California boating card

[catalinajack]

I'd like to have a chat with the instructor who led you to believe that you ever have "right of way."

Actually, you are OBLIGATED under the rules to stand on (maintain course and speed) in certain situations. Failing to do so creates confusion which could lead to bigger problems.

To be fair, failing to act in time to avoid a collision, regardless of who is stand-on or give-way, is also a violation of the rules. So you're not 100% wrong there.

Geez, I never said any instructor taught me to do that. Bad assumption on your part. But you and a couple of other commenters have made the same same very good point. What I was trying to impart in my original posting is that whether I have the "right of way", okay, the correct term is stand-on vessell if you must, I assume that the "other guy" will do something unexpected. So, sometimes, even when it appears I will have the right of way, I turn away far in advance of needing an assessment of which is the stand-on vessel. Is that hurtful? Does that create danger? I think not.

 

[Seevee]

I don't think they will move things at all....nothing will change except limited resources being diverted from somewhere else.....some one has to run the program....and monitor the training....and maintain a database....... they'll be a new committee in the state government to monitor the program.... the person running the program will get a new office and a state car, and two admin assistants....and then fly to some other state for training.....

The spending on this will far far outweigh the benefits, and the money has to come from somewhere.....probably from somewhere boating related....so now fees at state marinas will go up.....boat ramp fees will go up....maybe they'll reduce the hours at the pump out stations..... boat registration costs will increase.... hmmm....we'll need to form a committee to see how big a committee will be needed to administer this program...

OK..so I was able to hold off on an anti-government rant for 53 posts.....I finally succumbed.

Totally agree. That just the way government works. And registering or titling a boat has no safety benefit either... just a money grab.

 

[Seevee]

Geez, I never said any instructor taught me to do that. Bad assumption on your part. But you and a couple of other commenters have made the same same very good point. What I was trying to impart in my original posting is that whether I have the "right of way", okay, the correct term is stand-on vessell if you must, I assume that the "other guy" will do something unexpected. So, sometimes, even when it appears I will have the right of way, I turn away far in advance of needing an assessment of which is the stand-on vessel. Is that hurtful? Does that create danger? I think not.

Catalina,
Im with you on this one. I'd always take the conservative action, regardless if I'm stand on or not. If the other boater isn't clearly operating at a professional level, you don't know what he'll do.

 

[sunchaser]

Hopefully the CA test guides will adequately explain reasons and importance for stand on and give way vessels to abide by rules.

 

[Art]

I live by this basic code/creed eulogy/poem regarding any type of diversion action that may be suddenly-required on the water...

Here lies the body of one Michael O'Day
He died defending his right of way
He was right, dead right - as he sailed along
But, he's just as dead as if he were wrong

IMO - Act correctly [by the rules] yourself in every marine instance. However, whenever necessary no matter the circumstance, give way or do some other action required to avert collision/problems because someone else or something other is not acting correctly [by the rules] them-self/itself.

 

[psneeld]

Rule 2 covers taking early action based on judgement, but generally the rules are more open to application than interpretation.

As I said, the actions of the jet skier are not exactly the same , especially timing, as the super tanker captain...even though they can and should both correctly apply the same rule.

People who think common sense and being really safe overides the need to understand and follow the rules are only kidding themselves.

 

[Bay Pelican]

Boater education, having taught the Power Squadron's initial boating course I can add that it is amazing what many boaters don't know. Basic things like what the green and red daymakers mean, basic vhf rules, whether their boat's depth sounder is set to below keel or offset to show true water depth. Forget the right of way rules.

A requirement to have basic knowledge is a good thing. Hope it doesn't turn into a revenue source for the states.

 

[dhays]

What I was trying to impart in my original posting is that whether I have the "right of way", okay, the correct term is stand-on vessell if you must, I assume that the "other guy" will do something unexpected. So, sometimes, even when it appears I will have the right of way, I turn away far in advance of needing an assessment of which is the stand-on vessel. Is that hurtful? Does that create danger? I think not.

I agree with you. Nothing wrong with changing course a long way out in a large waterway to avoid any potential conflict long before it arises.

One of the things that I still have a hard time remembering is that the cruising grounds for many of us here vary widely. The experience of those used to dealing with traffic in constricted channels is a lot different than mine.

While at times it may seem that there is only a semantic difference between "right-of-way" and "stand-on", that isn't really the case. Because of this I consciously try to watch the verbiage I use. Not only is this more accurate (which is a helpful reminder to myself as to the meaning of the Colregs) but it also avoids dyspeptic reactions from some quarters of TF.

 

[diver dave]

Maybe this tremendous (sarcastic) revenue source should go the agencies that are looking after the body recoveries and boating accident investigations. (not sarcastic).

 

[BandB]

So it's better to maintain the status quo where it's just fine to have zero knowledge of any aspect of boating, and anyone can operate any boat anywhere in any conditions at any speed?

Or are all of you who are against this actually proposing much more stringent rules that would require a thorough knowledge of nav rules, and demonstrated operator competency?

Or are you just opposed to it because it's a rule and rules are bad?

I think you hit the primary reasons people oppose it as against all rules or say this won't make waterways safer.

However, I believe something is better than nothing. Driver's licenses for cars don't mean you're a safe driver of an automobile, just that you passed a minimum test at some point in your life. I think the cards are a step forward in at least making sure boaters have had some exposure to basic rules and operation. It's exposure, not training, but it's better than nothing.

Now, do I feel like some form of "water test", proficiency exam would be good? Perhaps. However, that does become costly to even think about setting up and a bit of an administrative nightmare. In larger boats, we'd turned that over to insurers who often require some evidence of ability.

The cards are not designed to insure all boaters are safe. However, I think they are beneficial in assuring that all operators have at least been exposed to some basics of boating and they'd done so at minimum cost.

 

[Art]

I agree with you. Nothing wrong with changing course a long way out in a large waterway to avoid any potential conflict long before it arises.

One of the things that I still have a hard time remembering is that the cruising grounds for many of us here vary widely. The experience of those used to dealing with traffic in constricted channels is a lot different than mine.

While at times it may seem that there is only a semantic difference between "right-of-way" and "stand-on", that isn't really the case. Because of this I consciously try to watch the verbiage I use. Not only is this more accurate (which is a helpful reminder to myself as to the meaning of the Colregs) but it also avoids dyspeptic reactions from some quarters of TF.

"... dyspeptic reactions... "

Dave - Don't recall you being quite so eloquent before! Some TF member give you a bit o' shat over wording?? - LOL

 

[SoCal]

I agree with you. Nothing wrong with changing course a long way out in a large waterway to avoid any potential conflict long before it arises.

One of the things that I still have a hard time remembering is that the cruising grounds for many of us here vary widely. The experience of those used to dealing with traffic in constricted channels is a lot different than mine.

While at times it may seem that there is only a semantic difference between "right-of-way" and "stand-on", that isn't really the case. Because of this I consciously try to watch the verbiage I use. Not only is this more accurate (which is a helpful reminder to myself as to the meaning of the Colregs) but it also avoids dyspeptic reactions from some quarters of TF.

When I'm the stand-on and see a potential conflict a long way out, I'll initially continue on my heading. Of course I'll keep a close watch and give way long before there's a potential conflict, but I want to give the other boat the time to follow the regulations. I think this method leads to less confusion especially when the waterway becomes more restricted like the Columbia River where I kept my first boat.

Regarding the OP, I have NP with California requiring a boaters card. I'm a new boater having taken Oregon's online course in 2013 and I learned a lot of useful information. I'm still shocked now, but it only took a few days on the river to realize how many boaters have no clue about right of way rules.

 

[knotheadcharters]

Don't rain on folks anti-government rants. No one wants actual facts and information. Knee-jerk reactions are just so much more fun.

Here is my .02 cents. As a professional Mariner that sails international and pleasure boats on the East Coast from MD to the Bahamas in my experiance 98% of "boaters" have no damn clue about the rules of the road. Hell most don't even have or keep their VHF on, let alone channel 16, and if they do they are usually calling and bullshitting with Bubba. I pleasure boat in the ICW quite a bit and normally when overtaking anyone, I will first give a call on the radio and then if no response, 99% of the time, then I will use my horn to let them know I am overtaking either to port or starboard and the only response I get is the middle finger.

So another "Boater Card" is not going to change that. You can't fix stupid no matter how hard you try. Rant over but this topic of boater education is just smoke and mirrors, You want to boat get your Captains license from an Approved School and I'm not talking Power Squadron Courses. Put a little skin in the game.

Oh yea And as far as International, try to get the South China Sea fishing fleets or any fishing fleet world wide to go by the rules of the road or proper lighting configuration at night. It's a free for all, you just gotta stay vigilant.

 

[psneeld]

Before the cards, pretty hard to convince anyone that the average bubba even heard of the navrules.

Now, not so hard. If bubba has a card, while he may not really know, understand, or follow the rules.....but he was made aware that he is supoosed to and there are fines for not following the navrules and fines for a bunch of other things too.

I think one of the major points of the program is being missed or ignored all too often....but obvious to all it isnt a magic bullet to make boating perfect.

 

[dhays]

So another "Boater Card" is not going to change that. You can't fix stupid no matter how hard you try. Rant over but this topic of boater education is just smoke and mirrors, You want to boat get your Captains license from an Approved School and I'm not talking Power Squadron Courses. Put a little skin in the game.

.

So either a 6-pack or don't bother?

Not sure I see the sense in that.

 

[diver dave]

There is certainly a continuum of training levels for boaters. If you talk to an Englishman about the US based captain training, you may get a tirade. I think this country does a great job of aviation based training; it's that surface driving seems to be our issue.

 

[psneeld]

And 99 percent of the problem isnt technical...its more of a self preservation thing.

As an assistance tower in an extremely busy part of the NJ ICW, yes I wish people were experienced or could follow the most basic Navrules....but in the big scheme of things....it isnt a huge deal.

However, doing things that will hurt or kill people is a different story and I am not sure the public would stand for the required program to get overly certified in what is a pretty simple and safe pastime.

For the most part, boaters are annoying, not life threatening.

 

[knotheadcharters]

So either a 6-pack or don't bother?

Not sure I see the sense in that.

Even with a six-pack you have to take a rules of the road portion and score at least a 90, so yea that would qualify. It also involves sound signals and lighting configurations and general deck. It's a good start. I wanted Unlimited Tonnage so you gotta go Deep Sea and put your time in, so it does irritate me a bit when I do follow the rules and no one else does. I have tens of thousands of dollars invested and a whole hell of a lot of time at sea. Yes my choice, but watching weekend Wally act like an ass, burns me up.