Town joins fight vs. Hudson River anchorage plan

The town of Esopus is joining the Hudson River Waterfront Alliance’s fight against proposed large-vessel anchorage grounds at 10 location on the river.

The Esopus Town Board signed on at a meeting Monday. The town of Rhinebeck joined the alliance in March.

Members of the Esopus board expressed particular concern about the proposed use of a 210-acre site for up to four vessels in front of the Port Ewen Water District intake.

“Each of these barges ... holds 4 million gallons of oil,” town Waterfront Advisory Board member Carol Tomasetti said.

Opponents of the anchorage grounds — which would be spread out between Yonkers and Kingston — have emphasized the shipping of volatile Bakken crude oil, but barges and tankers also are used regularly to carry chemicals such as benzene between ports in Albany and the New Jersey refineries.

There is no way for communities to be prepared for all of the potential risks to people who use the water for either consumption or recreation, opponents say.

“There’s a lot of issues, like how much insurance they have should they have a spill. Can they cover ... a cleanup of any sort?” Tomasetti said.

“It’s the biggest concern, but we shouldn’t downplay the economic implications,” she said. “I, personally, living [along] the river, am not too excited about paying the taxes I pay when I look at barges behind my house.”

The anchorage proposal has been submitted to the U.S. Coast Guard by the Maritime Association of the Port of New York/New Jersey Tug and Barge Committee, the Hudson River Port Pilots Association and the American Waterways Operators. Coast Guard officials, who reported there were 10,206 public comments submitted about the proposal last year, expect to determine in the next two months whether the proposal should move ahead.

Port Ewen Water Superintendent Donald Kiernan, in written comments to the Coast Guard, expressed concern about the Esopus portion of the anchorage plan.

“A leak anywhere near our river intake would have a devastating effect and could seriously limit the district’s ability to supply potable water to its 4,500 residents,” he wrote. “My next concern is ... the [system] structure could be damaged by placing a anchor too close to our Hudson River intake.”

Two other sites that would also affect the Esopus viewshed would be directly in front of Port Ewen and in front of the Rhinebeck shoreline.

“What they’re trying to do is set up these permanent ... parking lots,” Tomasetti said. “It’s really cheap for them to leave this stuff

stored there.”

Among the proposed anchorage sites between Kingston and Yonkers are:

• Kingston Flats South, covering about 280 acres for up to three vessels.

• Port Ewen, covering about 50 acres for one vessel.

• Big Rock Point, covering about 210 acres for up to four vessels.

• Roseton, covering about 305 acres for up to three vessels.

• Milton, covering about 75 acres for up to two vessels.

• Marlboro, covering about 155 acres for up to three vessels.

The plan has drawn significant criticism from elected officials and environmental groups up and down the Hudson River, including Ulster County Executive Michael Hein, the Ulster County Legislature, Kingston Mayor Steve Noble,

the Kingston Common Council and supervisors of towns on both sides of the river.

Opponents say they fear the river will become a parking lot for commercial vessels waiting their turn at the Port of Albany and that the number of vessels carrying Bakken crude along the river could increase significantly, creating a potential hazard.

The industry has said the sites are needed to create safe places for ships to stop and crews to rest.