|
CURRENT ISSUES
Last year, the Michigan Shallow Harbor Coalition secured millions of dollars for dredging recreational harbors by working with its members of Congress and state agencies. Ohio was not prepared to move ahead with any projects and did not take advantage of stimulus spending.
In light of the situation, stakeholders formed an Ohio Chapter for the Great Lakes Small Harbors Coalition to represent dredging interests. The first meeting was held Aug. 5 in Port Clinton and included the following presentations:
- Kathy Griffin’s PowerPoint with background on USACE projects
- Frank Lichtkoppler’s PowerPoint about shallow harbor economic impacts
- Jim Weakley’s PowerPoint about the dredging crisis
- Chuck May’s PowerPoint about the Great Lakes Small Harbors Coalition
Additionally, Frank Lichtkoppler and the Ohio Sea Grant office are developing an Ohio Chapter website to complement the Great Lakes Small Harbors Coalition’s site (http://www.miseagrant.umich.edu/harbors/).
After the meeting, Frank put together a few “take-home” points that should be followed-up on:
- The USACE needs to know about local small harbor needs and conditions. For example they have only 5 charter captains working out of West Harbor in their West Harbor fact sheet.
- The Ohio River is receiving a much larger share of USACE funding than the Great Lakes. The USACE regional HQ for the Ohio River/Great Lakes is in Cincinnati.
- Commercial Navigation and Recreational Navigation interests in the Great Lakes are willing to (and must) work together for harbor Operations & Maintenance funding. There are 139 federally authorized commercial and recreational harbors on the Great Lakes. Small draft harbors bring local jobs and votes to the table.
- The small harbors must clearly identify where the highest priority needs are.
- There is a systemic problem in communicating Great Lakes needs to Congress. Citizens must know who handles what issues in the senator or congressperson’s office. (Talk to the right person to get your ideas across.) Have specific recommendations for projects you want to accomplish. (Do not just ask for a bunch of money. Do your homework.) Have the regional priorities set. (How will they impact my constituents?)
- There is a great need for education, collaboration and advocacy. OHSG can help with education and collaboration.
- There needs to be a passion, organization and action to get the issue of Great Lakes dredging allocated the funding needed to do the work. We will see if someone from the private sector will step up and lead the charge. The MI folks have set the example and obtained $6,000,000 for dredging their small harbors. They are willing to share their experience and want to make this a Great Lakes wide effort.
- Legislation to change the way the USACE determines cost/benefit rates for recreational dredging may be needed.
- There is a surplus in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund that is used to reduce the budget deficit.
- There is a minimum amount of material that has to be dredged for the USACE to economically dredge a harbor. Mobilization costs are in the $200,000 range.
- There may be opportunities for us to gather information to assist LEMTA and BAO in getting action on small harbor maintenance issues.
- Ken Alvey (LEMTA, BAO) will be working on some follow up action items. There is a draft resolution of support for the Great Lakes Small Harbors Coalition that they would like to get signed by local port authorities, local cities, towns and counties. Meeting participants were encouraged to get resolution s of support and send them to Chuck May in MI of Ken Alvey.
For more information see:
www.miseagrant.umich.edu/harbors
www.ramphmtf.org
www.lcaships.com
|
