Local knowledge needed

H

Hunkydory

New member
On a recent thread I started wanting information for pre planning a trip to Prince William Sound in Alaska one of the suggestions given was heed the chart warnings on area's that say "local knowledge needed" I believe due to many uncharted rocks especially in areas of uplift from l964 earthquake. Kinda wondered what others do if wanting to see an area where cruising guide, coastal pilot or chart warns of something like this. Before cruising an area I try to gain any local knowledge on an area I can, such as talking to the fisherman on the docks who work the area, other cruisers and commercial operators, cruising guides and of course knowledge from other C-brats, but what do YOU do if the knowledge is just not available and its an area you would really like to see and explore or go to for great fishing or for other personally important activity.

Jay
 
When we take Journey On to a new area we certainly look for local knowledge. I usually get that from a cruising guide and here is one for Prince William Sound: http://www.alaska.net/~awss/CruisingGuides.html . Updated to 1998 and I haven't heard of any disasters since then.

As for submerged rocks, the C-map charts we've used havent missed. I don't see how they do it, but they've got Judy convinced. I assume Navionics is as good, but no experience
 
Steve, Its not hard to take your suggestion :thup due to it being a built in part of my nature, but I'll leave the write the guide to someone else. When I do want to go somewhere where its reported that local knowledge is needed and I can't find anyone that can give me the knowledge, then it won't stop me from going if I think we're up to it. If all is known about an area and one is just following the routes on a chart where you know all hazards are marked, that may be cruising, but I wouldn't call it exploring, which is my favorite thing to do whether on land or water.

Journey on, thanks for the link, but I do already have that cruise guide and it seems to be a good one. From the information I've been able to gather so far there is no chart that accurately marks all the hazardous rocks in the PWS. Even before the l964 quake it was an area known for many unmarked pinnacle type rock formations that were just under the surface and extremely hazardous. Then during the quake a good portion of it above and below water raised from a few feet to slightly over 30. while the rest dropped somewhat less.

Jay
 
Jay, have you downloaded the FREE NOAA ENC (vector) charts covering PWS? I just looked at them NOAA ENC Chartsand they go to great detail. At least they would serve as a first cut at identifying the danger areas. Between the written word and electronic charts, I've been able to get into (and out of) some shaky places. Talking to people with local knowledge is great; gets you pointed in the right direction, but then you need the charts for details.

My great example is when we were waiting for the Nanimo ferry this summer, a guy told me where to launch the boat and store the truck in Pt. Alberni. In 5 min. that guy told me where to look, but it took a lot of talking in Pt. Alberni to pin it down.

If you want to look at the charts, NOAA has an on-line viewer: NOAA ENC Viewer

Boris
 
Thanks for chart info Boris, never have downloaded any of the free NOAA charts. When we bought the C-Dory in 2003 knew at that point we needed charts to go the places we planned on taking the boat, so started right out with the Nobletec software and charts with small Garmin and Lowrance gps backup. At that time didn't know about free charts and then even if free would have gone with the Nobletech anyway because of great software and seamless chart viewing along with tides and current overlay. Have since went with an additional Garmin 276C with their Blue Charts. After our 2007 Alaska cruise where we had problems with both the computer and Nobletech and the Garmin 276C have decided to carry an additional Garmin 545. I checked out the free charts and you're right about them being good, but I don't think any better then what I already have.

No matter how good the charts there are places still where they don't cover all the hazards. Also even if the chart is totally accurate in its marking of hazards I've been in places where the gps mark of where the boat is on the chart is not accurate such as the border area's to the ocean like the salt water lakes and their inlets. One of these places is Sister and Anna Lakes accessed from the west coast of Chichagof Island between Sitka and Pelican, Alaska. When accessing these kind of places I've found past shallow water boating experience, eyesight and depth finder to be the most useful tools to avoid trouble. I'm more inclined to think the chart points you in the right direction with local knowledge adding additional details similar to but even more detailed then the coastal pilot.

One thing for sure, as stated, with what charts you use in addition to your ability you have got your self in and out of some shaky places and I respect your opinion.

Jay
 
Jay, I certainly agree with you. The charts will get you there, but careful navigation is essential. Lookout and depth sounder is part of that careful navigation.

When we had our sailboat (with the 6' keel) on the East Coast (the right one?) I got stuck quite a bit, since the depth sounder was through the hull. By the time it read 6' you were stuck. So now I have an Interphase forward looking depth sounder. Works well at slow speeds, under 10 knts. I'm sure that any good depth sounder should serve well.

Boris
 
Boris,

Would appreciate more information on yours or if you know what's now available in forward looking depth sounders. Remember looking into it after our first summer with the Hunkydory thinking it would be just the ticket for our future cruises. At that time like your sailboat had to see through the hull and mounted very forward in the boat and the reviews weren't very good on their real time use. I take it they now have ones that are not mounted through the hull and see far enough ahead for useful navigation info. In order to really be useful to me I think it would need to show well the obstacle's near the surface at least 50 feet ahead of the boat bow with any further accurate view ahead being even better. What is the cost range?

Sure don't mind getting off topic here and would appreciate more input from others with experience or knowledge about the latest in the forward looking sounders.
 
I love to explore and poke my my nosie in places it does not belong. I read the maps. I read the guides. I ask the local questions, then I just go do it. my wife has asked me several time how do you know if you can make it thru there? my answer is always the same "when i do" I have ran aground , very slowly , several time with out damage to the boat, but I know where I can and cant go.

The one other area that I do not hear talked about alot is reading the water. I grew up on small to mediun lakes in small outboard boats with no electronic, not even a depth finder. The only knowalage is the one you go get your self. I have found a lot of my best fishing spots in those days in the middle of winter during low water. info I kept in my mind for summer. Now as for the coastal areas we all travel the most. I learned to read the water just as I did the lake and the rivers. If I am in the SJ and see a area that is pushing up a lot of smooth water to the surface then I dont mind traveling over that because I know from my electronic that its a deep reef that makes that type of water in the current. On the other hand if its not smooth and is more like a river then I know that its a shallow reef. I use this experance to read the water when the map info is thin on details. You will never hit a rock if you stay in the middle and wide of shore and the markers, but you will never never learn to read water like that. current is a good freind because it shows you where things are.
 
I bought an older model interphase sounder , a Probe, a few samples of which they list here:Interphase sonar. Search the internet for a better price. They aren't exactly cheap, but well worth it.

I used the transome mount, and it works well at speeds below 10 knts. Above that there's too much water noise forward to give a clear reading, though one get a general idea. I like it and it has helped. As you mention, the chart only gets you to the general area, after that we use the depth sounder and someone on the bow. Between the two, haven't hit anything yet.


I will say that we were in a small cove on the North Channel of Lake Huron, and the depth sounder allowed us to follow the 4' contour into a really neat anchorage. I was amazed at the accuracy of the C-Map chart, and Judy was satisfied with the depth sounder.

Boris
 
Appreciate the info on the sonar, Boris. Am going to think over whether it's worth that much money to me or not. Seems like a real improvement in a electronic navigational aid with only draw back being over relience on it and perhaps not doing a good eye's on water read too. I think most of us who enjoy and spend considerable boating time in the shallow water area's have like Tom learned to read the water. Without my time spent on canoe and small RIB learning to read the rivers would never have attempted to take the C-Dory up and down the Yukon River from Carmacks to Whitehorse when I was advised by a guy who had jet boated that area not to and I would never make if I tried in the C-Dory. Good short description made by Tom on how he learned and now reads the water. Would only add color variations are very helpful too, guess that could be considered a given. One way I have found to learn how to read the water in rocky ocean areas close to shore without endangering the boat in the process is to find a spot on the shore where you can sit and watch the tides do their cycle and see how the waves and currents react to the rocks at different depths under the surface in the varying currents and wave action.

Jay
 
My father installed the forward looking sonar on his boat but I have not had a chance to use it. It looks good on line and on the booth at the seattle boat show . I would like to see how good it is at tracking schools of pink and silvers ,both of which school fairly tight.
 
In PWS the water is generally very clear. In addition to watching the depth sounder if you are in shallow water someone standing on the bow can protect you when going into places like Hidden Bay on Culross or Marsha Bay on Knight Island. I have had far more problems with deadheads in the Sound that unmarked rocks. A sounder doesn't give you much warning of those. I have hit deadheads near lower passage just N of Knight Island on two occasions. One was a nearly 100 foot log with its butt resting on bottom and its top about a foot deep. A good reason to stay in deep water given the opportunity.
 
Back
Top