| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
KingOfTheApes wrote:
" wrote: On Aug 20, 1:36 pm, KingOfTheApes wrote: The question is, WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT? Don't know, but we're all going to chip in and buy him a beer. You must one of those who celebrate the Law of the Jungle. I bet you got one of those bumper stickers that say, "We support our troops." You lose. I was trying to insult you, but you're too dense to recognize it. Oh, yeah, PLONK Steve |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Aug 24, 4:42*pm, (Rod) wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:06:47 -0700 (PDT), ComandanteBanana wrote: On Aug 24, 7:07=A0am, Morten Reistad wrote: The thing with a motorboat is that you don't know if stopping puts you at lesser or greater danger. You just have to predictable, and hopefully they'll steer around you. A word from some commercial captains I know. Pleasure boaters are normally not aware of the traffic control and zone separation in place; and even some quite experiencd amateur skippers are clueless about how a large, commercial vessel stops. Hint: You don't want to be in front of them. They try to manouver as well as they can; but they really need the zone space they are given in and out of ports. If you cross the separation zon= es please do so at a fixed course and speed at as sharp an angle to the lane= s as you can. The large ships have automatic anti-collision trackers that are _extremely_ useful in such waters, but they tend to give lots of false alarms on small craft that zigzag in and out of lanes. I just cheched the Miami area on commercial charts. It is chock full of separation sones and report requirements almost halfway to Bahamas. If you are unaware of these zones you will make a lot of commercial ships hate you intensely when you are there, even in a Kayak. Especially in a kayak. Basically there are two kinds of zones he "THE HAVES" & "THE HAVES NOT." And the kayakers must stay in the area of the haves not, because if not they are fair game. Otherwise, go out when the haves are working or sleeping. ;) Damn, what an ass, you must be French- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - How clever. If I was French, I'd signing something like LeComandanteBanana. ;) |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Aug 24, 6:11*pm, Steve Cramer wrote:
KingOfTheApes wrote: " wrote: On Aug 20, 1:36 pm, KingOfTheApes wrote: The question is, WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT? Don't know, but we're all going to chip in and buy him a beer. You must one of those who celebrate the Law of the Jungle. I bet you got one of those bumper stickers that say, "We support our troops." You lose. I was trying to insult you, but you're too dense to recognize it. |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
ComandanteBanana wrote:
-hh wrote: KingOfTheApes wrote: Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and... Kind of an interesting self-contradiction you're making, by first talking about how these boats are huge and expensive, yet now they're owned by uneducated high school dropouts, which is a demographic with very low incomes... First of all, there are "lions" out there and "wannabes." Meaning there are many big yachts and cigarette boats owned by the filthy rich, and then crappy motorboats of all kinds ... It's a matter of STATUS. Just like cars. "Money to burn"=Big Yacht & SUV. "Survivor"=old car and boat. Agreed, but this is hardly new news. Mahogany hulled Chris-Craft powerboats have been around since the 1920s, as well as efforts over the years to broaden the market base to the middle class; one can suggest that Boston Whaler contributed to this trend too, staring in the mid-1950s. But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too... You sure that you're not smelling naturally occurring organics? Afterall, the ICW runs through a lot of muddy marshes and estuaries. I can tell the smell of gas. And you can see it floating all over the place. Maybe in a marina. Gas is a light aeromatic and disappears quite rapidly. If its not natural marsh stuff, its more likely to be diesel, which tends to be more of what larger working boats tend to use, not your generic commercial pleasure boat 30ft. And when a motorboats goes by, you can get some serious second hand smoke. While there's always going to be the occasional gross polluter, they generally are quite uncommon. Turbo-diesels will smoke when under heavy load, such as a 40 footer trying to get home on one engine. 0.04% incidence. *Yes, very 'startling'. * You would have to boat for over 25 years just to get up to a 1% risk. I bet many of those registered boats don't even make it to the water (they look good parked on the driveway). Catch-22 alert: if these are your high risk "unskilled" boaters, if they're parked at home, they can't be a risk at sea. And the kayaks stay away from those motorboat highways, so the statistics may be misleading. Kayaks aren't a class of boat requiring registration, so the actual total numbers are higher, which means that the actual statistical risk is even lower. But your common sense tells you they are a real threat. More than terrorists, say. ;) Common sense says that all parties should take responsibility for their decisions, which includes wandering out into harm's way when you suspect that there are operators of less than stellar skill levels present. Yes, it is "unfair", but life is unfair: you either deal with it and roll with the punches, or die from being too inflexible. -hh |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
In article ,
-hh wrote: Morten Reistad wrote: Money to burn, indeed. I could buy a complete set of diving gear for what a new Genua costs. And I have a 22 year old 36' boat. That might depend on what calls a 'complete' set. As in everything else, there's the bare-bones basics and then there's the more serious stuff, particularly when it comes to specialized ares. For example, the Ikelite SS-200 strobe heads I have for my old 35mm underwater camera cost me $1K each...and they aren't compatible with going digital. Another high ticket item is a quality drysuit for use in colder climates. Figure spending $2K for that with one basic set of underwear. Its all too easy to have the same stereotype of 'bubba diver' recreationalist as it is for power boating in a 17ft fiberglass runabout with too much horsepower & beer. Basic, cheap dacron 140% Genua for 14.65 meter mast : $3500 150% dacron with some fibres for stiffening : $4500 Mylar 150% deck-swiper with woven fibres : $6000 ... Kevlar/Carbon racing genua, 150% : $14000 I guess you could just squeeze in ABC/wetsuit/tank/bcd/reg+bottom timer for $3500. $14k should buy you a decent computer, doubles, drysuit&undergarments and a camera too. -- mrr |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Aug 23, 6:06 pm, "Lee Bell" wrote:
Sometimes that law doesn't exist or is not enforced and they just follow the Law of the Jungle. If you talk about the channels their speeds are not terribly willd, but still you are a sitting duck. It exists everywhere you're ever likely to be in your kayak. There's more enforcement on the intracoastal, per boater, than in any city or state anywhere near here. Yes, you are a sitting duck, which is a really good reason not to go where you can't be safe. I presume you would not ride your bicycle on I-95, which would you ride you kayak in a zone where running on a plane is legal? Not only I wouldn't ride on a highway, I wouldn't even ride on the street right in front of my door. It's so bad that most people stay away from riding bikes on the road around here and rather ride the sidewalks... Of course, you ain't safe there either. Just today, as I was coming down on the sidewalk to cross this intersection, a car came blasting the horn at me because he felt every right to beat me to the corner. I had to use my brakes to the limit or else. That was a close call. And the guy kept going like nothing. I'm sure he knows we've got few rights --if any. Then you realize you live in the jungle. Welcome to the Jungle --if you dare. WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION? ;) http://webspwner.com/users/bananarevolution |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Aug 25, 4:52*pm, -hh wrote:
But your common sense tells you they are a real threat. More than terrorists, say. ;) Common sense says that all parties should take responsibility for their decisions, which includes wandering out into harm's way when you suspect that there are operators of less than stellar skill levels present. *Yes, it is "unfair", but life is unfair: you either deal with it and roll with the punches, or die from being too inflexible. -hh- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Life was very unfair when the Vikings went around pillaging and killing left and right. But they are today very civilized people, even showing respect for nature as well as for the little guy on the bike or kayak. So I hope other "less-than-civilized" people can evolve too. |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Aug 25, 6:07*pm, Morten Reistad wrote:
In article , -hh wrote: Morten Reistad wrote: Money to burn, indeed. I could buy a complete set of diving gear for what a new Genua costs. And I have a 22 year old 36' boat. That might depend on what calls a 'complete' set. As in everything else, there's the bare-bones basics and then there's the more serious stuff, particularly when it comes to specialized ares. *For example, the Ikelite SS-200 strobe heads I have for my old 35mm underwater camera cost me $1K each...and they aren't compatible with going digital. *Another high ticket item is a quality drysuit for use in colder climates. *Figure spending $2K for that with one basic set of underwear. *Its all too easy to have the same stereotype of 'bubba diver' recreationalist as it is for power boating in a 17ft fiberglass runabout with too much horsepower & beer. Basic, cheap dacron 140% Genua for 14.65 meter mast : $3500 150% dacron with some fibres for stiffening * * * * : $4500 Mylar 150% deck-swiper with woven fibres * * * * * *: $6000 .. Kevlar/Carbon racing genua, 150% * * * * * * * * * *: $14000 I guess you could just squeeze in ABC/wetsuit/tank/bcd/reg+bottom timer for $3500. $14k should buy you a decent computer, doubles, drysuit&undergarments and a camera too. In the old days of 35mm film, a Nikonos V body was $700, the Nikkor 15mm WA lens with viewfinder was $2K, plus the strobe heads that I currently have were $1K each, plus strobe arms, chargers & other bits. I figure that I had spent around $6K for my current setup. In going digital: $~3.K - Canon 5D replacement that's rumored to be announced tomorrow $1.6K - "cheap" (pexiglass) Ikelite housing $0.6K - 8" port for above, with one modular extension $0.8K - decent WA lens (17-35mm L) $1.0K - Ikelite DS-160 strobe head, synch cord & charger $0.8K - Ikelite DS-160 strobe head & synch cord $0.2K - two spare strobe battery packs $~.5K - Ultralite strobe arms (if I'm lucky) -------- $8.5K and counting. Still haven't picked up the misc bits or a case to transport it in. If you want to take it to a high end system, add another $2-$3K to move up from a pexiglass housing to metal casting, as well as another $3K-$5K to go to a Pro camera body (1Ds Mark III)...and bump the strobes up to the digital replacement model of what I have now (DS-200)...and add a few more lenses and matching port extensions. Very easy to crack $14K for just the UW camera. -hh |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Aug 25, 5:51*pm, -hh wrote:
If you want to take it to a high end system, add another $2-$3K to move up from a pexiglass housing to metal casting, as well as another $3K-$5K to go to a Pro camera body (1Ds Mark III)...and bump the strobes up to the digital replacement model of what I have now (DS-200)...and add a few more lenses and matching port extensions. Very easy to crack $14K for just the UW camera. Not sure the pro camera bodies are worth it. Plenty of u/w "pros" are using "semi-pro". Speaking of which, I picked up an extra D200 body, brand new, for under $1,000 from B&H. That's the problem with digital camera housings, once your camera becomes obsolete and it floods, prepare to buy a new housing or find what you can on eBay. This will be an insurance policy to extend the life of my expensive housing, plus serve as a land camera since I can leave the strap on full-time. So now, packing my camera for Bonaire next week, I'm bringing 2 camera bodies, 4 lenses, 4 camera batteries, camera battery charger, various filters and diopters, 3 strobes, 4 strobe battery packs, 3 strobe battery chargers, 2 sync cords, focus light, assorted arms and clamps, camera housing, extended viewfinder, two ports, various extension rings and focus gears, all packed in a nice indestructable case that comes out to just over 65 lbs full. Oh, and the laptop, memory cards, and memory card reader, can't forget those. The cameras and lenses and laptop obviously have to go in carry-on, along with the regs and computers, and now the airlines have cut luggage limits to 50 lbs, one bag per passenger. Which reminds me, time to renew my insurance on all that since I dare not lock any of it for TSA, and Bonaire isn't exactly the most crime- free destination. |
A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule itsroads
10 Cyclists Struck by a Taxi on the Causeway to Miami Beach
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=457751 "A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule its roads; if we want to ensure fairness, government must act to protect the weak." And why should we protect the monkey, not the lion? Because then the lion will eat the monkey, stupid. And that keeps the other monkeys terrorized, which is not what we want. We want them to come out, right? Here's a smart comment on the subject... "The purpose of the police power is to protect public health, safety, and welfare. When it comes down to cars vs. bicycles, the latter need greater protection than the former -- after all, cars kill more Americans than guns do, whereas beds kill more Americans than bikes do. That's why places which truly embrace bicycling as a valid (and safe) mode of transportation have laws that aren't fair: bicycles get more rights than cars. In many northern European countries, the driver is always at fault in a bicycle-car crash. Some municipalities even completely exempt bicycles from many road regulations (like one-way traffic flow) -- since such regulations are often intended to regulate cars (in the one-way example, that street might be too narrow for two cars to pass but plenty wide for two bikes to pass). A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule its roads; if we want to ensure fairness, government must act to protect the weak. The #1 reason that people cite for not bicycling more often is that they feel that biking is unsafe. It isn't, really -- in fact, not bicycling degrades your life expectancy more than bicycling -- but it can be made much safer through good policies, enforced fairly." Posted by PCC | June 25, 2008 8:30 PM http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.c..._hierarchy.php |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:52:22 -0700 (PDT), -hh
wrote: ComandanteBanana wrote: -hh wrote: KingOfTheApes wrote: Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and... Kind of an interesting self-contradiction you're making, by first talking about how these boats are huge and expensive, yet now they're owned by uneducated high school dropouts, which is a demographic with very low incomes... First of all, there are "lions" out there and "wannabes." Meaning there are many big yachts and cigarette boats owned by the filthy rich, and then crappy motorboats of all kinds ... It's a matter of STATUS. Just like cars. "Money to burn"=3DBig Yacht & SUV. "Survivor"=3Dold car and boat. Agreed, but this is hardly new news. Mahogany hulled Chris-Craft powerboats have been around since the 1920s, as well as efforts over the years to broaden the market base to the middle class; one can suggest that Boston Whaler contributed to this trend too, staring in the mid-1950s. But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too... You sure that you're not smelling naturally occurring organics? Afterall, the ICW runs through a lot of muddy marshes and estuaries. I can tell the smell of gas. And you can see it floating all over the place. Maybe in a marina. Gas is a light aeromatic and disappears quite rapidly. If its not natural marsh stuff, its more likely to be diesel, which tends to be more of what larger working boats tend to use, not your generic commercial pleasure boat 30ft. And when a motorboats goes by, you can get some serious second hand smoke. While there's always going to be the occasional gross polluter, they generally are quite uncommon. Turbo-diesels will smoke when under heavy load, such as a 40 footer trying to get home on one engine. 0.04% incidence. =A0Yes, very 'startling'. =A0 You would have to boat for over 25 years just to get up to a 1% risk. I bet many of those registered boats don't even make it to the water (they look good parked on the driveway). Catch-22 alert: if these are your high risk "unskilled" boaters, if they're parked at home, they can't be a risk at sea. And the kayaks stay away from those motorboat highways, so the statistics may be misleading. Kayaks aren't a class of boat requiring registration, so the actual total numbers are higher, which means that the actual statistical risk is even lower. But your common sense tells you they are a real threat. More than terrorists, say. ;) Common sense says that all parties should take responsibility for their decisions, which includes wandering out into harm's way when you suspect that there are operators of less than stellar skill levels present. Yes, it is "unfair", but life is unfair: you either deal with it and roll with the punches, or die from being too inflexible. -hh Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in the future |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:19:41 -0700 (PDT), KingOfTheApes
wrote: On Aug 23, 6:06 pm, "Lee Bell" wrote: Sometimes that law doesn't exist or is not enforced and they just follow the Law of the Jungle. If you talk about the channels their speeds are not terribly willd, but still you are a sitting duck. It exists everywhere you're ever likely to be in your kayak. There's more enforcement on the intracoastal, per boater, than in any city or state anywhere near here. Yes, you are a sitting duck, which is a really good reason not to go where you can't be safe. I presume you would not ride your bicycle on I-95, which would you ride you kayak in a zone where running on a plane is legal? Not only I wouldn't ride on a highway, I wouldn't even ride on the street right in front of my door. It's so bad that most people stay away from riding bikes on the road around here and rather ride the sidewalks... Of course, you ain't safe there either. Just today, as I was coming down on the sidewalk to cross this intersection, a car came blasting the horn at me because he felt every right to beat me to the corner. I had to use my brakes to the limit or else. That was a close call. And the guy kept going like nothing. I'm sure he knows we've got few rights --if any. Then you realize you live in the jungle. Welcome to the Jungle --if you dare. WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION? ;) http://webspwner.com/users/bananarevolution Sounds like you are suffering from "lack of sack" desease and whinning about it. Bycyles have as much right on our roadways as cars do, and have no right on the side walks. |
A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule its roads
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:51:35 -0700 (PDT), ComandanteBanana
wrote: 10 Cyclists Struck by a Taxi on the Causeway to Miami Beach http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=457751 "A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule its roads; if we want to ensure fairness, government must act to protect the weak." And why should we protect the monkey, not the lion? Because then the lion will eat the monkey, stupid. And that keeps the other monkeys terrorized, which is not what we want. We want them to come out, right? Here's a smart comment on the subject... "The purpose of the police power is to protect public health, safety, and welfare. When it comes down to cars vs. bicycles, the latter need greater protection than the former -- after all, cars kill more Americans than guns do, whereas beds kill more Americans than bikes do. That's why places which truly embrace bicycling as a valid (and safe) mode of transportation have laws that aren't fair: bicycles get more rights than cars. In many northern European countries, the driver is always at fault in a bicycle-car crash. Some municipalities even completely exempt bicycles from many road regulations (like one-way traffic flow) -- since such regulations are often intended to regulate cars (in the one-way example, that street might be too narrow for two cars to pass but plenty wide for two bikes to pass). A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule its roads; if we want to ensure fairness, government must act to protect the weak. The #1 reason that people cite for not bicycling more often is that they feel that biking is unsafe. It isn't, really -- in fact, not bicycling degrades your life expectancy more than bicycling -- but it can be made much safer through good policies, enforced fairly." Posted by PCC | June 25, 2008 8:30 PM http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.c..._hierarchy.php As are the laws here, hit a bycyclest here and you are in trouble. What happened to the cab driver ? |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Why would anyone care unless they were planning to sue or something?
I've been kayaking all over the east coast, from Maine to the Everglades, and I find personal water craft far more irritating, hazardous, and likely to be in unskilled hands than any kind of smudgepot (power boat). |
A civilized society cannot let the law of the jungle rule its roads
Here's a smart comment on the subject...
"The purpose of the police power is to protect public health, safety, and welfare. When it comes down to cars vs. bicycles, the latter need greater protection than the former -- after all, cars kill more Americans than guns do, whereas beds kill more Americans than bikes do. Smart except for being completely wrong. The purpose of the police power is to investigate, apprehend and bring criminals to the judicial portion of the American system. |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will
surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in the future The gas doc? What's a gas doc? Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. Presto, no more gas slick. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Sounds like you are suffering from "lack of sack" desease and whinning
about it. Bycyles have as much right on our roadways as cars do, and have no right on the side walks. I believe that varies with location, but it's certainly true in many locations. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Galen Hekhuis wrote
Why would anyone care unless they were planning to sue or something? I've been kayaking all over the east coast, from Maine to the Everglades, and I find personal water craft far more irritating, hazardous, and likely to be in unskilled hands than any kind of smudgepot (power boat). You hit that one right on the nose except, of course, for the smudgepot part. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
"Lee Bell" wrote:
Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in the future The gas doc? *What's a gas doc? Dock. It doesn't matter too much anyway, because now the discussion is shifting. It started as claims of pollution from normal running conditions that was observed along protected waters (eg, ICW), but this is talking about a semi-"point" source of pollution, namely a spill occurring at refueling stations. Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. *Presto, no more gas slick. Of course, another option when refueling, is to not spill so much fuel (such that the Sheen Rule is invoked, etc). And from a similar observation of human nature, a chronic spiller may very well get inconvenienced by the owner of the refueling station to report every spill no matter how small (ie, well below reporting threshold). We can all figure out the real reasons why. -hh |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
ComandanteBanana wrote:
"Lee Bell" wrote: You do know that, by putting a trolling motor on your kayak, you're classified as a power boat, right? Oh, give me a break. At worst I'd be a hybrid. Small, slow, noiseless and backed up by paddles. Irrelevant, since "The Law is The Law". At one point, my Canoe was registered as a 'powerboat'. And I recall that it was a bit of a nuisance to get it fit with letters of the required minimum height for its Registration#. Many people that are into motorboating are poorly educated and couldn't care less about the consequences of their actions. I think MOTORBOATING IS LARGELY FOR COUCH POTATOES THAT WANT TO HAVE A DEGREE OF ADVENTURE IN THE GREAT OUTDOORS. Yet, in the same post, you identified yourself as a power boater. But not a threat to anything. Except as a threat to navigation, when in the wrong place. My anchor weighs 1 1/2 lbs... Terrible threat to the reefs. ;) It's almost exactly the same threat as mine. An anchor that sets and stays in place, does very little damage to anything and there's already a law requiring people to anchor in adjacent sand areas rather than on coral. Chain and line, on the other hand, can do quite a bit of damage, whether attached to a kayak or different kind of power boat. I'd look before I anchor to a reef, don't you? Oh, to always have the luxury of being able to look through perfectly clear water. How much you need for a motorboat? Which power boat? I have three and, as I've already mentioned, a kayak. Anchors for each boat is designed for the boat I use it with. My smallest power boat uses an anchor just like the one I use for the kayak. OK, why don't you get rid of the big ones? The proper sizing of an anchor is predicted on several factors, not just the size of the craft. But motorboat pollution contributes to "the soup" out there too. You can even smell the gas, and I doubt it that it would be safe to swim in the intracostal anymore. What you can smell is not harming the reefs. As for what you doubt, I suggest you learn a bit more before getting it wrong again. If you're talking about human waste by those on boats, I'm afraid you'll have to include kayakers in your list. It's legal for either of us to use the ocean as a bathroom. It is not legal for me to discharge my head directly overboard or to discharge my holding tank within coastal waters. The sewage outfalls in Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, on the other hand, pump millions of gallons of partially treated sewage and chemicals onto the reefs every day. Can the government ever be that bad? They claim they treat everything at Virginia Key... http://www.reef-rescue.org/research/keywestcitizenpage1.pdf http://www.reef-rescue.org/MiamiHerald/ Oceanisnoplacefortreatedsewage.pdf Here's their homepage; note the 'Donate' button: http://www.reef-rescue.org/ Do you do kayaking by any chance, or you just represent the motorboating association? Apparently, you find it utterly incomprehensible for there to be people who actually own both powered and unpowered watercraft, particularly when their perspectives and conclusions are at odds with yours. -hh |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will
surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in the future The gas doc? What's a gas doc? Dock. It doesn't matter too much anyway, because now the discussion is shifting. I thought of that, but in all my years of boating, I've never seen a dock surround anything. I considered that it might be a local company in the business of spill mitigation. Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. Presto, no more gas slick. Of course, another option when refueling, is to not spill so much fuel (such that the Sheen Rule is invoked, etc). Not as much of an option as you'd think. You generally don't know your tank is full until gas comes out of the overflow which, of course, is over the water. Some gas is spilled more often than not. Gas evaporates pretty quickly and such small amounts don't last long enough to be a significant problem. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
You do know that, by putting a trolling motor on your kayak, you're
classified as a power boat, right? Oh, give me a break. At worst I'd be a hybrid. Small, slow, noiseless and backed up by paddles. Still a power boat. So is a sailboat when under power, which they are most of the time while in the Intracoastal. At one point, my Canoe was registered as a 'powerboat'. And I recall that it was a bit of a nuisance to get it fit with letters of the required minimum height for its Registration#. No more nuisance than any other boat. You left off the bother of having to renew it every year. It's a tax, pure and simple. If you are documented, it's worse. I don't have to display numbers, the name of the boat identifies it. The numbers that match the name have to be permanently carved into the boat somewhere. Mine are in a stringer in the engine room. In addition to the Coast Guard document, which has to be renewed every year, I have to have a Florida registration as well that alwo has to be renewed every year. I'd look before I anchor to a reef, don't you? What am I going to see when the reef is more than 100 feet below and visibility is 40 to 50 feet? I have an option most kayakers don't. I have a color depth finder that can give me an idea of the nature of the bottom below me. It's not always sure what I'm over, but I generally have at least an idea what's there. A high profile reef is pretty easy to see. A flat one isn't. OK, why don't you get rid of the big ones? If you're talking about the anchor, because it's what I need to hold my big boat. If you mean the boat itself, because it's what I stay on, fish from and dive from. I'm not sure my wife would agree to sleep on a kayak. Can the government ever be that bad? They claim they treat everything at Virginia Key... Hugh already gave you the links. http://www.reef-rescue.org/research/keywestcitizenpage1.pdf http://www.reef-rescue.org/MiamiHerald/Oceanisnoplacefortreatedsewage.pdf Here's their homepage; note the 'Donate' button: http://www.reef-rescue.org/ Do you do kayaking by any chance, or you just represent the motorboating association? I have a kayak. I don't usually take it into the ocean. I sometimes take it into the Gulf when I vacation in the Keys. I'm taking the boat down to Lake Olita this weekend. Perhaps I'll see if the kayak will fit on the bow. I'd kind of like to tour the waterway in the state park and they won't allow my powered dinghy in there. Apparently, you find it utterly incomprehensible for there to be people who actually own both powered and unpowered watercraft, particularly when their perspectives and conclusions are at odds with yours. Until recently, I had a rowboat and a sail boat too. As Hugh knows, I live on a lake. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:37:15 -0400, "Lee Bell"
wrote: Totally untrue, if I spill gas while refueling. THe gas doc will surround the area with absorption material, and clean it up, I have to file an EPA report on how it happened, and how I will prevent it in the future The gas doc? What's a gas doc? Personally, I sprinkle some Dawn dishwashing detergent around. Presto, no more gas slick. Lee gas Dock attendant, when you are paying 1200 dollars to fill up, someone hands you the hose |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Rod wrote
gas Dock attendant, when you are paying 1200 dollars to fill up, someone hands you the hose My tanks don't get that empty, but they could. The weekend fuel bill was a modest $341.00. They handed me the hose too. |
Why the Law of the Sea has to be the Law of the Jungle?
On Aug 14, 1:09*pm, "Lee Bell" wrote:
While it is possible that the boater chose to make it a close call, that's not certain at all, However, given the world in which we live, it's highly probable. As a new boat owner whose future father in law is a past Power Squadron District Commander, and usually within visual distance on his own boat when I'm piloting mine with his daughter on board, I scrupulously recite the rules of the road and how they apply to every other boat I see out there - fewer than 10% follow them, and at least another 10% demonstrate the sort of asinine contempt that can only be explained by the choice described above. I never thought I'd find a higher asshole density than I do on the roads, but the waterways have exceeded my worst expectations. "Against stupidiy, the gods themselves contend in vain" - Isaac Asimov "My dear sir, 95% of EVERYTHING is crap" - Theodore Sturgeon |
Why the Law of the Sea has to be the Law of the Jungle?
While it is possible that the boater chose to make it a close call, that's
not certain at all, However, given the world in which we live, it's highly probable. As a new boat owner whose future father in law is a past Power Squadron District Commander, and usually within visual distance on his own boat when I'm piloting mine with his daughter on board, I scrupulously recite the rules of the road and how they apply to every other boat I see out there - fewer than 10% follow them, and at least another 10% demonstrate the sort of asinine contempt that can only be explained by the choice described above. I never thought I'd find a higher asshole density than I do on the roads, but the waterways have exceeded my worst expectations. 10% is not highly probable. The assholes on the water here are not higher density than those on the roads, but they don't have to be to be a problem. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
Hey, I've thought this thread was dead... Yes, I assumed you
acknowledged that the Law of the Jungle was the law of the sea. But it turns out someone mention bikes and I've got carried away, and went to fight the land predators... http://forums.miamibeach411.com/inde...hread/3039/P0/ But this philosophy of "big fish vs. little fish," I have learned recently, carries over to where you can keep you kayak or motorboat. This lady told me that the selective tenants of her upper scale condo don't want kayaks there... but welcome yachts. "NO BLACKS" have been changed to "NO BIKES, NO KAYAKS." |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
But this philosophy of "big fish vs. little fish," I have learned
recently, carries over to where you can keep you kayak or motorboat. This lady told me that the selective tenants of her upper scale condo don't want kayaks there... but welcome yachts. Money talks. The managee protection plan for S. Florida includes limits on boat slips, which is driving owners of larger boats to look for places to keep them. This, in turn, is creating an opportunity for those with docks to make a lot of money by providing those spaces. Kayaks don't generate income. Yachts do. It's a fact of life. Small kayaks can probably be stored inside a condo or apartment. Larger ones can't. Anything that is stored in common areas, that does not generate income, is going to be less welcome than things that do generate revenue. Blame all the Yankees that moved here for the congestion or blame all the refugees that came from the south and east. Just don't blame those of us that were born here. "NO BLACKS" have been changed to "NO BIKES, NO KAYAKS." There have long been restrictions on motorcycles. Back 25 years ago, when I lived in Jacksonville, I was required to keep my motorcycle out of sight. Then I was required to keep it away from the building due to fire regulations. Lucky for me, I had a ground floor apartment with a storage room big enough to hold my bike. It was illegal, but out of sight was out of mind. By the way, you left trucks, boats on trailers, any kind of trailer, any kind of motor home and vehicles with advertising on the side, all of which are limited to one degree or another, by local laws and/or deed restrictions. In my neighborhood, for example, which is not gated and is in Davie, long considered Cracker territory, it is not legal to leave a trailer of any kind where it can be seen from the street, it is not legal to park a motor home in your driveway and it is not legal to have any vehicle with advertising on it in your driveway on a permanent basis. Other communities in the area go so far as to ban pickup trucks completely. It's a crazy world. Lee |
WHO'S LIABLE IF I DO GET HIT?
On Sep 3, 10:52*am, "Lee Bell" wrote:
But this philosophy of "big fish vs. little fish," I have learned recently, carries over to where you can keep you kayak or motorboat. This lady told me that the selective tenants of her upper scale condo don't want kayaks there... but welcome yachts. Money talks. *The managee protection plan for S. Florida includes limits on boat slips, which is driving owners of larger boats to look for places to keep them. *This, in turn, is creating an opportunity for those with docks to make a lot of money by providing those spaces. *Kayaks don't generate income. *Yachts do. *It's a fact of life. Well, I don't see much of an argument here. The same thing happened to me with a motorcycle. That reason being that the kickstand could make a hole on the pavement, serious. The signs may as well say, "Yachts and SUVs welcome, kayaks and bikes are not." I meant bicycles but it applies to both motorized and non motorized. I go all the time into my girlfriend's hotel with a bicycle and I have fun seeing the security guards follow me and ask me all kinds of questions, "Chief, what are you doing here?" Then I tell them the apartment number and they have to shut up. Today I got even. I went in the back door, and when the guard thought he finally caught me slipping in, I produced the key and said, "What's up chief?" ;) He still followed me but only saw me taking my mail and walking out. You know, the usual routine. The moral of this story is that monkeys in bikes or kayaks are not welcome everywhere. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:09 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com