Unlghted boat, unlighted swimmer? Apples and Oranges
 

.

Maybe I misunderstood the question, I thought Nightwing's post was about an unlighted boat being on the water at night and legal not an idot swimming, you know, something actually germain to the topic.

If, God forbid, I was out at night (at 1:30 in the morning) and struck a swimmer that was more than 150 feet from shore I seriously doubt there is a jury in the world, or even NH, that would find me at fault.

BTW, I did respond to the question regarding post 234 in post 265 (I think it is 265 but the numbers aren't listed in the "write mode"), it was delayed in posting due to moderator. Not a critical comment, just fact.

I believe the topic is the responsibility of a boater with respect to hitting unlit objects (or people).

Operating an unlit boat is not much of a topic, you are an idiot and you are breaking the law.

What if that swimmer was 50 feet from a properly lighted boat at anchor?

What if their canoe, with a light, had overturned and they a waiting for rescue.

What if instead of just laying there they were kicking their feet to rise out of the water, waving their arms and screaming at you at the top of their lungs. And they are 151 feet from shore.

Still sure about that jury? What about the testimony that you had three beers at dinner? That you were looking back and talking to your passengers? That you didn't have a current chart on board?

Darwin rules apply in most of these situations. You take on additional risk by going out at night. A swimmer 50 feet from their properly lighted boat is taking a risk that they can hear a boat coming and get back in time. An overturned canoe at night is already in the running for a Darwin award, and hopefully their luck will turn so no boats run them over. Same thing with the person who is waving arms and screaming. They are hoping for a break and most will be lucky. If they get run over, its a bad day for all. We all take risks. Some more than others. What is a high risk for one may be a calculated risk for another.

One problem with that example, if the swimmer was 50' away from a properly lit boat at night and got hit than a 150' rule would have been broken by the offending boat. Not the swimmers fault in this case.

Why is the lighted canoe that tips over up for a Dawin Award? They were not breaking any laws or doing anything stupid. The canoe may have tiped because of the wake of a GFBL.

Anyway the question was would the boat operator be in any trouble. And in any of those instances the operator is going to be asked some very tough questions. Could you see where you where going? If you had trouble seeing why didn't you slow down? Why couldn't you hear them screaming?

If you tell the jury "I didn't see a light so I gave it the gas" you are going to end up in a very small room.

The topic, as I understand it is, who is responsible, liable, for this accident?

The responsibility of ALL boaters is to keep a proper lookout and have the required lighting at night. If you'd like to visit the USCG Navigation rules site they do have an FAQ section in which they point out that even a ONE PERSON vessel, including an 18 foot boat or kayaks and canoes, have to adhere to Navigation Rules.

To the best of my knowledge, NH has adopted the USCG Navigation rules as law. The USCG Nav site also has a FAQ about kayaks and canoes and the response is that, based on the NAV RULES, they are treated like a small sailboat.

Let's review:

The kayaker(s) went out at night without lights.
The kaykers(s) eventually found themselves in the path of a lighted underway vessel.
The kayker abandonded his boat leaving the (probably) overturned kayak, unlighted, unmaned, and in the direct path of the powerboat.

The powerboat went out at night with required navigation lights on and functioning.
The powerboat found itself in a position that it required a spotlight to find the next navigation marker
The powerboat, with a spotlight in use, struck an abandonded, capsized boat (kayak) in the water.

As I posted many many many posts ago. I have had personal experience in coming across an unlighted boat at night. The boat I nearly hit was a fully loaded 21 foot pontoon boat. They had lots of lights on the boat, but not a stern light. I came up from behind and nearly hit them because I didn't see them.

Both of our boats were going at barely above headway speed. I swung around the pontoon boat to come along side to apologize about what I had almost done, and to my utter horror, when I came up behind it again, the boat, THAT I HAD IN MY SIGHT AND WAS WATCHING! disappeared from view. The area where I knew there was a boat, it was invisible, no boat, nothing but black!

We're not talking about on Winnipesaukee somewhere out in the Broads, we're not talking about off the coast of Newburyport where folks crowd into the mouth of the river to get home. I am talking about the Merrimack River in LOWELL! We were headed out for the fireworks so both sides of the river were well lighted! And still, even knowing where the boat was after I almost hit it and lots of light from both shores, NOTHING BUT BLACK!
So, I pulled up along side the pontoon boat to talk to the owner. When I told him what happened, he understood and repositioned his stern light so that instead of lighting the deck of his boat it actually was useful for other boats to see.

Bottom line. An unlighted boat on the water, whether it's a 21 foot pontoon boat or a kayak, is INVISIBLE AT NIGHT!
If it is unlighted it is at fault for any accident. Period.

A swimmer is not covered by the Navigation laws. If you're stupid enough to be swimming after dark in an area where there is boat traffic then you stand a good risk of being killed.

A kayak IS required to follow ALL navigation rules.

Let's say the kayak had overturned in front of the on coming powerboat, do you think the kayker would have swum away or called attention to himself?

If the powerboat hit a swimmer 50 feet from shore the powerboat operater is totally at fault.

The powerboater in this case hit an unmanned, unlighted hazard to navigation and you folks are trying to place the blame on the skipper of the powerboater? It was not the powerboaters fault in any way shape or form! The naked kayakers should have been charged!

No one allowed at night!
 

BTW who said there was alcohol involved in this incidnet?
Islander:
Give it a break! No booze, no speed, but a bonehead kayaker that has changed the lives of innocent boaters on Lake Winnipesaukee! And yet he/she is your hero!
It's over!

And to follow up ...
 

So what do you think the Mount's Captain would say ? I seem to recall that vessel out and about on some dark nights where a swimmer or overturned canoe could not be expected to be visible. For that matter what would you say if, on one of the dark rainy nights going to your island where you couldn't see the aforementioned people, you ran over them ?

D/A : So it was dark and raining and you were headed to your island that night ?
Islander : Yes sir but I was proceeding at no wake speed.
D/A : Yes but you admit you couldn't, didn't see the person in the water.
Islander : It isn't possible to see every obstacle in the water at night.
D/A : So why did you go out that night ?
Islander : {insert answer here}

The point being that there are circumstances we can imagine, however unlikely, that will lead to the boat overrunning the person in the water no matter how cautious the boater may be. You either believe you can boat responsibly under these conditions or you believe that you must stay at the dock, no matter how unlikely you think the possible circumstance may be.

Not the swimmers fault in any case. The swimmer has just as much right to be on the lake, day or night, as the boat.

It is incredible that there are people who think they can run over a swimmer!

It's called chum when the swimmer encounters the five-blade rollas.

Hey, the fish have to eat too - variety is the spice of life... :D

Let's keep them separate
 

Okay, so kayakers and canoeist and swimmers apparently want certain concessions from powerboaters. How about some from the human-powered mode of transportation? I propose that swimmers, kayakers and canoeist must remain within 150' of shore at night.

You all are in such trouble when I become empress of the universe.:D

Swimmers again
 

I don't see people are saying you can run over swimmer willy nilly but rather that a swimmer is taking a known risk. When Islander says "It isn't possible to see every obstacle in the water at night" and "One could easily run down a swimmer that had just a few inches exposed", I believe them to be true statements. Moreover there's no speed a boat can travel at and avoid all such potential tragedies. So is it moral and responsible to boat on a dark night, knowing that there might, maybe an unlit swimmer out there in the middle of the Broads ?

And we are right back to The reason they keep beating this horse
 

"The canoe may have tiped because of the wake of a GFBL." Islander

There is that agenda again......It must be those Scary boats again!

I hope the Reps in Concord are following this saga.... I know it has been pointed out to them.

This incident will never fit the mold you keep trying to put it in... you know the We need a speed limit to get rid of these GFBL's we don't like mold.

PS: Fact: GFBL's produce less wake at speed !