Safer Boating

Group,

I am new to this group and wanted to intro at the beginning of this
boating season. There are many hidden water hazards out there so this
is just a note to remind you to be careful, keep the "recreational
mind set" under control.

I have recently formed the group that is known by it's acronym, SAFER
BOATING. That said, the organization is properly named Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Recreational (SAFER) Boating. The
purpose of this organization is to establish appropriate, economical
but much needed higher standards for all Recreational Watercraft. In
short, eventually if the watercraft has not been inspected and
certified by SAFER, we will not consider it a safe vessel. This
organization will not be a "front" group for boating and boat
accessory or after market boating products.

The web site is under construction, accessible by the end of fall. In
the interim we invite you to participate in our newly established
discussion group on goggle, under the groups heading under this
organizations name in the recreational category. We are currently
focused on "Propeller Strikes" but we will pursue other areas of
SAFER BOATING in the near future. The only other injury we have ever
seen that is as grotesque and disfiguring as well as life altering,
almost always ending in death, is a full body burn or war injury.
Propeller Strike injuries are so easily preventable for a minimum
amount of money.

I lobby for the reform of recreational boating when I am in my
Washington DC office each month. I need additional information about
any tragic boating event. Thus if you see one, know of one or are
involved in one, please let me know. Better yet, if you happen to have
caught the incident on film or video, please forward and with your
permission I will post on the web site after it comes up. We are also
interested in capturing film or video of boaters that are operating
or allowing unsafe activities happen within their zone of operation.
Even Recreational Boating, the last frontier of unregulated personal
activity (or so it is claimed) should remain fun....but safe as well. I
know many will disagree, but you can be safe and still have fun
boating...and that is what this is all about...SAFER BOATING!

The information provided would assist greatly when continuing efforts
are made to convince the federal regulatory agency and the congress
that something must be done to prevent exposed propeller strikes as
well as other necessary reforms in boating.

I am also a Legal Investigator with operations out of Dana Point, Ca
92629 as well. As an investigator I have witnessed the tragic
consequences and detailed the evidence in boating accidents. The
carnage, if unable to be eliminated must be dramatically mitigated in
the next few years.

If you have already become involved in a tragic boating accident and If
legal counsel represents you, please advise him/her of this contact. If
litigation is planned or in fact proceeding, we will welcome his/her
contact; indeed we might have information that will be helpful to the
litigation. They are welcome to contact me via email or through my web
site as indicated, rhtownsend.com. Please advise if counsel does not
represent you as well. I hope that you will feel free to contact me. I
will be available to answer any of your questions as directly and
honestly as I can.

Very truly yours,


RobertTownsend,CLI

Mr. Townsend,

In all honesty, I don't feel this is a federal issue at all. I can't
speak for California or the rest of the United States, but I can tell
you that here in Wisconsin, at least the waters I frequent the State and
Counties do a superb job of monitoring watercraft safety. I think the
last thing we need is one more level of government leaning on us. Like
you said "the last frontier of unregulated personal activity", should
remain just that. You want to put together an awareness group that is
voluntary to help with safety, hey, I am all for it. I don't personally
want another government organization reiterating what my local
governments already have in place.

If I see someone being unsafe on the water, I will either confront them,
or call the local authorities, and they do a good job of responding. So
what is my "watercraft" doesn't meet "SAFER" standards? What happens
then? The acronym itself bothers me. Flexible and Efficient imply
restrictions , and who determines how flexible and efficient?
Accountability is part of personally responsibility on the water. Leave
it to the boaters and local authorities to deal with problems.

Could you give us a breakdown of cost to the taxpayers to get this
started? Could you give me a benefit to having this that isn't already
provided by Wisconsin programs? Why duplicate efforts???

I will tell you this, one of the main attractions of fishing to me is
the freedom I am allowed out on the water. It is up to me to be safe,
and keep the people around me safe. I know the consequences of my
actions with a ton of fiberglass beneath me, just as I do when I get in
my car if I have been drinking. I know what it is like to have someone
you care for injured in a boating accident, I had 2 friends run right
over by a larger boat. The kids in the bigger boat were drinking and
not paying attention in the evening. T-Boned my buddies boat, both my
friends survived, and the kids were punished according to Wisconsin law.

If I am completely missing the boat........please show me more
information on how this is a benefit to the people who use the water to
escape the red tape of everyday life. Escape should not imply
irresponsibility, it should imply peacefulness, fun, nature, etc etc.

Chris
RT wrote:
Group,

I am new to this group and wanted to intro at the beginning of this
boating season. There are many hidden water hazards out there so this
is just a note to remind you to be careful, keep the "recreational
mind set" under control.

I have recently formed the group that is known by it's acronym, SAFER
BOATING. That said, the organization is properly named Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Recreational (SAFER) Boating. The
purpose of this organization is to establish appropriate, economical
but much needed higher standards for all Recreational Watercraft. In
short, eventually if the watercraft has not been inspected and
certified by SAFER, we will not consider it a safe vessel. This
organization will not be a "front" group for boating and boat
accessory or after market boating products.

The web site is under construction, accessible by the end of fall. In
the interim we invite you to participate in our newly established
discussion group on goggle, under the groups heading under this
organizations name in the recreational category. We are currently
focused on "Propeller Strikes" but we will pursue other areas of
SAFER BOATING in the near future. The only other injury we have ever
seen that is as grotesque and disfiguring as well as life altering,
almost always ending in death, is a full body burn or war injury.
Propeller Strike injuries are so easily preventable for a minimum
amount of money.

I lobby for the reform of recreational boating when I am in my
Washington DC office each month. I need additional information about
any tragic boating event. Thus if you see one, know of one or are
involved in one, please let me know. Better yet, if you happen to have
caught the incident on film or video, please forward and with your
permission I will post on the web site after it comes up. We are also
interested in capturing film or video of boaters that are operating
or allowing unsafe activities happen within their zone of operation.
Even Recreational Boating, the last frontier of unregulated personal
activity (or so it is claimed) should remain fun....but safe as well. I
know many will disagree, but you can be safe and still have fun
boating...and that is what this is all about...SAFER BOATING!

The information provided would assist greatly when continuing efforts
are made to convince the federal regulatory agency and the congress
that something must be done to prevent exposed propeller strikes as
well as other necessary reforms in boating.

I am also a Legal Investigator with operations out of Dana Point, Ca
92629 as well. As an investigator I have witnessed the tragic
consequences and detailed the evidence in boating accidents. The
carnage, if unable to be eliminated must be dramatically mitigated in
the next few years.

If you have already become involved in a tragic boating accident and If
legal counsel represents you, please advise him/her of this contact. If
litigation is planned or in fact proceeding, we will welcome his/her
contact; indeed we might have information that will be helpful to the
litigation. They are welcome to contact me via email or through my web
site as indicated, rhtownsend.com. Please advise if counsel does not
represent you as well. I hope that you will feel free to contact me. I
will be available to answer any of your questions as directly and
honestly as I can.

Very truly yours,


RobertTownsend,CLI

"Chris Rennert" wrote in message
.. .
Mr. Townsend,

In all honesty, I don't feel this is a federal issue at all. I can't
speak for California or the rest of the United States, but I can tell
you that here in Wisconsin, at least the waters I frequent the State and
Counties do a superb job of monitoring watercraft safety. I think the
last thing we need is one more level of government leaning on us. Like
you said "the last frontier of unregulated personal activity", should
remain just that. You want to put together an awareness group that is
voluntary to help with safety, hey, I am all for it. I don't personally
want another government organization reiterating what my local
governments already have in place.

If I see someone being unsafe on the water, I will either confront them,
or call the local authorities, and they do a good job of responding. So
what is my "watercraft" doesn't meet "SAFER" standards? What happens
then? The acronym itself bothers me. Flexible and Efficient imply
restrictions , and who determines how flexible and efficient?
Accountability is part of personally responsibility on the water. Leave
it to the boaters and local authorities to deal with problems.

Could you give us a breakdown of cost to the taxpayers to get this
started? Could you give me a benefit to having this that isn't already
provided by Wisconsin programs? Why duplicate efforts???

I will tell you this, one of the main attractions of fishing to me is
the freedom I am allowed out on the water. It is up to me to be safe,
and keep the people around me safe. I know the consequences of my
actions with a ton of fiberglass beneath me, just as I do when I get in
my car if I have been drinking. I know what it is like to have someone
you care for injured in a boating accident, I had 2 friends run right
over by a larger boat. The kids in the bigger boat were drinking and
not paying attention in the evening. T-Boned my buddies boat, both my
friends survived, and the kids were punished according to Wisconsin law.

If I am completely missing the boat........please show me more
information on how this is a benefit to the people who use the water to
escape the red tape of everyday life. Escape should not imply
irresponsibility, it should imply peacefulness, fun, nature, etc etc.

Chris

I'm with you Chris. We need to stop adding "agencies" to do things that
should already being done under current laws. Better enforcement and not new
bureaucracies are what we really need. If anything, we need to look at some
sort of boater safety courses for boat operators younger than a certain age
(like many states require gun/hunter safety courses before they can gain
hunting licenses), or everyone that intends to operate a watercraft
regardless of age if you find the other method somehow prejudicial. And we
need to set a minimum age for PWC operators too IMO. Every person I saw
pulled out of local lakes last year as a result of a PWC-involved accidents,
wasn't even old enough to drive themselves to the lake where they got hurt.

I don't think any of those above would require some new organization though.
Especially not some new country wide organization. I think it should be
handled at the state level, personally. And therefore funded by the people
that will ultimately be affected. I'm not fond of pouring money into a
federal-level warchest that may or may not ever help my own state.


RT wrote:
Group,

I am new to this group and wanted to intro at the beginning of this
boating season. There are many hidden water hazards out there so this
is just a note to remind you to be careful, keep the "recreational
mind set" under control.

I have recently formed the group that is known by it's acronym, SAFER
BOATING. That said, the organization is properly named Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Recreational (SAFER) Boating. The
purpose of this organization is to establish appropriate, economical
but much needed higher standards for all Recreational Watercraft. In
short, eventually if the watercraft has not been inspected and
certified by SAFER, we will not consider it a safe vessel. This
organization will not be a "front" group for boating and boat
accessory or after market boating products.

The web site is under construction, accessible by the end of fall. In
the interim we invite you to participate in our newly established
discussion group on goggle, under the groups heading under this
organizations name in the recreational category. We are currently
focused on "Propeller Strikes" but we will pursue other areas of
SAFER BOATING in the near future. The only other injury we have ever
seen that is as grotesque and disfiguring as well as life altering,
almost always ending in death, is a full body burn or war injury.
Propeller Strike injuries are so easily preventable for a minimum
amount of money.

I lobby for the reform of recreational boating when I am in my
Washington DC office each month. I need additional information about
any tragic boating event. Thus if you see one, know of one or are
involved in one, please let me know. Better yet, if you happen to have
caught the incident on film or video, please forward and with your
permission I will post on the web site after it comes up. We are also
interested in capturing film or video of boaters that are operating
or allowing unsafe activities happen within their zone of operation.
Even Recreational Boating, the last frontier of unregulated personal
activity (or so it is claimed) should remain fun....but safe as well. I
know many will disagree, but you can be safe and still have fun
boating...and that is what this is all about...SAFER BOATING!

The information provided would assist greatly when continuing efforts
are made to convince the federal regulatory agency and the congress
that something must be done to prevent exposed propeller strikes as
well as other necessary reforms in boating.

I am also a Legal Investigator with operations out of Dana Point, Ca
92629 as well. As an investigator I have witnessed the tragic
consequences and detailed the evidence in boating accidents. The
carnage, if unable to be eliminated must be dramatically mitigated in
the next few years.

If you have already become involved in a tragic boating accident and If
legal counsel represents you, please advise him/her of this contact. If
litigation is planned or in fact proceeding, we will welcome his/her
contact; indeed we might have information that will be helpful to the
litigation. They are welcome to contact me via email or through my web
site as indicated, rhtownsend.com. Please advise if counsel does not
represent you as well. I hope that you will feel free to contact me. I
will be available to answer any of your questions as directly and
honestly as I can.

Very truly yours,


RobertTownsend,CLI

"SimRacer" wrote in message SNIP

I'm with you Chris. We need to stop adding "agencies" to do things that
should already being done under current laws. Better enforcement and not
new
bureaucracies are what we really need. If anything, we need to look at
some
sort of boater safety courses for boat operators younger than a certain
age
(like many states require gun/hunter safety courses before they can gain
hunting licenses), or everyone that intends to operate a watercraft
regardless of age if you find the other method somehow prejudicial. And we
need to set a minimum age for PWC operators too IMO. Every person I saw
pulled out of local lakes last year as a result of a PWC-involved
accidents,
wasn't even old enough to drive themselves to the lake where they got
hurt.

I don't think any of those above would require some new organization
though.
Especially not some new country wide organization. I think it should be
handled at the state level, personally. And therefore funded by the people
that will ultimately be affected. I'm not fond of pouring money into a
federal-level warchest that may or may not ever help my own state.

I too am in agreement with both Chris and SimRacer. I think as a nation, we
are already being regulated to death. What has happened to personal
responsibility and accountability?

As a firefighter/EMT, I have seen first-hand the consequences of boating
injuries. Tragic?, yes! Preventable?, most certainly! In need of
additional legislation?, HELL NO!!!

I am fully aware of when and how I operate my boat. I know the boat's
capabilities and I know how it's constructed. Is it safe? Yes, as deemed
by the U.S. Coast Guard and boat manufacturer's standards. The last thing I
need and/or want is additional rules, regulations and inspections.

And who is to determine what is safe operation? My new boat is capable of
running in excess of 80 mph. To some, that isn't safe. To me with a lot of
seat time in a high performance boat, I'm probably safer at 80 mph than many
operators at 35 mph. Is this going to be considered? Will I need to "take
a class" to prove I know how to operate MY boat? There's just too many
questions and concerns about another organization that is going to set an
arbitrary set of standards that will potentially interfere with the way I
run my boat.

You cannot legislate stupidity! So stop trying!!!!
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

"Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers" wrote in
message ...

"SimRacer" wrote in message SNIP

I'm with you Chris. We need to stop adding "agencies" to do things that
should already being done under current laws. Better enforcement and not
new
bureaucracies are what we really need. If anything, we need to look at
some
sort of boater safety courses for boat operators younger than a certain
age
(like many states require gun/hunter safety courses before they can gain
hunting licenses), or everyone that intends to operate a watercraft
regardless of age if you find the other method somehow prejudicial. And
we
need to set a minimum age for PWC operators too IMO. Every person I saw
pulled out of local lakes last year as a result of a PWC-involved
accidents,
wasn't even old enough to drive themselves to the lake where they got
hurt.

I don't think any of those above would require some new organization
though.
Especially not some new country wide organization. I think it should be
handled at the state level, personally. And therefore funded by the
people
that will ultimately be affected. I'm not fond of pouring money into a
federal-level warchest that may or may not ever help my own state.

I too am in agreement with both Chris and SimRacer. I think as a nation,
we
are already being regulated to death. What has happened to personal
responsibility and accountability?

That last question has a larger impact on more things than just boater
safety, and I agree with you asking it 110%.


As a firefighter/EMT, I have seen first-hand the consequences of boating
injuries. Tragic?, yes! Preventable?, most certainly! In need of
additional legislation?, HELL NO!!!

I am fully aware of when and how I operate my boat. I know the boat's
capabilities and I know how it's constructed. Is it safe? Yes, as deemed
by the U.S. Coast Guard and boat manufacturer's standards. The last thing
I
need and/or want is additional rules, regulations and inspections.

And who is to determine what is safe operation? My new boat is capable of
running in excess of 80 mph. To some, that isn't safe. To me with a lot
of
seat time in a high performance boat, I'm probably safer at 80 mph than
many
operators at 35 mph. Is this going to be considered? Will I need to
"take
a class" to prove I know how to operate MY boat? There's just too many
questions and concerns about another organization that is going to set an
arbitrary set of standards that will potentially interfere with the way I
run my boat.

I don't want to have to prove my skills by passing a safety course either,
but how can we regulate who is and is not allowed to operate watercraft
otherwise? Not being sarcastic, but am asking genuinely. There are people
out there operating boats and PWCs that have absolutely no business doing it
IMO. "How do we deal with this issue?" is my main question with boating
regulation today.

We can't do it at the point of sale, as boats are loaned out more than cars
(since there are fewer of them to go around). People like you and I, who've
been operating boats probably longer than we've been driving cars - I know I
have -, know how to act responsibly on the water and will naturally balk at
the idea of getting a license to operate a boat. We just need to find some
sort of middle ground so we can weed out the idiots, at least a little bit.
Though I can say I don't think some sort of new "SAFER" organization is the
way to go. That'd probably evolve into a money pit, that preyed on the
giving nature of most of us conservationist-types, likely with little return
on our investment outside of maybe a few print ads and a newsletter. As I
stated before, I think this kind of issue is best addressed at the state
level, with genuine volunteers/fundraisers - for the ever required lobbyists
- who have a vested and direct interest in the outcome. Lobbying in
Washington for anything usually results in less money for the people paying
the lobbyist, and that's about it.


You cannot legislate stupidity! So stop trying!!!!
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

Sim,

My thought would be based on personal experience. I would leave it to
the boaters themselves and local agencies. I think if we see something
we don't like that become at threat to our well being, I think we have
to take a proactive approach and deal with the situation. As I
mentioned in my previous post, I think confronting the person posing the
threat and making them aware of your concern (I know, sounds great in
theory, but really, we are usually told to f*** off, or kiss their a$$),
or contact local agencies such as in my case the Dept. of Natural
resources and/or County Sheriffs dept.

I am always wary of discrimination strictly based on age, and therefore
the only fair solution would be to test everyone, which in my opinion
only isn't necessary. Like Steve said, he is comfortable in high
powered boat, probably more comfortable at 80mph than others at 35mph.
The same holds true for age, Not all 16 year old are bad drivers that
cause trouble, not all 18 year olds are mature enough to vote, and not
all 21 year olds are mature enough to drink. Yet there are a large
number that are on the other end of each statement. I think when we
start approaching controlling "groups" in this situation we are stepping
right through Groups like "SAFER"s front door where they are waiting
with open arms. You have to start asking, why start at Age 14, and not
12? Why not 10, why not wait until 20? Who draws the lines?

Optimistically as a society if we would "all" step back (not saying most
don't already, but...) and take responsibility for our own actions and
be conscious of others around us, things would be inherently safer.
Fact still remains, Great swimmers can drowned, people get struck by
lightning, and some of us might win the lottery. I guess my point is I
just control what I can, be conscious of what is around me, and
"hopefully" things all work out. Do I have the answer to the problem,
definitely not, at least not a definitive answer, but I don't think it
is broken to the point that needs another agency , especially a Federal
Agency. The last thing I need is a Toll booth out on the lake, and a
guard at every launch.

Chris
SimRacer wrote:
"Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers" wrote in
message ...
"SimRacer" wrote in message SNIP

I'm with you Chris. We need to stop adding "agencies" to do things that
should already being done under current laws. Better enforcement and not
new
bureaucracies are what we really need. If anything, we need to look at
some
sort of boater safety courses for boat operators younger than a certain
age
(like many states require gun/hunter safety courses before they can gain
hunting licenses), or everyone that intends to operate a watercraft
regardless of age if you find the other method somehow prejudicial. And
we
need to set a minimum age for PWC operators too IMO. Every person I saw
pulled out of local lakes last year as a result of a PWC-involved
accidents,
wasn't even old enough to drive themselves to the lake where they got
hurt.

I don't think any of those above would require some new organization
though.
Especially not some new country wide organization. I think it should be
handled at the state level, personally. And therefore funded by the
people
that will ultimately be affected. I'm not fond of pouring money into a
federal-level warchest that may or may not ever help my own state.
I too am in agreement with both Chris and SimRacer. I think as a nation,
we
are already being regulated to death. What has happened to personal
responsibility and accountability?

That last question has a larger impact on more things than just boater
safety, and I agree with you asking it 110%.

As a firefighter/EMT, I have seen first-hand the consequences of boating
injuries. Tragic?, yes! Preventable?, most certainly! In need of
additional legislation?, HELL NO!!!

I am fully aware of when and how I operate my boat. I know the boat's
capabilities and I know how it's constructed. Is it safe? Yes, as deemed
by the U.S. Coast Guard and boat manufacturer's standards. The last thing
I
need and/or want is additional rules, regulations and inspections.

And who is to determine what is safe operation? My new boat is capable of
running in excess of 80 mph. To some, that isn't safe. To me with a lot
of
seat time in a high performance boat, I'm probably safer at 80 mph than
many
operators at 35 mph. Is this going to be considered? Will I need to
"take
a class" to prove I know how to operate MY boat? There's just too many
questions and concerns about another organization that is going to set an
arbitrary set of standards that will potentially interfere with the way I
run my boat.

I don't want to have to prove my skills by passing a safety course either,
but how can we regulate who is and is not allowed to operate watercraft
otherwise? Not being sarcastic, but am asking genuinely. There are people
out there operating boats and PWCs that have absolutely no business doing it
IMO. "How do we deal with this issue?" is my main question with boating
regulation today.

We can't do it at the point of sale, as boats are loaned out more than cars
(since there are fewer of them to go around). People like you and I, who've
been operating boats probably longer than we've been driving cars - I know I
have -, know how to act responsibly on the water and will naturally balk at
the idea of getting a license to operate a boat. We just need to find some
sort of middle ground so we can weed out the idiots, at least a little bit.
Though I can say I don't think some sort of new "SAFER" organization is the
way to go. That'd probably evolve into a money pit, that preyed on the
giving nature of most of us conservationist-types, likely with little return
on our investment outside of maybe a few print ads and a newsletter. As I
stated before, I think this kind of issue is best addressed at the state
level, with genuine volunteers/fundraisers - for the ever required lobbyists
- who have a vested and direct interest in the outcome. Lobbying in
Washington for anything usually results in less money for the people paying
the lobbyist, and that's about it.

You cannot legislate stupidity! So stop trying!!!!
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

"Chris Rennert" wrote in message
.. .
Sim,

My thought would be based on personal experience. I would leave it to
the boaters themselves and local agencies. I think if we see something
we don't like that become at threat to our well being, I think we have
to take a proactive approach and deal with the situation. As I
mentioned in my previous post, I think confronting the person posing the
threat and making them aware of your concern (I know, sounds great in
theory, but really, we are usually told to f*** off, or kiss their a$$),
or contact local agencies such as in my case the Dept. of Natural
resources and/or County Sheriffs dept.

I am always wary of discrimination strictly based on age, and therefore
the only fair solution would be to test everyone, which in my opinion
only isn't necessary. Like Steve said, he is comfortable in high
powered boat, probably more comfortable at 80mph than others at 35mph.
The same holds true for age, Not all 16 year old are bad drivers that
cause trouble, not all 18 year olds are mature enough to vote, and not
all 21 year olds are mature enough to drink. Yet there are a large
number that are on the other end of each statement. I think when we
start approaching controlling "groups" in this situation we are stepping
right through Groups like "SAFER"s front door where they are waiting
with open arms. You have to start asking, why start at Age 14, and not
12? Why not 10, why not wait until 20? Who draws the lines?

Optimistically as a society if we would "all" step back (not saying most
don't already, but...) and take responsibility for our own actions and
be conscious of others around us, things would be inherently safer.
Fact still remains, Great swimmers can drowned, people get struck by
lightning, and some of us might win the lottery. I guess my point is I
just control what I can, be conscious of what is around me, and
"hopefully" things all work out. Do I have the answer to the problem,
definitely not, at least not a definitive answer, but I don't think it
is broken to the point that needs another agency , especially a Federal
Agency. The last thing I need is a Toll booth out on the lake, and a
guard at every launch.

Chris

I agree in principle with everything you say, and Steve too. There just has
to be a way to govern who can and who can't operate a watercraft, based on
skill. I'm not fond of age limits either, but it may come down do it. It's
good enough for driver's licenses. And even those have gone to "graduated"
here in NC - basic privliges at 16, unlimited license not granted until 18.

I don't think it needs another agency either. I think it needs more
enforcement. Maybe more Fish and Game cops out there "pulling over" the
idiots displaying their inability to be responsible. Maybe stiffer penalties
for parents that turn their kids out to the water when they don't have the
skill required. Something needs to be looked at IMO, as the issue is only
getting worse. It is on my local waterways anyway.

SimRacer wrote:
"Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers" wrote in
message ...
"SimRacer" wrote in message SNIP

I'm with you Chris. We need to stop adding "agencies" to do things
that
should already being done under current laws. Better enforcement and
not
new
bureaucracies are what we really need. If anything, we need to look at
some
sort of boater safety courses for boat operators younger than a
certain
age
(like many states require gun/hunter safety courses before they can
gain
hunting licenses), or everyone that intends to operate a watercraft
regardless of age if you find the other method somehow prejudicial.
And
we
need to set a minimum age for PWC operators too IMO. Every person I
saw
pulled out of local lakes last year as a result of a PWC-involved
accidents,
wasn't even old enough to drive themselves to the lake where they got
hurt.

I don't think any of those above would require some new organization
though.
Especially not some new country wide organization. I think it should
be
handled at the state level, personally. And therefore funded by the
people
that will ultimately be affected. I'm not fond of pouring money into a
federal-level warchest that may or may not ever help my own state.
I too am in agreement with both Chris and SimRacer. I think as a
nation,
we
are already being regulated to death. What has happened to personal
responsibility and accountability?

That last question has a larger impact on more things than just boater
safety, and I agree with you asking it 110%.

As a firefighter/EMT, I have seen first-hand the consequences of
boating
injuries. Tragic?, yes! Preventable?, most certainly! In need of
additional legislation?, HELL NO!!!

I am fully aware of when and how I operate my boat. I know the boat's
capabilities and I know how it's constructed. Is it safe? Yes, as
deemed
by the U.S. Coast Guard and boat manufacturer's standards. The last
thing
I
need and/or want is additional rules, regulations and inspections.

And who is to determine what is safe operation? My new boat is capable
of
running in excess of 80 mph. To some, that isn't safe. To me with a
lot
of
seat time in a high performance boat, I'm probably safer at 80 mph than
many
operators at 35 mph. Is this going to be considered? Will I need to
"take
a class" to prove I know how to operate MY boat? There's just too many
questions and concerns about another organization that is going to set
an
arbitrary set of standards that will potentially interfere with the way
I
run my boat.

I don't want to have to prove my skills by passing a safety course
either,
but how can we regulate who is and is not allowed to operate watercraft
otherwise? Not being sarcastic, but am asking genuinely. There are
people
out there operating boats and PWCs that have absolutely no business
doing it
IMO. "How do we deal with this issue?" is my main question with boating
regulation today.

We can't do it at the point of sale, as boats are loaned out more than
cars
(since there are fewer of them to go around). People like you and I,
who've
been operating boats probably longer than we've been driving cars - I
know I
have -, know how to act responsibly on the water and will naturally balk
at
the idea of getting a license to operate a boat. We just need to find
some
sort of middle ground so we can weed out the idiots, at least a little
bit.
Though I can say I don't think some sort of new "SAFER" organization is
the
way to go. That'd probably evolve into a money pit, that preyed on the
giving nature of most of us conservationist-types, likely with little
return
on our investment outside of maybe a few print ads and a newsletter. As
I
stated before, I think this kind of issue is best addressed at the state
level, with genuine volunteers/fundraisers - for the ever required
lobbyists
- who have a vested and direct interest in the outcome. Lobbying in
Washington for anything usually results in less money for the people
paying
the lobbyist, and that's about it.

You cannot legislate stupidity! So stop trying!!!!
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

Well I do not know what happened to my earlier response. But here goes
again. This is a great start for a new discussion. Please keep the
postings coming, agree or disagree, it is all helpful input. If all the
boaters and PWC operators had similar attitutdes there would be no
reason for what I suggest. Regretably, the vast majority are not as
repsonsible as the posters I have read today. Perhaps some thought can
be given to the issue of comparing the current boating practices and
building to that of the automobile. I would no more think of driving a
car today without vrious build it safety devices. Are all injuries and
death prevented. Nope, won't happen, but there has been a percitious
drop in major lifem altering disfiguring injury and death...even when
alchol is involved. Simply because one is drinking, does not mean they
waive a right to be as safe as possible. Simply because a person is on
a boat and gets in the water does not mean they need to be penalized
with the loss of life and /or limb. In any event, good discussion.
Looking forward to more input.Keep safe out there!

RT