Corpusfishing.com

Johninaustin · Full Grown Flour Bluffian Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 1113

Navy MWR has always been pathetic. Heck, I can rent better boats from the ARMY!!

Guys, If you are a retiree I suggest you look up the MWR facilities on Ft Sam, Hood, and Canyon lake. First rate campers, boats and cabins.

I retired from the Army in 2006, I've always noticed that MWR at Navy facitilites never really went beyond the "ratty pool table and deck of cards" stage.

I'm guessing that the Navy would prefer their folks to just hang out in bars.

If some guide gets exclusive use of one of these boats for HIS guide concession, I'd blow my top. Evil or Very Mad

One note. Since the head of the place put all those break-in hours on both boats, didn't he essentially get paid (and free gas) to go fishing?

Also, WHO bought the old boats? Like already posted, the boats themselves were fine. If no one wanted them they could have easily been transferred to other facilities. Did someone's buddy get a sweet disposal contract?

FoldCatOne · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:38 am Post subject:

The guide who provides bait to the NAS MWR Marina used to use the NAS' old twin outboard offshore boat for offshore charters. He did this through the auspices of the MWR, but since almost ANYONE can pay $20 and get an MWR Card, the offshore charters were essentially open to anyone. One would ASSUME the offshore charters are still going to be available.

This whole subject is an OLD SUBJECT to me. In the past I have spoken to people as high up the Chain of Command at NAS as the XO/Deputy Commander and probably was instrumental in the MWR director who was there in 2009 getting replaced.

Many of us had been trying to take the MWR Boating Safety Course which is/was required to rent a boat from NAS MWR. For the longest time they didn't / couldn't find anyone to teach the course. Then they said to take the on-line course from TP&W. That cost about $40 to take. Last I heard, that is now not sufficient, and you must take some course again through MWR. I can only wonder what kind of Qualification is needed to take their new fancy boats offshore, and one would wonder where offshore they would be willing to let someone take the boat. Since they had so much problem maintaining the motors on the small boats, how long will it be before anyone in their right mind would TRUST one of the new engines if going out to the rigs or beyond.

To me, it seems like this is a great big boondoggle for the benefit of the few. A letter to my Congressman seems to be in order.

FoldCatOne · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:53 am Post subject:

Just spoke again to NAS MWR and there is more interesting info that will BLOW YOUR MIND. The two new boats are 17' 7" deep V boats with 90 HP engines. THE BIG REVELATION is - NAS WON'T ALLOW THEM TO GO OUT IN THE GULF. MWR indicates they are for use in the intercoastal channel only!!! How many people FISH in the Intercoastal??? Imagine fishing with the boat and barge traffic int he Intercoastal. WHAT IDIOT convinced the Powers That Be to buy even ONE of these boats, let alone TWO.

NOW I KNOW A LETTER TO MY CONGRESSMAN IS IN ORDER.

spamman_tx · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 11:26 am Post subject:

I talked to the manager of the Outdoor rec at FT Sam Houston in San Antonio. Outdoor rec is run by the manager in charge at the specific outdoor rec and then goes up to a general that is not even in Texas. He is doing an audit in Texas.
Secondly, if you rent it and wreck it you pay to repair it or replace it at a higher cost then anyone would think of paying.
Just my two cents,
Mike

jebsays · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:48 pm Post subject:

FoldCatOne · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:04 pm Post subject:

BUT, it doesn't take a Deep V offshore style boat with a 90 HP motor to idle over to the Intercoastal and anchor on its edge. whomever approved the purchase of one of these boats either was taken for a ride by someone wanting to sell boats that wouldn't sell otherwise, or it was done by someone with absolutely no knowledge of fishing shallow/bay waters. A much better buy would have been new 25-40 HP motors to go on the 16 and 18 foot Sea Ark/Mon Ark/Blue Wave/Pontoon boats that they sent to DRMO. Only an idiot would buy 2 Deep V offshore style boats with 90HP motors for use in place of the smaller boats that could be used in the Crash Channels, Boat Hole,King Ranch Shoreline areas. OR and maybe equally as likely, another motive that would allow SELECT PEOPLE to take the boats offshore in the Gulf with either the NAS Guide or along with the NAS Guide. You know - for fishing trips to entertain SENIOR VISITORS. NAH, that would never happen, no one would be sure to be able to cater to Priority Visitors (CAPTS, ADMIRALS, CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS, MEMBERS OF INSPECTION TEAMS). NAH, COULDN'T HAPPEN.

jebsays · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:14 pm Post subject:

FoldCatOne · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:38 pm Post subject:

Not in the least debating that you CAN GET TO THE INTERCOASTAL from the NAS boat launch. Not in the least debating whether it is POSSIBLE to fish the Crash Channels from an OFFSHORE V Hull boat. But I WILL DEBATE ALL DAY LONG the rational of buying 2 such boats after sending ALL OF YOUR OTHER BOATS to DRMO, vs procuring new motors for them and maybe only buying ONE Deep V OFFSHORE BOAT.

FoldCatOne · Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:45 pm Post subject:

More information concerning NAS MWR boats. It seems they still also have their twin engine OFFSHORE boat and a 20 ft Kenner inshore boat. BOTH OF THESE BOATS ARE DEDICATED FOR CHARTER ONLY USE BY THE NAS FISHING GUIDE ( the same one who provides bait to NAS MWR ). These two boats are also not available for use by qualified operators. So it appears that the NAS MWR FLEET consists of 2 17.7 Foot Offshore DEEP V boats (new), 1 twin engine OFFSHORE DEEP V Boat, and a 20 ft Kenner. SOMEHOW, we are taking care of a precious FEW people at the expense of the average person who just wants to go fishing for the day.

The latest from the MWR Rep on the cost of usage and the requirements for usage of the new boats is that the CHAIN OF COMMAND STILL HASN'T DEVELOPED THOSE PLANS. I guess - more to come later.

rabbit · Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 11:22 am Post subject:

It was like that in the army also. End of year the first sargent would go and by everything he could think of just to use up the funded money.
_________________
Fishing and Kayaking its a rough life but somebody has to do it.

FoldCatOne · Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:46 pm Post subject:

At Naval Stations the funds for MWR come from profits generated by the Navy Exchanges. As such they are non-appropriated funds, but hopefully they purchase items that provide the most bang for the buck in recreation for the sailors and families. I have a lot of auditing experience from when I was a Navy Supply Corps Officer. Boy what I wouldn't give for a look at their books!!!

I was looking at prices for the boats like they bought. What they got are Triton Sea Hunt 177 boats w/ 90 hp engines ( http://seahuntboats.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=81&Itemid=103 ). The 20 foot version of this same boat with 115HP motor lists around $35K. I'll bet they wasted about $28K per boat depending on the electronics they put into the boat. Of course if all you are going to let the boat do is cruise the ICW, the need for much in electronics is minor. Just think of the new outboards they could have gotten for their old 16 and 18 ft Sea Arks and Mon Arks with $28,000 bucks!!!

I will be making a visit tomorrow to my Congressman's Office in Kerrville to get the ball rolling with a letter to Congressman Lamar Smith laying out what I know about the boat situation. Maybe he can get some idea of what they are planning to do. To ad insult to injury on the boat situation NAS MWR allowed a number of 20 foot camper trailers they had to become water damaged and they sent them to DRMO (salvage) too. Of course they got the trailers for FREE from FEMA, but they were good assets available for people to rent by the night if they had family visiting or for people desiring to come to Corpus. Allowing damage to valuable assets under their control is pure waste, fraud and abuse.

OutCast · Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 2:51 am Post subject:

FoldCatOne,
Just a question, what info do you have on the amount of damage to the old boats and trailers that were sent to DRMO during the storm that took out the bait house, boat launch and damaged several winter texan RV's not to mention the pier and other marina buildings?
The new boats are V-hull bay boats, not offshore boats, thats just rediculous to call them offshore boats. Its hard to fit a family of four on the old boats...The new boats will fit families better or a small group of servicemembers.
I agree completely if there is unfair usage of said MWR equipment that is not part of a contract that a complaint is in order.
The repairs and improvements over the past several years I've used the facilities has been pretty darn good in my experience w/ government practices.

FoldCatOne · Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:28 am Post subject:

The boats they had were Mon Ark and Sea Ark ALUMINUM boats in 16 and 18 foot sizes, as well as a Pontoon Party Boat, and according to their rental sheet a 16 foot Blue Wave which I assume was fiberglass. HOW MUCH DAMAGE / UNSEAWORTHYNESS could the boats have sustained?? They weren't kept in the water. They may have needed some upholstery done on cushions - who knows. If they weren't PRETTY, they could have been taken somewhere to be sandblasted and powder coat painted, or the inside bottoms could have been painted with the same material used to line beds on trucks. They had 25HP outboards on them as far as I can tell from their rental sheet. THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE ALMOST INDESTRUCTABLE TYPE OF RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE BOAT TO MAINTAIN (other than the motors) THAT ALLOWED FOR THE MOST PEOPLE TO USE THEM FOR FISHING. Now they are replaced with fiberglass (much easier to damage and more expensive to repair) boats with 90HP motors which are capable of much faster speeds and much more damage if run aground which as most will agree is a matter of WHEN VS IF.

The old boats rented for $8.00 to $18.00 dollars an hour or $40-$90 a day. Can you imagine the cost of one of these new boats?? Who will these new boats serve - the Young Sailor and his family or Senior Officers and affluent retirees?? I'll bet the new boats will rent for at least $25 and hour and probably much more. The daily rate will probably be at least $150.

And the main point of the whole issue - HOW DO YOU SPEND THE AVAILABLE MONEY TO MAKE THE MOST ASSETS AVAILABLE TO THE MOST PEOPLE. There is nothing in the shallow waters around Corpus that the old boats couldn't do that the new boat can - except maybe run quickly down to Baffin or the Land Cut. AND REMEMBER THEY BOUGHT 2 OF THESE NEW BOATS. They could have repaired the old boats, replaced the motors and still have had one of the new boats. WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE IF YOU ASK ME.

BTW, the reason I referred to the boat as an offshore type boat is because that is what the MWR Rep I talked to referred to them as.

OutCast · Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:35 am Post subject:

If you are really interested in improving the situation you should probably use the CoC on base Face to Face. Try the senior master chief on base, I'm sure he could fix the problem or get you a sit down with the skipper. If they don't resolve your problem you should speak w/ the Inspector General. Then if you're still unsatisfied consult your congressman. A congressional inquiry is a serious matter for any CoC as I'm sure you are aware.
I would be mad as he77 to think you believe this matter is "congressional level stuff". They have enough on thier plates as it is. COME ON MAN Razz

FoldCatOne · Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 2:12 pm Post subject:

Outcast - I sent you a PM on the subject. I have been trying to rent a boat from NAS since Sept 2009 with no success to date. Since I have been involved with the subject since 2009, there has been at least 2 turnovers of Welfare and Rec Department Heads. There hasn't been anything that even remotely resembles a PLAN (or at least a plan that anyone will provide information about) during this time. Providing boats that are capable of fishing the waters around NAS Corpus shouldn't be Rocket Science. The 16 and 18 foot Mon Arks and Sea Arks that they had were more than capable of being used to fish the waters around NAS Corpus, with minimal maintenance required. Good reliable motors like 25hp Yamaha's are pretty tough to screw up, and are dependable - they are used all over the world to power Panga type boats. The new boats they have procured are going to be cost prohibitive for many people to be able to rent them, and with 90HP engines they are likely to be used in a manner which damages the motor - its just a matter of time, and trust me there are plenty of places in the bays around Corpus just waiting to trash a motor. The decision to procure multiple boats with larger engines at the expense of more boats with smaller engines is folly at best and a decision probably made by people who are not familiar with fishing the waters around Corpus. The rental cost of one of these larger boats is going to price most of the enlisted sailors out of the boat rental market or is that the intent??? BTW, I sent you a PM. Print this all off and take it by the station Command Master Chief - I am more than happy to talk to anyone that cares to give me a call. I have talked to Jeff (who seems to be in charge at the Boat rental area) and he said he doesn't know what is going on. In fact he still doesn't even know how much the boats will be renting for.