Page 40

LETTERS that they did. I then asked if the contaminants entered said trap from yard workers and boatowners alike. I was told that they did. Gravelle's claims that too many organizations are watching them, and they're afraid of a lawsuit, so they don't want to take any chances. What's this mean to me? Farewell Gravelle's! Does anyone else know of this practice being enacted at other yards? For me, half the fun of boat ownership is being able to work on your own boat. And frankly, I don't trust the workmanship at many yards. That's why I choose to do the work on my own boat. Mike Coleman Latitude, Santana 22 Monterey

MARINA AMENITIES • Full service harbor master's office • Waterfront dining • Free WiFi access • Guest facilities with restrooms, showers and dressing rooms

• Water sport rentals • Surveillance and electronic controlled gates • Individual water hook ups • Garbage and recycling disposal

Sausalito's Finest Marina 85 LIBERTY SHIP WAY, #205, SAUSALITO, CA 94965

415•331•5550 FAX 415•331•8523 www.schoonmakermarina.com Page 40 •

Latitude 38

• March, 2014

Mike — The sad truth is that boatyards have legitimate reasons to fear lawsuits, both by organizations that really care about the environment, and sometimes by individuals or groups who seem primarily motivated by the money they can extract from the yards. Get a Northern California boatyard owner drunk enough to loosen his tongue and you'll get an earful about threats of environmental lawsuits. Some yards also limit or restrict the right of owners to work on their boats because of problems with their insurance policies. Some yards have always prohibited or limited the kind of work owners can do on the exterior of their boats, others have allowed it on a case-by-case basis, and a few yards have let owners do pretty much whatever they want. ⇑⇓A GOVERNMENT AGENCY SHOULD DO SOMETHING The January 23 San Francisco Chronicle had a report about a 20-ft powerboat being partially sunk near Candlestick Pt. According to the article by Vivian Ho, there are many government agencies that regulate and oversee the Bay, but none with the authority and/or means to remove the wreck. The reporter mentioned that the Coast Guard said they couldn't do anything unless there was an environmental hazard, and they believed all the oil and fuel had already leaked out. San Francisco Recreation & Parks said they couldn't help. What about the Army Corp of Engineers? The Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)? What about the County of San Francisco? Why isn't there some government agency on San Francisco Bay to address the common and recurring issue of partially sunken or derelict boats on the Bay? I wrote to Nancy Pelosi. Maybe she can help. Bruce Adornato Pelagic Magic, True North 38 South Beach Bruce — You ever hear of the expression, 'So many lawyers, so little justice?' We think the same thing applies to government. The more and bigger government agencies there are, the less quickly and efficiently things get done. And the more each one says, "It's not our job." There is a state fund to pay for the disposal of derelict boats, but the boats have to be brought to boatyards, not left to sink. ⇑⇓THE FEBRUARY COVER WOULD BE ILLEGAL IN THE US Going onto the Latitude website, we saw the cover of the February Latitude, which featured an interesting shot of Craig Shaw of the Portland-based Columbia 43 Adios at the masthead. We're curious how the shot was taken. Are we correct in thinking that the Wanderer has become quite proficient with Latitude's Phantom quad drone and GoPro camera, and

Profile for Latitude 38 Media, LLC

Latitude 38 March 2014  

The March 2014 issue of the West's premier sailing and marine magazine.

Latitude 38 March 2014  

The March 2014 issue of the West's premier sailing and marine magazine.