Boatnerd Discussion Forum

That ship has sailed.
1)There won't be any coal fired power plants and only a handful of blast furnaces in a few years. So what are these boats supposed to haul to make up for those cargoes?

2) Trucks weren't the bad guys. Railroads were able to haul all the main cargoes. And operate year round instead of just 9 months. Playing the railroads against the shipping companies keep everyone honest.

Guest wrote: February 28, 2026, 9:04 am Even during the dark days of the 1980s, there seemed to be hope remaining of a comeback of some level. I don't get the same feeling today.

For half a century or more now, the maritime industry on the Great Lakes has been reduced by an artificial suppression of demand, an invisible damper in the form of enormous taxpayer-funded subsidies that encourage freight to move via less efficient, more expensive, and more dangerous means of long-distance freight transport. If we want to see the return of a robust parade of ships along the shores of the Lakes we’d have to change what we have become accustomed to as the societal and governmental spending norms since the 1960s-‘70s. People in North America, especially the U.S., have unwittingly accepted that it’s normal to tip the scales away from the fuel-efficiency and better bang-for-taxpayer-dollar that shipping represents. If we stopped doing that, not only would boatwatching be a rejuvenated and more interesting pastime, but highways would be safer for car drivers and highway maintenance costs would drastically decrease. Meanwhile, people who work in freight trucking could concentrate on last-mile delivery where their industry really excels. A taxpayer dollar is better spent at a few strategic dredging or navigation lock chokepoints that unlock thousands of miles of deepwater shipping routes in the Great Lakes region, vs. being spent at every mile along the way of tens of thousands of miles of heavily constructed, expensive to build and even more costly to maintain highways that are constantly being torn up by heavy trucks going at high speeds over cross-continental distances.

https://itif.org/publications/2025/09/0 ... portation/

https://www.hopaports.ca/wp-content/upl ... -FINAL.pdf

I doubt that you will see many future fleet mergers on the lakes. There are only a relatively few large fleets left, less than can be counted by the fingers on two hands. With the end of Lower Lakes, I believe that leaves only Algoma, CSL, and McKeil as the major players in the Canadian bulk transportation fleet. The US side isn't much better, and with shrinking tonnages I would expect to see a continuing dwindling of both the number of lake fleets and vessels in the not so distant future. With no current plans being announced for new US ships for the lakes and, with the exception of the Mark W. Barker, even the next youngest powered ships are nearly 45 years old with many in the fleet now well into their 70s. Even with upgrades the older vessels are going to eventually need replacement and with no replacements on the horizon, it is almost certain that many familiar vessels are soon destined for the scrapyard. So I don't know if there is much to talk about concerning future mergers at this point. Don't mean to be an unpopular guy on an enthusiast forum, and I can honestly say that there can be no greater fan of these ships on the lakes than I, but the truth is the industry is slowly dying as it has been for the past nearly 50 years. That said, I fully believe that there will always be some level of shipping activity on the lakes but it will be pale in comparison to that of the past and with little or no possibility of meaningful positive growth. Even during the dark days of the 1980s, there seemed to be hope remaining of a comeback of some level. I don't get the same feeling today.

How do you value the contracts and the boats in an industry that is changing so rapidly and shrinking?
And recall that you still have the competition from the railroads so rates can only go so high.

These ideas assume fleets are willing to merge.

With all of the talk lately about how Rand Logistics has rebranded itself now Mainstay Maritime and the future of Lower Lakes I guess being taken over by Algoma or somebody else and the future of a few of their vessels, I got to doing some thinking about possible and I strongly say possible fleet mergers in the future. Now, before I get slammed for any comments and my ideas here just to keep in mind that these are only my ideas and theories I’ve had on this. I hope that everyone will please remember that if anyone responds to this. Anyway, I’ve often thought about this for many years and been wanting to post this here! So, here’s a few ideas and suggestions on any possible fleet mergers someday. First, you have ASC with all of their 1,000 footers and GLF with 3 of their own 1,000 footers. At times, the ASC footers will carry Taconite Ore loads to either Gary, Indiana or to Conneaut, Ohio similar to what GLF does with their own footers. The ASC footers some of them anyway but not all of them, have done runs to Gary and Conneaut for quite a few seasons now. Wouldn’t it then be wise and an idea and suggestion then to have maybe 🤔 ASC merge then with GLF to create a big, huge super fleet? I say and ask this only because of the fact that ASC hauls ore pellets to Gary and Conneaut like the GLF footers do then? To me it would make perfect sense and c-mon boatnerds, don’t tell me that you wouldn’t go for this as think about, the ASC footers in GLF hulls colors all red then with that unique bow stripe. Now wouldn’t that look sharpe to you all? Here’s another that comes to mind. You have Central Marine Logistics with the Block and Sykes both of which carry ore for Cleveland Cliffs to Burns and Indiana Harbor along with Cleveland and also Toledo sometimes. With only a fleet of two, why not have a firm like maybe Interlake take both the Block and Sykes and put them with Interlake? Sounds crazy I know but, think of it this way as both carry ore for Cleveland-Cliffs at Burns, Indiana Harbor, Cleveland and Toledo. Don’t Interlake also carry ore loads for Cleveland-Cliffs to those same places? Makes perfect sense to me then as far as the Block and Sykes at least going to Interlake. Then you have the VanEnkevort Tugs & Barge fleet with their 3 tugs and barges. Why not have a larger U.S. firm like Interlake or GLF take those three and then they are in a larger fleet then? Again these are all just ideas and suggestions I thought about as far as future mergers of shipping firms. Then there’s Purvis Marine Limited along with McKeil Marine Ltd. as well. Each fleet has tugs and barges and at times the McKeil fleet uses their tugs and barges to load steel coils at Algoma Steel. It seems McKeil loads more at Algoma then what Purvis does. So, why not have Purvis merge with McKeil then and have the tugs and barges of the Purvis fleet go to McKeil? Again this makes perfect sense to me to see that merger take place then. Again, these are just ideas and suggestions only that I have and it may sound silly and crazy but, it was just something I thought about. And before anyone has anything bad to say on my ideas or my suggestions, why not try and think about it yourselves of possible fleet mergers someday as I think it is a neat idea and surely would draw attention from many followers and they might agree then!