Jump to content

trouble in the NW Passage..


Recommended Posts

I wouldn't worry about the Canadian athorities, I think any village up there takes care of itself.  If he tries to go ashore he's more likely to come out the back end of a polar bear or get shot by a local. If he stays on the boat leave him be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Spent some time with him in Namibia a number of years ago. Very interesting guy but one who thinks he is right about things all the time. Had a tour of Kiwi Roa. It is the most impressive cruising boat I have ever seen. Not sure if he designed it but he built it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read the article, he has somewhat of a fair point about innocent passage and the status of the waters there as international vs. Canadian. As long as he stays away from other people and stays on his boat he won't be a danger to others. Now if something goes wrong and Canada has to do a SAR mission, they will rightly be quite angry.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Spent some time with him in Namibia a number of years ago. Very interesting guy but one who thinks he is right about things all the time. Had a tour of Kiwi Roa. It is the most impressive cruising boat I have ever seen. Not sure if he designed it but he built it.

I got that sense when we wanted the Canadian government to "negotiate" with him, as if they don't have anything else to do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s trouble in Boundary Passage last week :-).  (The waterway going lower left to upper right in my pic, between the two countries, is called Boundary Pass.)
 

Motoring up from Sooke, BC last Victoria in no wind, I “cut the corner” at Turn Point on Stuart Island (‘murican territory), determined to shorten my route to Saturna Isl (just visible in the upper right).  It was a long day already, we wanted to get in, so I didn’t see any reason to keep to Canadian waters only since we’d simply pass through US waters very quickly (an hour or so).  All the large international commercial shipping that comes through here does exactly the same thing.

Next morning, anchored on Saturna Island, a big, all black RIB with armed Canada Border Services dudes shows up, circling the boat until I come out.  (We have no hailing port, which I had no idea is actually a legal requirement for registered Canadian vessels, and no flag - I dislike national flags.).  Satisfied by our conversation (and my ignorance of the hailing port requirement, but apparently not too happy about us having no flag - WTF?), they left.  Next morning, in another anchorage 40+ miles away, a different black RIB shows up in the morning doing the same thing.  Someone message Peter - don’t mess with bored Canada Border Services Agency dudes :-) 

DA909551-65C7-4136-982B-A944E477CA9C.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

If you read the article, he has somewhat of a fair point about innocent passage and the status of the waters there as international vs. Canadian. As long as he stays away from other people and stays on his boat he won't be a danger to others. Now if something goes wrong and Canada has to do a SAR mission, they will rightly be quite angry.

It isn’t a fair point because there’s no part of the northwest passage that is outside the territorial waters of Canada. The only ppl claiming otherwise are those who have competing claims that somehow the standard limit doesn’t apply to Canadians because arctic waters are somehow diff. 
 

if you need to enter Canadian territorial waters to pass the passage, you can’t claim innocent passage. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah as a Canadian, Canada has always said it's not an international passage. If you are transiting through an area where the local country says you are in our jurisdiction better do what they say. He's not some diplomat arguing the point in the UN. Just another entitled cruiser who thinks the law doesn't apply to him. 

The US doesn't recognize the passage as Canadian, but still would inform Canada as a courtesy when they sent an icebreaker through (when they had a working icebreaker)! 

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

Here’s trouble in Boundary Passage last week :-).  (The waterway going lower left to upper right in my pic, between the two countries, is called Boundary Pass.)
 

Motoring up from Sooke, BC last Victoria in no wind, I “cut the corner” at Turn Point on Stuart Island (‘murican territory), determined to shorten my route to Saturna Isl (just visible in the upper right).  It was a long day already, we wanted to get in, so I didn’t see any reason to keep to Canadian waters only since we’d simply pass through US waters very quickly (an hour or so).  All the large international commercial shipping that comes through here does exactly the same thing.

Next morning, anchored on Saturna Island, a big, all black RIB with armed Canada Border Services dudes shows up, circling the boat until I come out.  (We have no hailing port, which I had no idea is actually a legal requirement for registered Canadian vessels, and no flag - I dislike national flags.).  Satisfied by our conversation (and my ignorance of the hailing port requirement, but apparently not too happy about us having no flag - WTF?), they left.  Next morning, in another anchorage 40+ miles away, a different black RIB shows up in the morning doing the same thing.  Someone message Peter - don’t mess with bored Canada Border Services Agency dudes :-) 

DA909551-65C7-4136-982B-A944E477CA9C.png

I'm wondering how they identified your vessel to send the RIB out. Were you broadcasting on AIS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The US claim is such bullshit. The Canadian claim isn’t even nonsense like the PRC’s dash 9 - it is just faithfully taking Canadian territorial landmass and drawing 12nm and there’s not even conflicting territorial claims. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is really short sighted because like Canadian-US participation in NORAD, our interests are so closely aligned that we should accept Canadian claims, and reinforce the norm and help enforcement should it become necessary. Enter into a bilateral agreement that Canadian and US flag vessels have bilateral most favored status and ensure usage. 
 

Instead we jeopardize Canadian claims against Russians. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

...Next morning, anchored on Saturna Island, a big, all black RIB with armed Canada Border Services dudes shows up, circling the boat until I come out.  (We have no hailing port, which I had no idea is actually a legal requirement for registered Canadian vessels, and no flag - I dislike national flags.).  Satisfied by our conversation (and my ignorance of the hailing port requirement, but apparently not too happy about us having no flag - WTF?), they left.  Next morning, in another anchorage 40+ miles away, a different black RIB shows up in the morning doing the same thing.  Someone message Peter - don’t mess with bored Canada Border Services Agency dudes :-)

So I assume your boat is registered in Canada? Here are the differing requirements for Canadian Registered vessels and licensed pleasure craft:

Markings that distinguish licensed or registered vessels

Example information you'll find on the vessel

What it is

Location on vessel

Is your vessel licensed or registered

50E12345
BC123456

Combination of letters and numbers that do not begin with the letter C

Exterior

Licensed pleasure craft

Happy Dolphin
Vancouver, BC
O.N. 123456
N.R.T. 10.52

Name of the vessel
Port of registry
Official number
Net registered tonnage

Exterior (vessel name and port)

Interior (official number and net registered tonnage)

Registered in the Canadian Register of Vessels

No mention of the flying the flag. However if the lads in the black zodiac didn't see a "50E" or "BC" number on the bow, or a hailing port or even a Canadian Flag at the stern, it seems pretty reasonable that they would be curious as to who you are and what you are doing, given that your track on radar would have appeared to originate from American waters. BTW there is a requirement to fly the flag on registered vessels under circumstances such as the one you described:

Flown on ships and boats

The National Flag of Canada is the proper national colours (flag of a military unit) for all Canadian ships and boats, including pleasure craft. The Canada Shipping Act states that a Canadian ship shall hoist the flag:

  • on a signal being made to her by one of Her Majesty's Canadian ships, or any ship in the service of and belonging to the Government of Canada;
  • on entering or leaving any foreign port; and
  • on entering or leaving any Commonwealth port if carrying 50 tonnes gross tonnage or upwards.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, IStream said:

I'm wondering how they identified your vessel to send the RIB out. Were you broadcasting on AIS?

They're (Traffic or CG) really good at tracking you on radar once you've got their attention.

A couple weeks ago someone reported an 12" deadhead just outside of English Bay and Traffic was providing location updates because he could track the 6" of it that was out of the water on radar :O

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s permitted as an act of comity and US-Canadian diplomacy and non hostile  relations. 
 

IOW it is a privilege extended to private ppl out of appreciation that transiting can be hard without it and the Canadians aren’t relinquishing territorial claims or right to exclude. 
 

This Kiwi guy is just an idiot. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IStream said:

I'm wondering how they identified your vessel to send the RIB out. Were you broadcasting on AIS?

God no. We fly we low as possible “under the radar”.  (I don't want anyone but friends/family to know our whereabouts.)

They have black helos (seriously) and spotter planes.  
 

But the guys that first came up to us must not have spoken to the guys at the next place, as they seemed not to know of us. But b/c of Covid they’re quite  serious about keeping US/other foreign boats out of Canada unless your transit to Alaska is legit and you don’t stop anywhere in Canada.) Hell, I’d get fined big time if I went to Haida Gwaii or other water/air-access only communities up the coast like Hartley Bay, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

If you read the article, he has somewhat of a fair point about innocent passage and the status of the waters there as international vs. Canadian. As long as he stays away from other people and stays on his boat he won't be a danger to others. Now if something goes wrong and Canada has to do a SAR mission, they will rightly be quite angry.

Yeah it's a funny combination of a national government trying to enforce a prohibition that is arguably stupid and overbroad - and an individual responding to that in a way that is arguably arrogant and self-absorbed.

Sometimes you encounter this with cruisers - this conflation of the individual right to move around on the Earth with some kind of important work or mission, which of course when viewed from the outside just translates to a kind of absurd self-importance:

"STAND CLEAR! It is IMPERATIVE that I float my yacht into this harbor! I'm like Shackleton, don't you see?! I AM ON A CRITICAL PLEASURE-BOATING MISSION, people will perish and economies fail if I don't sip this beer in exactly the harbor of my choosing!"

Freedom of movement is important and often ignored - but acting like it compares with the right (even if stupidly exercised) of a nation to close its borders in a time of emergency - that's a breath-taking level of self-regard.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zonker said:

Yeah as a Canadian, Canada has always said it's not an international passage. If you are transiting through an area where the local country says you are in our jurisdiction better do what they say. He's not some diplomat arguing the point in the UN. Just another entitled cruiser who thinks the law doesn't apply to him. 

The US doesn't recognize the passage as Canadian, but still would inform Canada as a courtesy when they sent an icebreaker through (when they had a working icebreaker)! . 

The USA was the first bully nation to go through when they sent the ice breaking tanker Manhattan through in 1969.

It was an all too typical "fuck you" foreign policy act by the USA because they knew there was really nothing we could do about it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim in Halifax said:

So I assume your boat is registered in Canada? Here are the differing requirements for Canadian Registered vessels and licensed pleasure craft:

 
 

 

 

 

 

C

 

 

 

   

 

No mention of the flying the flag. However if the lads in the black zodiac didn't see a "50E" or "BC" number on the bow, or a hailing port or even a Canadian Flag at the stern, it seems pretty reasonable that they would be curious as to who you are and what you are doing, given that your track on radar would have appeared to originate from American waters. BTW there is a requirement to fly the flag on registered vessels under circumstances such as the one you described:

Flown on ships and boats

The National Flag of Canada is the proper national colours (flag of a military unit) for all Canadian ships and boats, including pleasure craft. The Canada Shipping Act states that a Canadian ship shall hoist the flag:

  • on a signal being made to her by one of Her Majesty's Canadian ships, or any ship in the service of and belonging to the Government of Canada;
  • on entering or leaving any foreign port; and
  • on entering or leaving any Commonwealth port if carrying 50 tonnes gross tonnage or upwards.

 

Yeah, registered.  I actually know my tonnage and official number, have the document onboard easily accessible, but somehow never knew a hailing port was *required*.

I’m just not keen on national flag.  But if we ever do make it up to the High Arctic you can bet I’ll have a flag then :-) :-) Maybe the Inuk flag.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

...But if we ever do make it up to the High Arctic you can bet I’ll have a flag then :-) :-) Maybe the Inuk flag.

It would be cool to fly this as a courtesy flag:

Clip Art: Flags: Nunavut B&W | abcteach

I sometime fly the Acadian Flag as a courtesy, but only the Maple Leaf on the flagstaff astern. I kinda like all the old nautical traditions. You could always fly the Red Ensign if the Maple Leaf doesn't suit you. Funny we don't have a yacht ensign like the Mercans.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, climenuts said:

They're (Traffic or CG) really good at tracking you on radar once you've got their attention.

A couple weeks ago someone reported an 12" deadhead just outside of English Bay and Traffic was providing location updates because he could track the 6" of it that was out of the water on radar :O

Amazing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Zonker said:

Yeah as a Canadian, Canada has always said it's not an international passage. If you are transiting through an area where the local country says you are in our jurisdiction better do what they say. He's not some diplomat arguing the point in the UN. Just another entitled cruiser who thinks the law doesn't apply to him. 

The US doesn't recognize the passage as Canadian, but still would inform Canada as a courtesy when they sent an icebreaker through (when they had a working icebreaker)! 

The US has another ice breaker class in the works, and an renewed interest in the arctic waters for obvious reasons.  Ya the Canadians can dispute with the US about territorial waters up there, but they'll be happy the US is there to keep the Russians from encroaching when the bulk of the ice is gone.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Why do people want to do that trip?

You've seen one ice floe, you've seen them all.

image.png.8c1c8369c498aa804ae81bbc21bc8c8c.pngimage.png.48abb02c4dd853297dd406e604947fcf.pngimage.png.d2a7abf789a46a65470009d7438d71dd.pngimage.png.8e5bcbfa0dd2c5b9e596e1010783fd04.png

Where some see singular...others see more nuance

qanuk: ‘snowflake’

kaneq:  ‘frost’

kanevvluk: ‘fine snow’

qanikcaq: ‘snow on ground’

muruaneq: ‘soft deep snow’

nutaryuk: ‘fresh snow’

pirta: ‘blizzard’

qengaruk: ‘snow bank’

qanik snow falling
aputi snow on the ground
pukak crystalline snow on the ground
aniu snow used to make water
siku ice in general
nilak freshwater ice, for drinking
qinu slushy ice by the sea

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bgytr said:

The US has another ice breaker class in the works, and an renewed interest in the arctic waters for obvious reasons.  Ya the Canadians can dispute with the US about territorial waters up there, but they'll be happy the US is there to keep the Russians from encroaching when the bulk of the ice is gone.

I might worry more about the Danes and Norwegians

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zonker said:

If you have ever tried drinking a mix of schnapps and whiskey you know how close this comes to violating the Geneva protocal on chemical weapons

Link to post
Share on other sites

When we were anchor shopping, after much research, all other things being approximately equal, we bought a Manson Supreme -- mainly because we'd rather give our money to some Maori welders than to this entitled dickweed. Seriously! That was the deciding factor: P Smith's abrasive personality. I feel good about our choice. ;)

ETA: Per Wiki, "Innocent passage concedes the coastal country's territorial sea claim, unlike freedom of navigation, which directly contests it." So Peter Smith cannot simultaneously assert indemnity under innocent passage while denying Canada's territorial claim to it. One or the other, bonehead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bgytr said:

The US has another ice breaker class in the works, and an renewed interest in the arctic waters for obvious reasons.  Ya the Canadians can dispute with the US about territorial waters up there, but they'll be happy the US is there to keep the Russians from encroaching when the bulk of the ice is gone.

I’m not sure we are doing super good at stopping the Russians from doing whatever they want these days. But hopefully we get back to a day when the US and Canada work together so well that Canadians can once again complain  “jeez they act like we’re part of the US, don’t they know we’re a separate country?” and we can both agree on giving douchebaggy entitled yachtsmen like Peter the finger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly hope when sanity returns along with the EPA and other things dealing with the environment some sort of real international treaty can be put in place to protect things up there.  The natural resource potential has all potential stake holders salivating.  The amount of money Shell dumped into drilling a couple holes and creating a PR nightmare for themselves without any real concern shows the magnitude.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Why do people want to do that trip?

You've seen one ice floe, you've seen them all.

image.png.8c1c8369c498aa804ae81bbc21bc8c8c.pngimage.png.48abb02c4dd853297dd406e604947fcf.pngimage.png.d2a7abf789a46a65470009d7438d71dd.pngimage.png.8e5bcbfa0dd2c5b9e596e1010783fd04.png

I've been there twice. I'd give anything to go back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2020 at 10:31 PM, Simon75 said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/new-zealand-yacht-cambridge-bay-nunavut-1.5698347

in short: Peter and Kiwi Roa are on a record run through the NW Passage despite a ban by the CGC / TC

 

i just hope they don't make an example of him for all the other American Idiots defying Canadian Covid restrictions.

Jerome Rand, who recently completed a solo nonstop RTW and was en route to the NWP, was turned back (by the Canadian govt) in late July up in the Labrador Sea. They told him (really), don’t come now: you can come back up here October 31 (when things freeze up or are frozen).  

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=149889913423313&id=100767391668899

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, KC375 said:

If you have ever tried drinking a mix of schnapps and whiskey you know how close this comes to violating the Geneva protocal on chemical weapons

Apparently you are unfamiliar with Sno Shoe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bplipschitz said:

Apparently you are unfamiliar with Sno Shoe.

sno-shoe-grog.jpg

And I don't plan to become familiar with the commercial version as my experiences with the collegiate one were not overly successful ...but thirty years ago I might have been more inclined

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typically the most open water was found in late September. With climate change who knows. 

Canada already has the Arctic Water Pollution Prevention Regulations for ships in that area. It's pretty strict 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 5:07 AM, Ajax said:

I've been there twice. I'd give anything to go back.

Lancaster Sound, which is now a marine protected area, is high on my bucket list to cruise and see.  You can literally see narwhals swimming, polar bears on ice floes, tens of thousands of sea birds, whales, orcas, etc.  It’s one of the most biologically rich places on earth for marine life, and very beautiful.  It’s been called the ‘Serengeti of the Arctic’.  I read about it a few years ago and thought, “man, one day...” 

See: http://lancastersound.wwf.ca/#!/home?view=65.9733|-98.2214|3||335|544

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada's coast guard and/or military SAR assets will have to save his ass if he gets into difficulty.  I think our coast guard should have a say in who goes up there right now.  These are not normal times.  That he thinks he can just go wherever he wants is the height of arrogance.  There are plenty of other places to go, he should just go somewhere else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rain Man said:

Canada's coast guard and/or military SAR assets will have to save his ass if he gets into difficulty.  I think our coast guard should have a say in who goes up there right now.  These are not normal times.  That he thinks he can just go wherever he wants is the height of arrogance.  There are plenty of other places to go, he should just go somewhere else.

Eric and Susan Hiscock never had a VHF or other transciever on their boat (this was also before EPIRBs) because they believed that going to sea for adventure was a personal and possibly risky choice - one that must not endanger the lives and property of others, should they get in trouble. They thought the temptation to call for help would be too great if they found themselves in a life-threatening situation.  If this arrogant guy is willing to 'sink or swim' on his own and not have any contact with local inhabitants, then I'd say "go for it". But he does have modern comms and it is unlikely Canada would ignore his plea for help, should he need it...so, no, stay the fuck home!.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 2:51 AM, SloopJonB said:

Why do people want to do that trip?

You've seen one ice floe, you've seen them all.

image.png.8c1c8369c498aa804ae81bbc21bc8c8c.pngimage.png.48abb02c4dd853297dd406e604947fcf.pngimage.png.d2a7abf789a46a65470009d7438d71dd.pngimage.png.8e5bcbfa0dd2c5b9e596e1010783fd04.png

Maybe you need to rent this and do it in style...started life as a Soviet ice breaker.

https://www.navisyachts.com/20190812427/navis-august-/-september-2019/icon-77m-legend.html

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 1:21 PM, Diarmuid said:

When we were anchor shopping, after much research, all other things being approximately equal, we bought a Manson Supreme -- mainly because we'd rather give our money to some Maori welders than to this entitled dickweed. Seriously! That was the deciding factor: P Smith's abrasive personality. I feel good about our choice. ;)

ETA: Per Wiki, "Innocent passage concedes the coastal country's territorial sea claim, unlike freedom of navigation, which directly contests it." So Peter Smith cannot simultaneously assert indemnity under innocent passage while denying Canada's territorial claim to it. One or the other, bonehead.

We were planning on a Rocna, except two things.

1) They moved production to China a year or two before we were buying, and ended up with some quality problems on a couple of runs.

2) That fucking guy that popped up like Beetlejuice any time the word "Anchor" showed up three times in a thread was so freaking annoying pushing the Rocna. Was that him?

We ended up with a Manson Supreme as well.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

We were planning on a Rocna, except two things.

1) They moved production to China a year or two before we were buying, and ended up with some quality problems on a couple of runs.

2) That fucking guy that popped up like Beetlejuice any time the word "Anchor" showed up three times in a thread was so freaking annoying pushing the Rocna. Was that him?

We ended up with a Manson Supreme as well.

Yep, that was him...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a friend who has been planning a human powered trip around the top. Was impressed by the Canadian CG.  They actually sent someone to check him out and do a interview see if he was nuts or for real, then they gave it their blessing.  He's obviously postponed for now.  I think they take full responsibility for the safety of anyone going through regardless of if they want help or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 6:22 PM, KC375 said:

sno-shoe-grog.jpg

And I don't plan to become familiar with the commercial version as my experiences with the collegiate one were not overly successful ...but thirty years ago I might have been more inclined

It's good in hot cocoa.  IMO it's a darned sight better than peppermint schnapps, unless we're talking Rumpelminz.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, bplipschitz said:

It's good in hot cocoa.  IMO it's a darned sight better than peppermint schnapps, unless we're talking Rumpelminz.

Well I suppose compared to Caribou (the commercial stuff is for kids) and Screech anything seems refined

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

We were planning on a Rocna, except two things.

1) They moved production to China a year or two before we were buying, and ended up with some quality problems on a couple of runs.

2) That fucking guy that popped up like Beetlejuice any time the word "Anchor" showed up three times in a thread was so freaking annoying pushing the Rocna. Was that him?

We ended up with a Manson Supreme as well.

The welding on my Rocna was not done right and the rollbar was an annoyance with my setup. I also got the letter for possible underspec steel as well.

It wasn't just him that was spamming every boat forum. He was having a running dispute with one of his competitors on every board they could find.

Do you recall who his sparring partner was? I remember one of them was sailing off Chile at the time.

I ran him and his opponent off of one small boat forum. Sold the Rocna too, replaced it with a Manson Boss (another story).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I bought a Mantus in part because the Mantus folks seemed like good people while the Rocna folks seemed like dicks. These recent Viking knock-offs of the Mantus piss me off.

I see that Mantus has a new, rollbar-less model that looks interesting. My only complaint about the Mantus is its size, both in terms of rollbar diameter and shank length. If the new model has comparable performance, I may go for it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IStream said:

Yeah, I bought a Mantus in part because the Mantus folks seemed like good people while the Rocna folks seemed like dicks. These recent Viking knock-offs of the Mantus piss me off.

I see that Mantus has a new, rollbar-less model that looks interesting. My only complaint about the Mantus is its size, both in terms of rollbar diameter and shank length. If the new model has comparable performance, I may go for it.

Viking is such a disgusting business- even their “origin” story reads like a clone of the anchor they’re copying with E European manufacturing w Israeli backing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IStream said:

These recent Viking knock-offs of the Mantus piss me off.

I gave the Viking guy a mild kicking on the SA board, when he tried to subvert Panope's video review into an unpaid ad. Doubt criticism or boycotts will change these guys' behavior, but sometimes all you can do is say "You, sir, are an ass" and not give them your money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Diarmuid said:

I gave the Viking guy a mild kicking on the SA board, when he tried to subvert Panope's video review into an unpaid ad. Doubt criticism or boycotts will change these guys' behavior, but sometimes all you can do is say "You, sir, are an ass" and not give them your money. 

“I’m a person with hobby interest and $ but no ability” lemme copy another business and manufacture it with a “friend” and try to create sales online 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

 

2) That fucking guy that popped up like Beetlejuice any time the word "Anchor" showed up three times in a thread was so freaking annoying pushing the Rocna. Was that him?

 

Found 'em. Circa 2007 Alain Poiraud (Spade anchors) and Craig Smith (Rocna) were blowing up any boat forum or board they could with their running pissing match.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 8:07 AM, Ajax said:

I've been there twice. I'd give anything to go back.

Someone who went back was Donald MacMIllan who took his schooner Bowdoin back every year for about thirty years.  It's described as "to the arctic", I think it was mostly Greenland, Labrador, and Baffin Island. 

Some time, maybe in the 1980s, some folks at Bowdoin College made a project out of making a sort of documentary out of the MacMillan's movie film. This was silent film, probably 16mm. The folks who screened this film were definitely of the opinion that when you've seen one iceflow, you've seen them all, and same for polar bears, etc. 

I noted that the weather in the film looked pretty good, and was that just because they only took pictures in good weather, and they replied, oh yeah, there was much more rain and fog than sunshine.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Autonomous said:

Found 'em. Circa 2007 Alain Poiraud (Spade anchors) and Craig Smith (Rocna) were blowing up any boat forum or board they could with their running pissing match.

That doesn't necessarily mean that both of them were bad guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 12:37 AM, KC375 said:

Where some see singular...others see more nuance

qanuk: ‘snowflake’

kaneq:  ‘frost’

kanevvluk: ‘fine snow’

qanikcaq: ‘snow on ground’

muruaneq: ‘soft deep snow’

nutaryuk: ‘fresh snow’

pirta: ‘blizzard’

qengaruk: ‘snow bank’

qanik snow falling
aputi snow on the ground
pukak crystalline snow on the ground
aniu snow used to make water
siku ice in general
nilak freshwater ice, for drinking
qinu slushy ice by the sea

...Almost as many words for "snow" as Parisiens have for "dogshit". 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Craig Smith goes by the name 'anchorsmith' on CF.... still sniffing around but doesn't seem to post anymore.

I think that part of the deal with Canada Metals Pacific was that he had to be de-barked...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2020 at 11:07 PM, Cisco said:

Craig Smith goes by the name 'anchorsmith' on CF.... still sniffing around but doesn't seem to post anymore.

I think that part of the deal with Canada Metals Pacific was that he had to be de-barked...

That sounds painful.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2020 at 1:27 PM, Autonomous said:

Found 'em. Circa 2007 Alain Poiraud (Spade anchors) and Craig Smith (Rocna) were blowing up any boat forum or board they could with their running pissing match.

i met alain here in brazil, a couple of years before he passed. what a "character"...

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ishmael said:

That sounds painful.

Comments on the video, by username csmithrocna: 

"We invented the log debarker in 1985, out of nothing. Before our tool, there was no way to remove bark from trees except your teeth, or live beavers strapped to a pole. Obviously these ways are stupid, so really our debarking solution changed the entire tree processing industry forever. Now, several 'companies' such as these Log Wizard people have come out with cheap, defective imitations of our debarker, and all them suck and don't remove bark as well and will also probably kill you. When is the imitation ever as good as the original? These 'competitors' should be ignored because they use inferior materials, are blue, and also are made by someone other than us. If you buy a Log Wizard or some other shitty copy of our debarker, you are a moron and deserve to cut your own legs off, don't come crying to us that you should have bought a RocBarker, because we told you so."

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Zonker said:

Seriously? Of course in commercial saw mills there are debarkers aplenty, well before 1985.

Ive never seen anyone debark lumber by hand so I’m scratching my head wondering where all the bark went without a debarker :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zonker said:

Seriously? Of course in commercial saw mills there are debarkers aplenty, well before 1985.

No, not at all seriously. That there is what you call a parody of Smiths patris et filii. ;) There were modified spade/plow style anchors before Rocna. Some even had rollbars. To read their website and forum postings, every anchor that came before Rocna was pure garbage. Every anchor since is an inferior and probably dangerous  ripoff of their ideas, which of course were perfectly original in every way.

One of my business rules is not to talk down the competition. I'll demonstrate my materials and methods and why I think these things are worth the extra time and expense; if customers really want to know why my cabinets cost $3000 more than Home Depot's, I will show them some differences in construction methods and hardware. But HD does what HD does, and their business model is their own affair. My affair is to build to my own standards for those customers who seek out a bespoke kitchen, a more collaborative design experience, and are willing to pay/wait for the result. Slagging off box store casework isn't useful. Maybe that's all the person can afford. It's okay.

Many creators spend a lot of time sneering at other people's product, apparently to make their own seem better by comparison. Instead of merely being better by comparison, which is a more interesting pursuit.:) 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Miffy said:

Ive never seen anyone debark lumber by hand so I’m scratching my head wondering where all the bark went without a debarker :D

Make two light parallel cuts with the tip of a chainsaw along the length of the log, just cutting through the bark, then use a spud to peel the bark up and off. Depending on the species of tree, it's either an easy job and quicker than that contraption above (once you got the hang of it), or a difficult job that makes you wish you were just cutting the log up into firewood instead. Maybe that's why Dad had us kids doing it most often... but it was better than constantly sharpening the band saw blades.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2020 at 8:42 PM, KC375 said:

If you have ever tried drinking a mix of schnapps and whiskey you know how close this comes to violating the Geneva protocal on chemical weapons

You know what lawyers call "close to violating the law?"  

Legal. 

Now shut up and pass me one of them drinks.  For litigation discovery purposes, of course.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lex Teredo said:

You know what lawyers call "close to violating the law?"  

Legal. 

Now shut up and pass me one of them drinks.  For litigation discovery purposes, of course.  

Yes, legal is anything that is not explicitly illegal.

And the longer and colder the night the less discriminating the drinker. I've been in places where the temperature reads the same in Celsius and Fahrenheit and night is measured in days rather than hours. I've seen the appeal of any mind altering substance increase as the days nights go(es) on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Diarmuid said:

One of my business rules is not to talk down the competition. I'll demonstrate my materials and methods and why I think these things are worth the extra time and expense; if customers really want to know why my cabinets cost $3000 more than Home Depot's, I will show them some differences in construction methods and hardware. But HD does what HD does, and their business model is their own affair. My affair is to build to my own standards for those customers who seek out a bespoke kitchen, a more collaborative design experience, and are willing to pay/wait for the result. Slagging off box store casework isn't useful. Maybe that's all the person can afford. It's okay.

You must seek out and watch a lovely little Canadian film called "A Simple Curve". It's about living in a small town doing high end custom woodwork, and trying to convey this to customers.  There's a line in it where the protagonist has his cabinet order cancelled for a cheaper competitor and bemoans "But Jim uses particle board..."

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zonker said:

You must seek out and watch a lovely little Canadian film called "A Simple Curve". It's about living in a small town doing high end custom woodwork, and trying to convey this to customers.  There's a line in it where the protagonist has his cabinet order cancelled for a cheaper competitor and bemoans "But Jim uses particle board..."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites