# New Reef Ship just east of Freeport on its way to CC



## jdusek (Apr 7, 2006)

The old ship is closer to it final resting place.


----------



## acoastalbender (Jul 16, 2011)

That will be awesome...

.


----------



## FREON (Jun 14, 2005)

Corpus Christi reef is going to be 1/2 way between Port A and Packery just inside of Fed. waters


----------



## michaelbaranowski (May 24, 2004)

This is great news. I have been following it all week.


----------



## Slow Boat (Jun 12, 2011)

FREON said:


> Corpus Christi reef is going to be 1/2 way between Port A and Packery just inside of Fed. waters


According to TPWD it is just within state waters. Plotted it on Google Earth Pro and it's about 11 miles from Port A and Packery jetties and about 8.4 from the beach.


----------



## jregmund (Sep 15, 2005)

Thanks SEA!!!


----------



## Cabollero (Jun 1, 2011)

If it's east of Freeport sink it NOW! I wonder if Colonel Bubbies has any torpedoes??


----------



## AHL_1901 (Jan 22, 2013)

Awesome. so glad to see this


----------



## FREON (Jun 14, 2005)

Slow Boat said:


> According to TPWD it is just within state waters. Plotted it on Google Earth Pro and it's about 11 miles from Port A and Packery jetties and about 8.4 from the beach.


I meant just inside(closer to shore) ....Guess I could have stated it better.


----------



## GeeTee (Aug 8, 2014)

Anyone know how they`ll sink this? Interested to know the mechanics behind it.


----------



## James Howell (May 21, 2004)

with explosives.


----------



## Slow Boat (Jun 12, 2011)

FREON said:


> I meant just inside(closer to shore) ....Guess I could have stated it better.


The important thing is it's close enough to Federal water to catch Red Snapper and flip off the Feds on the other side of the line!


----------



## marlin lane (Mar 4, 2012)

why not between freeport and galveston?


----------



## Gumby (Aug 11, 2005)

Looking forward to diving and fishing the new wreck. Have seen lots of boats on the reef they built there last year with the concrete tetrahedrons and culverts. The area approved for reefing is quite large. 400 plus acres I believe. Correct me if wrong please. This effort needs to be repeated all up and down the coast. Thanks SEA.


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

160 acres, 1/2 mile by 1/2 mile. Not near big enough and TX is playing catchup on the whole nearshore reefing deal. Just glad to see something happening now.


----------



## liedtcr (May 28, 2013)

*TPWD.......*



Gumby said:


> Looking forward to diving and fishing the new wreck. Have seen lots of boats on the reef they built there last year with the concrete tetrahedrons and culverts. The area approved for reefing is quite large. 400 plus acres I believe. Correct me if wrong please. This effort needs to be repeated all up and down the coast. Thanks SEA.


TPWD dropped the ball big time for Texas offshore fisherman. In fact my belief is that TPWD continues to perform unacceptably in getting public reefing areas designated up and down the Texas coast in any kind of a efficient manner.

Alabama has a designated public reefing area of 1200 SQUARE MILES. This has ushered in private citizens building reefs by the 100's of thousands over the last 20 or so years.
With only 1&1/2 percent of the shoreline on the gulf coast, Alabama continues to take @40 % of the recreational quota of red snapper. This due directly to the increased bottom stucture.

While this ship is good. We should not let TPWD off the hook until EVERY port in Texas has hundreds of square miles just off the coast.

Then we could truly "FLIP OFF THE FEDS".


----------



## jhp3435 (Jan 8, 2013)

liedtcr said:


> TPWD dropped the ball big time for Texas offshore fisherman. In fact my belief is that TPWD continues to perform unacceptably in getting public reefing areas designated up and down the Texas coast in any kind of a efficient manner.
> 
> Alabama has a designated public reefing area of 1200 SQUARE MILES. This has ushered in private citizens building reefs by the 100's of thousands over the last 20 or so years.
> With only 1&1/2 percent of the shoreline on the gulf coast, Alabama continues to take @40 % of the recreational quota of red snapper. This due directly to the increased bottom stucture.
> ...


Well said!


----------



## Momma's Worry (Aug 3, 2009)

TPWD dropped the ball big time for Texas offshore fisherman. In fact my belief is that TPWD continues to perform unacceptably in getting public reefing areas designated up and down the Texas coast in any kind of a efficient manner. 


X's ten .............


----------



## USAHOG (Apr 21, 2013)

*reef*

i wish they could have tug that fishing vessel that grounded off freeport to the 8.5 mark and anchored it there. i guess it worth more to salvage than to sink and anchor in place for a reef. bummer


----------



## Pocketfisherman (May 30, 2005)

marlin lane said:


> why not between freeport and galveston?


The continental shelf slopes a lot shallower the farther north you go. When you sink a reef, you have to maintain a minimum depth of water over the reef for ship traffic. With a reefing ship that tall, if it were up around Galveston it would have to have been out about 30 miles to maintain that clearance above it, well into federal waters. Deeper water is in closer down south.


----------



## hb (Jul 30, 2011)

Does anyone know the name of the tug towing the kinta s to port aransas?


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

It's David Walter from Reefmaker in Alabama on the M/V Maranatha. There are details at https://www.facebook.com/TexasParksAndWildlifeArtificialReefProgram


----------



## hb (Jul 30, 2011)

showing maranatha sitting in the rockport cut, gues they are here....


----------



## lmgreeri (Dec 28, 2006)

Pocketfisherman said:


> The continental shelf slopes a lot shallower the farther north you go. When you sink a reef, you have to maintain a minimum depth of water over the reef for ship traffic. With a reefing ship that tall, if it were up around Galveston it would have to have been out about 30 miles to maintain that clearance above it, well into federal waters. Deeper water is in closer down south.


Even where they are putting it off Port A the shallowest part will only be 30ft under the surface. They got extra USCG approval to do this and will have a lighted buoy marking that spot. They could do this sort of thing in other shallow areas to I assume.


----------



## michaelbaranowski (May 24, 2004)

lmgreeri said:


> Even where they are putting it off Port A the shallowest part will only be 30ft under the surface. They got extra USCG approval to do this and will have a lighted buoy marking that spot. They could do this sort of thing in other shallow areas to I assume.


The 30' clearance is one of the best things I have heard. Cause I have always heard that there has to be 50' clearance and this just shows that 50' is not required. So maybe now it will be easier for other to get reefs with the shallower 30' clearance.


----------



## True Blue (Nov 27, 2008)

Does anyone know when they will be taking it to it's final resting place or when they are planning on sinking her? I followed a link to facebook but it doesn't have any dates that I could find. I would like to be able to watch as she's going under.


----------



## michaelbaranowski (May 24, 2004)

I was told that it was suppose to sunk in mid-September


----------



## acoastalbender (Jul 16, 2011)

True Blue said:


> Does anyone know when they will be taking it to it's final resting place or when they are planning on sinking her? I followed a link to facebook but it doesn't have any dates that I could find. I would like to be able to watch as she's going under.


If you can get an Island Moon in Portland you will get pretty good info on this...

.


----------



## mredman1 (Feb 4, 2007)

*Depth*

I hope the ship is sunk in a spot where there is potential for significant fish habitat. If the vessel is sunk in mud or silt, it might not be productive. We know this firsthand in Freeport.

Mike


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

I got an email that said they were shooting for this Wed am and, depending on weather, it could be moved to Tues, so it's going down soon.


----------



## hilton (Jan 28, 2008)

They can get away with the shallower clearance due to the lighted buoy requirement.


----------



## Slow Boat (Jun 12, 2011)

mredman said:


> I hope the ship is sunk in a spot where there is potential for significant fish habitat. If the vessel is sunk in mud or silt, it might not be productive. We know this firsthand in Freeport.
> 
> Mike


It's going to the MU775 site that they started sinking reef pyramids on in spring of 2013. Somebody (Tom Hilton?) said they survey bottom composition really well these days.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

Where's the CCA? All is see is SEA! I'm about to dump my CCA membership and just keep my SEA membership if this persists. I know CCA has the funds for these kinds of projects and much more!


----------



## Slow Boat (Jun 12, 2011)

Empty Pockets CC said:


> Where's the CCA? All is see is SEA! I'm about to dump my CCA membership and just keep my SEA membership if this persists. I know CCA has the funds for these kinds of projects and much more!


CCA kicked in for the Port Mansfield near shore reef which is a hell of a spot.


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

CCA spent a pile of $$ already on 775 last September with the pyramid reefs (see past threads). Whether one is a member of SEA, CCA, or both, the fishermen all win when more structure is going out.


----------



## Empty Pockets CC (Feb 18, 2009)

Perfect! Glad to hear it!


----------



## Pocketfisherman (May 30, 2005)

michaelbaranowski said:


> The 30' clearance is one of the best things I have heard. Cause I have always heard that there has to be 50' clearance and this just shows that 50' is not required. So maybe now it will be easier for other to get reefs with the shallower 30' clearance.


I so hope you are right and there are more such reefs added into state waters. I was not aware they got special permission to do this.


----------



## asher (Sep 27, 2011)

Pocketfisherman said:


> I so hope you are right and there are more such reefs added into state waters. I was not aware they got special permission to do this.


It isn't so much as special permission to have a shallow clearance to the top of the reef. I believe the main thing is that it must have a lighted buoy marking the navigational hazard and there must be funding in place to provide service to the buoy.


----------



## chad (Sep 7, 2006)

Any updates on when they are sinking her? It would be fun to go watch.


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

Just talked to a guy who is going tomorrow so barring unforeseen really bad weather/storms I think they are still on for Wed. I am sure several boats with different groups covering it will be there and people are encouraged to go see it happen. Sloppyish is my bet on the seas but the ship will sink regardless (hopefully coming to rest upright) and buoy is already attached to it so we'll all have a spot 10 miles out to mess with. Post some pictures if you go.


----------



## asher (Sep 27, 2011)

Everything I've heard has been Wednesday as well.


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

Supposed to be passing thru Pt A jetties tomorrow at 7am and on site for deployment at 10 am at the MU 775 reef site.

Location off the TPWD page : 
*Latitude: *27.6467
*Longitude: *-97.0076


----------



## chad (Sep 7, 2006)

I just saw it under tow West bound in the ICW almost to the Corpus Christi Ship channel between Gulf Marine North and South yards.


----------



## waverider (Apr 23, 2005)

Looks like they are headed out the Port A jetties now.


----------



## ding-a-ling (Jul 29, 2005)

Email today from a SEA rep who is going out said tomorrow, might be on the move staging it now closer to the jetties for tonight.


----------



## waverider (Apr 23, 2005)

ding-a-ling said:


> Email today from a SEA rep who is going out said tomorrow, might be on the move staging it now closer to the jetties for tonight.


Yeah, I saw them before they turned back north up the Lydia Ann Channel.


----------



## Slow Boat (Jun 12, 2011)

Somebody(s) video it!


----------



## waverider (Apr 23, 2005)

Waiting in the Intercoastal


----------



## snapperlicious (Aug 11, 2009)

Too bad it's not in matagorda! I would like to make a few dives on that rig.


----------



## coastman (Apr 18, 2013)

Awesome! wish I could be there to see it sink.


----------



## Slow Boat (Jun 12, 2011)

This morning n FB TPWD says it deploys at 10:00AM today.


----------



## asher (Sep 27, 2011)




----------



## michaelbaranowski (May 24, 2004)

Here you go.


----------



## asher (Sep 27, 2011)

On the move...


----------



## jiggin' (Apr 4, 2010)

Thanks for posting pictures for all of us that can't be there. Please post more when time permits!


----------



## asher (Sep 27, 2011)

I


----------



## jdusek (Apr 7, 2006)

I wanted to go see it but will not be able to. TPWD said they will film in and post the sinking.


----------



## True Blue (Nov 27, 2008)

There is video on kristv.com and on kiiitv.com. Thanks SEA and all that were involved.


----------



## trapper67 (Mar 23, 2011)

link

http://www.kristv.com/news/video-ship-sunk-for-artificial-reef/


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

I wonder where that old banana boat came from...


----------



## Gumby (Aug 11, 2005)

Here she is looking a bit better


----------

