[Paddlewise] Rough Seas

Dave said:
>Rough seas on the Columbia River bar:
http://www.columbiariverbarpilots.com/Picture_gallery/weather_rough_seas/Page.html

Dave, I particularly like the picture (#02) of the pilot boat inbound with
the bar "going off" in the background. That picture, more than any other I
have ever laid eyes on, typifies the intoxicatingly numb fear that the bar
must present when its "going off." The waves rear dangerously high, loosing
their backs as each peak plunges instantly downward toward the trough,
driving the hapless mariner's bow into the opposing current, thereby driving
a bow deeper and cartwheeling or rolling the vessel over. And to think that
only as little as four or so decades ago, the pilots rowed out to meet and
mount their commercial inbound steeds. It's no wonder helicopters make most
of the drops now.

I believe a lot of the Motor Life Boat training for the Coasties takes place
close inshore. It was actually an IMAX screening of the Ilwaco boys doing
their thing that got my crank turing to pay a visit to the bar. Anyway, must
be quite the rush:

http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/historic/nws/wea00811.htm

Check out the video of how the French do it in the open Atlantic:

http://www.sea-rescue.de/the-sea.html

Or perhaps how the Germans do it:

http://www.sea-rescue.de/video2330mclass.html


As far as my experience on the Columbia River Bar, I had no idea I'd be
paddling into an area so murky with controversy when I hit the end of the
North Jetty 2 years ago this May. As you know the Columbia River Crab
Fisherman's Assoc. cited 11 Columbia River bar victims and 5 drownings in
2001 alone. Later in that summer two 45-foot crab boats were capsized off
the North Jetty near where I ran into my own difficulties in the Spring -- 
the worst incident back then being the Miss Brittany accident on August 7
with loss of two young men and the third traumatized after spending hours in
the upturned hull. The crabbers cite wave amplification in the Site E area
where the Corps have been dumping their dredging spoils for decades.

I was wholly unaware of Site E as I attempted to swing wide of the mayhem
off the North Jetty. I was more worried about Peacock Spit on the other side
of the jetty, where all chart data and your comments suggested a rough ride
due to a strong alongshore current with the daily Northwesterly winds,
swell, wind waves, and flooding tide -- not to mention potential dangerous
hydraulics caused by the jetty proper. Site E turned out to be a trapezoid
configuration 10,000 to 12,000 feet wide at the base by 1,000 to 3,000 feet
wide at the other end, mounding to a shallow depth with millions of cubic
yards of sand evident by the eerie translucent, greenish sandy color in the
trough valleys. The strong current and lack of directional stability caused
by the turbulence forced the kayak into a wide arc, out into the middle of
Site E before I could develop a mitigating strategy to round the jetty and
make the Spit. I had two occasions to back out before it got worse, but I
was determined not to let it beat me. Unusually high confidence that day won
out. The relatively decent conditions for May during a drought year with
high temperatures also allowed for a margin of error. (BTW, my radio was
stashed away, leaving me to my own potential rescue efforts. I wouldn't
abuse your system and tax dollars). As Duane would say, roll or die. Or
perhaps re-enter, roll, or die.

While I'm not entirely sure the Corps had addressed concerns forthrightly
with respect to small vessels transiting this area, what I don't understand
is why a small to moderately large working vessel would _want_ to transit
this area (my self excluded). As evidenced by the dangerous crab pot lines I
encountered once I was through to Peacock Spit in the notoriously dangerous
and protracted surf-current mixed zone, this is where the crabbers must have
been working their pots, not Site E as some claim.

>From what I can gather, the Coast Guard inquiry found the skipper negligent
for working their line of pots in a know hazardous area. The waves break in
three different direction there (and Site E too I found). I know, as I
rolled many times. You mentioned sneaker breaks, and these can break
unexpectedly half a mile out even in summer. The drowned men were not
wearing PFD's and it would appear there was a loss of situational awareness
and an overestimation of seamanship skills. I suppose marine workers
harvesting their sustenance from the sea take frequent risks in pursuit of
profibility.

Bathymetric surveys were apparently not being done for some time prior to
the accidents, though one just happened to be done that winter just prior to
the accidents and suggested wave increases, increases that the fishermen
felt were presenting "unnecessary life-threatening danger." The survey
further suggested that material dumped had not been washed away by winter
storms in this usually highly erosive area.

So, who does one believe: the fisherman, the Corps, or the Coast Guard? I
dunno, but I sure had a fun paddle. I'm just glad it wasn't in the winter.

Doug Lloyd
Victoria BC

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~
"Whatever can be said at all can be said clearly and whatever cannot be said
clearly should not be said at all."
Ludwig Wittgenstein
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~


***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************