PDA

View Full Version : Licenses and boating regulations.



PatCassidy
06-16-2008, 09:04 AM
What do folks think about mandatory boating licenses? I'm for it. Not because I want to protect the boating public as much as I want to protect myself.

I don't want the responsibility to watch-out for single-handed sailors in the middle of the ocean, let alone be obligated to go their rescue due to an event that was completely avoidable.

I don't want to have to be a paranoid defensive driver, especially on weekends and holidays, because I have no idea if a recreational boater has any idea of their responsibilites on the water.

Obviously there are different issues on a small lake and in busy port. Perhaps there could be varying requirements rather than no requirements at all.

RonW
06-16-2008, 09:10 AM
mandatory boating licenses? I'm for it.let alone be obligated to go their rescue

I am opposed to it, as I am opposed to more big brother rules and regulations, fines, fees and generally krapt..

If you feel obligated to save someone else's life on the water, as a inconvenience to you, I say stay the hell off the water, because you don't belong on it...Period...

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
06-16-2008, 09:14 AM
Bad idea.

Here in the UK we have mandatory driving licences and test for cars - and an appalling standard of driving.

Whereas any idiot can take a boat on the high seas - and the average "driver" is a cautious careful person who pays attention.

Gary E
06-16-2008, 09:18 AM
I'm aginst it... same for the state cops on the water handing poor fools like Dan a ticket for being foolish.. It's his right to do what ever he wants.. If he gets in trouble, he knows why... Is it the State's job to protect us from ourselves? I dont thnk so...There are several organizations giving FREE boating instructions and anyone with a lick of sense should take advantage of them.

PatCassidy
06-16-2008, 09:49 AM
Well Ron, what about this hypothetical example - you are in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and you are instructed to divert 400 miles to assist someone who is rowing across the Atlantic and their EPBIB has gone off. Failure to assist could result in your imprisonment.

You have no option unless it would endangering your vessel or your crew. It's not a matter of inconvenience.

So you think it fair that the other party should have some sort of responsibility to reasonably minimize their chances of requiring assistance.

Gary E
06-16-2008, 09:51 AM
Instructed by WHO???
What is THEIR authority over you?

Phillip Allen
06-16-2008, 10:05 AM
US Coast Gard

Kaa
06-16-2008, 10:08 AM
Well Ron, what about this hypothetical example - you are in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and you are instructed to divert 400 miles to assist someone who is rowing across the Atlantic and their EPBIB has gone off. Failure to assist could result in your imprisonment.

You have no option unless it would endangering your vessel or your crew. It's not a matter of inconvenience.

So you think it fair that the other party should have some sort of responsibility to reasonably minimize their chances of requiring assistance.

First, what makes you think mandatory boating licenses are going to help with being responsible for oneself on the water?

Second, in your very very hypothetical scenario, what difference would it make whether that guy rowing across the Atlantic had a license or not?

Kaa

Phillip Allen
06-16-2008, 10:11 AM
BTW if I considered myself within reach I would definatly divert...sailors think that way

Gary E
06-16-2008, 10:11 AM
US Coast Gard

Are you telling me the CoastGuard has the authority to order me to go 400 miles to do something?

I think your wrong... they have the authority to STOP you...and to order you to follow them, but not to tell you what to go 400 miles for any reason.

RonW
06-16-2008, 10:21 AM
Well Ron, what about this hypothetical example - you are in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and you are instructed to divert 400 miles to assist someone who is rowing across the Atlantic and their EPBIB has gone off. Failure to assist could result in your imprisonment.

I understand, but waht are you saying? That you are not willing to go 400 miles out of your way on the high seas to save someone's life.
And a life that you don't even know.
It could be a escaped convict that ends up murdering you, raping your wife and keeping her as a sex slave, and sailing off into the wild blue with your boat.

Decisions, decisions, decisions..

And don't tell your wife she is a sex slave, this may not go over very well..
And this is exactly why I am a freshwater only boater..just due to reasons like this..

Gary E
06-16-2008, 10:25 AM
And this is exactly why I am a freshwater only boater..just due to reasons like this..

Nahh....it's cuz yer stuckin Zinzinnatti....

PatCassidy
06-16-2008, 10:28 AM
For example: International Rules of the Road: Rule 5 - every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision. - Every singlehanded long distance racer violates this one.


Two years ago I was being overtaken by a large sailboat sailing on autopilot that was on a collision course with me. I hailed ithe boat several time on 16. I shined a searchlight at him. There was nobody on deck. Winds were about 25 knots. Seas 8-12 feet off the bow. No moon. I had to run away from the phantom boat. We were about 800 miles east of Leeward Islands. I have no idea if anybody had a license. I just know that there was nobody on deck on a boat traveling at about 12 knots.

PatCassidy
06-16-2008, 10:30 AM
Gary, yes they do. And not just the US Coast Guard had this right.

Phillip Allen
06-16-2008, 10:38 AM
I'm afraid Gary is one of those people who drank the Kool-ade...voted to support his own hanging

Gary E
06-16-2008, 10:43 AM
I'm about outa gas... cant go 400 miles...
Go screw yourself CG... now what?

RonW
06-16-2008, 10:46 AM
And this is exactly why I am a freshwater only boater..just due to reasons like this..

Nahh....it's cuz yer stuckin Zinzinnatti....

Maybe so....
As a little thread drift, a few years ago I was in the new history museum, and in a little room they was playing a movie of the 1913 flood of cincy, I recognized a lot of the buildings, and this place was flooded big time.
And all over the streets of cincy, where whitehalls, rangley's, peapods and a unbelievable amount of very fine rowboats. It was amazing to see this then, and now to behold glass and tin.

Gary E
06-16-2008, 10:50 AM
Ron,
I grew up in Golf Manor... I heard lots of talk about how high the floods got... The "Official" level was much lower than it really was because the insurance co's had written boat loads of policies that theye would of had to pay off if the real number was known...

There are building downtown with the mark still on them... I've been gone from there to long to remember which one's..

Wasnt it the '37 flood that was the biggie?

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
06-16-2008, 10:51 AM
Well Ron, what about this hypothetical example - you are in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and you are instructed to divert 400 miles to assist someone who is rowing across the Atlantic and their EPBIB has gone off. Failure to assist could result in your imprisonment.

You have no option unless it would endangering your vessel or your crew. It's not a matter of inconvenience.

So you think it fair that the other party should have some sort of responsibility to reasonably minimize their chances of requiring assistance.

This is a spectacularly poor choice of hypothetical example.

1. - Any mandatory License scheme would apply only to masters of craft registered in which country? - the Transatlantic rower is most likely to be either a Brit or Frenchman - you need quality loonies.

2. - Few if any private pleasure craft are likely to be of much use to a sinking rower 400 miles distant - that's three days or more for a very well equipped sail boat on a convenient course.

What are you asking for - a dispensation to ignore pleas from people in real danger? - I refer you to recent discussions on the rights and wrongs of home built boats and the likelihood of a rescue attempt.

You might have to answer to the guy in the mirror.

RonW
06-16-2008, 11:04 AM
Wasnt it the '37 flood that was the biggie?


Maybe so, instead of 1913, there was another one in 59 I think, but not quite as bad..
I moved here from W.Va. in the early 60's..

The ohio is actually cleaned up a lot from what it was in the 70's and even 80's. Damms for flood control, but we have a lot more trees in the river, I guess they grow up along the banks easier due to flood control, and when things rise badly, less often, more trees get uprooted.

Ian McColgin
06-16-2008, 11:10 AM
I love the way folk pompously quote Rule 5 to dump on singlehanders. Law means what enforcement authorites - governments - interpret it to mean, not what a private grammatical theory has it. Singlehanding is not unlawful. The prevailing circumstances of single-handing mean that one will be asleep some of the time. Most singlehanders know that watchkeeping on ocean-going vessels is often diminished by reliance of electronics, watching TV and reading Climax. At at least in the lanes will stay as attentive as possible, becoming positivly nocturnal.

The legal issues of maintaining the watch arise in the event of collision. A single-hander who during a prudent sleep period who hits someone will be held culpable. Depending on circumstances, the other vessel will likely share culpability.

As for rendering assistance, read 46 USC 2301 - 2305.

I don't really care about further licenses. Mostly the real jerks are a hazard to themselves more than others. The problems that exist can be better solved by vigorous enforcement of existing laws and regulations.

We have appropriate rules for vessel registration and licenses for commercial operation. I don't oppose non-commercial operater licenses so much as just don't see a compelling analogy to auto licenses that really make sense.

PatCassidy
06-16-2008, 12:38 PM
Pompously quoting Rule 5? I'm not sure where you are going with that one. Yes, navigation rules violations only count in collisions. Unlike handgrenades and horseshoes, with regard to rules enforcement a close call is almost always no foul.

The rules are written to protect large unwieldly vessels from colliding with similar vessels - yet the rules apply to all. And many of the rules are ignored by vessels large and small. But many people don't even no what the rules are.

I'm talking about the guy who gets on the radio and asks what the compass course is to Avalon Harbor. The guy who puts his boat on auto-pilot and goes below to take a two-hour nap because he has a three-hour trip. The guy out in the fog with no radar and no horn who plows into a bouy with kids on board trapped in the forward cabin. They guy with 100 feet of rode out in 95 feet of water. The guy who runs out of fuel in front of a supertanker. The guy who sails close hauled along a breakwater and then gets set into it when the wind shifts and he is caught in irons. The two guys who get into a swearing contest on channel 16, that originally started as a channel 16 radio check. The two guys that collide on jet skis wake-jumping. The guy who has just chartered or borrowed someone's boat for the weekend and leaves the dock with the through-hull for the engine cooling closed.

Welcome to Los Angles on any given summer weekend.


I'm talking about safety. Safety for the "other guy". They guy who has to make a detour in the middle of nowhere because somebody can't answer their radio.

I'm not saying people should have captain's licenses. And I'm not talking about a fee mechanism for some govenment authority. I'm talking about safety and navigation courses. Understanding some of the nuances of the rules of the road for the relevant waters.

God forbid someone should have to be able to tie up thier boat or know how to dock it. After all, that is not covered on the multiple choice captain exams!

John of Phoenix
06-16-2008, 01:16 PM
Look at all the good licensing car drivers has done - talking on phones, putting on make up, reading a newspaper, drinking, doped up.

Nanny still hasn't figured a means to mandate responsibility on land. How can it be done on the high seas?

Kaa
06-16-2008, 01:22 PM
I think you're complaining about human stupidity and attitude to taking risks that's different from yours. You propose to cure it with "safety and navigation courses". Oh really?

Kaa

Henning 4148
06-16-2008, 01:50 PM
In the UK, you don't need a license for boating - but you need third party insurance and that is pretty hard to get without a license. I have found, that most people going to sea in the UK undergo the trouble of obtaining a license anyway, not just for insurance but for safety reasons. Already the UK day skipper license does cover tides.

In Germany, you need a license for every boat having more than 6 hp. You do learn a few basics, so there is a minimum standard of knowledge, but for sailing in the tidal areas of the North Sea, the required minimum license is legal but completely insufficient as it doesn't cover tidal heights and tidal streams.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
06-16-2008, 02:02 PM
In the UK, you don't need a license for boating - but you need third party insurance and that is pretty hard to get without a license. I have found, that most people going to sea in the UK undergo the trouble of obtaining a license anyway, not just for insurance but for safety reasons. Already the UK day skipper license does cover tides.

In Germany, you need a license for every boat having more than 6 hp. You do learn a few basics, so there is a minimum standard of knowledge, but for sailing in the tidal areas of the North Sea, the required minimum license is legal but completely insufficient as it doesn't cover tidal heights and tidal streams.

The RYA qualifications in no way constitute "Licenses"! - they are entirely voluntary - the training courses for them however are really good learning opportunities and very good fun.

S.V. Airlie
06-17-2008, 07:37 AM
CT. now requires a boater's safety course. Basically a waste of time.
CT. also requires a written and road test for a drivers' lic. That is okay as there is actually a test done on the road. Perhaps not perfect but better than not having one. The Boater's course is just 50 questions. No 'on the road test' so to speak. Basically useless... An 8 yr old can pass it.
Bottom line, the lic. is 25 bucks and that is what the state wants.

I'm all for safety. I'm against state or federal gov. creating paperwork to create revenue..

Bob Triggs
06-17-2008, 12:51 PM
I am in favor of mandatory boater safety education. How they wish to certify that, with a license or certificate etc, is moot. I feel it should be a legal requirement, just like driving a car. There are too many people on the water for us to ignore the serious value of boating safety and competence education.

I see some very unsafe and bad operators every season here, often with large vessels, lots of power etc. The ability to buy a big, expensive and powerful boat does not automatically confer on one the requisite skills to operate that vessel safely.

No one is born with an innate understanding of The Rules Of The Road; knowing the navigation bouy systems, much less having on the water experience of tides, currents, weather conditions and the ability to read a chart or take a fix, plot DR, calculate their Course Made Good etc.

Education is a very good thing. Requiring it wise. Seeking it out is even wiser.

peb
06-17-2008, 01:00 PM
I agree with Mr. Triggs. Mandatory boater education is needed very much so around here. I continually see extremely stupid things done on small motor boats. Everyone assumes that it is easy to drive a boat and think nothing of getting behind the wheel and charging across the lake at very high speeds. We had 40 boats on a downwind leg the other night and a idiot comes blasting through the fleet at high speed not once, but the circled around and did it twice. Bouncing over waves, boat poorly trimmed. All four on board were yelling and screaming the whole time. They came remarkably close to some boats on a broad reach with spinnakers up. One unfortunate broach at the wrong time and it would have not been pretty.

PatCassidy
06-17-2008, 01:29 PM
I agree that passing a "safe boating" course does not necessarily mean a lot more than your check cleared. In this technological aid a great deal of meaningful material could be standardized using DVDs.

The US not leading the world in boating safety. Just look at jet skis: go crazy in the US Virgin Islands and banned in the British Virgin Islands. In France you have to stay (I believe) 300 meters from shore and wear a helmet; and, licensing rules now follow the rules of the flag state. In Italy everyone operating a jet ski needs a license.

On the flipside, these other countries have far fewer inflatibles mounted with machine guns. So maybe we are safer.

Kaa
06-17-2008, 01:30 PM
Mandatory boater education is needed very much so around here. I continually see extremely stupid things done on small motor boats.

I entirely fail to understand why anyone would think that mandatory boater education would stop "extremely stupid things done".

Kaa

Bob Triggs
06-17-2008, 01:47 PM
You can not legislate for stupidity. But education does bring, along with knowledge, more accountability for one's actions.

Arko
06-17-2008, 02:00 PM
Is it not against the constitution of the U S of A for the government to require a person to have a liscense for ANYTHING? A liscense is a form of extortion. A liscense will do nothing, absolutly nothing to protect you from the rest of the boating public. No one needs a liscense for anything. They just need common sense, and a sense of responsibility.The government needs you to have a liscense.

S.V. Airlie
06-18-2008, 06:23 AM
Well, some did not get my point above.. I.E., the boatersafety course is just a written test where the material can be memorized and afterwards forgotten.
If the safety test included an actual test on thewater.. well, I'd be for t.
Iremembertaking a test ( boater safety ) in NY in 1963. We took a written as well as a 'road' test. No problem with that.

Phillip Allen
06-18-2008, 06:29 AM
I suppose such a test would need to broken down into tidal, civic impoundment, open sea, riverine and so on

S.V. Airlie
06-18-2008, 06:31 AM
Well, here is a story from last summer on the CT River.
Boater A ( power ) drunk.. ran down a sailboat.. Well his boat did as he had fallen over... One death..not his..
State.. first thing it did was take his boater safety lic. away.. WOW!

AussieBarney
06-18-2008, 06:35 AM
In NSW Australia, we have mandatory licencing for boat drivers if the boat does over 10 knots?(I think) Help me Here Ian:o. And we have a never ending stream of idiots killing themselves and others. So mandatory licences dont mean much. Having a brain and commonsense should be mandatory:D:eek: Barney

peb
06-18-2008, 08:29 AM
I entirely fail to understand why anyone would think that mandatory boater education would stop "extremely stupid things done".

Kaa

It won't stop all the stupid things done. But if just a little common sense can be imparted, it will help, perhaps a lot. Much of the time, people on ski-boats and jet skis doing the stupid stuff don't realize that they are endangering themselves or others.
In Texas, they implemented a mandatory boater education law for everyone born after a certain date, this was an attempt to grandfather in existing boaters. The grandfather clause was a bad idea. They tried to copy what they did with hunting licenses, which worked the similarly. If you were born after a certain date, you cannot get a hunting license without taking a hunting safety class. It worked great. Hunters loved it. I know of know hunter that complained about their kids having to take the class. But the grandfather clause with hunting was ok, because the vast majority of hunters are very much safety conscience anyway. The same is not true with boaters, so we are stuck with a lot of adult, stupid boaters.

SamSam
06-18-2008, 08:36 AM
Is it the State's job to protect us from ourselves? I dont thnk so...

Is it the state's job to protect us from others? Just wondering....

Gary E
06-18-2008, 08:50 AM
Is it the state's job to protect us from others? Just wondering....

The "state" can not protect you from others, just look at the job they do protecting you from someone driving their car into you or your property.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
06-18-2008, 08:58 AM
We already have a Boat operators card. There are restrictions in place for age and horsepower, and all boaters will be required to have an operators card by September 2009. The course is about 2 hours, and can be take online. The card itself does not expire, and does not have a fee. That said, I'm sure it will have at some point, and I fully expect the requirements to obtain it will get more rigorous. The Ontario provincial police and the Coast guard and RCMP are enforcing it. The fine is $300.00.

The last couple of years, the OPP have been stepping up inspections of boats, equipment and the operators card in a big way.Unfortunately, some of the enforcement has been dumbass stuff, but thats the learning curve. I'm in favour, although I think it adds more government, which isn't necessarily good.

I come in contact with a lot of boaters due to my part time job, and you would be amazed at the lack of knowledge out there, not only of equipment, but just basic seamanship. These people are a liability to me, and to their passengers and themselves. Inadequate maintenance, not enough safety equipment, coupled with not knowing where the hell they are, and where they're going. These are the people with color GPS and no charts, who haven't figured out there is no brake pedal on their boat.

I have no fear of the regulations tightening. All for it. The area I boat in is close quarters a lot of the time, and lots of rock. Hopefully this will pound some sense into some of them.