"NOYB" wrote in message nk.net...
Tolls. It's already a toll bridge. Just up the toll charge.


"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
(Florida Keyz) wrote in message
...
Typical government bully tactics!

Bully tactics??
Let's see, you don't want higher taxes, right?
But you DO want nice roads to drive your car on, right?
And I assume you want safe bridges, so you don't have to worry when
you come to one, whether or not it will withstand your vehicle going
over it, right?

So, how would you suggest that the infrastructure, aging, and being
destroyed by wakes should be fixed?


Wow, I thought you were a die hard conservative. You want to do
something as liberal as have everyone who uses the bridge pay for the
idiots that don't read the no wake signs, or are ignorant of the
law??? You may be more liberal than I am!!!!

"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in message
...
Boots,
Just wondering what a wake can do that a storm couldn't do a lot
better.
If the bridge is in that much jeopardy, perhaps they need to fix the
bridge.
Also, how do they show that your boat caused $27,500 worth of damage?
A
bad
Easterly storm did about $5,000 worth of damage to my property one
day,
but
that's the breaks when you live on a big lake.
Paul

A storm doesn't come through two thousand eleventy dozen times on a busy
weekend.

The concrete isn't failing from cyclic fatigue from boat wakes...more
likely
from car, truck, bus traffic on top.

It sounds to me like the CG is being overly cautious because if they do
nothing at all and someone's hurt, they'd be blamed for not posting warnings
and issuing citations. Not much different than the way my office park puts
300 lbs of salt on the sidewalk anytime they see a snowflake. They have to
pretend to try.

""Uh, that's why they have signs, and laws. Ignorance of the law is not
a viable excuse.""

Spoken like a true ossifer of the law!

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in message
...
Boots,
Just wondering what a wake can do that a storm couldn't do a lot
better.
If the bridge is in that much jeopardy, perhaps they need to fix the
bridge.
Also, how do they show that your boat caused $27,500 worth of
damage?
A
bad
Easterly storm did about $5,000 worth of damage to my property one
day,
but
that's the breaks when you live on a big lake.
Paul

A storm doesn't come through two thousand eleventy dozen times on a
busy
weekend.

The concrete isn't failing from cyclic fatigue from boat wakes...more
likely
from car, truck, bus traffic on top.

It sounds to me like the CG is being overly cautious because if they do
nothing at all and someone's hurt, they'd be blamed for not posting
warnings
and issuing citations. Not much different than the way my office park puts
300 lbs of salt on the sidewalk anytime they see a snowflake. They have to
pretend to try.

I agree. The CG is telling people to slow down, or their wake will cause
concrete to fall off and hit them and their boat. But wouldn't it make
sense to speed up and hurry under the brdige so as to spend as little time
as possible sitting under it?

This whole Sanibel bridge debacle is a political football. I suspect the CG
just wants to get in the news story about it. There is a lot more going on here
than simply an old bridge.
For one thing, this is the place where manatee suddenly decide to move to the
other side exactly at midnight on Nov 15 every year.
The slow speed zone flips sides of the bridge then. 25 on one side, slow on the
other. It flips back in April. There is also an ongoing war about what kind of
bridge they are going to build. That is the biggest part of the reason why it
has taken so long to get rid of this one. They don't want to spend a lot of
money to fix the bridge since it is scheduled to be torn down and replaced. The
problem is the USCG wants a high bridge, Sanibel wants another low draw bridge.
I suppose the USCG is pressing their case to boaters to VOTE. A high bridge
will be "safe normal speed", a draw bridge will be "no wake" up to $27,000
fine.

It does not take too much smarts to understand that a storm
is an act God and Man can not control that but a wake is man
made and can be controlled.
"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in
message ...
Boots,
Just wondering what a wake can do that a storm couldn't
do a lot better.
If the bridge is in that much jeopardy, perhaps they need to
fix the bridge.
Also, how do they show that your boat caused $27,500 worth
of damage? A bad
Easterly storm did about $5,000 worth of damage to my
property one day, but
that's the breaks when you live on a big lake.
Paul

"Boots Crofoot" wrote in message
. ..
It has been a rule for ever that a Capt. of a vessel is
responsible for any and all damage caused by his or her
boat. That is law. Bout time you are responsible for your
actions
"JK" wrote in message

...
See link below. (FL. msnbc news)
http://www.msnbc.com/local/wbbh/ifyourefinc.asp
JK

Doug,
But the winds that do very frequently occur cause more of a wave than
the average wake. There's many a time I stayed in back of Estero Island
(which is just south of the bridge) rather than venture into the Gulf
because of the waves, those same waves if created by a boat would be
considered a wake. Now I understand reducing waves around docked boats so
they don't get damaged, but a bridge should be built to be sturdy enough to
not be phased by normal everyday waves, either by boats or winds.
Paul

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in message
...
Boots,
Just wondering what a wake can do that a storm couldn't do a lot
better.
If the bridge is in that much jeopardy, perhaps they need to fix the
bridge.
Also, how do they show that your boat caused $27,500 worth of damage? A
bad
Easterly storm did about $5,000 worth of damage to my property one day,
but
that's the breaks when you live on a big lake.
Paul

A storm doesn't come through two thousand eleventy dozen times on a busy
weekend.

Greg,
Aren't politics a bitch? It's the most convoluted thing I've ever seen.
Paul
"Greg" wrote in message
...
This whole Sanibel bridge debacle is a political football. I suspect the
CG
just wants to get in the news story about it. There is a lot more going on
here
than simply an old bridge.
For one thing, this is the place where manatee suddenly decide to move to
the
other side exactly at midnight on Nov 15 every year.
The slow speed zone flips sides of the bridge then. 25 on one side, slow
on the
other. It flips back in April. There is also an ongoing war about what
kind of
bridge they are going to build. That is the biggest part of the reason why
it
has taken so long to get rid of this one. They don't want to spend a lot
of
money to fix the bridge since it is scheduled to be torn down and
replaced. The
problem is the USCG wants a high bridge, Sanibel wants another low draw
bridge.
I suppose the USCG is pressing their case to boaters to VOTE. A high
bridge
will be "safe normal speed", a draw bridge will be "no wake" up to $27,000
fine.

bass,
BTW - What does the sign "Slow Speed Minimal wake" mean? Just what is
minimal wake, how do you quantify that? It's sounds faster than "No Wake",
but to what degree?
Paul

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
(Florida Keyz) wrote in message
...
Really? If you failed to slow down , because you did not know, would you
think
that $27,000 was NOT out of line?

If so, come on down, I have a nice piece of Florida Keys property for
you to
buy.

Sterling

Uh, that's why they have signs, and laws. Ignorance of the law is not
a viable excuse.

bass,
That's the problem with trying to attach labels to anyone. Were all a
little bit more conservative or a little bit more liberal depending on the
specific issue. Anyone who's totally conservative or liberal probably has a
problem. IMHO
Paul

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...
Tolls. It's already a toll bridge. Just up the toll charge.


"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
(Florida Keyz) wrote in message
...
Typical government bully tactics!

Bully tactics??
Let's see, you don't want higher taxes, right?
But you DO want nice roads to drive your car on, right?
And I assume you want safe bridges, so you don't have to worry when
you come to one, whether or not it will withstand your vehicle going
over it, right?

So, how would you suggest that the infrastructure, aging, and being
destroyed by wakes should be fixed?


Wow, I thought you were a die hard conservative. You want to do
something as liberal as have everyone who uses the bridge pay for the
idiots that don't read the no wake signs, or are ignorant of the
law??? You may be more liberal than I am!!!!