"Sean Corbett" wrote in message
...
You wrote:


Pray tell, how would all these boaters "document" their hours?

Your boat got an hour meter?

No. But, I've been handling boats for over 40 years. It's a real problem.

On Mon, 15 May 2006 19:20:45 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On 14 May 2006 19:15:33 -0700, "wf3h" wrote:

http://www.thelog.com/news/newsview.asp?c=184983

Coast Guard Requests Authority to Require 'Proof of Proficiency'
By Louis Gerlinger
May 3, 2006
If approved, the provision could lead to mandatory licensing for
boaters nationwide.

WASHINGTON D.C. (LNS) - The Coast Guard has asked Congress for
authority to establish a "proof of proficiency" requirement for
recreational boaters - which, officials conceded, could lead to
mandatory nationwide licensing for recreational boat operators. A
legislative change proposal, which was submitted by the Coast Guard's
Office of Boating Safety, would amend Section 4302(a) of Title 46,
United States Code, which gives the Secretary of Transportation
authority to prescribe regulations, by adding subsection (4) which
would read (The Secretary may prescribe regulations) "establishing
minimum requirements for recreational vessel operator proficiency."
California presently doesn't have a mandatory education or licensing
requirement for recreational boat operators

I hope they put some math in the test!
--
'Til next time,

John H

Essay: Your boat is 30 feet high, measuring from the waterline. The water is
10 feet deep. Clearance under the bridge is 42 feet. Which information is
missing here?


Yeah, or: You start on a 200 mile trip. What do you need to know to
calculate how much fuel you need?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 May 2006 19:20:45 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On 14 May 2006 19:15:33 -0700, "wf3h" wrote:

http://www.thelog.com/news/newsview.asp?c=184983

Coast Guard Requests Authority to Require 'Proof of Proficiency'
By Louis Gerlinger
May 3, 2006
If approved, the provision could lead to mandatory licensing for
boaters nationwide.

WASHINGTON D.C. (LNS) - The Coast Guard has asked Congress for
authority to establish a "proof of proficiency" requirement for
recreational boaters - which, officials conceded, could lead to
mandatory nationwide licensing for recreational boat operators. A
legislative change proposal, which was submitted by the Coast Guard's
Office of Boating Safety, would amend Section 4302(a) of Title 46,
United States Code, which gives the Secretary of Transportation
authority to prescribe regulations, by adding subsection (4) which
would read (The Secretary may prescribe regulations) "establishing
minimum requirements for recreational vessel operator proficiency."
California presently doesn't have a mandatory education or licensing
requirement for recreational boat operators

I hope they put some math in the test!
--
'Til next time,

John H

Essay: Your boat is 30 feet high, measuring from the waterline. The water
is
10 feet deep. Clearance under the bridge is 42 feet. Which information is
missing here?


Yeah, or: You start on a 200 mile trip. What do you need to know to
calculate how much fuel you need?
John H

......and calculate exactly how long pretzels will remain fresh, in a sealed
bag in the galley.
A) 5 minutes
B) 2 days
C) 1 week
D) 30 seconds

"Sean Corbett" wrote in message
...
You wrote:

Essay: Your boat is 30 feet high, measuring from the waterline. The
water is 10 feet deep. Clearance under the bridge is 42 feet. Which
information is missing here?

How it's (Bush's/Clinton's/the Trilateral Commission's/the Jews') fault
that your boat hit the bridge.

Or, the mob skimped on the tape measures used while building the bridge.

Wayne.B wrote:
On 15 May 2006 08:22:11 -0700, "
wrote:

The vast majority of
pleasure boaters self certifying sea time to sit for the OUPV or
100-ton license do so with a wink, and a nod, and would also suffer
from a guilty conscience if they were so endowed.

I've heard you say that before, any supporting statistics or evidence?
Certainly anyone who has been boating for half a lifetime or more
should have no problem documenting sufficient hours, same for anyone
who uses their boat several times a week for 5 to 10 years.

Statistics, no. Evidence, yes.

For example: One year not so long ago I was scheduled to give seminars
on various topics at a local boat show. I showed up to the seminar room
about 15 minutes early, long enough to catch the last portion of the
seminar that preceded mine. A representative from one of the license
schools was pitching his program and answering questions about
qualifying to
sit for an OUPV or 100-ton exam. About every third answer was, "As long
as you're willing to write it down, it's going to be accepted. Nobody
is going to challenge your self certification because they aren't going
to be able to prove that you *don't* have the time you claim." He gave
some pretty far fetched justifications for "rounding up" if hours on a
particualr day didn't actually qualify. To his credit, he did tell one
party who admitted that he had only been boating for 90 days and never
previously owned a boat of any type that it would probably be "too
early" to try to qualify for the exam.

I specifically know of individuals who sat for the exam with between
500-1000 engine hours on their first and only boats and no prior
experience. I asked one, how did you get the sea time to qualify? His
frank answer, "I lied."

Talk to nearly any one of the Captain's R US license mills about
qualification, and you will most likely have an opinion similar to my
own.

On 15 May 2006 19:22:52 -0700, "
wrote:

A representative from one of the license
schools was pitching his program and answering questions about
qualifying to
sit for an OUPV or 100-ton exam. About every third answer was, "As long
as you're willing to write it down, it's going to be accepted. Nobody
is going to challenge your self certification because they aren't going
to be able to prove that you *don't* have the time you claim." He gave
some pretty far fetched justifications for "rounding up" if hours on a
particualr day didn't actually qualify. To his credit, he did tell one
party who admitted that he had only been boating for 90 days and never
previously owned a boat of any type that it would probably be "too
early" to try to qualify for the exam.

I specifically know of individuals who sat for the exam with between
500-1000 engine hours on their first and only boats and no prior
experience. I asked one, how did you get the sea time to qualify? His
frank answer, "I lied."

Talk to nearly any one of the Captain's R US license mills about
qualification, and you will most likely have an opinion similar to my
own.

To lie on your application, or to actively encourage others to lie, is
probably a felony criminal action. It also demeans the experience
level of owner/operators for you to imply that the practice is
widespread. All of the owner/operators that I know have thousands of
hours experience behind the wheel. I have not yet documented my own
time or sat for the exam but I know for a fact that I've accumulated
more than 1500 engine hours in the last 6 years, and thousands more in
years prior.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 15 May 2006 08:22:11 -0700, "
wrote:

The vast majority of
pleasure boaters self certifying sea time to sit for the OUPV or
100-ton license do so with a wink, and a nod, and would also suffer
from a guilty conscience if they were so endowed.

I've heard you say that before, any supporting statistics or evidence?
Certainly anyone who has been boating for half a lifetime or more
should have no problem documenting sufficient hours, same for anyone
who uses their boat several times a week for 5 to 10 years.


Pray tell, how would all these boaters "document" their hours?


And how does hours on the water translate to good experience? Lots of
people spend hours a day on driving their cars, and they are still
incompetent.

Wayne.B wrote:
On 15 May 2006 19:22:52 -0700, "
wrote:

A representative from one of the license
schools was pitching his program and answering questions about
qualifying to
sit for an OUPV or 100-ton exam. About every third answer was, "As long
as you're willing to write it down, it's going to be accepted. Nobody
is going to challenge your self certification because they aren't going
to be able to prove that you *don't* have the time you claim." He gave
some pretty far fetched justifications for "rounding up" if hours on a
particualr day didn't actually qualify. To his credit, he did tell one
party who admitted that he had only been boating for 90 days and never
previously owned a boat of any type that it would probably be "too
early" to try to qualify for the exam.

I specifically know of individuals who sat for the exam with between
500-1000 engine hours on their first and only boats and no prior
experience. I asked one, how did you get the sea time to qualify? His
frank answer, "I lied."

Talk to nearly any one of the Captain's R US license mills about
qualification, and you will most likely have an opinion similar to my
own.

To lie on your application, or to actively encourage others to lie, is
probably a felony criminal action. It also demeans the experience
level of owner/operators for you to imply that the practice is
widespread. All of the owner/operators that I know have thousands of
hours experience behind the wheel. I have not yet documented my own
time or sat for the exam but I know for a fact that I've accumulated
more than 1500 engine hours in the last 6 years, and thousands more in
years prior.

You can accumulate an hour a day for a million days, and you won't have
qualifying sea time.

On 15 May 2006 23:37:35 -0700, "
wrote:

You can accumulate an hour a day for a million days, and you won't have
qualifying sea time.

That's true but it will also make you at least 2,740 years old.

The fact is that many, many people who are serious boaters can
accumulate legitimate amounts of sea time without lying about it.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 15 May 2006 23:37:35 -0700, "
wrote:

You can accumulate an hour a day for a million days, and you won't have
qualifying sea time.

That's true but it will also make you at least 2,740 years old.

The fact is that many, many people who are serious boaters can
accumulate legitimate amounts of sea time without lying about it.


Since I am a part-time serious boater (interest comes and goes), I probably
do not have enough legit hours in the past 3 years to qualify for the
captain's license requirements. A few years ago I did have enough hours
either crewing or piloting and planned to take the course while in Florida
one winter, but decided to forget about it. I was thinking of doing fishing
charters on the Egg Harbor, but was convinced by others that I'd regret it.

I can handle the boats and know the basic rules, but I still consider myself
to be a somewhat "experienced amateur" overall.

RCE