Port of Humboldt Bustling With Activity
To hear it from our very own Harbor Commission- dude, Richard Marks, the Port of Humboldt is bustling with activity- ships coming and going- a 61% increase in activity since 1991. You could have fooled me. Then again, despite being able to see the bay from Trinity Street, on the south side of our house, I don't pay much attention to it nowadays.
When I used to fish the north jetty, I saw regular incoming and outgoing ships, of course, but not anymore.
I've wrote here before of being skeptical regarding plans for an east/west railroad as I don't think our bay is big and deep enough to handle enough traffic to make a rail line economically feasible. Maybe I'm wrong about that with traffic in and out of the bay increasing with current harbor infrastructure and no rail line?
Sad thing is, many from The Left up here see increased commerce as a bad thing. You have to wonder if it becomes known commerce is picking up, some of them might try to stop it?
posted by Fred Mangels @ 7:16 AM
11 comments
11 Comments:
Sadder thing is, many from the Right wipe their asses and eat with their right hand.
Geez, Fred, will you ever get over this, Left-bad/Right-good, kick you're constantly on?
Either/or... For us or agin us (remember that one?) Up/Down.
This whole post you concocted is a rambling incoherent mess: Marks says port activity is up; you used to watch, didn't see much when you did and now, not even sure if that's true anymore, or, maybe not; skeptical of east/west RR, port not deep enough, but, again, might be wrong; in any or either case Left is against commerce. Period. That's quite a lot of illogical and incompatible thoughts strung together to arrive at what, exactly?
I'm not sure I ever wrote The Right was good, although I might have alluded to feeling them more responsible.
As far as being against commerce, Richard Marks is one lefty who isn't against commerce. Perhaps our own Julie Timmons as well, but all the complaints over a potential east/west rail line I read the very first day the issue arose in Lost Coast Outpost, were from lefties that seemed to be grasping at straws for reasons to oppose the rail line. No doubt in my mind they would have remained silent or supported it had the idea been of a tourist train.
I don't think it's just "lefties" who oppose the East West proposed train line. It's anyone who has taken basic physics, knows the weight of loaded trains and can calculate the grades involved in the up and over, up and over, up and over plus all the downs to go with those ups. Unfortunately, like teleportation terminals taking stuff from up there to down here - at present - it's not within the abilities of technology to violate the laws of physics.
Sorry, reality bites.
Seems to me they complained on Lost Coast Outpost just about the idea of an east/west line. My complaint was whether they should pay so much for the studies to find out if it's feasible.
At least one complaint was over the added truck traffic that more shipping through the port would create.
Percentages mean nothing without the base figure. Are they saying that 2 ships are docking now instead of just one?
Fred, Fred Fred....
In the LoCO (and other forums) I have been arguing against the railroad boondoggles for years. Never once have I (or anyone else) argued that the East/West railroad is bad because we would be making money.
Quite the opposite.
I know you have read our arguments; and I have no idea how you come to the conclusion that anti-choo-choo equals anti-commerce. It doesn't. It never did.
I'm all for commerce. I'm all for everybody getting a piece of the big juicy pie, living comfortable lives, sending kids to college and having dignified retirements. The East/West railroad will do none of those things for us. The economics, plain and simple, doom this plan.
You want to make this a Liberal versus Conservative argument? If you do, you are not taking part in the real debate. You are just pushing a straw man argument that no one against the railroad is making.
Is there a way to find out how much revenue was brought into the Harbor district with all these ships coming in?
I wonder to how those numbers are made. Are there more ships or just more tonnage going in and out?
"Are there more ships or just more tonnage going in and out?"
I don't know. I've maintained for some time the bay can't handle very many ships, especially the larger ones nowadays that make shipping less expensive.
I figure probably only one ship can enter or leave the bay at a time due to the width of the entrance, and that would be limited to high tide, or twice a day. Once in the bay, there's very limited room to maneuver. You only have the area from the entrance to the Samoa bridge. The area between those two is mostly mud flats at anything close to low tide, with just a few channels for ships to use.
It seems to me it would be too congested with only a couple ships in the bay for any other activity. Thus I don't see how it could get the traffic to generate the revenue to pay for an east/ west rail line, or make that rail line worth paying for.
Uri: The Harbor Surcharge fees for 2015 was $53,760. For 2016 it will be $76,200. If all goes as expected in 2017 the Harbor District will collect $156,000. This is a good trend. Upgrades by California Redwoods chip facility and growing log exports is pushing the tonnage levels up.
Everybody does not deserve a piece of the big juicy pie, whatever flavor, fruit, veggie or meat.
Evil deserves a swift kick up the ass.
Revenue is not a sound figure to satisfy data for a port in a cost environment such as we have.
Products and services totals are more reflective of the "movements commercially".
Post a Comment
<< Home