Boatnerd Discussion Forum

I still do not understand the reason for the retirement of the Algontario. In 2004 she had extensive steel work done. What happened?

[quote="Guest]Were the others you cited all built to the same specifications and same limited life span as some other lakers that are slated for scrapping? Are you comparing apples to apples?[/quote]


It is hard to get exact comparisons. However both the [i]Kathryn Spirit[/i] (ex-[i]Menominee[/i]) and the [i]Catherine Desgagnes[/i] (ex-[i]Gosforth[/i] (a), [i]Thorold[/i] (b)) were built in the 1960s to Saltwater standards, so they may be more strongly built. On the other hand, both of them, especially the [i]Kathryn Spirit[/i], have had considerably more exposure to Saltwater than the Canadian Lakers destined for he scrapheap.

The [i]Canadian Provider[/i] which was worth repairing last year, is much like the [i]Canadian Leader[/i] or [i]Miner[/i]. So is the [i]Algocape[/i], which is still sailing. The [i]J.W. Shelley[/i] (ex-[i]Algocen[/i]), was worth repairing, and except for her Fairbanks-Morse engines, is an exact sister to the [i]Algocape[/i], and very similar to the [i]Canadian Miner[/i] (which also has F-M engines). The destined-for-scrap [i]Algontario[/i] is the sister of the [i]Cedarglen[/i] which often makes Seaway Trips, and which CSL is running profitably, and has mentioned no plans to retire her. The [i]Canadian Navigator[/i] is still going strong, while her sister, the [i]Canadian Prospector[/i] is to be scrapped. That these ships, still running with some worth expending large repair expenses on, are so similar to those slated to be scrapped, is what makes me suspect the decision to scrap those ships.

Is there any information on the Cedarglen concerning her potential longevity? I've been trying to catch her in the canal this season and really just want to know if its a safe bet she'll fit out next season. Last of the old Hall fleet still operating on the lakes.

[quote="bhale849"]...However, the [i]Catherine Desgagnes, Quebecois, Montrealais/i] - and in long-term layup - the [i]Kathryn Spirit[/i] and [i]Wolf River[/i] have also had extensive exposure to salt water and are viable carriers. Also, the [i]Canadian Provider[/i] and [i]Algorail[/i] received major repairs last year, and are as old and have endured the same rough treatment as the ships slated for scrap. [/quote]

Were the others you cited all built to the same specifications and same limited life span as some other lakers that are slated for scrapping? Are you comparing apples to apples?

I realize that these ships are, or are getting, old. I also realize that Seaway trips and salt water are hard on these ships. However, the [i]Catherine Desgagnes, Quebecois, Montrealais/i] - and in long-term layup - the [i]Kathryn Spirit[/i] and [i]Wolf River[/i] have also had extensive exposure to salt water and are viable carriers. Also, the [i]Canadian Provider[/i] and [i]Algorail[/i] received major repairs last year, and are as old and have endured the same rough treatment as the ships slated for scrap. All this makes me feel that part of the reason for the scrappings is to pressure Ottawa.
Also, the shipping firms claim that the necessary ship-building skills don't exist in Lakes yards. I don't know if that is true. However, I do know that if all the new ships are built in foreign yards, by the time Canadian ship-builders are called upon to build another Laker, those specialized skills will have disappeared.

It must be frustrating to ship owners to have no clear decision from the feds on the tariff issue.
One other factor is that all the big 3 owners know there is money to be made with self-unloaders, when the US economy rebounds, but this is on deep sea routes.
They need the flexibility to run word-wide and Seaway/Lakes with these ships, but the aft sections of most of the existing ships are barely worth refitting for deep sea.
I imagine Algoma/UL are better off without the old Algoport stern (assuming insurance paid off)- a new after section will last a long time. A rebuilt one may not last as long as the forebody, even though it has a brand new engine.

you make and interesting point. im not sure what ULS and Algoma are thinking now. i know algoma recently brought in three of their salt water vessels that were flagged outside of canada, had them re-flagged and had their cranes removed off the decks. so essentially they added three straight deck, bulk carriers capable of running on the lakes. algoma is also expanding its salt water fleets with something like 10 new ships. but i looks like everyone is waiting for the decision on that tariff so decide the fate of all its vessels. the agawa canyon and canadian. prospector? are officially done. as for the rest, i think their fates await the tariff decision

The number of ships reaching the point where they're well past their intended lifespans is far higher than it was 15, 10, or even 5 years ago when a lot of the work being mentioned was carried out. The yard capacity available to do such work appears to have diminished. The cost of such work has likely increased, and at the same time age of the vessels available to be renovated has gone up and their condition has deteriorated, so the economics are different now than back in the 1990s or early 2000s. On top of that the demand for cargo to be carried by Canadian fleets has bottomed out in the past few years.

Given all of this it seems pretty doubtful that scrapping all of these ships is a tactic intended to pressure the government into rescinding the vessel import tarriff. What seems more likely is that the Canadian fleet has gotten to a point where either the import tarriff is removed or the fleet shrinks drastically. The cost of building new ships in Canada or doing all of the needed work on existing ones in Canadian yards seems to have reached a point where it is greater than the profit that the companies could safely expect to generate over the available financing periods.

I'm not trying to create a lot of controversy here, to me it seems like the Canadians are in a big hurry to scrap a lot of ships? Could this be a way of pressuring Ottawa to rescind the import duty on foreign-built ships?

after all, ULS was willing to re-engine the [i]Canadian Progress[/i], do a stern-swap of ships with differing beams to create the [i]Canadian Transfer[/i], equipt the [i]Canadian Navigator[/i] with self-unloading machinery, give the [i]John D. Leitch[/i] a new midbody. Canada SS Line was willing to give 4 of their ships new forebodies (in the case of [i]CSL Tadoussac[/i], a new midbody). Algoma Central had the [i]Algobay[/i] rebuilt, planned the same for the [i]Algoport[/i], and gave the [i]Tim S. Dool[/i] a new midbody & engines. So why no rebuilds, re-engining, or stern-swaps now?