Donating a three hour sunset cruise

[Alaskaflyer]

Good points. Now we know that there are charity exceptions, both in aviation and boating.

What becomes difficult to accept is that our government is hell bent on anyone making a profit without being under their thumb. And why does the exchange of money force the level of safety up from not making money. Shouldn't we give ANY of our passengers the same level. We do brief them and have a safe ship, don't we? And, I could argue in any case, we have to educate them as to the risks and issues of boating and let them make up their own mind.

However, I have no issue if a commercial operator who is in the business of openly providing rides to the public, for a charge, is held to a higher standard.

Another thing that is irritating, it that the captain is "guilty" until proven innocent and assumed liable for anything that happens on his ship. What the hell ever happened to personal responsibility? Well, guess the lawyers killed that.

In the spirit of discussion: Plenty of passengers don't know what they don't know. Inviting my BIL and sister on my boat for a three hour cruise rightly ought to be treated differently than inviting strangers who paid money for a raffle (or more directly to the charity) for the privilege of a boat ride ("Show up on the dock at x and x time and Joe Blow will be there to greet you and show you aboard. Sure hope he at least does a safety briefing.") And as a previous poster mentioned, unlike with aircraft pilots there is no minimum standard to fall back on with the captain, either.

The regulation doesn't deal with "dudes getting paid" it deals with "paying passengers."

 

[psneeld]

Actually it doesn't in my mind.


I think it matters if the boat (if in a company) or the Captain is rewarded in some way by taking the passengers.


We know that friends splitting actual costs of the trip is OK with the USCG with some limitations....because the owner doesn't gain anything, he just doesn't lose as much. In that case the friends are paying, they aren't necessarily crew and the captain does get money possibly.


In this case, how is the boat or owner benefiting from the voyage? Hes not, he (or she) is bearing the total cost.


I get the concept of passenger versus friend or relative, but I think the USCG is 2 part....passenger AND for hire (consideration).


Till I see a court case, hearing conclusion, legal interpretation or confirmation by the USCG....I can not be sure either way.