....
At what point does government impose the same requirements on boaters it
requires, rightfully so, of all other modes of transportation to protect
the "others", passengers, other boaters, commercial traffic and those
boys in the helos?
....

When the cost is worth the benefit. Also, governments don't license
all modes of transportation. Bicycles are popular and dangerous and
rarely licensed. Ultra-light planes, roller skates, scooters, swim
fins, pogo sticks, skis, Segways, motorized shopping carts, high
powered propeller beanies, horses, donkeys, really big prehistoric
carnivorous ducks and many, many more modes of transport may be
operated unlicensed in most countries. I'm not against licensing as
such. I have two boating licenses, one of which is commercial. But,
unless you are willing to make the licensing bar very high and require
COI's for all vessels I don't think you will prevent many accidents
offshore. The costs of such a program would be great and the loss of
freedom real and the benefits negligible. I think the argument for
licensing for very fast boats used in populated areas is much easer to
make than the one for offshore boaters.

-- Tom.

On 10 May 2007 22:40:44 -0700, "
wrote:

I think the argument for
licensing for very fast boats used in populated areas is much easer to
make than the one for offshore boaters.

Not to mention a little drug and alcohol testing.

" wrote in
oups.com:

Bicycles are popular and dangerous and
rarely licensed. Ultra-light planes, roller skates, scooters, swim
fins, pogo sticks, skis, Segways, motorized shopping carts, high
powered propeller beanies, horses, donkeys, really big prehistoric
carnivorous ducks and many, many more modes of transport may be
operated unlicensed in most countries

Ok, so, as with these devices, we won't require testing and licensing to
operate boats less than 5 hp, including manually powered. Sailboats
without engines will be exempt. Hatteras 58' motor yachts will not.

Larry
--

Larry wrote:
Don W wrote in news:YZK0i.1163
:

I say government should stay out of peoples lives
unless there is a compelling reason not to. I'm
really opposed to the idea that government should
become our mommies and save us from ourselves.



Everyone has presented exceptional examples of just wonderful 70-year-
old, physically fit sailors they know, some famous, some not. This is
great. If I were advocating licensing of airplane pilots, and there were
no licensing or testing or physical exams of airplane pilots, everyone
would be pointing out Chuck Yeagar and a host of airplane pilot heros,
for the same reasons....they don't need to be examined, obviously.

Those are NOT the people walking the docks to play captain where I have
been, or whom I have met. THESE are the people who need to be told when
enough is enough, just like airplane pilots are told, now. These people
walking the docks are sure they can handle any situation. Just ask them
or point out to them that they are walking a little slower than they were
10 years ago, or have trouble getting aboard, or are a little out of
breath from the walk from the parking lot, and you'll be told how
wonderful shape they are in. In their minds, just like everyone on this
newsgroup who have gotten all excited and mad at me, they are 27 and
strong as an ox....just with white hair...well, some white hair.

But, with increasing frequency lately, we find them offshore, in heavy
weather and in trouble...beaten and exhausted to the point a rescue
swimmer must be deployed to get them into the helo harness...endangering
the lives of the Coasties and everyone else who comes near the abandoned
vessel left behind.

Their inflated egos have gotten them in trouble and endangered others.
I'm not concerned with themselves. It's the "others" that continues to
bother me.

At what point does government impose the same requirements on boaters it
requires, rightfully so, of all other modes of transportation to protect
the "others", passengers, other boaters, commercial traffic and those
boys in the helos?

Larry
Almost everyone driving on our interstates and roads has a license yet
there are hundreds of people killed every day in auto accidents.
Licensing is not the ultimate answer. Common sense and good judgment is
what is needed. At any age!

krj wrote in news:tp11i.3529$ya.477
@bignews8.bellsouth.net:

Licensing is not the ultimate answer. Common sense and good judgment is
what is needed. At any age!


Licensing is simply taxation. TESTING is the problem on the roadways. The
tests are stupidly easy so even the dumbest humans can pass them. That's
wrong. Once cursory tested, the only thing they test for is cursory vision
until they are senile. That's what the problem is on the
roads...inadequate standards that need to be REtested, especially after
they reach retirement when things start to fall apart....where I am, now.

Larry
--

Commercial bus drivers are one thing, persuing happiness, alone or
with friends, is an American human being right. Feeding goldfish is
deadly, according to some. Enjoying property is a right in Canada.

Terry K

Larry wrote:


As long as rich stupids like these are buying boats, I still say
LICENSING should be mandatory.

Why? Why bother? If they want to die, let the old farts become fish
food. I don't want to pay for licensing the bureaucracy or the bull****.

On Tue, 08 May 2007 07:06:46 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

http://www.wvec.com/news/local/stori...642a3b1 .html

Anybody know if this storm was well-predicted?
A fluke?

As of Friday morning, May 4, it was forecasted as a developing low
pressure system with sustained winds over 30 kts. Hardly a surprise
to anyone who was paying attention.

How would a Mac 26M fare in these situations?

Your guess is as good as anyone else. No one in their right mind
would go off shore in a boat not designed for that kind of use.

If the boat isn't sinking, when would you send the distress signal?

If you have people seriously injured there isn't much choice. Boats
are usually tougher than people, and broken ribs, dehydration, or
hypothermia can all be life threatning.

On Tue, 08 May 2007 09:21:52 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 07:06:46 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

http://www.wvec.com/news/local/stori...642a3b1 .html

Anybody know if this storm was well-predicted?
A fluke?

As of Friday morning, May 4, it was forecasted as a developing low
pressure system with sustained winds over 30 kts. Hardly a surprise
to anyone who was paying attention.

How would a Mac 26M fare in these situations?

Your guess is as good as anyone else. No one in their right mind
would go off shore in a boat not designed for that kind of use.

If the boat isn't sinking, when would you send the distress signal?

If you have people seriously injured there isn't much choice. Boats
are usually tougher than people, and broken ribs, dehydration, or
hypothermia can all be life threatning.

There were broken ribs in one case here. And the seas were pretty
vicious from all accounts. I guess I asked this because I've seen
accounts where some ride it out while others decide - with no injuries
- to pack it in, leaving their vessels for salvors.
Probably too individual a thing to answer unless you've gone through
it.
And maybe, despite all efforts, I could get caught in a similar
situation, and I'm thinking that there are some measures of
preparedness that could help ride it out. Sea anchors, harnesses,
topside liferafts that would deploy if the boat sank, personal
EPIRB's, etc. Could be that preparedness would lessen the urge
to abandon.
Just hate the thought of abandoning a boat and putting the coasties at
risk when it's not a vital need.

--Vic

On May 8, 7:09�am, Vic Smith wrote:
On Tue, 08 May 2007 09:21:52 -0400, Wayne.B





wrote:
On Tue, 08 May 2007 07:06:46 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

http://www.wvec.com/news/local/stori...0707_uscg_resc...

Anybody know if this storm was well-predicted?
A fluke?

As of Friday morning, May 4, it was forecasted as a developing low
pressure system with sustained winds over 30 kts. *Hardly a surprise
to anyone who was paying attention.

How would a Mac 26M fare in these situations?

Your guess is as good as anyone else. *No one in their right mind
would go off shore in a boat not designed for that kind of use.

If the boat isn't sinking, when would you send the distress signal?

If you have people seriously injured there isn't much choice. *Boats
are usually tougher than people, and broken ribs, dehydration, or
hypothermia can all be life threatning.

There were broken ribs in one case here. *And the seas were pretty
vicious from all accounts. *I guess I asked this because I've seen
accounts where some ride it out while others decide - with no injuries
- to pack it in, leaving their vessels for salvors.
Probably too individual a thing to answer unless you've gone through
it.
And maybe, despite all efforts, I could get caught in a similar
situation, and I'm thinking that there are some measures of
preparedness that could help ride it out. *Sea anchors, harnesses,
topside liferafts that would deploy if the boat sank, personal
EPIRB's, etc. *Could be that preparedness would lessen the urge
to abandon.
Just hate the thought of abandoning a boat and putting the coasties at
risk when it's not a vital need.

--Vic- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The primary plan should be avoiding that type of situation in the
first place.
I never leave the dock without first listening to the weather forecast
on the VHF.
It takes about 3-4 minutes to listen to the latest prerecorded update,
which is a perfect amount of time to warm up the engine.

Also, every boat should have a barometer, placed where it will be seen
frequently.
I have a clock and barometer on the aft bulkhead of the main cabin,
with the barometer mounted above the companionway leading aft. I see
it all the time, and consciously look at it 2-3 times a day. If the
forecast is favorable but the barometer suddenly starts to plummet, I
believe the barometer and not the forecast.

A Mac 26 would not do well in hurricane force winds, nor would the
majority of small sailboats. There are very good reasons why most
sensible boaters won't venture out in a near gale, let alone the winds
described in the news item.