hit. He reported that there were lots of boats on the East wall, but the fish were just not there. So, instead he visited one of his favorite fall spots to the west and was successful.
The dreams of Bacardi bluefin are becoming nightmares with the wicked witch of the East blowing. As you all know and feel the pain of being kept at the dock, winds did not let up until this past Monday. By that time, more and more guys have taken their boats out for the season, and too many finally defeated by way too many weekends watching sports rather than doing them.
One experienced captain said “The tuna are gone!” How depressing! He may not be right, but who and when will we be able to find out? It is not only the weather we contend with but also the skepticism we have on believing the NOAA offshore forecasts. Having said that, let’s review the meeting where our survey and petition for an offshore weather buoy was presented.
Buoy News & Report: As reported last week, October 30 was the date for the annual MACOORA meeting in Baltimore Maryland. MACOORA, the Mid-Atlantic Ocean Observing Regional Association is made up of many scientists, marine studies departments from the Mid-Atlantic States including the University of Delaware, Rutgers, other institutions, corporate individuals, engineers, regional government departments, and stakeholders. Their mission is to observe the waters and to offer the public and government research so that we can all learn more of our ocean habitat.
Also part of their job is to bring recommendations and ideas to NOAA. As part of this effort, NOAA sends its representative, Dr. Hervey to this and the other 11 regional “Macoora’s” to gather information, and take the pulse of the scientific community._ MACOORA is represented by many educators so part of its mission is to involve other groups, and stakeholders including the recreational fisherman. And that would be us! To add our voice to this conference, a nice wad of material was put together: Letters from a legislator, well-known fishing writer, sport fishing federation, as well as a survey of almost 500 respondents, and petitions from marinas, bait and tackle stores, charter boats, recreational and commercial boaters, and more were assembled into a package and personally given to Dr. Hervey. There was a 99% level of support for all those 676 who took the time to give their opinion and signature.
And you bet this was impressive!
Currently Dr. Hervey, a meteorologist from NWS, is representing the National Data Buoy Center to seek input. According to his own words, if it were up to him, we would have a buoy. But he acknowledges that he is the first in the chain of command when it comes to information collection. After that this goes to his superiors who draft a budget, and then it goes to Congress for appropriations. This is a typical bureaucratic process, but we are now part of the agenda. From what I am told, the 2007 budget is in place, but 2008 is now being put together. It appears that we have a very good chance to be a line item on their budget if all continues as well as it is now.
Dr. Rex Hervey, director of the National Data Buoy Center, and department in charge of all buoys, was to speak on the “prioritization” of our buoy system. The word “redeployment” was also used prior to the meeting. I was curious what that actually meant, so I was very interested to attend and understand what he meant. In my mind it meant that the NDBC was actually going to re-deploy, or move, or bring out of mothballs, buoys to aid in increasing the accuracy of the weather forecasts, and thereby increase the safety of offshore boaters. After all, it is part of the mission of NOAA to do just that. But did it mean placing a buoy in a new location, add technology to existing installations, use satellites for more data gathering, or what? Attending this meeting I had a chance to listen to what his definition of those words was, and to hear his vision, and interpretation of the stated mission of NOAA’s FY2005-2010 strategic plans.
Unfortunately, this was only to be a 20 minute session, but I was determined to take this opportunity to present the results of the “Survey for Deployment of a Real-time weather buoy at the Hudson Canyon”. The purpose this survey was to give everyone that saw this petition a chance to answer a couple of questions, and to comment on the idea. Not surprisingly, 99% of those that answered and commented were in strong favor f the idea.
Dr. Hervey was cordial, and open to learning more about our concerns. During his talk he confirmed that the current set of buoys including 44025, 44008, and 44004 are to be retained, and fitted with new equipment to increase functionality. He also confirmed that they are looking at a new buoy, so our timing is well coordinated with his stated mission. Surprisingly he let on that once a buoy is deployed there is a two year maintenance schedule. So if something goes wrong, then it could conceivably take a long time to fix. We have seen this on our other buoys when they are down for an unreasonable of time during our boating season. I will have a copy of his presentation which I will post after I receive it.
Coincidentally the good folks at Rutgers Marine Studies also have the need for the same type of buoy and at the same location, the Hudson. These are the same people that bring us the free daily satellite sea temps services. As educators who now take measurements, send out gliders to the deep, and investigate the ocean floor, having a buoy at the Hudson shelf break would only add to their scientific understanding of this important fishing and oceanographic area. So, it is clear that we have common goals, and are on the same page of the oceanographic book.
Dr. Scott Glenn, the professor of Rutgers that represents the NY Bight for MACOORA was thrilled by the detail and consensus of our presentation. He felt that this information and solid support would open the eyes of NOAA and allow them to see the needs of real people on real water. Since the idea of a buoy at the Hudson was floated a couple of times in the past, this meeting was the perfect forum since Dr Hervey was addressing the buoy need. Dr. Glenn believes that our contribution will set us apart from many of the other regions with the support of the regional members of MACOORA, we should be at the top of the list when it comes to our needs and the new buoy.
The success of the reception to this presentation is a testament to the cooperation of all that participated in this on-line survey. Congratulations to you all. This survey will remain up, and I ask that everyone forward this to their friends, marinas, insurance people, boat and accessory manufacturers, gas company execs, boat yards, commercial friends, retired captains, and anyone else that feels this would be of a benefit to those who go offshore. I have to state that this is one of many initiatives by concerned fishermen. There is room for all our needs to be met, but we all must work together to make them happen. I also want to say that I have really only superficially covered the many diverse areas of expertise that MACOORA represents. To find out more go to www.macoora.org
**************************************
Following is a copy of the letter that was presented to Dr. Hervey along with the documents.
October 29. 2006
Dr. Hervey:
NOAA/NDBC
I am pleased to present to you, at the 2006 annual MACOORA meeting, the results of both an electronic Survey/Petition, and several hand petition sheets by interested stakeholders requesting that NOAA’s NDBC place a real-time weather buoy at the Hudson Canyon. We have over 500 electronic responses with a 99% consensus supporting the buoy placement. There are 176 hand-signed petitions supporting the same initiative. This is not a scientific study, but rather more an equivalent to a vote. The respondents overwhelmingly agree that more accurate and improved forecasts can be achieved by an in-water real-time device in the offshore waters of the Hudson Canyon. This survey, and petition task were begun and completed in nine (9) days, so it is a small representation of what the larger fishing population and boaters of our offshore Canyons want from the government.
This petition contains the names of recreational, commercial, charter boat captains, scientists, fishing writers, bait and tackle shops, marina owners, customers, boaters, and other stakeholders in the usage of the offshore waters. There are also letters of support from a Nassau County, NY, legislator David Denenberg, journalist Capt. John Raguso and Dennis Cataldo of the NY Sportfishing Federation. Others have contacted you directly.
Since the deployment of buoys 44025, and 44017, times have changed radically. Thousands of vessels travel offshore daily, and push to the continental shelf. Twenty-five years ago, most boats traveled to the 25 mile inshore areas for fishing. But due to prosperity, and a whole new generation of power boats, this range has increased to far offshore. However, the in-water equipment for forecasting has stayed in the same places and yields localized oceanic climatic information. We need additional, localized, and improved offshore data in the Canyon area on a real-time basis to aid us in understanding conditions for a responsible and safe trip.
According to NOAA “We will direct our efforts and actions towards delivering trusted, timely information services to those who need and can use them.”_ The authors go on to add they will “Increase number and use of climate products and services to enhance public and private sector decision making.”
The current NOAA forecasts provide extensive generalized forecasts that tend to err quite often in the areas we pass through, congregate in, and use. It is responsible for NOAA to implement this change to further protect the health and safety of the thousands of pelagic permit holders that ply the waters from Massachusetts to New Jersey.
NOAA’s stated objectives, and outcomes from the strategic plan FY2005-FY2010: Stated objectives include improving the “predictability of the onset, duration, and impact of hazardous and severe weather and water events.” and “reduce uncertainty associated with weather and water decision tools and assessments.” It adds,” Better, quicker, and more valuable_ weather and water information to support improved decisions, and increased customer satisfactions with weather and water information services.”
Yet the government has thousands of projects that do little to improve the day-to-day lives of offshore boaters. We continually hear there is no budget or money for this type of project. Why we are not provided the buoy coverage that would improve forecasting? Are we not entitled to a fair distribution of assets that will plug the offshore weather hole? Isn’t it time the NOAA finally utilized its technology to protect the interests of thousands of boaters who depend on government information for guidance.
To underscore the importance of our place in the overall economic scheme of things, it is estimated, according to NOAA, “The amount added annually to the national economy by the commercial and recreational fishing industry alone is $48 billion.” But, what is the price of a protecting and saving human life? Why not ask the families and friends of the28 men who died on the offshore Texas Tower 4 in 1962. It is probable that if there were an accurate_ real-time monitored weather buoy at this location, these men might not have needlessly perished. We collectively ask that NOAA implement this improvement to our bluewater constituency as mandated by its mission statement.
The results of this survey reflect what NOAA’s strategic plan, which was promulgated with stakeholder and internal assessments, is for the 21st century.
Excerpts include:
- “Serve society’s needs for weather and water information
- “Understand climate variability and change to enhance society’s ability to plan and respond”
To further quote NOAA, “Realizing our information and services bridge both weather and climate timescales, we will continue to collect and analyze environmental data, and issue forecasts and warnings that help protect life and property, and enhance the U.S. economy.” If these numbers that NOAA has published are true, and for us to believe in their strategic plan then why is it that what we have been seeking for years, has yet to be delivered in the buoy form we can use?
So, given the change in demographics, extended range of current boats, and need, stated mandates of the government, and mission statement of NOAA` itself, we petition for a buoy in the Hudson area at NOAA’s for fiscal 2007. We understand the importance of most of the current installations, but also feel that it is imperative that a real-time weather buoy be situated near the Hudson Canyon to add safety, and protect the well being of the thousands that venture offshore during the course of the year who add financially to the surrounding States and national economy.
Sincerely yours,
Jeffrey Yapalater
On behalf of the 676 people that have contributed to this survey and petition
Overview: The weekend preceding Halloween was scary indeed. Gale force winds were predicted early in the previous week, and yes, NOAA was 100% accurate this time around. Well, I think, since there is no real-time weather station in the Hudson, I have to figure that since they were right inshore, then the offshore would follow with such a widespread weather system. Winds were horrific even on land, with lots of downed trees, power lines, and ripped coverings in boat yards all along NY, and Connecticut.
There was one iffy weather window on Friday depending on how big your boat and gonads were. Although the forecast had light winds predicted for late Thursday into late Friday, how many of us were prepared to test the accuracy of the forecasts with 35 to 50 mile per hour winds around the corner?
If you had seen the ocean from the beach on Saturday, you know full well that it was a risk to go out. Not so much with the prevailing seas on Friday, but the “what if” came into play. What margin of safety was there if something went wrong? Who was going to be able to anchor up in “Victory at Sea” waves and wait for help? You couldn’t even see the cabin of a 35 footer out there in the 11 to 15 foot lashing seas.
Reports: But, guess what. Someone made it out, and back safely. Capt Mark of the “HU2” did a day trip to the Hudson area. He spent a lot of time working a few spots with not much to report. But when he went to pull lines for home at 3 in the afternoon, things popped. He brought in a beautiful 150 pound bigeye. Soon after, one of the elusive 100 pound bluefins also attacked his chunk spread. So, congrats to him and crew for making the most of the day, and beating it back home before the ghoulish weather hit. He reported that there were lots of boats on the East wall, but the fish were just not there. So, instead he visited one of his favorite fall spots to the west and was successful.
The dreams of Bacardi bluefin are becoming nightmares with the wicked witch of the East blowing. As you all know and feel the pain of being kept at the dock, winds did not let up until this past Monday. By that time, more and more guys have taken their boats out for the season, and too many finally defeated by way too many weekends watching sports rather than doing them.
One experienced captain said “The tuna are gone!” How depressing! He may not be right, but who and when will we be able to find out? It is not only the weather we contend with but also the skepticism we have on believing the NOAA offshore forecasts. Having said that, let’s review the meeting where our survey and petition for an offshore weather buoy was presented.
Buoy News & Report: As reported last week, October 30 was the date for the annual MACOORA meeting in Baltimore Maryland. MACOORA, the Mid-Atlantic Ocean Observing Regional Association is made up of many scientists, marine studies departments from the Mid-Atlantic States including the University of Delaware, Rutgers, other institutions, corporate individuals, engineers, regional government departments, and stakeholders. Their mission is to observe the waters and to offer the public and government research so that we can all learn more of our ocean habitat.
Also part of their job is to bring recommendations and ideas to NOAA. As part of this effort, NOAA sends its representative, Dr. Hervey to this and the other 11 regional “Macoora’s” to gather information, and take the pulse of the scientific community._ MACOORA is represented by many educators so part of its mission is to involve other groups, and stakeholders including the recreational fisherman. And that would be us! To add our voice to this conference, a nice wad of material was put together: Letters from a legislator, well-known fishing writer, sport fishing federation, as well as a survey of almost 500 respondents, and petitions from marinas, bait and tackle stores, charter boats, recreational and commercial boaters, and more were assembled into a package and personally given to Dr. Hervey. There was a 99% level of support for all those 676 who took the time to give their opinion and signature.
And you bet this was impressive!
Currently Dr. Hervey, a meteorologist from NWS, is representing the National Data Buoy Center to seek input. According to his own words, if it were up to him, we would have a buoy. But he acknowledges that he is the first in the chain of command when it comes to information collection. After that this goes to his superiors who draft a budget, and then it goes to Congress for appropriations. This is a typical bureaucratic process, but we are now part of the agenda. From what I am told, the 2007 budget is in place, but 2008 is now being put together. It appears that we have a very good chance to be a line item on their budget if all continues as well as it is now.
Dr. Rex Hervey, director of the National Data Buoy Center, and department in charge of all buoys, was to speak on the “prioritization” of our buoy system. The word “redeployment” was also used prior to the meeting. I was curious what that actually meant, so I was very interested to attend and understand what he meant. In my mind it meant that the NDBC was actually going to re-deploy, or move, or bring out of mothballs, buoys to aid in increasing the accuracy of the weather forecasts, and thereby increase the safety of offshore boaters. After all, it is part of the mission of NOAA to do just that. But did it mean placing a buoy in a new location, add technology to existing installations, use satellites for more data gathering, or what? Attending this meeting I had a chance to listen to what his definition of those words was, and to hear his vision, and interpretation of the stated mission of NOAA’s FY2005-2010 strategic plans.
Unfortunately, this was only to be a 20 minute session, but I was determined to take this opportunity to present the results of the “Survey for Deployment of a Real-time weather buoy at the Hudson Canyon”. The purpose this survey was to give everyone that saw this petition a chance to answer a couple of questions, and to comment on the idea. Not surprisingly, 99% of those that answered and commented were in strong favor f the idea.
Dr. Hervey was cordial, and open to learning more about our concerns. During his talk he confirmed that the current set of buoys including 44025, 44008, and 44004 are to be retained, and fitted with new equipment to increase functionality. He also confirmed that they are looking at a new buoy, so our timing is well coordinated with his stated mission. Surprisingly he let on that once a buoy is deployed there is a two year maintenance schedule. So if something goes wrong, then it could conceivably take a long time to fix. We have seen this on our other buoys when they are down for an unreasonable of time during our boating season. I will have a copy of his presentation which I will post after I receive it.
Coincidentally the good folks at Rutgers Marine Studies also have the need for the same type of buoy and at the same location, the Hudson. These are the same people that bring us the free daily satellite sea temps services. As educators who now take measurements, send out gliders to the deep, and investigate the ocean floor, having a buoy at the Hudson shelf break would only add to their scientific understanding of this important fishing and oceanographic area. So, it is clear that we have common goals, and are on the same page of the oceanographic book.
Dr. Scott Glenn, the professor of Rutgers that represents the NY Bight for MACOORA was thrilled by the detail and consensus of our presentation. He felt that this information and solid support would open the eyes of NOAA and allow them to see the needs of real people on real water. Since the idea of a buoy at the Hudson was floated a couple of times in the past, this meeting was the perfect forum since Dr Hervey was addressing the buoy need. Dr. Glenn believes that our contribution will set us apart from many of the other regions with the support of the regional members of MACOORA, we should be at the top of the list when it comes to our needs and the new buoy.
The success of the reception to this presentation is a testament to the cooperation of all that participated in this on-line survey. Congratulations to you all. This survey will remain up, and I ask that everyone forward this to their friends, marinas, insurance people, boat and accessory manufacturers, gas company execs, boat yards, commercial friends, retired captains, and anyone else that feels this would be of a benefit to those who go offshore. I have to state that this is one of many initiatives by concerned fishermen. There is room for all our needs to be met, but we all must work together to make them happen. I also want to say that I have really only superficially covered the many diverse areas of expertise that MACOORA represents. To find out more go to www.macoora.org
**************************************
Following is a copy of the letter that was presented to Dr. Hervey along with the documents.
October 29. 2006
Dr. Hervey:
NOAA/NDBC
I am pleased to present to you, at the 2006 annual MACOORA meeting, the results of both an electronic Survey/Petition, and several hand petition sheets by interested stakeholders requesting that NOAA’s NDBC place a real-time weather buoy at the Hudson Canyon. We have over 500 electronic responses with a 99% consensus supporting the buoy placement. There are 176 hand-signed petitions supporting the same initiative. This is not a scientific study, but rather more an equivalent to a vote. The respondents overwhelmingly agree that more accurate and improved forecasts can be achieved by an in-water real-time device in the offshore waters of the Hudson Canyon. This survey, and petition task were begun and completed in nine (9) days, so it is a small representation of what the larger fishing population and boaters of our offshore Canyons want from the government.
This petition contains the names of recreational, commercial, charter boat captains, scientists, fishing writers, bait and tackle shops, marina owners, customers, boaters, and other stakeholders in the usage of the offshore waters. There are also letters of support from a Nassau County, NY, legislator David Denenberg, journalist Capt. John Raguso and Dennis Cataldo of the NY Sportfishing Federation. Others have contacted you directly.
Since the deployment of buoys 44025, and 44017, times have changed radically. Thousands of vessels travel offshore daily, and push to the continental shelf. Twenty-five years ago, most boats traveled to the 25 mile inshore areas for fishing. But due to prosperity, and a whole new generation of power boats, this range has increased to far offshore. However, the in-water equipment for forecasting has stayed in the same places and yields localized oceanic climatic information. We need additional, localized, and improved offshore data in the Canyon area on a real-time basis to aid us in understanding conditions for a responsible and safe trip.
According to NOAA “We will direct our efforts and actions towards delivering trusted, timely information services to those who need and can use them.”_ The authors go on to add they will “Increase number and use of climate products and services to enhance public and private sector decision making.”
The current NOAA forecasts provide extensive generalized forecasts that tend to err quite often in the areas we pass through, congregate in, and use. It is responsible for NOAA to implement this change to further protect the health and safety of the thousands of pelagic permit holders that ply the waters from Massachusetts to New Jersey.
NOAA’s stated objectives, and outcomes from the strategic plan FY2005-FY2010: Stated objectives include improving the “predictability of the onset, duration, and impact of hazardous and severe weather and water events.” and “reduce uncertainty associated with weather and water decision tools and assessments.” It adds,” Better, quicker, and more valuable_ weather and water information to support improved decisions, and increased customer satisfactions with weather and water information services.”
Yet the government has thousands of projects that do little to improve the day-to-day lives of offshore boaters. We continually hear there is no budget or money for this type of project. Why we are not provided the buoy coverage that would improve forecasting? Are we not entitled to a fair distribution of assets that will plug the offshore weather hole? Isn’t it time the NOAA finally utilized its technology to protect the interests of thousands of boaters who depend on government information for guidance.
To underscore the importance of our place in the overall economic scheme of things, it is estimated, according to NOAA, “The amount added annually to the national economy by the commercial and recreational fishing industry alone is $48 billion.” But, what is the price of a protecting and saving human life? Why not ask the families and friends of the28 men who died on the offshore Texas Tower 4 in 1962. It is probable that if there were an accurate_ real-time monitored weather buoy at this location, these men might not have needlessly perished. We collectively ask that NOAA implement this improvement to our bluewater constituency as mandated by its mission statement.
The results of this survey reflect what NOAA’s strategic plan, which was promulgated with stakeholder and internal assessments, is for the 21st century.
Excerpts include:
- “Serve society’s needs for weather and water information
- “Understand climate variability and change to enhance society’s ability to plan and respond”
To further quote NOAA, “Realizing our information and services bridge both weather and climate timescales, we will continue to collect and analyze environmental data, and issue forecasts and warnings that help protect life and property, and enhance the U.S. economy.” If these numbers that NOAA has published are true, and for us to believe in their strategic plan then why is it that what we have been seeking for years, has yet to be delivered in the buoy form we can use?
So, given the change in demographics, extended range of current boats, and need, stated mandates of the government, and mission statement of NOAA` itself, we petition for a buoy in the Hudson area at NOAA’s for fiscal 2007. We understand the importance of most of the current installations, but also feel that it is imperative that a real-time weather buoy be situated near the Hudson Canyon to add safety, and protect the well being of the thousands that venture offshore during the course of the year who add financially to the surrounding States and national economy.
Sincerely yours,
Jeffrey Yapalater
On behalf of the 676 people that have contributed to this survey and petition