Licking River Caper

Tom Schiffer;13750 wrote: I would like to Scotch any rumors that this is a shakedown for a prize crew to take DQ to the Great Lakes where she is exempt from Safety at Sea legislation. Cap'n Walnut

Huh? exempt? Please to expain.

Paul

Paul,

To my knowledge, this is true, as well as the St. Lawrence River of Canada. Technically, she could run up there with no interferance from SOLAS.

Can I hear "Oh Canada" on the calliope, please?

~Travis~

PS: I know how to play the Canadian National Anthem on calliope and have...please accept this posting as my resume for the positions of Perfessor and Lakealorian!

"technically she could run up there with no interference..."

Travis, doesn't this assume a few things, like boat country of registry being something other than American, which necessitates her stopping regularly at a foreign port? I guess we got that covered with the cities on the left descending bank...

Also she'd be perfect on the St. Lawrence...I can picture her going under the Ivy Lea bridge..., going past Grindstone Island...Kingston to Quebec City with Montreal thrown in for good measure. And down the accesses to Oswego and into Lake Champlain, is the canal big enough into Champlain?...

And not like it wouldn't be perfect for the Krause's 🙂

But the Great Lakes? I don't think so....pictures of the Edmund Fitzgerald come to mind...even "little" Lake Ontario can be very rude sez the guy who has ridden a 20 car flat bottomed ferry in "little" 35 MPH winds.

I have always found this part of the law interesting--the great lakes are exempt--even though they are much more like an ocean than the river systems. If only the river systems had been exempted too.
Methinks that back when the law was written, there must have been wooden superstructure UNIONIZED boats on the Lakes. . . .
S'
David D.

So the SOLAS Act specifically doesn't apply to the great lakes? Really? I'm embarrassed that I didn't know that little loophole.

Thanks, David for setting that straight. And everyone, I apologise for the wrong stuff suggested in post #4 above.

Now I'm gonna ask all a real nerdy but important question...What makes the St. Lawrence a part of the great lakes and not a forbidden, infamous river in SOLAS-eese...Specifically, what exactly does it say about the great lakes being exempt?

The whole thing is a bit complicated, especially because there are two different legal entities that are being mixed up all the time: There is the international convention SOLAS ad there is the Safety at Sea Act from 1966. Both are totally different things but are being cited with the same abbreviation: SOLAS.

You'll find the wording of the US law in the US Code ( http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/46C35.txt):

(a) A passenger vessel of the United States having berth or
stateroom accommodations for at least 50 passengers shall be
granted a certificate of inspection only if the vessel is
constructed of fire-retardant materials. Before November 1, 2008,
this section does not apply to any vessel in operation before
January 1, 1968, and operating only within the Boundary Line.

"Only within the Boundary Line" is what might exempt the Great Lakes as long as the Delta Queen will also have regular port stops in Canada. By the way, this wording was changed with the last exemption 1996 from "only on inland rivers" to "only within the Boundary Lines". I'm not sure whether that changes anything or whether this wording is just more compliant with the international treaty SOLAS which is using this wording, too.

As soon as she's travelling internationally, the international treaty SOLAS comes into effect (which is only relevant internationally!) SOLAS has very strict rules about fire safety, too, but has a generous grandfathering provision which might make it possible to run her on the Great Lakes.

But as someone already mentioned, this is more a a theoretical discussion for the flat-bottom Delta Queen anyway.

Franz,

So...theoretically, the DQ could run on the St. Lawrence Sea Way and the St. Lawrence River in Canada with limited stops in the US along the way, so long as her cruises had at least one stop in a foreign nation. Of course the problem remains, how do you make money on a limited 7-month a year schedule (because of prevailing weather conditions) and how would the DQ look with the red maple leaf on her stern mast! Then there is the expense of taking her totally out of the water each season, maintenance, and the trip to get up there.

The good news about it is, No#6 fuel is very popular up there and easy to come by. I believe the Canadians would welcome her with open arms...if not total jubilation! Possibly some trips could be combined with agreements with other Great Lakes operators to entice passengers with a dual experience. So....in theory, there are many reasons this could work as a reasonable alternative to what could happen if we don't get the exemption in the US.

In my heart it is only a possibility, as she needs to be in her natural element...the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. However, it is a possibility...and I would rather see her do this than rot away in some forlorn port masquerading as a Deep South Hotel Robert E. Lee-esque steamboat themed atraction, or Convention Center in a backwater port where no one will see and appreciate what she truly was.

Just my take on it....I could be wrong!

~Travis~

Bottom line is she needs to be running not sitting. Without steam up, without that big beautiful wheel thumping, without that pitman arm going in and out, without the whistle, without the smoke from the stack, without the caliope being played, without that river breeze, without locking through in the middle of the nite, without all those things shes just a lifeless shell.

I have a question...

If this did happen, and she was kept running, kept in good shape, could she return to the Mississippi River system in the future if she was able to get an exemption? I am just wondering, if she can't get an exemption now, does that mean she never will be able to? Even if she doesn't operate now, if she is kept in good shape, and gets an exemption like a year from now, or maybe 2, would it even be possible? I was really, really hopeing Oberstar wouldn't get relected, but he did, theres always next time.

Travis, I'm not a maritime laywer; but my understanding is thet ther might be a chance to run her this way. But SOLA is a very complicated and long document so there might be other problems in this traty that I haven't found yet.

Now that there will be a lame-duck session, we are still OK. People want to buy her, if the company would cooperate. I have no question that, if done right, the DQ could still run yet. So keep badgering your legislators RIGHT NOW to vote for the boat. We are hopeful that, at the very least, we will still get added on as an amendment.
Nick, here is my take on the exemption: I am not a lawyer, so as Franz says, it is a complicated document. But Congress makes law; they are free to change this situation if they think it is important enough. They can always make a new law to cover just the DQ, if it came to that. That being said, it is still best to get the exemption now. If we had it, I'm certain we could get a buyer.

A person from Minnesota that I correspond with tells me that Oberstar is really, really loved up on the iron range. There's no accounting for taste.

Folks,
Wasn't this thread about the "Licking River Caper". I think we've jumped the track and completely missed the tale of a really good time that anyone on here would have enjoyed. May we try again?

Sure Sam....

Tell us about it...cause I really wanted to be there! This work thing is really cutting into my river time! I really need to be back on the river! Perhaps in time?

~Travis~

Within the Boundary Lines? Are there boundary lines at Pittsburgh, or St. Paul? If not, then the DQ would always be within an open-ended area. The only boundary lines she faces are at Mobile and New Orleans.

Thanks, Sam for trying to get this thread back on track. I was about to post a similar statement but you beat me to it. Yes it was a great day! But Capt. Walnut didn't mention anythng about Missie getting "snagged"! Maybe it was because he was steering? No damage done, though.

John: I am not at liberty to discuss who was at the helm when MISSIE fetched up on a snag...being duly extricated by the good offices of Chief Howe and James Reising handling the lines with brother John at the throttle and helm of the WONDERFUL to pull us off. But, my lips are sealed as to who was behind the wheel when it happened in fifteen feet of water no less. Suggestions that we lighten the draft by evacuating the pax did not need to be accommodated (MISSIE draws two feet of water light). I'd rather not discuss the draft with the load we had aboard. I do want to add that Jim tried hard to make up for the fact that Travis was not there, by blowing both whistles! MISSIE was generally on her good behavior and I feel that we'd be hard-pressed to improve the quality of the crew but there are any number on this board that qualify too. It was indeed a pleasure to host such a group. It is a luxury to be able to relax when ANYTHING happens and things just seem to get done with no fuss or shouting. Please keep in mind that the "grounding" or snagging mentioned above WAS a very minor happening and is oft repeated when we are running Big Bone or Gunpowder Creeks in Boone County. We did not penetrate into central Kentucky as far as we might have liked but did go about as far as navigation is supported by the Corps of Engineers. Now, if they want to send a snag-boat up there, John can show them the spot! Eager to do it again, I remain....Cap'n Walnut.

Interesting ideas...

I believe Lake Michigan would be the exception to that rule as it's the only "Great Lake" that is entirely within the USA. One could possibly run the shoreline of these lakes, which in theory would be no different than the Gulf jaunts the DQ did, however I can attest from the 5 generations worth of Lake Michigan water in my veins, even on a calm August day, the big lake can turn in one heck of a hurry! I always dreamed the return of a regular lake cruise service, as was once rumored with the former SS Spartan car ferry.

As others stated, running the St Lawrence would be the key (like the Thousand Islands!)...but plan on a May to October season, much like the carfarries on Lake Michigan adhere to.

As long as we are talking hypotheticalsituations here, the $10 question, would Canada allow the DQ to operate under a Canadian flag, given the current circumstances?

Shipyard Sam;13823 wrote: Folks,
Wasn't this thread about the "Licking River Caper". I think we've jumped the track and completely missed the tale of a really good time that anyone on here would have enjoyed. May we try again?

Sorry, made my reply without completely reading the thread...Mea Culpa!

Pete: You have not offended my sensibilities in the least, but I did hope that my posting would inspire thoughtful response regarding the Great Lakes venue which it did and response to a delightful trip on Saturday which it, mostly, has not...as yet at least.
Cap'n Walnut.

Cap'n Walnut here is some thoughtful response to the Licking River trip. As you and I talked, and I'm sorry I was not able to go, maybe we ought to plan another trip next year and really try to penetrate into the Commonwealth. I took Sewickley almost to Ryland so I know Missie and a pontoon craft could easily get there, unless the river has filled in the interim. It would help to have a little water running out of the Licking, like early summer. Lewis & Clark called their trip an expedition so maybe it ought to be a Schiffer and Company Expedition. Maybe an overnight riverbank campout. Cap'n Walnut being a revered citizen of the Commonwealth could vouch for those of us north of the Mason-Dixon Line.

I too will not tell who was the the helm when MISSIE ran atop the snag. But, I will say never turn the helm over to an engineer. With a crew consisting of Capt Walnut, Shipyard Sam and the Chiefy, it's no wonder that MISSIE hit the only snag in the Licking River. The only load that needed to be lightered was the BS that accumulated in the bilge from all the river stories those three distinguished rivermen told.
Pictures:
1. MISSIE with her talented crew heads for her date with destiny.
2. The rescue craft IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE.
3. Capt Walnut relaxing between trips.

Some more pictures from our excellent Licking River Caper. Thanks Tom, it was a wonderful day. Bill Judd is right we will have to have a repeat performance...minus hitting the snag...next spring.
Pictures:
1. MISSIE's mighty two cylinder steam engine (which ran perfectly)
2. Capt. Walnut and Shipyard Sam
3. Chiefy at the helm, Capt Walnut handling the engine, Shipyard Sam forward observer

Hi. Although I wasn't there for your caper, I DO have some interesting video of Missie from the DQ departure at Cincinnati on Oct. 21. Here's a still frame from that day.
-Jim Herron