Ice Breaking Issues - March 2026

[Denny]

Don’t know about any ships so far regarding any ice damage to them. In regards to the Lee A. Tregurtha question you asked, I think it was ice off the Duluth Piers and entrance that caused and forced her to go back into Duluth? The story about her is on the Boatnerd News on the News Page. Hope this information helps you out.

[Guest]

Any reports of ships being damaged by the ice?

Does anyone know why the LEE A TREGURTHA left Duluth and then came right back?

[Guest]

Any new icebreaker for USCG on the Great Lakes will have to be multi-mission capable. It's very costly to have a singe-mission asset like the 1944 Mackinaw sitting around, doing goodwill post calls in the Summer, and then only going about its task in the Winter. That's too expensive and always makes such a vessel liable to being de-funded. That's what happened in the 1980s and '90s with the 1944 Mackinaw. It was just by luck and a lot of push by congressional members that it was saved from retirement at that time.

The US could buy an off-the-shelf commercial icebreaker, like the Judy LaMarsh, but it would most likely be a foreign-built vessel. Would congress and the administration allow such a purchase?

I'm disappointed at what the head of the LCA said about Canada's assistance in icebreaking on the lakes. He knows that the Great Lakes are bi-national waters, shared by both countries and that we work together for the good of all people using these waters. It also applies to our bi-national agreements on joint security, such as NORAD that goes back decades. There is no reason for animosity, we are friends, family and neighbours.

Well said!

[Andrew]

It almost surprises me that the Coast Guard has not sent one of their east coast stationed Junipers to help with icebreaking duty, especially considering the Mackinaw is down and the Sequoia is out indefinitely. The Oak and Sycamore are both in Newport, RI, and the Willow is in Charleston, SC. Wouldn't be extraordinarily difficult or detrimental for one of them to come into the lakes for a week or two.

[Guest]

this may start a firestorm, which certainly is not my intent. To what extent should icebreaking operations (both USCG and CCG) be based on conditions rather than a date on the calendar? Some winters the late January runs are problematic in certain areas, and free and open in others. Same is true for the March start of the season. This winter along the St. Mary's is certainly one that begs the question of if the effort is warranted for a few weeks. Yes, the amount of commerce that moves has incredible value. But one must ask what the value is with vessels sitting in ice along with tremendous ice-breaking efforts being spent. At some point there has to be a cost value discussion both on the LCA and CG sides.

Totally agree. At a time when we should be conserving fuel, what would two or three more weeks of waiting mean for steel mills? So they should go into the winter with slightly bigger stockpiles.

I could see when power plants were running out of coal but those days are over.

Not every season has the ice like this.

[Guest]

Any new icebreaker for USCG on the Great Lakes will have to be multi-mission capable. It's very costly to have a singe-mission asset like the 1944 Mackinaw sitting around, doing goodwill post calls in the Summer, and then only going about its task in the Winter. That's too expensive and always makes such a vessel liable to being de-funded. That's what happened in the 1980s and '90s with the 1944 Mackinaw. It was just by luck and a lot of push by congressional members that it was saved from retirement at that time.

The US could buy an off-the-shelf commercial icebreaker, like the Judy LaMarsh, but it would most likely be a foreign-built vessel. Would congress and the administration allow such a purchase?

I'm disappointed at what the head of the LCA said about Canada's assistance in icebreaking on the lakes. He knows that the Great Lakes are bi-national waters, shared by both countries and that we work together for the good of all people using these waters. It also applies to our bi-national agreements on joint security, such as NORAD that goes back decades. There is no reason for animosity, we are friends, family and neighbours.

[Ohio Bob]

this may start a firestorm, which certainly is not my intent. To what extent should icebreaking operations (both USCG and CCG) be based on conditions rather than a date on the calendar? Some winters the late January runs are problematic in certain areas, and free and open in others. Same is true for the March start of the season. This winter along the St. Mary's is certainly one that begs the question of if the effort is warranted for a few weeks. Yes, the amount of commerce that moves has incredible value. But one must ask what the value is with vessels sitting in ice along with tremendous ice-breaking efforts being spent. At some point there has to be a cost value discussion both on the LCA and CG sides.

[john mcgraw]

Yes, the CCG and USCG work wonderfully together. I remember the CCG Risley arriving in Buffalo several years ago to free stranded lake freighters in the spring due to the heavy ice field. And last year a CCG icebreaker (Risley?) worked with the USCG Bristol Bay Neah Bay in freeing the Manitoulin in January.
The issue is the lack of a heavy icebreaker to assist the Mackinaw, which seems to be prone to constant mechanical issues with its bow thrusters. The medium icebreaker Spar is needed in Duluth and Superior.
For example the Bristol Bay was in Buffalo attempting to cut a channel through an ice field 10 to 15 miles wide and up to two feet thick, in order to allow the combo Victory/Maumee to leave port. Its was unable to get the channel cut, before it was called away for more urgent duty on the St. Mary's River. The Victory remains in Buffalo unable to engage in the grain trade, as of today. That delay is very costly to industry. Industrial sand, oil/asphalt, salt, sugar and coal and grain are waiting to be shipped in to and out of the Port of Buffalo, and are unable to do so at this point.
USCG ice breaking operations have been dramatically under funded for years - they need immediate help - apparently the ocean side will purchase Finnish icebreakers in the short term, but the Great Lakes operations need help too.
Could the Polar Wind and the old Mack be returned to service? Yes, but there would have to be emergency work order contracts issued, and knowing the USCG DC bureaucracy, that is unfortunately not likely. The Polar Wind, regettably has been stripped for parts for the Polar Star for years, she needs two new engines also. Again it could be done with emergency work order contracts, but not likely.

[Guest]

In reference to this comment made by the Lake Carriers' Association that appeared on the News Channel on March 27, 2026 concerning the supposed "old saying": “A Canadian icebreaker is for Canadians and an American icebreaker is a shared resource.”

Has anyone ever heard this one before? I have been following Great Lakes shipping since the early 1970s, and I have never heard of anything ever commented like this in relation to the USCG/CCG cooperation in icebreaking duties on the lakes. Furthermore, I have never witnessed Canadian icebreakers prioritizing Canadian flagged ships over other vessels, of any nation, during the many years of watching these operations on the St. Clair and St. Marys Rivers. Just wondering if this is really a perception shared by mariners on the lakes themselves.

[Steamboater66]

It is 2309h EST Sun. March 29/26
Ice breaker/ice breaking dialogues on here were thoughtfully written. Really informative reads by all writers.
SSM is a critical junction point. It was a true northern winter! Commerce should not be restricted. Both USA and Canada can iron this out. Both Coast Guards have worked cooperatively on this for decades. Update the heavy breakers on both sides. Place them and employ them strategically and we’ll all benefit. It is the 21st century and this is not rocket science.

[Jared]

Old Mackinaw needed to be retired 15 years before she finally did. We shouldn’t have to rely on a 85 year old ship anyways.

I honestly don't see the urgency to get icebreakers in the lakes when you can navigate through the better part of January before the lakes freeze up. There isn't that many boats running and the demand is on the low side. Within the next week and a half most of that ice will be melted to a level that is manageable by most boats.

[Wxbuoy]

Well Said JP. To speed things up, gut the museum ship Mackinaw, repower that hull with all new current engines and electronics. Should not take 10 years. Mackinaw #2 consistently has engineering/mechanical issues. Never has made an entire season without casualty. Order
3 new heavy ice breakers and refit to old Mackinaw. Make new Mackinaw a museum ship.

[algowest]

Very well said JP. We don't need any more "stoking of the fire" in the Canada/US relationship these days. I've been a "boatnerd" since I was a teenager and seen both CCG & USCG work very well together over the years, and as USCG assets have aged and had more breakdowns, the CCG has stepped up and assisted. Recently, with Risley have a breakdown, more Bay-class icebreakers are in the St. Mary's working the channels as necessary.
I will say, I wish both Canada and U.S. would jointly design a Great Lakes specific heavy icebreaker and then each build one in their domestic shipyards. Since they share information on icebreaking and techniques, this only makes sense to me given current economic times.

[GreatLaker]

Well put, JP.

[JP Burgoyne]

Thank you John McGraw you are so correct. Now in response to Mr. Weakly's comments on the news page as president of the Lake Carriers Association, you sir should know better. The Massey's departure for 24 hours to go up to Thunder Bay had absolutely no bearing on the current situation along the St. Mary's River. They had completed nearly 30 hours of round the clock track maintenance prior to departure and there were 4 USCG assets working below the locks at the time. Anyone with any sense would have known this spring was going to be trouble, big trouble. A little about myself, I am Canadian and darn proud of the work the CCG does every spring to keep both the U.S. and Canadian fleets moving. I have lived along the St. Mary's for the past 9 years near Johnson's Point. The USCG has historically had unfortunate mechanical issues with their fleet. The CCG always works nearly round the clock to ensure the boats can move, and moved 2 significant assets to the upper lakes with the loss of the Risley due to it's own engineering issue. The Massey freed the Mesabi Miner the other night and is now working with 2 USCG vessels to get more boats moving in the lower river. This isn't a competition, but since I do watch movements every single day especially in the spring, I can tell you the the Canadians do a fantastic job to help ALL carriers move safely and expediently no matter the flag or the port requiring ice breaking. As do the USCG whenever able. These men and women from 2 countries working together and doing the best they can in severe conditions should be commended not chastised. Canada always does more than their part, and as president of such an important multinational organization you should know that. There are plenty of Canadian flagged vessel in the queue as well and I'd think no one is happy about the downtime and associated costs. I've lived around here my entire life.... mother nature always wins and our part is to do our best to handle what she gives us. PERIOD!

[john mcgraw]

What we are seeing is a failure to provide sufficient ice breaking capacities for the USCG on the Great Lakes and in Alaska too. The USCG has only one heavy icebreaker on the Great Lakes - the Mackinaw, and a medium ice breaker the Spar, and 9 icebreaker tugs like the Neah Bay and Bristol Bay (700 tons).
The current - today - backup at the Soo, now numbering over a dozen ships struck in the ice, shows the need for another heavy icebreaker. Yet the lead time for new icebreakers in US yards is ten years. Not acceptable.
The USCG and our Great Lakes Congressional delegation need to push hard for the purchase and conversion of a commercial heavy icebreaker for Great Lakes use.
The USCG just purchased one in 2024, refitted the ship and renamed her the USCG Storis, because of critical shortage of ocean icebreakers (only the USCG Polar Star and USCG Healy are in service, with the USCG Polar Wind in storage out of service).
The same solution is needed on the Great Lakes - purchase a private commercial icebreaker for Great Lakes use. The Canadian CG has already made the same move.
We can not depend on CCG for assistance at all times, we need our own US resources.
Time for talk is over, the time is now for action. Purchase the icebreaker now!