More bad kayak legislation

[bob budd]

We both know that lighting is required. I never said it wasn't, its part of knowing "how to take care of themselves". I mentioned it in my response to the legislators. It may have been more proactive to have reminded them that they could/should enforce lighting requirements as you did but I was giving them the credit for connecting the dots. I don't see a need for any of us to debate this issue, the point is to get others involved. I am glad to see that happening.

[gyork]

...the Coast Guard already mandates lighting for nighttime boaters, including kayakers. Brian

Brian/others: Please remind me-one should have immediate access to a white "torch", to be used to warn approaching vessels of your presence, or some such verbage. I don't believe we are required to have a lit torch with 360 degree visibility (as required on NH inland lakes) are we?

If a torch-at-the-ready satisfies requirement, CG should enforce that rule, period, paragraph.

gary

[rick stoehrer]

Brian/others: Please remind me-one should have immediate access to a white "torch", to be used to warn approaching vessels of your presence, or some such verbage. I don't believe we are required to have a lit torch with 360 degree visibility (as required on NH inland lakes) are we?

If a torch-at-the-ready satisfies requirement, CG should enforce that rule, period, paragraph.

gary

as a kayaker you need a white light that you can use to "avoid collision" there is NO OTHER light requirement per the CG.

that doesn't mean you need to flash a light to let others know you're anywhere in particular....just that you need one handy in case you need to avoid collision.

i put a waterproof flashlight in my pfd pocket and voila...i am cg compliant.

if anything, i think the lights we often put on kayaks/people at night (the glow sticks at bow/stern) to manage the group, only serve to potentially confuse power, sail and commercial boaters. personally, i just go along in my black boat and stay out of the way. if something looks like it might be a problem, then out comes that flashlight or i can start swinging a glowstick on a piece of line around, whistles, etc...i can be seen/heard if i WANT / NEED to be seen or heard, otherwise, i try to not attract any attention and just be out of the way.

FWIW...i emailed sarah peake well over a week ago and pointed out several problems with the legislation and the proposal and haven't even had the courtesy of a response....if everyone were to email this rep and chime in along the same lines as discussed here, she may begin to understand that they are trying to solve for a "problem" that doesn't exist (at least until the legislature gets involved)

[leong]

Lots of people kayak fish and noone is being run down by power boats doing it. I know many of them. I can't offer suggestions on how to solve what isn't a problem. If someone goes out for a long paddle in the dark on their own it doesn't really matter whether they are fishing or not. I won't get into whether or not its a bad idea to paddle alone in the dark. If they are aware of the risks and know how to take care of themselves they are likely to do okay. If they don't there's no amount of legislation that is going to help.

Besides the general objections to the discussed bill there is the fact that the bill is a “one size fits all” design. There are kayaks and there are kayaks. I think it’s worth noting that almost all kayak fishing is done using short and wide recreational kayaks (usually a SOT, but sometimes a SIK), not the long and skinny seaworthy kayaks that we in NSPN tend to use. Additionally, it appears that most operators of recreational kayaks, whether fishing or not, are not qualified “sea kayakers”, at least as we in NSPN would define a sea kayaker. Most of our objections to the flag on a pole really don’t apply to recreational kayaks. For instance this list of objections to the flag for sea kayaks (posted elsewhere in this thread) are less applicable to recreational kayaks:

1. The flag will interfere with navigation of the boat, especially in wind.

2. The flag could cause a kayak to capsize.

2. The flag will make it impossible to roll a kayak.

3. The flag may actually trap the capsized kayaker in the kayak.

4. The flag would prevent ladder rescues

Obviously, to those who fish from real sea kayaks (including Adam B., Don Perry and me) the flag is a terrible idea. I’ve been fishing the Florida bays and ocean almost every day since late November. Other than myself, I have yet to see another person fishing from a real sea kayak, no less a high performance racing type sea kayak; also I’ve rescued several capsized “stable” recreational kayaks.

[rick stoehrer]

Besides the general objections to the discussed bill there is the fact that the bill is a “one size fits all” design. There are kayaks and there are kayaks. I think it’s worth noting that almost all kayak fishing is done using short and wide recreational kayaks (usually a SOT, but sometimes a SIK), not the long and skinny seaworthy kayaks that we in NSPN tend to use. Additionally, it appears that most operators of recreational kayaks, whether fishing or not, are not qualified “sea kayakers”, at least as we in NSPN would define a sea kayaker. Most of our objections to the flag on a pole really don’t apply to recreational kayaks. For instance this list of objections to the flag for sea kayaks (posted elsewhere in this thread) are less applicable to recreational kayaks:

1. The flag will interfere with navigation of the boat, especially in wind.

2. The flag could cause a kayak to capsize.

2. The flag will make it impossible to roll a kayak.

3. The flag may actually trap the capsized kayaker in the kayak.

4. The flag would prevent ladder rescues

Obviously, to those who fish from real sea kayaks (including Adam B., Don Perry and me) the flag is a terrible idea. I’ve been fishing the Florida bays and ocean almost every day since late November. Other than myself, I have yet to see another person fishing from a real sea kayak, no less a high performance racing type sea kayak; also I’ve rescued several capsized “stable” recreational kayaks.

my concern is that any law discussed and passed will not define "kayak" any better than current legislation and that all "kayaks" will be burdened with the same stupid laws.

on the other hand, if current laws were enforced and any money was spent no education rather than enforcing another dumbass law, the goal would be closer to achieved. and bottom line, people will still do stupid things and some will eventually die as a result...for cryin' out loud let's not try to outlaw darwin

[EEL]

I don't believe we are required to have a lit torch with 360 degree visibility (as required on NH inland lakes) are we?

Gary:

The NH requirement for a 360 degree light applies to all NH waters and not just inland lakes. My understanding is the NH marine Patrol enforces this requirement on tidal waters such as Little Harbor area.

Ed Lawson

[tyson]

...and bottom line, people will still do stupid things and some will eventually die as a result...for cryin' out loud let's not try to outlaw darwin

[Brian Nystrom]

my concern is that any law discussed and passed will not define "kayak" any better than current legislation and that all "kayaks" will be burdened with the same stupid laws.

You can pretty much count on that. Considering the obvious lack of understanding of kayaks behind this bill, a nuanced approach is not in the cards.

on the other hand, if current laws were enforced and any money was spent no education rather than enforcing another dumbass law, the goal would be closer to achieved.

No doubt. We need to emphasize education, but that will take at least some money, whereas passing a useless regulation costs essentially nothing, as there's not going to be any extra funding allocated to enforce it.

and bottom line, people will still do stupid things and some will eventually die as a result...for cryin' out loud let's not try to outlaw darwin

I have to wonder how much of the concern is about kayaker safety and how much is really about reducing inconvenience/annoyance for power/commercial boaters and protecting them from the trauma - and possible legal consequences - of running over a kayaker while they're out on the water getting drunk and/or not paying attention to what's in front of them.

[rick stoehrer]

I have to wonder how much of the concern is about kayaker safety and how much is really about reducing inconvenience/annoyance for power/commercial boaters and protecting them from the trauma - and possible legal consequences - of running over a kayaker while they're out on the water getting drunk and/or not paying attention to what's in front of them.

and that might be entirely true...power, sail and commercial boater have / spend a lot more money than us poor paddlers on boats, registrations, etc. and certainly have a louder voice given the # of marina's etc. that are sprinkled along the coast. we aren't really patrons of those marina's and i'd guess few of us if any just sit and chat it up with the harbor masters or local coasties.

from our standpoint i think education overall is key and to actively participate and let legislators know how we feel about "kayak" bills....to get involved with the coast guard auxillary paddle safe events...to have the occasional chat with harbor masters....let these folks know that not everyone in a kayak is oblivious to the water around them - and that we're oblivious as a whole very well may be the perception...none of those folks are aware of the trips that happen with no incident and are only aware of the knuckle heads that end up in the channels and are a nuisance, the folks that need rescue or otherwise end up needing help.

[rwolson]

Just to add my $0.02 worth.

I replied to Sarah last night and since I paddle a SOT for fishing and a sea kayak I pointed out the various differences. Also, brought up issues related to re-entries in sea kayaks. Finally, like most of you highlighted education, but mentioned stay away from brochues which people never read. I suggested web sites, etc since so many people turn to the web for entertainment, education, etc.

I'm glad to see so many fired up over the issue and responding to our "elected" officials. Hopefully, our voiced opinions make a difference.

[Bmach]

This bill is just plain stupid, no nicer way of describing it. A lot of posters keep siting education and that fact that it will cost money. There already is plenty of education available to kayakers. There are power squadron courses all over the place. No it is not geared towards kayakers but it will educate the uneducated. Now do we want to make all kayakers have to have certificate like power boaters do? Ron White said it and to me sums this up, from our esteemed lawmakers who proposed this bill to the stupid kayakers with no common sense, "you can't fix stupid".

[Bmach]

I called both peake and atkins office as well as two local reps. The two that sponsored the bill have heard quite a bit from the kayaking community and my local reps were unaware of our side of it and were very interested in what I had to say (I was not as blunt as in my post).I also gave them my phone number and invited them to come over and I would show them the problems it would create.

[djlewis]

I was afraid that the all the compromising on Straus's bill would be a foot in the door for lots more such legislation. Looks like it's starting quickly.

If the legislature is serious about kayak safety, by far the best thing would be to fund safety training in the schools and recreational programs. That would demonstrably save lives, mainly by getting more people to wear PFDs, and making them generally aware of the dangers.

Technical regulation, if any, should be assigned to an executive branch agency which, in conjunction with the ACA, could do some sensible things. That assumes, of course, that regulation of non-motorized sports makes any sense at all, especially when regulation of the really dangerous motorized sports is so poorly enforced.

But somehow the legislature always seems to want to take the easy, feel-good way out and just pass laws directly addressing various complex issues that they are in no position to be experts on.

My first and last $00.02. --David

[djlewis]

2. Powerboat operators have a strong lobby with lots of money... In general, they don’t want to share their “turf” with any small human-powered boats (especially in the open ocean). Like for Scuba divers, powerboaters want visible flags on all kayaks (canoes, rowboats, etc.) that share any water with them.

I think this is the real source of the problem. There is circumstantial evidence from the legislative and PR followup to the South Cape deaths of two women that this was a big part of the dynamic behind the proposed laws -- and will continue to be. In short, power-boaters would love to see kayakers legislated and regulated off the water to whatever extent they can accomplish.

One $00.01 more. --David

[bazzert]

I think this is the real source of the problem. There is circumstantial evidence from the legislative and PR followup to the South Cape deaths of two women that this was a big part of the dynamic behind the proposed laws -- and will continue to be. In short, power-boaters would love to see kayakers legislated and regulated off the water to whatever extent they can accomplish.

One $00.01 more. --David

This story probably grinds their gears