In article ,
says...
Jeff wrote:

What country is "M" chartering in? "Big Cats" doesn't sound like the
US. Do the various Caribbean charter countries have the same strict
licensing requirements as the US?

The USVI. I don't know of many charter fleets in the CONUS.

CONUS DOES extend West of the Mississippi! There are substantial
charter fleets in the Puget Sound area. I think the largest are
in the Anacortes area and provide charters in the San Juan Islands
and Canadian Gulf Islands. There are also charter fleets in
neighboring British Columbia. (I'll be spending a week in the
Desolation Sound area in August on a chartered boat.)

SNIP

Mark Borgerson

The whole point in having a licensed captain aboard is that someone has to
be responsible for the passengers and vessel.
People are always trying to outsmart the rules. Seems the people that
enforce the rules always seem to catch up with these people.
I'd bet the second or third time a guy tried to charter his boat without a
license and insurance to haul passengers for hire, the real captains on the
dock would lining up to turn his ass in.
Want to get into the business? Pay your dues like everyone else.

"beaufortnc" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi,

I have a charter captain friend who told me once that there is a
loophole around the conventional "6-pack" CG License chartering
regulations.

He said something to the effect that if you have a contract that
specifies that the boat is being rented as a whole to the "guests",
that they are able to pick whoever they'd like to be the captain of
their "rented" vessel, whether that person is licensed or not.

So, in essence, the boat "rental" provides the income, and the
"captain" performs duties for free.

With this method, he was able to charter his boat with more than 6
guests, and without a captain's license.

Does anyone know the real story on this? Was he f.o.s.?

Thanks,

Mike.

I've often wondered about this. Of course, technically, if anybody
pays you anything to take them out on your boat, you need to have the
6-pack license, at least. But in many cases, it's like driving 31 in a
30, or not reporting that 50 bucks you won on your tax return; just
don't say anything and don't worry about it.

Say, for example, I'm down at the coast getting ready to take my center
console out a few miles to some oil rigs for some fishing. A couple in
the hotel room next door is having a dull trip and wonders if they
could run out there with me. They say, "hey, we'll throw in a hundred
bucks to help cover gas and bait; we don't want to leech."

What if it's not even that obscure? Suppose a couple of guys in my
office want to come down to the coast with me to go out in my boat, and
they all pitch in on the cost? Jack says he'll split the cost of the
gas. Robert says he'll buy the bait. Does that warrant a license? I'm
sure that if it ever came up for question, we'd just play it cool and
deny everything.

It seems to me that if taken to its literal extreme, the license
requirement states that whoever is piloting the boat MUST pay for
EVERYTHING, which isn't very realistic.

Ron M.

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Chuck Gould wrote:
Rosalie B. wrote:

The way I read this, the guy wants to take more than 6 people. Or are
you saying the next license above the six-pack license is easy to get?

The 100-ton license is virtually the same test as the OUPV. However, to
carry more than six passengers for hire with that 100-ton master's, I
believe you have to operate an inspected vessel.

There is a category of Uninspected Passenger Vessel over 100 tons and
suitable for up to 12 passengers. I don't know what license is required
to operate such a vessel, but I don't think its the basic OUPV. The
section "A" that I snipped from the USCode in a previous post referred to
those boats.

According to the http://www.uscg.mil/STCW/ page, there are the following:

Limited OUPV (launch tender)
OUPV (6-pak)
Limited Master (90 days in 3 years + 120 day)
Master 100 ton (less than 100 tons)

There are higher licenses, but everything I could find requires having a
valid US merchant mariner credential.

There are other licences, such as able seaman, lifeboatman, etc. But, I
don't see how these would apply.

There are also endorsements, such as towing or oceans.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
ups.com...
I've often wondered about this. Of course, technically, if anybody
pays you anything to take them out on your boat, you need to have the
6-pack license, at least. But in many cases, it's like driving 31 in a
30, or not reporting that 50 bucks you won on your tax return; just
don't say anything and don't worry about it.

Say, for example, I'm down at the coast getting ready to take my center
console out a few miles to some oil rigs for some fishing. A couple in
the hotel room next door is having a dull trip and wonders if they
could run out there with me. They say, "hey, we'll throw in a hundred
bucks to help cover gas and bait; we don't want to leech."

What if it's not even that obscure? Suppose a couple of guys in my
office want to come down to the coast with me to go out in my boat, and
they all pitch in on the cost? Jack says he'll split the cost of the
gas. Robert says he'll buy the bait. Does that warrant a license? I'm
sure that if it ever came up for question, we'd just play it cool and
deny everything.

It seems to me that if taken to its literal extreme, the license
requirement states that whoever is piloting the boat MUST pay for
EVERYTHING, which isn't very realistic.

Ron M.

Sure.. you're right, but that's not really the point. It's easy to get
around rules, but they're there for a reason. And, if there is some tragedy
involving the couple or Jack or whomever, you better have the right license.
The question is, is it worth it?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Bob wrote:
...
Another interesting thing, outside the boundary line a sailing school
must have a licensed master. However, on inland waters....get
this........ there are a few states that all you need is the state's
"Guides & Packers" license. No uscg master or oupv needed on inland
waters for sailing lessons. Just think YMCA summer sailing lessons...
as an example

I'm guessing these "inland waters" are actually State regulated bodies of
water that are not covers by the US Inland rules. This would include most
of the lakes in New England, for example, where the camps are.

These state rules are often quite different, and will include things like
"human powered vessels have right of way over sailboats," which are
totally ignored by the ColRegs or Inland Rules.

Well, not completely... Rule 25

see page 72 of Navigation Rules... Sailing Vessels Underway and Vessels
Under Oars :-)

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote:
I've often wondered about this. Of course, technically, if anybody
pays you anything to take them out on your boat, you need to have the
6-pack license, at least. But in many cases, it's like driving 31 in a
30, or not reporting that 50 bucks you won on your tax return; just
don't say anything and don't worry about it.

Say, for example, I'm down at the coast getting ready to take my center
console out a few miles to some oil rigs for some fishing. A couple in
the hotel room next door is having a dull trip and wonders if they
could run out there with me. They say, "hey, we'll throw in a hundred
bucks to help cover gas and bait; we don't want to leech."

What if it's not even that obscure? Suppose a couple of guys in my
office want to come down to the coast with me to go out in my boat, and
they all pitch in on the cost? Jack says he'll split the cost of the
gas. Robert says he'll buy the bait. Does that warrant a license? I'm
sure that if it ever came up for question, we'd just play it cool and
deny everything.

It seems to me that if taken to its literal extreme, the license
requirement states that whoever is piloting the boat MUST pay for
EVERYTHING, which isn't very realistic.

Ron M.

If you look back to my first post in the thread, you'll see I posted
the the formal CG memo on the update rules from 1994. In particular,
a person is a passenger for hire if they are required to pay "but not
including a voluntary sharing of the actual expenses of the voyage, by
monetary contribution or donation of fuel, food, beverage, or other
supplies." In other words, if you would take them out even if they
didn't share the fuel cost, then its not a license requiring situation
if you do accept the offer. The previous rules were actually so
strict that allowing a friend to "bring the beer" could be considered
a charter.

Capt. JG wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message
....
There is a category of Uninspected Passenger Vessel over 100 tons and
suitable for up to 12 passengers. I don't know what license is required
to operate such a vessel, but I don't think its the basic OUPV. The
section "A" that I snipped from the USCode in a previous post referred to
those boats.

According to the http://www.uscg.mil/STCW/ page, there are the following:

Limited OUPV (launch tender)
OUPV (6-pak)

I don't believe the regs ever mention "6-pak."

Limited Master (90 days in 3 years + 120 day)
Master 100 ton (less than 100 tons)

There are higher licenses, but everything I could find requires having a
valid US merchant mariner credential.

There are other licences, such as able seaman, lifeboatman, etc. But, I
don't see how these would apply.

There are also endorsements, such as towing or oceans.


46CFR15 seems to say that a Master is required on "Uninspected
Passenger Vessels" over 100 tons, which can carry up to 12 people. So
an OUPV is not sufficient for this category.

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message
...
There is a category of Uninspected Passenger Vessel over 100 tons and
suitable for up to 12 passengers. I don't know what license is required
to operate such a vessel, but I don't think its the basic OUPV. The
section "A" that I snipped from the USCode in a previous post referred
to those boats.

According to the http://www.uscg.mil/STCW/ page, there are the following:

Limited OUPV (launch tender)
OUPV (6-pak)

I don't believe the regs ever mention "6-pak."

Sure doesn't. In fact, the CG hate that term.

Limited Master (90 days in 3 years + 120 day)
Master 100 ton (less than 100 tons)

There are higher licenses, but everything I could find requires having a
valid US merchant mariner credential.

There are other licences, such as able seaman, lifeboatman, etc. But, I
don't see how these would apply.

There are also endorsements, such as towing or oceans.


46CFR15 seems to say that a Master is required on "Uninspected Passenger
Vessels" over 100 tons, which can carry up to 12 people. So an OUPV is
not sufficient for this category.

Definitely not.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Jeff" wrote in message
...

If you look back to my first post in the thread, you'll
see I posted
the the formal CG memo on the update rules from 1994. In
particular,
a person is a passenger for hire if they are required to
pay "but not
including a voluntary sharing of the actual expenses of
the voyage, by
monetary contribution or donation of fuel, food, beverage,
or other
supplies." In other words, if you would take them out
even if they
didn't share the fuel cost, then its not a license
requiring situation
if you do accept the offer. The previous rules were
actually so
strict that allowing a friend to "bring the beer" could be
considered
a charter.


What if I receive ''sexual favors'' for a moonlight sail?


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_