View Single Post
Old 04-14-2010, 02:34 PM   #1103
Mee-n-Mac
Senior Member
 
Mee-n-Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 111 Times in 51 Posts
Arrow OK, my 0.05 worth

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunset on the dock View Post
We can only hope that all the attention to this affair has increased public awareness of some of the safety issues on the lake and therefore positively influence boating safety.
On the note above ...

1) Someone asked if it was "normal" to increase speed to reduce the rocking of the boat under the conditions that night. The answer is no. Obviously you shouldn't be going any faster than your ability to reasonably avoid a collision. I find it hard to believe that a 37' cruiser would be rocking that much but assuming that's true, the proper action might have been to change course so as to take what must have been a beam sea on the quarter instead. Alas this action would have been difficult due to point #2. Speeding back up to solve that problem after acknowledging that it was too foggy/rainy to see properly is negligent operation IMO.

2) Some have said she shouldn't have left the dock. I tend to agree given the situation. We were sitting on our dock until 11:30 pm that night. It wasn't raining then and visibility over the water was unimpeded but the clouds and fog were low in the sky and any moonlight, skyglow and city light pollution was unavailable. There was no way to see the outlines of the hills against the sky. Given the unpredicable nature of Winni weather, leaving the dock w/o the proper navigational equipment is also negligent operation IMO. When the weather closed in what I heard was "I used my depth finder". I didn't hear "I relied on my GPS (there was none) or Loran or charted a course and used the compass". Checking your depth would be marginally OK but you'd have to be going NWS to be effective, especially in that part of the lake. Alternately she could have returned to the last port or just drifted about, it was a cruiser after all. Getthereitis is a prime cause in a lot of "accidents". Ask any airline pilot.

3) BUI is obviously stupid but I'm conflicted about what I've read. It doesn't make sense to me. Alcohol goes into your bloodstream fairly quickly and comes out fairly slowly. Even if the 3 drinks were doubles, in the 3 hours they were consumed over I'd expect most the alcohol to be in the bloodstream and a lot of it removed. There had to be more drinks involved to get to the measured level. In any case I suspect most people could operate their boat w/o much trouble even if not stone cold sober ... during the day. At night it's a whole nuther story.

So what to do ? I recall the police dept (can't remember where and whether it was local or state) actually sponsoring some "drunk tests". This was done with autos and people were given a little track to navigate sober and then after some drinks. The tests were publicized for all to know. I think it was an instructive exercise and don't see why similar "tests" couldn't be done for the boating world. I'm sure there would be no shortage of volunteers to get drunk on the state's dime.

People need to know their, and their boats, limitations. It's hard to teach people these as those who'd care to learn probably do so on their own and those who don't would need a team of oxen to drag them to the truth. In the past I and Lakegeezer (?) have suggested some form of "simulation training". While not the real thing, I have to wonder what people might learn by accident if they were playing the Lake Winni First Person Boater game ... say, while waiting for iceout. It's an easy way to expose people to dangerous (looking) scenarios w/o there being any real danger.
__________________
Mee'n'Mac
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by simple stupidity or ignorance. The latter are a lot more common than the former." - RAH
Mee-n-Mac is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Mee-n-Mac For This Useful Post: