False Ducks, Timber Island and Pigeon Island.

[Tetepare]

Make sure you have family and friends who know about your travel, particularly return time/ date.

Losing a boat blown ashore on Timber Island is one thing. Sitting there for a week drinking guano spoiled water and trying to eat gulls is another.

I admire your drive, and I too like to visit remote places (hence my user name). There is something beautiful, peaceful, and serene about a few hours or days of isolation, surrounded by nature. But don't be cavalier about it.

[Ungvar]

No kidding, I haven't made a post in 3 months because I was tired of how nasty and condescending some of the members on this forum are. I had a legitimate question about making landfall on a couple of islands, figured id make contributions on two other threads (it only makes sense to try give a little if your going to ask for help).

2 out of those 3 threads I was pounced on, one immediately for not being in tidal waters and not knowing what tides are (inspite of the 22.5 foot tidal range on the lower St Lawrence). Then this guy who for some reason assumes he is less likely to get into trouble sailing the Lake Ontario 300 which has a long and well established history of needing Coast Guard Rescue assistance than me cruising around at 3 knots minding my own business. AND he for some reason assumes he pays more taxes then me and has made a greater contribution to the country then me. Who knows, maybe I'm a veteran? I certainly didn't say I wasn't.

The real cost of a Coast Guard tow job, if one were to be staged would be fuel costs for their 733 out of Kingston. $100. They wouldn't pay over time for a tow job, nor would they prioritize the call over a more serious rescue.

I think it's safe to assume if I own a 35 yacht, I pay at least $100 a year I'm income tax.

[Ungvar]

2010, Lake Ontario 300, LO300, ends on first day for Black Diamond - Blogging aboard Black Diamond!


Lets see here, 2010 LO 300, 5 dismastings, 2 boat capsizes, 1 boat sunk, broken ribs.


Oh ya, me working my way into an anchorage at a knot and a half with a lead line is much riskier than this race.

[Dave Lochner]

Originally Posted by Ungvar

2010, Lake Ontario 300, LO300, ends on first day for Black Diamond - Blogging aboard Black Diamond!


Lets see here, 2010 LO 300, 5 dismastings, 2 boat capsizes, 1 boat sunk, broken ribs.


Oh ya, me working my way into an anchorage at a knot and a half with a lead line is much riskier than this race.

In this year's Lake Ontario 300 one of the solo sailors ran aground in the area you are planning to visit.

The bottom around PE Point, the False Ducks and Main Duck is typically shale with large boulders. The bottom may be 8-10 feet deep and then suddenly there is a 5 ft high boulder the size of a small car sitting in front of you.

[Ungvar]

Okay, thanks for the tip on bottom type, I sail in the area frequently, I've just never made landfall on the 3 islands mentioned.

A solo racer in the 300 is doing something fundamentally different from me. He is racing and therefore trying to go fast. I am approaching an unknown Anchorage at idle or slower. He likely had a fin keel, I have a full keel nearly a foot wide and can easily survive a bump at that speed if it happens. My rudder and prop are well protected.

If he ran aground in the area at any kind of speed, then I would wager he plotted his course much to close to an island or over a shoal. A $20 chart and carefully plotting might have saved him the grounding.

I already have a chart. As previously mentioned there are several deep water shipping channels in the area. There is a major aggregate Port in Picton, vessels of 20' draft visit Kingston often and the St Lawrence Seaway runs a couple miles from Main Duck. Channels in the area are extremely well marked, so navigating in the general area is pretty straightforward. Approaching my islands is my only concern.

Tet, made an excellent point about letting my family know where I'm going, in addition, I do where a waterproof VHF on my PFD, which is always worn when single handing.

Drinking bird poop doesn't sound the least bit fun, I would like to avoid that.

But this doom and gloom about touching a rock at a knot and a half really doesn't concern me, it's something I definitely try to avoid, but it just isn't that big of a deal if it happens.

[30yearslater]

I'm following this conversation intently as I am mulling over a trip up to the east end around Labor Day. Thinking about looping Galloo for a non stop cruise from Point Breeze and back. You are giving me some ideas for next season. Keep it going as I want to know everything about the area prior to arrival.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

What a jerky thing to say. You were doing so well with useful info, and then you just have to tack on this moralizing bit of crap. No real boater I have ever met would express such sentiments. Boaters help boaters, period.


Why go fast, when you can go slow

Tired of people trying to save a few bucks on safety, meanwhile
putting others at risk. We have repaired or towed a boat in distress almost every year of the last 20. Almost all could have been easily avoided.

[Ungvar]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

Tired of people trying to save a few bucks on safety, meanwhile
putting others at risk. We have repaired or towed a boat in distress almost every year of the last 20. Almost all could have been easily avoided.

Are you concerned about my safety or are the president of a company that specialises in boat upgrades? Been a slow month? The tax man been cutting into your bottom line?
The biggest problem with the yachting industry is the concerted effort of the industry to sell people who dont know any better a bunch of junk they don't need.

Check the TC small vessel regs, show me where it says I need a depth sounder? Check commercial regs and show me where it says anybody needs a depth sounder? It isn't there is it? So Transport Canada and therefore the Coast Guard seem to consider my level of risk well within reasonable limits.

Because Rambling Rod, president of acme boat upgrades says I need one, I need one? I don't think so buddy.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Ungvar

Are you concerned about my safety or are the president of a company that specialises in boat upgrades? Been a slow month? The tax man been cutting into your bottom line?
The biggest problem with the yachting industry is the concerted effort of the industry to sell people who dont know any better a bunch of junk they don't need.

Check the TC small vessel regs, show me where it says I need a depth sounder? Check commercial regs and show me where it says anybody needs a depth sounder? It isn't there is it? So Transport Canada and therefore the Coast Guard seem to consider my level of risk well within reasonable limits.

Because Rambling Rod, president of acme boat upgrades says I need one, I need one? I don't think so buddy.

Business is awesome.

Whether you have a depth instrument has no bearing on Sheen Marine.

This is obviously a personal post. I am obligated by forum rules to declare I am a marine service provider. If I wasn't, it wouldn't change anything.

Yes, to concerned about your safety. Actually, more concerned about the safety of other boaters obligated to assist if you run aground as a result of your decision not to properly equip your vessel.

24000 lb boat and no depth instrument?

$100 cost for a COMRA rescue mission?

Here's a link.

Lowrance Elite 3X Fish Finder | Canadian Tire

I won't personally benefit one bit if you install one of these.

The boating regulations cover the MINIMUM LEGAL REQUIREMENTS and clearly state that. Just because one isn't legally required to have a depth sounder on a 24000 pound boat that frequents shoal waters, doesn't mean that it isn't prudent to have one.

[1000 islands]

I have been to Main Duck just the one time a number of years ago, but if my memory serves Main Duck has hundreds if not thousands of snakes.

So if you have any fear, be careful.

[Ungvar]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

Business is awesome.

Whether you have a depth instrument has no bearing on Sheen Marine.

This is obviously a personal post. I am obligated by forum rules to declare I am a marine service provider. If I wasn't, it wouldn't change anything.

Yes, to concerned about your safety. Actually, more concerned about the safety of other boaters obligated to assist if you run aground as a result of your decision not to properly equip your vessel.

24000 lb boat and no depth instrument?

$100 cost for a COMRA rescue mission?

Here's a link.

Lowrance Elite 3X Fish Finder | Canadian Tire

I won't personally benefit one bit if you install one of these.

The boating regulations cover the MINIMUM LEGAL REQUIREMENTS and clearly state that. Just because one isn't legally required to have a depth sounder on a 24000 pound boat that frequents shoal waters, doesn't mean that it isn't prudent to have one.

Non sense, a depth sounder is an aid to navigation not a piece of safety equipment. What are you going to mandate onto my boat next? ECDIS, RADAR, Side Scan SONAR?

Where is the empirical evidence that suggests depth sounders make navigation safer?

Only a very high end depth sounder can provide any meaningful information with regards to depth ahead of the Vessel.

Is your argument that somebody wondering around aimlessly following EC and Depth readings at any less risk of grounding then somebody who carefully plots routes and enters unknown waters with vigilance.

The dude mentioned in the LO 300 that grounded above, did he have an echo sounder? Would he have plotted his course so close to shoals had he not had EC and Depth, or would he have reduced speed and or given areas of known danger a wider birth?

CHS produces excellent charts, if the chart says your standing into dangerous water, it's dangerous water regardless of the presence of a depth sounder looking straight down.

Is the guy staring at often inaccurate depth soundinger and EC less likely to ground then a person moving at a safe speed and watching the surface and water colour and watching his transit lines? If so, do you have evidence to support this opinion?

Me thinks your getting navigation aids, labour saving devices and safety muddled up.

If your going to cut somebody down and call them cheap and impudent for not doing things your way, let's see some evidence supporting your claims.

Prudence has nothing to do with what toys you have on board, prudence is a reflection of how you use the equipment and information you do have.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Ungvar

Non sense, a depth sounder is an aid to navigation not a piece of safety equipment. What are you going to mandate onto my boat next? ECDIS, RADAR, Side Scan SONAR?

Where is the empirical evidence that suggests depth sounders make navigation safer?

Only a very high end depth sounder can provide any meaningful information with regards to depth ahead of the Vessel.

Is your argument that somebody wondering around aimlessly following EC and Depth readings at any less risk of grounding then somebody who carefully plots routes and enters unknown waters with vigilance.

The dude mentioned in the LO 300 that grounded above, did he have an echo sounder? Would he have plotted his course so close to shoals had he not had EC and Depth, or would he have reduced speed and or given areas of known danger a wider birth?

CHS produces excellent charts, if the chart says your standing into dangerous water, it's dangerous water regardless of the presence of a depth sounder looking straight down.

Is the guy staring at often inaccurate depth soundings and EC less likely to ground then a person moving at a safe speed and watching the surface and water colour and watching his transit lines less likely to ground? If so, do you have evidence to support this opinion?

Me thinks your getting navigation aids, labour saving devices and safety muddled up.

If your going to cut somebody down and call them cheap for not doing things your way, let's see some evidence supporting your claims.

Prudence has nothing to do with what toys you have on board, prudence is a reflection of how you use the equipment and information you do have.

A depthsounder is a navigation tool, that when used properly, can contribute to navigation accuracy, and therefore safety.

Not equipping a vessel with a reasonable level of navigation equipment is not prudent.

A chart can be wrong. A chart may be correct but a fix may be wrong. A chart could be lost or damaged. A depthsounder could save the day.

A $139 fishfinder clearly shows bottom contour, depth trend, and bottom consistency, great information for the prudent navigator.

I have never suggested that an expensive forward scanning sonar is required to be prudent.

For a 24000 pound boat, I can't even believe we are having this discussion.

Is there a good reason NOT to have some form of depth instrument on a boat this size in shoal waters?

[MoondanceSaga35]

Originally Posted by Ungvar

Hey guys, just looking for local knowledge, Eastern Lake Ontario.

Does any one know if there is a safe anchorage for a 35 ft boat, 5ft draft adjacent to False Duck, Timber Island or Pigeon Island?

I am solo sailing the first two weeks of September and would like to visit each location.

I have good ground tackle, but my electric windlass is busted, so less than 20 feet of water is good. I have no depth sounder but I do have a good lead line.

I would also like to know if there is anything worth seeing at the meteor crater SW of Wolfe Island.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

[MoondanceSaga35]

Originally Posted by MoondanceSaga35

Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm with u all the way on that brother ur abso-fraken-lutly 100% correct on this one pal.

Right on ♈️ 💪🏾 🎪

[Ungvar]

Okay, thanks guys, I think I have the info I need. Thank you to those who shared first hand knowledge and observations of Pigeon, False Duck and Timber.

It sounds like Timber is doable, the other two I'll have to take a closer look at. I'm going to unsubscribe from this thread and CF again.

Hopefully I'll see some of you on the water.

Cheers.