 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsBoatsPaddle BoatsSailingCruisingBuildingElectronics Related Topics CarsMotorcyclesMore Topics ... |
Boat Forum / Paddle Boats / September 2008Why the Law of the Sea has to be the Law of the Jungle?
Well, I'm not going to speak in defense of the sardine in their eternal quest to survive the big fish... The issue here is, WHY A KAYAK OR CANOE MUST GIVE THE RIGHT OF WAY TO THE MOTORBOATS? Every weekend the intracostal waterway of Miami becomes a parade of motorboats of all sorts, from the very big (the owners of this town) to the very small (the noisy jet skis), often driven by intoxicated drivers (I guess you call them "drivers," though seldom they are accountable to the standards as vehicle drivers, like DUI), and almost always running (or should I say "flying"?) up and down (again, with no speed limit restrictions like regular drivers). So the task of crossing these sea highways by paddle becomes something like a duck crossing the hunting grounds, and you are the sitting duck... But the ocean is also hunting ground. The other day (it was weekday, hardly any boats out there), I went to out in my tandem kayak, which I chose as bright as it could be (sunrise) with the paddles to match (they could be more visible than the kayak itself), and out of nowhere came this boat that passed us right in front, so much so that my partner stopped paddling. The ocean was absolutely flat and it was a nice sunny day, so the driver must have chosen to make it a close call... It wasn't a surprise for me though. The cigarette boats routinely roar close to the beach to signal who the seas belong to. Hey, it belongs to the big fish! NOTE: The attendants of this West Marine store I went to to get a flag for the kayak told me of the motorboats, "Hey be careful. They don't care." WELCOME TO BE JUNGLE (beware of the big fish) http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION? (the sardine revolution) http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution > Well, I'm not going to speak in defense of the sardine in their > eternal quest to survive the big fish... Glad to hear it since you do not appear to be competent to defend your position on the issues you did address. > The issue here is, WHY A KAYAK OR CANOE MUST GIVE THE RIGHT OF > WAY TO THE MOTORBOATS? Here is is in a nutshell. It's called "The Rule of Tonage." I outweigh you by . . . well, by a lot of times. In an encounter between my boat and yours, yours, and you, will be crushed. If you aren't, you'll be turned into hamburger, or fish chum if you prefer, by the propellers on the back, that are turned, slow or fast, by more than 300 horsepower each. It's call survival. Ignoring it is commonly referred to as testing Darwin's theory. They have awards, issued poshumously, for thost that do. Other than that, here's another anwer. You don't have to give right of way. Generally speaking, non powered vessels, operated with a bit of common sense, have the right of way over powered ones. > Every weekend the intracostal waterway of Miami becomes a parade of > motorboats of all sorts, from the very big (the owners of this town) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > crossing these sea highways by paddle becomes something like a duck > crossing the hunting grounds, and you are the sitting duck... They're called Captains or pilots, not drivers. If they intoxicated, report them. There are, in fact, laws controlling that very much like those for automobile driers. There are speed limits posted all over the place and quite a few that apply even when not posted. On top of it all, there are maximum wake and other requirements you've not bothered to notice. Crossing the channel, whether by paddle or by motorboat, is a lot like crossing any other highway. You would be ill advised to pull out right in front of a boat operated by a captain with more knowledge and experience than your appear to have, operating at a legal speed, not intoxicated, just like you would be ill advised to push your skateboard out in front of traffic traveling at the speed limit on I-95. You're the one entering the channel. You're the one responsible for doing it safely. Imagine that. > But the ocean is also hunting ground. The other day (it was weekday, > hardly any boats out there), I went to out in my tandem kayak, which I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > nice sunny day, so the driver must have chosen to make it a close > call... You don't know that at all. There are rules for who has the right of way on the ocean as well. Have you bothered to research them? While it is possible that the boater chose to make it a close call, that's not certain at all, particularly if he did not change course. For all you know, he would have been on autopilot or, possibly, following a GPS course from one point to the next. Your assumption that he chose to bother you is a bit off the mark. I will grant you that it would have been nice for him to give you a bit more room. I make a habit of doing that for vessels small enough that going behind them, through their wake, is not a problem while forcing them to go through mine might be. On the other hand, if you were paddling into his path, you also had the option to give yourself more room. Mostly, I think you think you should have equal rights and you're not happy that you weren't able to impose your will on those bigger than you are. I have the same problems with cops. You'll get over it. I did. Lee > > Well, I'm not going to speak in defense of the sardine in their > > eternal quest to survive the big fish... > > Glad to hear it since you do not appear to be competent to defend your > position on the issues you did address. Perhaps gaining ground for the little boats out there is ambitious enough not to take upon my shoulders the defense of the whole sardine population. > > The issue here is, WHY A KAYAK OR CANOE MUST GIVE THE RIGHT OF > > WAY TO THE MOTORBOATS? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > survival. Ignoring it is commonly referred to as testing Darwin's theory. > They have awards, issued poshumously, for thost that do. Good to know. Just by choosing to be a kayaker you'll be a strong contender for the Darwin's awards. But since I consider myself a SITTING DUCK, I'm actually doing little to deserve that award. The motorboat driver is better qualified. He's playing the SHARK here. > Other than that, here's another anwer. You don't have to give right of way. > Generally speaking, non powered vessels, operated with a bit of common [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > quite a few that apply even when not posted. On top of it all, there are > maximum wake and other requirements you've not bothered to notice. If the drivers of those motorboats are captains, then I'm the captain of my kayak. Hey, I better leave that honor for the sailboat captains. > Crossing the channel, whether by paddle or by motorboat, is a lot like > crossing any other highway. You would be ill advised to pull out right in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > traffic traveling at the speed limit on I-95. You're the one entering the > channel. You're the one responsible for doing it safely. Imagine that. Ha, ha, ha. The sitting duck is responsible for sitting there... http://www.whimsical-art.com/ProdImages/SittingDuck1.jpg Now you explain to me how a 4mph kayak dodges a 40mph motorboats. A lot of praying, right? ;) > > But the ocean is also hunting ground. The other day (it was weekday, > > hardly any boats out there), I went to out in my tandem kayak, which I [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > You don't know that at all. There are rules for who has the right of way on > the ocean as well. Have you bothered to research them? Why research them if they are not practiced? The only de facto law is law of the jungle, as I said before. And if it is in the books so the books must be changed because the lawyers (who work for the motorboat industry) are NOT considering kayaks when writing them. > While it is possible that the boater chose to make it a close call, that's > not certain at all, particularly if he did not change course. For all you > know, he would have been on autopilot or, possibly, following a GPS course > from one point to the next. Your assumption that he chose to bother you is > a bit off the mark. It was plain intimidation at worst, or simply ignoring the kayak the way you would ignore, say, an ant. Do you change your course over an ant? > I will grant you that it would have been nice for him to give you a bit more > room. I make a habit of doing that for vessels small enough that going > behind them, through their wake, is not a problem while forcing them to go > through mine might be. On the other hand, if you were paddling into his > path, you also had the option to give yourself more room. Which means, I should stop paddling and become a sitting duck, not a slow duck. You know my strategy? Just ignore him, and go on living like this is my last day. ;) > Mostly, I think you think you should have equal rights and you're not happy > that you weren't able to impose your will on those bigger than you are. I > have the same problems with cops. You'll get over it. I did. > > Lee Hey, don't generalize. Some cops are good just as some boaters are good, and even deserve to be called captains. It is a jungle. From the law of gross tonnage that Lee mentions to the fact that there are oodles of natural things out there that can kill you. Powerboats aren't the only thing. (As a matter of fact, I've had a powerboat with a bunch of teenagers almost sink their own boat trying to play "sink the kayak" when they caught me on a lake in Virginia. They gave up in frustration, I barely even got wet. Unless it runs you over or something, a powerboat is no match for a kayak. It can seem a little scary, however.) It is much safer to sit inside and watch TV. > It is a jungle. From the law of gross tonnage that Lee mentions to > the fact that there are oodles of natural things out there that can [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > can seem a little scary, however.) It is much safer to sit inside and > watch TV. You can always watch kayaking videos, right? ;) But this kid makes the wrong assumption first (it's NOT a jungle) and then realized the hard truth... 'Looks like I’m wrong. According to this coast guard captain, one should always assume that “might makes right” on the water. If you see a vehicle larger than you....avoid it!' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prDueT4iHj8&feature=related Yeah man, you are in worse situation that a bike. Here you are fair game for every single predator out there. And the least of your worries are sharks and alligators. > 'Looks like I’m wrong. According to this coast guard captain, one > should always assume that “might makes right” on the water. If you > see a vehicle larger than you....avoid it!' Anything else may be right, but there's a reason for the words "dead right." Lee >> Here is is in a nutshell. It's called "The Rule of Tonage." I outweigh >> you [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> survival. Ignoring it is commonly referred to as testing Darwin's theory. >> They have awards, issued poshumously, for thost that do. >Good to know. Just by choosing to be a kayaker you'll be a strong >contender for the Darwin's awards. Not at all. Your question was why you have to give way. The answer is because you don't stand a chance if you don't. Just like motorcyclists, the one most likely to die in an accident is the one that had better make sure one doesn't happen. > But since I consider myself a SITTING DUCK, I'm actually doing little > to deserve that award. The motorboat driver is better qualified. He's > playing the SHARK here. Only if you assume that he's trying to get you. If he was, you'd be the first to know. I suppose if a rock were falling, you'd step under it and blame the rock for hitting you. If the drivers of those motorboats are captains, then I'm the captain of my kayak. OK with me. >> Crossing the channel, whether by paddle or by motorboat, is a lot like >> crossing any other highway. You would be ill advised to pull out right in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> traffic traveling at the speed limit on I-95. You're the one entering the >> channel. You're the one responsible for doing it safely. Imagine that. > Ha, ha, ha. The sitting duck is responsible for sitting there... Were you sitting there or crossing the channel? Make up your mind. > Now you explain to me how a 4mph kayak dodges a 40mph motorboats. A > lot of praying, right? ;) You don't. You give way. It appears you had the answer to your question all along. You just don't like it. >> You don't know that at all. There are rules for who has the right of way >> on >> the ocean as well. Have you bothered to research them? >Why research them if they are not practiced? So you know what they are and can act accordingly? So you can report those that fail to abide by them? Did you learn the rules of driving even though they are routinely violated? > The only de facto law is law of the jungle, as I said before. If you believe that, then quit your complaining. You chose to be low on the food chain. They chose not to be. They benefit and suffer for their choices. You benefit and suffer for yours. If you don't like it, change your choice. > And if it is in the books so the books must be changed because the lawyers > (who work > for the motorboat industry) are NOT considering kayaks when writing them. You don't know what the laws are, but you know what those that wrote them were thinking? The lawyers that wrote the laws were not, in fact, working for the motorboat industry. If they were, there would be no give way rules for sailboats and their damned sure would be no manatee zones where there are not, normally, any manatees. > It was plain intimidation at worst, or simply ignoring the kayak the > way you would ignore, say, an ant. Do you change your course over an >ant? Sometimes. >> I will grant you that it would have been nice for him to give you a bit >> more [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> through mine might be. On the other hand, if you were paddling into his >> path, you also had the option to give yourself more room. >Which means, I should stop paddling and become a sitting duck, not a >slow duck. Which means that paddling into the path of an oncoming speeding boat is kind of stupid. Refer back to the Darwin discussion. > You know my strategy? Just ignore him, and go on living like this is >my last day. ;) Works for me, but it makes me wonder why you're complaining here. Lee > Mostly, I think you think you should have equal rights and you're not > happy > that you weren't able to impose your will on those bigger than you are. I > have the same problems with cops. You'll get over it. I did. > > Lee Hey, don't generalize. Some cops are good just as some boaters are good, and even deserve to be called captains. > > The only de facto law is law of the jungle, as I said before. > > If you believe that, then quit your complaining. You chose to be low on the > food chain. They chose not to be. They benefit and suffer for their > choices. You benefit and suffer for yours. If you don't like it, change > your choice. Pretty lousy defense of the law of the jungle you make. "If you don't like it, grow up!" Now, suppose I don't want a motorboat because I find it stupid, suppose that I don't want to pollute, that I like to have fun... Imagine a world where nations invade nations, your sister is raped and your kids get bullied at school. Well, much of it is already happening, and it comes right from the top... (just from today's news) http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php?t=222358 Not even bikes are as insignificant as kayaks to be ignored by the law. And not that it makes a big difference, but, oh well, that's another subject. ;) On Aug 14, 8:39 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: >>> The only de facto law is law of the jungle, as I said before. >> If you believe that, then quit your complaining. You chose to be low on >> the >> food chain. They chose not to be. They benefit and suffer for their >> choices. You benefit and suffer for yours. If you don't like it, change >> your choice. > Pretty lousy defense of the law of the jungle you make. "If you don't > like it, grow up!" Not defending it. Just recognizing it. > Now, suppose I don't want a motorboat because I find it stupid, > suppose that I don't want to pollute, that I like to have fun... Your choice. Take the good with the bad. For what it's worth, I have a Kayak too and, for that matter, rode my bicycle about 10 miles today. Lee > On Aug 14, 8:39 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Lee TO RECOGNIZE WE HAVE A PROBLEM IS HALF THE PROBLEM. DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT IS THE OTHER HALF. Hey, we all trying to survive in the jungle, but DOES IT HAVE TO BE THAT WAY? Are the predators going to laugh their way into extinction? On Aug 15, 4:23 pm, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "ComandanteBanana" <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Are the predators going to laugh their way into extinction? no it doesn't have to be that way. it should be that folks show at least some respect for others safety and comfort. if for no other reason than they might get a good return. > They're called Captains or pilots, not drivers. If they intoxicated, report > them. There are, in fact, laws controlling that very much like those for > automobile driers. There are speed limits posted all over the place and > quite a few that apply even when not posted. On top of it all, there are > maximum wake and other requirements you've not bothered to notice. I'll like you to elaborate more on this. Is enforcement as harsh and frequent as on the roads? Are there open container laws? Are there speed limits? And are there wake requirements? Not that I care about the last issue. ;) > They're called Captains or pilots, not drivers. If they intoxicated, > report > them. There are, in fact, laws controlling that very much like those for > automobile driers. There are speed limits posted all over the place and > quite a few that apply even when not posted. On top of it all, there are > maximum wake and other requirements you've not bothered to notice. I'll like you to elaborate more on this. Is enforcement as harsh and frequent as on the roads? More so in the intracoastal. Every city in S. Florida, plus the Coast Guard, Marine Patol the Fish and Game Commission has boats on the intracoastal enforcing the laws. > Are there open container laws? Probably not, if for no other reason, because a lot of the boats, mine, for example, have bars aboard. Having opened containers does not translate into being impaired. There are laws against operating a boat under the influence. They're quite similar to the ones for drivers if you're a civilian. They're must more stringent if you're a licensed captain. > Are there speed limits? Yes. How does it happen you have not observed the signs? They're all over the intracoastal. > And are there wake requirements? Yes. They're posted in various places along the intracoastal too. > Not that I care about the last issue. ;) You might. While my wake probably would not sink you, it would probably make you uncomfortable. Lee the rules of the road inland or at sea say the un powered less maneuverable vessel has the right of way and the real watch out is on the overtaking vessel. "The Nav Rules are written with the understanding that not all boats can maneuver with the same ease. Therefore, Rule 18 states that certain vessels must keep out of the way of other vessels due to their ability to maneuver. A power driven vessel underway must keep out of the way of the following: o A sailing vessel, under sail only, and vessels propelled by oars or paddles. (Note: when a sailboat has its motor running, it is considered a power driven vessel). o A vessel engaged in fishing, whose fishing equipment restricts its maneuverability. This does not include a sport fisher or party boat and generally means a commercial fishing vessel. o A vessel with restricted maneuverability such as a dredge or tow boat, a boat engaged in work that restricts it to a certain area, or a vessel transferring supplies to another vessel. o A vessel not under command – broken down. Each of these vessels must keep out of the way of the next vessel in the hierarchy. For example, a sailboat must keep out of the way of a vessel engaged in fishing, which in turn must keep out of the way of a vessel with restricted maneuverability. And everyone must keep out of the way of a vessel not under command. " that being said unofficially tonnage rules. or you can decide to get mad and do something about the drunken a.sholes. this can range from getting a citizen group together or direct action. a granade or a can of white gas with a blasting cap floated in front of a cig boat. sure makes the scum of the water into so much scrap. A nice chain just under the water does a good job as well. I do love the sound of bubbas beer can breaking his tooth. mainly my advice is to get out of the cancer coast and move to a place with humans. here is a link to the inland rules of the road. http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/mwv/navrules/rotr_online.htm read it carefully and don't try to go head to head with a jet ski. however they have side numbers and you can report them and bring charges. PS. in case you didn't notice Lee is a Plexiotomy recipient. On Aug 15, 3:20 am, Two meter troll <eawis...@gmail.com> wrote: > the rules of the road inland or at sea say the un powered less > maneuverable vessel has the right of way and the real watch out is on [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > PS. in case you didn't notice Lee is a Plexiotomy recipient. In South Florida is a bad idea to be a manatee. So much so that it may become a verb... Suzy wrote: >> ...so you won’t get manateed, I mean run over. Gus wrote: > LOL at that. Oh, I missed that. Maybe it will become and entry in the next Webster’s Dictionary… Manatee (v): to live in South Florida and get run over by motorboats while kayaking, just like manatees. Shark (v): to live in South Florida and own a big superfast motorboat while intimidating others. *** Hey, where's the real place with humans, Alaska, Scandinavia? On Aug 15, 7:21 am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Aug 15, 3:20 am, Two meter troll <eawis...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > > Hey, where's the real place with humans, Alaska, Scandinavia? any place where you get actual sailors. I worked the gulf for a while and was on the whole unimpressed. what i observed was a total lack of licensing, no familiarity with either inland or international rules of the road, skill levels in boat handling and navigations somewhere around those of a brain damaged squid, drunkenness at the helm, no enforcement at all, trash all over the place, a disregard for every one else on or in the water, and an over whelming attitude that folks don't actually have to follow any rules. In short; Bubbas (I cant actually think of anything that acts as slovenly and boorish as the majority of southern boaters). Take your pick go north or south east or west from the cancer coast and you soon get a higher proportion of humans to Bubbas. >On Aug 15, 7:21 am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> >wrote: >> On Aug 15, 3:20 am, Two meter troll <eawis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hey, where's the real place with humans, Alaska, Scandinavia? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >rules. In short; Bubbas (I cant actually think of anything that acts >as slovenly and boorish as the majority of southern boaters). In Scandinavia the greater Oslo Fjord area is like this. Sheltered waters, lots of yuppies with daddys gofast-boat; as you call them ; "bubbas" with cabin cruisers, and rich drunkards with cigar boats. The first day of main holiday you can barely get through on the VHF ch 16 because of all the disaster messages. Fortunatly, the vast majority of damage is self-inflicted. [1] This territory is sharply defined as the coastal waters from Mandal (just west of Kristiansand) to just south of Smogen. These are a sheltered morass of crisscrossing small fjords, and except for finding the shallows and rocks (with the boaters are very good at), there is no real challenge in navigating. West and north of this area there is a whole different culture. Same for Denmark. There is far between ports, you need to handle the weather. The larger fjords make excellent wind and wave tunnels; you can have a storm at the center, and total calm on land. You have to handle stretches where navigation can be an issue; e.g. finding the little ports in between all the rocks. I put the good seamanship in most of Sweden up to the fact that it is the most well organised place on the planet. >Take your pick go north or south east or west from the cancer coast >and you soon get a higher proportion of humans to Bubbas. -- mrr [1] But the story of the motor torpedo boat that ran aground and killed a cow is true. It actually happened twice, in 1954 and again in the 1970s. The first cow was almost cut in half, the second one died of a heart attack. The Navy has "improved the charts" a lot by finding shallows and rocks noone has know about. They are very good at finding them at 40 knots as well. > In article <7d600a9a-a2d2-401b-869b-2c2aa7743...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > VHF ch 16 because of all the disaster messages. Fortunatly, the vast > majority of damage is self-inflicted. [1] When I was in Norway in 2000 everything looked good and unpolluted, but I noticed you were being fed too many American TV shows. I guess what happened is that some people bought into the "American dream" (those who could afford it anyway), and started doing like in the series "Miami Vice." But I assure you, that those cigarette boats do pollute, and leave a trail of garbage while terrorizing kayakers and other civilized people. >> In article <7d600a9a-a2d2-401b-869b-2c2aa7743...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >When I was in Norway in 2000 everything looked good and unpolluted, >but I noticed you were being fed too many American TV shows. Garbage TV is the same everywhere. >I guess what happened is that some people bought into the "American >dream" (those who could afford it anyway), and started doing like in No, we don't have much of the industrial pollution. Rules for the oil industry are strict; and the plants tend to have localised pollution, and are put in some desolate place between steep mountains. The cruise ships don't go to those fjords. They even put back some water in the waterfalls for the tourists to watch. Normally any waterfall of any size would have been put in pipes to make hydropower. >the series "Miami Vice." But I assure you, that those cigarette boats >do pollute, and leave a trail of garbage while terrorizing kayakers >and other civilized people. Nowadays, we MAKE a lot of those boats. And the Swedes make a lot of the engines. Also sold in America. The entrepreneurs among us saw Miami Vice, and thought "I can make those cheaper and better". -- mrr > In article <504ddef9-0cbd-46d3-b55c-848c735fb...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Garbage TV is the same everywhere. Yep, but it always comes from the same place. ;) > >I guess what happened is that some people bought into the "American > >dream" (those who could afford it anyway), and started doing like in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to watch. Normally any waterfall of any size would have been put > in pipes to make hydropower. Wherever you go in Norway, you don't see piles of garbage, not even a piece of paper on the ground. I wonder if our politicians could ever go there and bring back some ideas. > >the series "Miami Vice." But I assure you, that those cigarette boats > >do pollute, and leave a trail of garbage while terrorizing kayakers [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Well, it's like Volvo. They also got into the SUV craze... Not as stupid as our Stupid Unnecessary Vehicles but still unnecessary. Good old fashioned station wagons are still the best. >> Well, I'm not going to speak in defense of the sardine in their >> eternal quest to survive the big fish... [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Generally speaking, non powered vessels, operated with a bit of common >sense, have the right of way over powered ones. With modifications. If you are in a defined VTC area the vessels in the "motorway" have right of way to anything crossing. These are clearly marked on any chart. Dates from the Copenhagen protocol of 1859, with later extensions. Flag states have authority over the VTC, even in international waters. (Was never ratified by the confederate states, though). The VTC operator is king. Listen to VHF on the VTC channels to get updates. Ferries and other officially scheduled traffic comes next. Then there are three conflicting sets of rules. 1) The "seamanship" rules. * Everyone yield for special signs, like dive flag, trawler, etc. * Planes under landing and takeoff have next right of way. * Overtaking boat yields for the overtaken. * Propelled (including rowboats) yield for sailboats and planes. * Planes yield for sail (until Jun 1st 2006 this was the other way around) * Engine yield for non-engine * Sailboats with the wind from port yield for other sailboats with the wind from Starboard. * Sailboats yield for other sailboats with a higher angle into the wind. 2) The "useful" rules. * Boats carrying payload have first rights. * More payload => more right of way * You shall not disturb a vessel that cannot manouver as well as you can. 3) Biggest carries the day. * I am bigger than you are. Interesting point is that you must yield for planes, even if they are overtaking. With sea planes it can be hard to distinguish the transition from plane to vessel some times. As of June 1st 2006, military or SAR vessels with blinking blue lights have first priority over all. >> Every weekend the intracostal waterway of Miami becomes a parade of >> motorboats of all sorts, from the very big (the owners of this town) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> crossing these sea highways by paddle becomes something like a duck >> crossing the hunting grounds, and you are the sitting duck... But, if convicted of wrongdoing they can have the book thrown at them. DUI, reckless driving, endangering ship traffic, violations of a score of SOLAS regulations etc. We have a couple of cases each year where skippers end up with a year or more of hard time. >They're called Captains or pilots, not drivers. If they intoxicated, report >them. There are, in fact, laws controlling that very much like those for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >traffic traveling at the speed limit on I-95. You're the one entering the >channel. You're the one responsible for doing it safely. Imagine that. Big difference between VTC and non-VTC areas. VTC is more like a runway for planes. You really _should_ listen to the traffic controller, even in a canoe. Especially in a canoe. We have done many dives in VTC areas; they are usually very cooperative, and we have to follow a given timeslot, and report in as all other VTC parties do. >> But the ocean is also hunting ground. The other day (it was weekday, >> hardly any boats out there), I went to out in my tandem kayak, which I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >from one point to the next. Your assumption that he chose to bother you is >a bit off the mark. I can confirm than going off autopilot is a definate hassle. If he was following a marked sea lane he would probably think of you as a nuisance; and have the law on his side. >I will grant you that it would have been nice for him to give you a bit more >room. I make a habit of doing that for vessels small enough that going >behind them, through their wake, is not a problem while forcing them to go >through mine might be. On the other hand, if you were paddling into his >path, you also had the option to give yourself more room. Also, signal your intensions by making course adjustments if you have to, and do it early. BTW, the really large vessels run anti-collision systems, and have to log collision alarms. If they behave like a**h*les you can buzz them a little by triggering those alarms. You can do so at a safe distance, you just need to set a colliding course, and stay there for a minute or two. The radar and anti-collision systems will pick you up. -- mrr > 1) The "seamanship" rules. > > * Everyone yield for special signs, like dive flag, trawler, etc. I do have a dive flag that use when snorkeling, but just got a "protest" red flag, which I learned later was for sailboat races... Anyway I intend to fly it for two purposes: 1. to be seen, and 2. to protest against the Law of the Jungle, currently in practice everywhere in the seas. The question is, WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT? I'm afraid the laws are made to fit the big ones, of course... HOW THE LAW WORKS... FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LION One day the King of the Jungle, tired of being called AUTHORITARIAN, gathered the most cunning animals in the kingdom, chief among them the Foxes, and told them: "It's mighty unjust that I am not recognized for what I am. You know full well that the best of my SCRAPS, after you, go to the Little Animals... Well, I want you to write LAWS, so from now on it'll be them, and not me, who would rule over this God chosen kingdom..." After a few months of hard deliberations (and a few "private parties" and "business trips") the Foxes (now turned politicians) returned with a long, long book of laws written in a language so hard to understand to the Little Animals that they thought it was old Greek. After translation, it started like this: "The animals with a mane will be treated like kings; the animals with paws and teeth will be above the Laws; and the animals who will represent the interests of the Little Animals, us, will be granted a raise in benefits and status... Of course, ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION will be considered ILLEGAL, and will result in the Lion eating the Little Animal..." (Moral: The trick is in the law.) > The question is, WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT? Don't know, but we're all going to chip in and buy him a beer. Steve On Aug 21, 11:18 am, "cramer...@gmail.com" <cramer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The question is, WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT? > > Don't know, but we're all going to chip in and buy him a beer. > > Steve You must one of those who celebrate the Law of the Jungle. I bet you got one of those bumper stickers that say, "We support our troops." In article <9dc6da00-1ad6-4893-8a5f-cfab2ea44df4@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > On Aug 21, 11:18 am, "cramer...@gmail.com" <cramer...@gmail.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I bet you got one of those bumper stickers that say, "We support our > troops." At least they don't whine at extended, exhaustive length, looking for someone else to blame. On Aug 21, 2:10 pm, Steve Hix <se...@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID> wrote: > In article > <9dc6da00-1ad6-4893-8a5f-cfab2ea44...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > At least they don't whine at extended, exhaustive length, looking for > someone else to blame. They do blame somebody else: Hussein, WMDs, terrorists... But I'm talking about the safety of those very activities (green, healthy) that should be promoted, not be left to the Law of the Jungle. Hey, fast motorboats sound to me like WMDs. ;) > Hey, fast motorboats sound to me like WMDs. ;) BFD. I kids bicycle probably sounds like them to you too. (This is a contribution by the very same person who sold me the last kayak. Reporting from the watery jungle) Flex 029 wrote: hi folks, first time here .. met Sr. Commandate Banana at my shop .. one way of dealing with this problem is to NOT paddle in these areas on weekends. when i go on any given week-DAY, there’s usually nobody around - EXCEPT for all that damn trash~ Howdy Flex, good to see you here so we can discuss how best to survive out there. I totally agree with you, and in fact I stay away from the waterways on weekends. The weekends belong to the predators, so to speak. I also canoe at night (which you told me you do too), which not makes for far fewer motorboats, but also hides the mountains of trash (yes, including batteries and mattresses) left behind by the said motorboats. (I have a bright kayak for daylight, and camouflage canoe with proper lights for night time.) As you know, the beautiful kayak I’ve got from you is as bright as sunrise (that’s the color), as well as the lights and flag I’m getting from you. So if the superfast, superbig boats don’t see me is because their drivers (I deny them “captain” status) are superdrunk and superhigh. Hey, we’ve developed the same strategy for survival! Actually it was developed by the early mammals at the time the dinosaurs ruled the earth. That’s kind of metaphorical, isn’t it? > I also canoe at night (which you told me you do too), which not makes > for far fewer motorboats, but also hides the mountains of trash (yes, > including batteries and mattresses) left behind by the said >motorboats. (I have a bright kayak for daylight, and camouflage canoe >with proper lights for night time.) In all my years of boating and kayaking, I've never, ever seen a battery floating by. As far as I know, boaters aren't really well known for dumping their mattresses in the water either. Perhaps you'd like to explain why you crossposted your complaints about boaters in the Intracoastal to rec.scuba and a UK group, all of whom are extremely unlikely to even know what the Intracoastal is, let alone care about boats in it. Lee In rec.boats.paddle Lee Bell <pleebell@bellsouth.net> wrote: >> I also canoe at night (which you told me you do too), which not makes >> for far fewer motorboats, but also hides the mountains of trash (yes, >> including batteries and mattresses) left behind by the said >>motorboats. (I have a bright kayak for daylight, and camouflage canoe >>with proper lights for night time.) >In all my years of boating and kayaking, I've never, ever seen a battery >floating by. As far as I know, boaters aren't really well known for dumping >their mattresses in the water either. >Perhaps you'd like to explain why you crossposted your complaints about >boaters in the Intracoastal to rec.scuba and a UK group, all of whom are >extremely unlikely to even know what the Intracoastal is, let alone care >about boats in it. We have a canal here called the I&M canal. Around 1996 a dam rupture caused the canal to drain exposing all sorts of stuff. We were on the bike trail the following weekend and were looking at all the recliners, washing machines and stuff in the canal. The canal is only open to canoes and kayaks and I don't think many canoeists or kayakers were taking washing machines or recliners in their boats... course, I could be wrong... Most of the larger garbage was concentrated near bridges...  SignatureJohn Nelson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chicago Area Paddling/Fishing Page http://www.chicagopaddling.org http://www.chicagofishing.org (A Non-Commercial Web Site: No Sponsors, No Paid Ads and Nothing to Sell) wpns4l wrote: "this thread is crazy lol. stories of lions and the jungle. do yourself a favor and carry a hand held uhf radio or something and if you see people, motorboat or not, acting like a.ses call the police/ coast guard." Hey, you seem to be ready for “the jungle” in that picture. Either you have big guns… or have a banana to go in there (I have to tell the metaphorical meaning of it). Anyway, I do carry a cell phone, and I assume they don’t see me. But I’m not sure that’s good or bad because then I get all stressed out over the damn boats, and it defeats the purpose of the kayak, which is to relax. In other words, I ignore them. So, I go back to one of the favorite slogans of the revolution, “Whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” On Aug 22, 12:37 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > I also canoe at night (which you told me you do too), which not makes > > for far fewer motorboats, but also hides the mountains of trash (yes, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > floating by. As far as I know, boaters aren't really well known for dumping > their mattresses in the water either. Well, there are islands on the water and the batteries are left behind on the islands. It would be mighty difficult to leave piles of garbage on the water, even if they tried. > Perhaps you'd like to explain why you crossposted your complaints about > boaters in the Intracoastal to rec.scuba and a UK group, all of whom are > extremely unlikely to even know what the Intracoastal is, let alone care > about boats in it. > > Lee Well, maybe they heard of the coral reefs in the tropical waters of the Caribbean dying because of all the pollution and motorboats that anchor in the wrong places. By the way, do you have many coral reefs in the UK? > Well, there are islands on the water and the batteries are left behind > on the islands. I suppose it's happened, but it darned sure doesn't happen often. Boats big enough to carry batteries, don't work without them. They have to have them to start the motors. It's really unlikely that anybody would go to all the trouble to drive their boat out to an island with a spare battery on board, change the battery while on the island and go to all the touble to take the battery off the boat just so they can leave it someplace where it will later have to be collected by another power boater. It could happne, but I don't know why. It's much more likely that any batteries you round were taken to the island for use by somebody camping there. They may or may not have gotten to the island by power boat, but the batteries you see almost certainly weren't lift there because they are power boaters. > Well, maybe they heard of the coral reefs in the tropical waters of > the Caribbean dying because of all the pollution and motorboats that > anchor in the wrong places. In more than 45 years of diving, and boating in the Caribbean, no, I've never heard of it. I have heard of them dying because of fertilizer, sewerage and other chemicals washed our from those on land who have less consideration than either you or I do. I have heard of reefs destroyed by sewage outfalls operated by Miami Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties. I have heard of reefs destroyed by "accidental" leaks of millions of gallons of raw sewage from Miami Dade about twice a year. I have heard of reefs destroyed by those that dispose of thousands of tires as "artificial reefs" that nothing ever lives on. Here's a clue. Gas floats. Reefs don't. Anchors don't do much damage and their use is not limited to motor boats. Sailboats and even kayaks carry them too. Lee On Aug 22, 4:08 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > Well, there are islands on the water and the batteries are left behind > > on the islands. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > have to be collected by another power boater. It could happne, but I don't > know why. Batteries may get damaged by sea water or just get depleted. I have one on my canoe to power my trolling motor. I changed to AGM though because they are water and leakproof. > It's much more likely that any batteries you round were taken to the island > for use by somebody camping there. They may or may not have gotten to the > island by power boat, but the batteries you see almost certainly weren't > lift there because they are power boaters. Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. I think MOTORBOATING IS LARGELY FOR COUCH POTATOES THAT WANT TO HAVE A DEGREE OF ADVENTURE IN THE GREAT OUTDOORS. I, personally, would prefer that they stay home watching baseball and drinking beer. > > Well, maybe they heard of the coral reefs in the tropical waters of > > the Caribbean dying because of all the pollution and motorboats that [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Lee My anchor weighs 1 1/2 lbs... Terrible threat to the reefs. ;) How much you need for a motorboat? But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim in the intracostal anymore. Their main threat though is to life and property... "Here are some startling statistics regarding boating accidents from the United States Coast Guard: In 2005, states and jurisdictions reported a total of 12,942,414 registered recreational boats compared with 12,781,476 in 2004. The 4,969 boating accidents reported in 2005 resulted in 697 fatalities, 3,451 injuries, and $38,721,088 in property damage. Florida had 973,859 registered motorboats and 603 boating accidents in 2005. Approximately 70% of all fatal boating accident victims drowned. The most reported type of accident was a collision with another vessel. Overall, carelessness/reckless operation, operator inattention, excessive speed, and operator inexperience are the leading contributing factors of all reported accidents. The most common types of boats involved in reported accidents were open motorboats (45%), personal watercraft (PWC) (26%), and cabin motorboats (14%). Increases were observed in the number of reported fatalities involving PWC, cabin motorboats, inflatables, sailboats, and houseboats from 2004. A decrease was observed in the number of fatalities involving canoes/kayaks and rowboats from the number of fatalities reported in 2004." http://www.rueziffra.com/practiceAreas.php?id=14 > Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and > couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. Kind of an interesting self-contradiction you're making, by first talking about how these boats are huge and expensive, yet now they're owned by uneducated high school dropouts, which is a demographic with very low incomes. With just a McDonald's job, how can they afford the gas to be constantly running their boats? > But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You > can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim > in the intracostal anymore. You sure that you're not smelling naturally occurring organics? Afterall, the ICW runs through a lot of muddy marshes and estuaries. > Their main threat though is to life and property... > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > registered recreational boats compared with 12,781,476 in 2004. > The 4,969 boating accidents ... 0.04% incidence. Yes, very 'startling'. You would have to boat for over 25 years just to get up to a 1% risk. > The most common types of boats involved in reported accidents were > open motorboats (45%), personal watercraft (PWC) (26%), and cabin > motorboats (14%). And 15% missing. FYI, this data is statistically meaningless without the context of the relevant contributing base population also being provided. > Increases were observed in the number of reported > fatalities involving PWC, cabin motorboats, inflatables, sailboats, > and houseboats from 2004. With 160,938 more registered watercraft, is this really surprising that the observed total also increased? > A decrease was observed in the number of fatalities > involving canoes/kayaks and rowboats... Was this because they as a group became safer, or because they as a group became fewer? You don't know because that can only be answered if the relevant contributing base population context was included ... which here it is not. As such, you have "true statements" being made that are functionally meaningless because they fail to determine causality. -hh >> Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and >> couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >very low incomes. With just a McDonald's job, how can they afford the >gas to be constantly running their boats? The "salarimen" have taken to motorboating, with cabin cruisers. They have the cash, but less time to learn to operate the craft. Most marinas are built for boats up to 39'/12m length, 11'6"/3.5m wide. The new cigar boats and cabin cruisers are too big for them, so they are often forced to anchoring. >> But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You >> can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim >> in the intracostal anymore. > >You sure that you're not smelling naturally occurring organics? >Afterall, the ICW runs through a lot of muddy marshes and estuaries. There is remarkably little pollution from watercraft of any type around here. >> Their main threat though is to life and property... >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >0.04% incidence. Yes, very 'startling'. You would have to boat for >over 25 years just to get up to a 1% risk. There are some "peak" risk groups. The insurance for a cigar boat without a proper skipper exam and practice is now about $100 per horsepower per year. With proper traning documented you can almost cut a digit from those prices. Some insurance agencies refuse to insure > 100 hp, 12 tons or 13 m/42' without skipper certifications. >> The most common types of boats involved in reported accidents were >> open motorboats (45%), personal watercraft (PWC) (26%), and cabin [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >that are functionally meaningless because they fail to determine >causality. Indeed. Authorities here are reviewing ideas of zone separation for different craft. 5kn speed limits proposed for motorboats outside zones, and licensing for larger crafts with a point system for revoking the licence. -- mrr > > Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and > > couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > very low incomes. With just a McDonald's job, how can they afford the > gas to be constantly running their boats? First of all, there are "lions" out there and "wannabes." Meaning there are many big yachts and cigarette boats owned by the filthy rich, and then crappy motorboats of all kinds owned by the ones that want to imitate the others. The former you see either cruising slowly on their yachts or racing by on their fast boats. The latter are the ones that bring their extended family to the islands out there and leave all the garbage behind. In other words, motorboating has become democratic and even the dog participates in the affair. Actually, there are ads on TV that promote motorboating as a fun thing for the whole family --and the dog. It's a matter of STATUS. Just like cars. "Money to burn"=Big Yacht & SUV. "Survivor"=old car and boat. > > But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You > > can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim > > in the intracostal anymore. > > You sure that you're not smelling naturally occurring organics? > Afterall, the ICW runs through a lot of muddy marshes and estuaries. I can tell the smell of gas. And you can see it floating all over the place. And when a motorboats goes by, you can get some serious second hand smoke. > > Their main threat though is to life and property... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 0.04% incidence. Yes, very 'startling'. You would have to boat for > over 25 years just to get up to a 1% risk. I bet many of those registered boats don't even make it to the water (they look good parked on the driveway). And the kayaks stay away from those motorboat highways, so the statistics may be misleading. But your common sense tells you they are a real threat. More than terrorists, say. ;) > > > Many people that are into motorboating > > > are poorly educated and... [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > "Money to burn"=Big Yacht & SUV. > "Survivor"=old car and boat. Agreed, but this is hardly new news. Mahogany hulled Chris-Craft powerboats have been around since the 1920s, as well as efforts over the years to broaden the market base to the middle class; one can suggest that Boston Whaler contributed to this trend too, staring in the mid-1950s. > > > But motorboat pollution contributes to > > > "the soup" out there too... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I can tell the smell of gas. And you can see > it floating all over the place. Maybe in a marina. Gas is a light aeromatic and disappears quite rapidly. If its not natural marsh stuff, its more likely to be diesel, which tends to be more of what larger working boats tend to use, not your generic commercial pleasure boat <30ft. > And when a motorboats goes by, you can get > some serious second hand smoke. While there's always going to be the occasional gross polluter, they generally are quite uncommon. Turbo-diesels will smoke when under heavy load, such as a 40 footer trying to get home on one engine. > > 0.04% incidence. Yes, very 'startling'. > > You would have to boat for over 25 years just [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > even make it to the water (they look good parked > on the driveway). Catch-22 alert: if these are your high risk "unskilled" boaters, if they're parked at home, they can't be a risk at sea. > And the kayaks stay away from those motorboat > highways, so the statistics may be misleading. Kayaks aren't a class of boat requiring registration, so the actual total numbers are higher, which means that the actual statistical risk is even lower. > But your common sense tells you they are a real > threat. More than terrorists, say. ;) Common sense says that all parties should take responsibility for their decisions, which includes wandering out into harm's way when you suspect that there are operators of less than stellar skill levels present. Yes, it is "unfair", but life is unfair: you either deal with it and roll with the punches, or die from being too inflexible. -hh > > But your common sense tells you they are a real > > threat. More than terrorists, say. ;) [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Life was very unfair when the Vikings went around pillaging and killing left and right. But they are today very civilized people, even showing respect for nature as well as for the little guy on the bike or kayak. So I hope other "less-than-civilized" people can evolve too. >> > > Many people that are into motorboating >> > > are poorly educated and... [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > >-hh Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in the future Why would anyone care unless they were planning to sue or something? I've been kayaking all over the east coast, from Maine to the Everglades, and I find personal water craft far more irritating, hazardous, and likely to be in unskilled hands than any kind of smudgepot (power boat). > Why would anyone care unless they were planning to sue or something? > I've been kayaking all over the east coast, from Maine to the > Everglades, and I find personal water craft far more irritating, > hazardous, and likely to be in unskilled hands than any kind of > smudgepot (power boat). You hit that one right on the nose except, of course, for the smudgepot part. Lee > Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will > surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to > file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in > the future The gas doc? What's a gas doc? Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. Presto, no more gas slick. Lee > > Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will > > surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to > > file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in > > the future > > The gas doc? What's a gas doc? Dock. It doesn't matter too much anyway, because now the discussion is shifting. It started as claims of pollution from normal running conditions that was observed along protected waters (eg, ICW), but this is talking about a semi-"point" source of pollution, namely a spill occurring at refueling stations. > Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. > Presto, no more gas slick. Of course, another option when refueling, is to not spill so much fuel (such that the Sheen Rule is invoked, etc). And from a similar observation of human nature, a chronic spiller may very well get inconvenienced by the owner of the refueling station to report every spill no matter how small (ie, well below reporting threshold). We can all figure out the real reasons why. -hh >>> Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will >>> surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to >>> file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in >>> the future >> The gas doc? What's a gas doc? >Dock. It doesn't matter too much anyway, because now the discussion >is shifting. I thought of that, but in all my years of boating, I've never seen a dock surround anything. I considered that it might be a local company in the business of spill mitigation. >> Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. >> Presto, no more gas slick. >Of course, another option when refueling, is to not spill so much fuel >(such that the Sheen Rule is invoked, etc). Not as much of an option as you'd think. You generally don't know your tank is full until gas comes out of the overflow which, of course, is over the water. Some gas is spilled more often than not. Gas evaporates pretty quickly and such small amounts don't last long enough to be a significant problem. Lee > Not as much of an option as you'd think. You generally don't know your tank > is full until gas comes out of the overflow which, of course, is over the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Lee after 40 years you would think the installation of a sight glass would occur to you. or simply dipping the tank and having a relatively good idea of how much fuel you need, or a spill pan around the fill, or any of the several other ways to stop overflow problems. it only took me one fill to figure out a sight glass on the Terry L, from that experiance every ship or boat I get on gets a deck visible sight glass. saves me from those pesky $5,000 fines. >> Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will >> surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Lee gas Dock attendant, when you are paying 1200 dollars to fill up, someone hands you the hose > gas Dock attendant, when you are paying 1200 dollars to fill up, > someone hands you the hose My tanks don't get that empty, but they could. The weekend fuel bill was a modest $341.00. They handed me the hose too. On Aug 23, 5:57 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > Batteries may get damaged by sea water or just get depleted. I have > > one on my canoe to power my trolling motor. I changed to AGM though [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > You do know that, by putting a trolling motor on your kayak, you're > classified as a power boat, right? Oh, give me a break. At worst I'd be a hybrid. Small, slow, noiseless and backed up by paddles. And still I've got the kayak that goes on banana power alone (meaning I eat the bananas that power the boat). ;) > > Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and > > couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. I think > > MOTORBOATING IS LARGELY FOR COUCH POTATOES THAT WANT TO > > HAVE A DEGREE OF ADVENTURE IN THE GREAT OUTDOORS. > > Yet, in the same post, you identified yourself as a power boater. But not a threat to anything. Certainly not a couch potato looking for adventure. > > My anchor weighs 1 1/2 lbs... Terrible threat to the reefs. ;) > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Chain and line, on the other hand, can do quite a bit of damage, whether > attached to a kayak or different kind of power boat. I'd look before I anchor to a reef, don't you? > > How much you need for a motorboat? > > Which power boat? I have three and, as I've already mentioned, a kayak. > Anchors for each boat is designed for the boat I use it with. My smallest > power boat uses an anchor just like the one I use for the kayak. OK, why don't you get rid of the big ones? > > But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You > > can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > millions of gallons of partially treated sewage and chemicals onto the reefs > every day. Can the government ever be that bad? They claim they treat everything at Virginia Key... > > The most common types of boats involved in reported accidents were > > open motorboats (45%) . . . [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Lee Do you do kayaking by any chance, or you just represent the motorboating association? > "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Oh, give me a break. At worst I'd be a hybrid. Small, slow, noiseless > and backed up by paddles. Irrelevant, since "The Law is The Law". At one point, my Canoe was registered as a 'powerboat'. And I recall that it was a bit of a nuisance to get it fit with letters of the required minimum height for its Registration#. > > > Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and > > > couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. I think [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > But not a threat to anything. Except as a threat to navigation, when in the wrong place. > > > My anchor weighs 1 1/2 lbs... Terrible threat to the reefs. ;) > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I'd look before I anchor to a reef, don't you? Oh, to always have the luxury of being able to look through perfectly clear water. > > > How much you need for a motorboat? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > OK, why don't you get rid of the big ones? The proper sizing of an anchor is predicted on several factors, not just the size of the craft. > > > But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You > > > can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Can the government ever be that bad? They claim they treat everything > at Virginia Key... <http://www.reef-rescue.org/research/keywestcitizenpage1.pdf> <http://www.reef-rescue.org/MiamiHerald/ Oceanisnoplacefortreatedsewage.pdf> Here's their homepage; note the 'Donate' button: <http://www.reef-rescue.org/> > Do you do kayaking by any chance, or you just represent the > motorboating association? Apparently, you find it utterly incomprehensible for there to be people who actually own both powered and unpowered watercraft, particularly when their perspectives and conclusions are at odds with yours. -hh >> > You do know that, by putting a trolling motor on your kayak, you're >> > classified as a power boat, right? >> Oh, give me a break. At worst I'd be a hybrid. Small, slow, noiseless >> and backed up by paddles. Still a power boat. So is a sailboat when under power, which they are most of the time while in the Intracoastal. > At one point, my Canoe was registered as a 'powerboat'. And I recall > that it was a bit of a nuisance to get it fit with letters of the > required minimum height for its Registration#. No more nuisance than any other boat. You left off the bother of having to renew it every year. It's a tax, pure and simple. If you are documented, it's worse. I don't have to display numbers, the name of the boat identifies it. The numbers that match the name have to be permanently carved into the boat somewhere. Mine are in a stringer in the engine room. In addition to the Coast Guard document, which has to be renewed every year, I have to have a Florida registration as well that alwo has to be renewed every year. >> I'd look before I anchor to a reef, don't you? What am I going to see when the reef is more than 100 feet below and visibility is 40 to 50 feet? I have an option most kayakers don't. I have a color depth finder that can give me an idea of the nature of the bottom below me. It's not always sure what I'm over, but I generally have at least an idea what's there. A high profile reef is pretty easy to see. A flat one isn't. >> OK, why don't you get rid of the big ones? If you're talking about the anchor, because it's what I need to hold my big boat. If you mean the boat itself, because it's what I stay on, fish from and dive from. I'm not sure my wife would agree to sleep on a kayak. >> Can the government ever be that bad? They claim they treat everything >> at Virginia Key... Hugh already gave you the links. <http://www.reef-rescue.org/research/keywestcitizenpage1.pdf> <http://www.reef-rescue.org/MiamiHerald/Oceanisnoplacefortreatedsewage.pdf> > Here's their homepage; note the 'Donate' button: > <http://www.reef-rescue.org/> >> Do you do kayaking by any chance, or you just represent the >> motorboating association? I have a kayak. I don't usually take it into the ocean. I sometimes take it into the Gulf when I vacation in the Keys. I'm taking the boat down to Lake Olita this weekend. Perhaps I'll see if the kayak will fit on the bow. I'd kind of like to tour the waterway in the state park and they won't allow my powered dinghy in there. > Apparently, you find it utterly incomprehensible for there to be > people who actually own both powered and unpowered watercraft, > particularly when their perspectives and conclusions are at odds with > yours. Until recently, I had a rowboat and a sail boat too. As Hugh knows, I live on a lake. Lee On Aug 23, 6:06 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > Sometimes that law doesn't exist or is not enforced and they just > > follow the Law of the Jungle. If you talk about the channels their [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > you can't be safe. I presume you would not ride your bicycle on I-95, which > would you ride you kayak in a zone where running on a plane is legal? Not only I wouldn't ride on a highway, I wouldn't even ride on the street right in front of my door. It's so bad that most people stay away from riding bikes on the road around here and rather ride the sidewalks... Of course, you ain't safe there either. Just today, as I was coming down on the sidewalk to cross this intersection, a car came blasting the horn at me because he felt every right to beat me to the corner. I had to use my brakes to the limit or else. That was a close call. And the guy kept going like nothing. I'm sure he knows we've got few rights --if any. Then you realize you live in the jungle. Welcome to the Jungle --if you dare. WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION? ;) http://webspwner.com/users/bananarevolution >On Aug 23, 6:06 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: >> > Sometimes that law doesn't exist or is not enforced and they just [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION? ;) >http://webspwner.com/users/bananarevolution Sounds like you are suffering from "lack of sack" desease and whinning about it. Bycyles have as much right on our roadways as cars do, and have no right on the side walks. > Sounds like you are suffering from "lack of sack" desease and whinning > about it. Bycyles have as much right on our roadways as cars do, and > have no right on the side walks. I believe that varies with location, but it's certainly true in many locations. Lee > Batteries may get damaged by sea water or just get depleted. I have > one on my canoe to power my trolling motor. I changed to AGM though > because they are water and leakproof. Batteries in boats are generally protected against sea water or of a type that is not easily damaged, like the AGM battery you use. As it happens I use them too. As for getting depleted, that's what chargers are for. By the way, your battery is much more likely to become depeleted than mine. Perhaps it Kayakers that are leaving them. You do know that, by putting a trolling motor on your kayak, you're classified as a power boat, right? > Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and > couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. I think > MOTORBOATING IS LARGELY FOR COUCH POTATOES THAT WANT TO > HAVE A DEGREE OF ADVENTURE IN THE GREAT OUTDOORS. Yet, in the same post, you identified yourself as a power boater. > My anchor weighs 1 1/2 lbs... Terrible threat to the reefs. ;) It's almost exactly the same threat as mine. An anchor that sets and stays in place, does very little damage to anything and there's already a law requiring people to anchor in adjacent sand areas rather than on coral. Chain and line, on the other hand, can do quite a bit of damage, whether attached to a kayak or different kind of power boat. > How much you need for a motorboat? Which power boat? I have three and, as I've already mentioned, a kayak. Anchors for each boat is designed for the boat I use it with. My smallest power boat uses an anchor just like the one I use for the kayak. > But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You > can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim > in the intracostal anymore. What you can smell is not harming the reefs. As for what you doubt, I suggest you learn a bit more before getting it wrong again. If you're talking about human waste by those on boats, I'm afraid you'll have to include kayakers in your list. It's legal for either of us to use the ocean as a bathroom. It is not legal for me to discharge my head directly overboard or to discharge my holding tank within coastal waters. The sewage outfalls in Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, on the other hand, pump millions of gallons of partially treated sewage and chemicals onto the reefs every day. > The most common types of boats involved in reported accidents were > open motorboats (45%) . . . You know that includes your kayak, right? I've been boating in south Florida for 54 years. I've never had an accident. Imagine that. Lee On Aug 22, 3:58 pm, "Lee Bell" <pleeb...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > do yourself a favor and carry a hand held uhf radio or something and > > if you see people, motorboat or not, acting like a.ses call the police/ [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > too. You wouldn't want to miss out on any opportunity to make an > impression. No, you have to nice to people, even the ones that threaten your life. It's the Christian thing to do. That's why I tell them, "Hey, don't eat me, you can eat my banana!" ;) > This is all a great way to ensure that, when others don't have a legal > obligation to consider your needs. they are considerate anyway and even to > be really sure that, should you ever actually need somebody with a powered > boat to assist you that they'll do so without hesitation. Some of them are real nice, real captains. Once one in Key Largo helped us recover a sunken kayak. It's like there's decent people driving SUVs, just that many of them are reckless and they have made the wrong vehicle choice. > Here are a couple of clues. Power boaters have been picked on, harassed, > limited, and taxed almost out of their activities. It takes hours for them [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > matter what the reason, they have a right and a right to expect to be able > to use them to their maximum potential when and where the law allows. Sometimes that law doesn't exist or is not enforced and they just follow the Law of the Jungle. If you talk about the channels their speeds are not terribly willd, but still you are a sitting duck. In certain spots of the intracostal and the beach, though, they just fly over the water with their cigarette boats. It's common sight there that they just fly by past the buoys, a few hundred feet from the beach. If you go there to relax, their roaring motors will remind you there's no place to hide. Well, try ear plugs perhaps. ;) C'mon, there's no control to this? Can't we have them stay at least 1 mile from shore? > You guys, and I, for that matter, have chosen a slower, more sedate and less > expensive mode of transportation for very different reasons. We don't us [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > we enjoy? Why encroach on the few places left that power boaters can use > their transportation the way the want and bitch about them doing it? I've said the weekends belong to the predators. I even grant them the daylight because I don't want to see their garbage. But going past the buoys at the beach is reasonable, since staying within them would make me a danger to the swimmers, and I don't want to become the predator. > One more thing to keep in mind. It costs you nothing to wait a minute for a > power boat to pass. It probably costs a boat 25 feet or more in length, and > certainly the high speed monohulls you guys were complaining about, anywhere > from $10 to $20 extra to slow down and return to a plane. Perhaps that will > give you at least a little understanding of why they are so reluctant to do > so. The thing with a motorboat is that you don't know if stopping puts you at lesser or greater danger. You just have to predictable, and hopefully they'll steer around you. > You want to cross the channel, no problem. Find someplace where speed is > limited and go for it. God knows such places are all over the Intracoastal > You want to share areas where boats go faster, great, do it out of the > channels, in shallower water where your vessel is designed to go and power > boats aren't. There's no safe intersections in those channels, much less a signal light. ;) You just go for it and pray to come out alive. > You want consideration, so do the power boaters. You want consideration > from them, try giving it to them. I do. The problem is NOT them actually. But the whole set up where we --kayakers and canoeists-- are exposed to uncessary dangers, and where they can speed, drink, get high, be reckless, and get away with it. > Now, before you guys get all excited and tell everybody about the > occasionally jerk, ask yourself this. For every time a power boater > inconvenienced you, how many times do you suppose the power boater was > inconvenienced by you. > > Lee Some steering from them to avoid you is NOT an inconvenience. The ocean is full of different species, and we all must get along, or declare that the only law out there is the Law of the Jungle. Hey, people who got "money to burn" can try sailing, that is more rewarding and totally environmentally friendly. Motorboats which are needed for fishing are OK too since they serve a purpose. And then you can always choose the smaller motorboats out there. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message