New PFD rules?

Misty Blue · 07-30-2007, 04:08 PM

'Got a e-mail from the CG the other day asking to update my public education lesson plans to inform students of the new requirement that all childred 12 years old and under are required to wear a PFD while the vessel is underway. It said that the rule becomes effedtive on August 18th.

Asside of that message I have heard nothing else on the matter. Nothing in the paper or for that mater here, so I called the MP headquarters and the very courtious officer acknowledged that he had heard talk about it but hadn't seen anything official.

I question the need for this rule, I have never heard of a child who drowned from a boat that was underway but if it does nothing more than bring NH laws more into alignment with our neighboring states it's OK with me.

The problem is that if true the rule becomes effective in just a couple of weeks. Many boaters cover the youth PFD rule (over age five) with Type II PFD, I use type I PFDs. You can't get kids to put up with wearing them. They are uncomfortable and way un-cool. So now you have 18 days to get your hands on type IIIs. They are not available!

I have to score 20 youth PFDs of various sizes for commercial use so I can meet the law with the type Is and also keep the kids happy. Most stores are sold out by this time of year, particularly for youth PFDs. Picking up 20 at West Marine prices would cost a pretty penny. Finially one vendor helped me out and is getting quality PFDs (and doing me a favor with the $) UPSed by week's end.

So now that I have rambled:

Does anyone have any more information on this new rule?

And keep in mind that you may have to scramble to get new ones.

Misty Blue.

Lin · 07-30-2007, 04:17 PM

Misty Blue, I just read last week a little blurb in our local paper about it. But that paper is a Massachusetts paper. I didn't see anything announcing it while in NH the last three days though.

jrc · 07-30-2007, 04:44 PM

Is that a Coast Guard rule or a State of NH rule?

Kamper · 07-30-2007, 04:46 PM

Smaller sizes are sometimes located in with pool suplies.

Misty Blue · 07-30-2007, 05:10 PM

This is a New Hampshire rule. The CG just want's all instructors to be aware and put out the new information in our classes.

Misty Blue

Skip · 07-30-2007, 05:48 PM

The RSA will be ammended effective this upcoming August 17th and the age will indeed move from 5 up to 12 years of age.

Here is the proposal as finally passed:

CHAPTER 176

HB 519 – FINAL VERSION

27Mar2007… 0350h

2007 SESSION

07-0384

08/05

HOUSE BILL 519

AN ACT requiring children 12 years of age or under to wear personal flotation devices.

SPONSORS: Rep. Campbell, Hills 24; Rep. Rodeschin, Sull 2; Sen. Odell, Dist 8; Sen. Hassan, Dist 23

COMMITTEE: Children and Family Law

ANALYSIS

This bill extends the age where children are required to wear a personal flotation device from 5 to 12 years of age.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

27Mar2007… 0350h

07-0384

08/05

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Seven

AN ACT requiring children 12 years of age or under to wear personal flotation devices.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

176:1 Persons 12 Years of Age or Under. Amend RSA 270:30-a to read as follows:

270:30-a Persons [5] 12 Years of Age or Under. [No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under] No child 12 years of age or under shall operate, control, or be transported on the deck of a boat or vessel which is underway upon the public waters of the state unless said child is wearing a personal flotation device of a type approved by the United States Coast Guard; provided, however, boats, vessels, and ships with continuous side rails enclosing the perimeter of the boat, vessel, or ship, 3 feet or more in height and enclosed between the deck and the top of the railing in a way that would reasonably prevent passage of a small child are exempted from the provisions of this section.

176:2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.

Approved: June 18, 2007

Effective: August 17, 2007

gwood · 07-30-2007, 05:51 PM

CT has this rule. I think it makes sense. I've hit some wakes ocassionally that could send a small child flying out of the boat when they're not paying attention.

boat_guy64 · 07-30-2007, 07:32 PM

Just great. When my kids heard about this they both decided that they don't want to go boating with us anymore. Thanks legislature.

BTW...My 12 year old son is 5'10" and a better swimmer than 90% of the adults on the lake.

Since he can pass for 15+, we'll just ignore this rule unless we now have to carry a birth certificate on board.

Lakegeezer · 07-30-2007, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under

HUH!? Am I reading this right? Is this new?

pmj · 07-30-2007, 08:12 PM

I interpret that to mean that the operator of the boat cannot transport a child under 5 alone..that there needs to be another adult with a child under 5.
It makes some sense to me that if the operator of the boat is paying attention to operating the boat he may not be able to properly supervise a little one and keep them safe.

As far as PFD's..this is not a bad thing in my opinion. I have seen sooo many little children riding on the bows of very bouncy boats. This lake is just too busy with big wakes to deal with,that can put kids in danger who ride the on bow. Granted , if they fall from the bow it could be deadly in itself but a life jacket increases the chance of a good outcome.

NightWing · 07-30-2007, 08:29 PM

No, this is the final draft of the new law. Read the headers above it. The wording has been changed from a child 5 years and under to 12 years and under.

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

27Mar2007… 0350h

07-0384

08/05

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Seven

AN ACT requiring children 12 years of age or under to wear personal flotation devices.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

176:1 Persons 12 Years of Age or Under. Amend RSA 270:30-a to read as follows:

hazelnut · 07-30-2007, 09:01 PM

Wait someone please clarify this broad legislation for me. What is the part about not being able to transport children under 5????? Ummm I live on an Island and i transport my three children, all under 5, every day!!!! Are you kidding me?!?!?!? God forbid I ever get this ticket because I will SNAP!!!!! What are we legislating against here? I am a responsible operator who has over 23 years experience on this lake on boats from 10 feet to 60 feet now the NH legislators are telling ME that I can't take my kids to and from my house?!?!!

Live Free or Die???? HA HA HA HA YEAH RIGHT

jrc · 07-30-2007, 09:11 PM

No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under

This is not a rule! This part of a sentence removed from the old rule. It has no meaning, it's just confusing editing.

Old Rule
270:30-a Persons 5 Years of Age or Under. No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under unless said child is wearing a personal flotation device of a type approved by the United States Coast Guard....

New Rule

270:30-a Persons 12 Years of Age or Under. No child 12 years of age or under shall operate, control, or be transported on the deck of a boat or vessel which is underway upon the public waters of the state unless said child is wearing a personal flotation device of a type approved by the United States Coast Guard....

NightWing · 07-30-2007, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Wait someone please clarify this broad legislation for me. What is the part about not being able to transport children under 5????? Ummm I live on an Island and i transport my three children, all under 5, every day!!!! Are you kidding me?!?!?!? God forbid I ever get this ticket because I will SNAP!!!!! What are we legislating against here? I am a responsible operator who has over 23 years experience on this lake on boats from 10 feet to 60 feet now the NH legislators are telling ME that I can't take my kids to and from my house?!?!!

Live Free or Die???? HA HA HA HA YEAH RIGHT

Explanation above and below your post.

Misty Blue · 07-31-2007, 07:21 AM

Thanks Skip and Nightwing.

I have scored the PFDs and will be ready to comply.

Misty.

pmj · 07-31-2007, 07:23 AM

Thanks for the clarification..that makes more sense now.

kjbathe · 07-31-2007, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boat_guy64

My 12 year old son is 5'10" and a better swimmer than 90% of the adults on the lake.

Since he can pass for 15+, we'll just ignore this rule unless we now have to carry a birth certificate on board.

How well does he swim after being knocked unconscious when thrown from your boat? With your logic, I just hope he floats far better than 90% of the adults in that situation, too.

If you want to take chances with your own life, that's fine. But put PFDs on your kids. This law shouldn't change anything because they should already be wearing their vests while under way. PFDs may not be cool, but they sure as heck beat being dead.

If needing to wear a PFD while under way is so bad that it makes them want to stay home, then they should stay home. I'd rather not have the next generation on the lake being taught that you only need to comply with the the laws you find agreeable...

Skip · 07-31-2007, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pmj

Thanks for the clarification..that makes more sense now.

It was my mistake for not ensuring that I reformatted the legislation to include the original fonts.

I simply cut & pasted the original legislation which contributed to the confusion. I'll fix the post later when I get a chance.

My apologies.....

Chris Craft · 07-31-2007, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boat_guy64

Just great. When my kids heard about this they both decided that they don't want to go boating with us anymore. Thanks legislature.

BTW...My 12 year old son is 5'10" and a better swimmer than 90% of the adults on the lake.

Since he can pass for 15+, we'll just ignore this rule unless we now have to carry a birth certificate on board.

Maybe if you wear your life jacket with them they will be less reluctent to wear theirs? They should look around the lake and see all the other kids wearing them and feel that they are no less "cool".

hazelnut · 07-31-2007, 09:07 AM

Phew!!!! I always have the boys in their PFD's and their little sister. I always will. I was freaking out when I read that. I went to bed so mad and now the light of day and a few folks here have brightened my day.

So while we are clarifying laws here:

Someone please explain the law that states PFD's are not required when the bow rail/gunwale of the boat is a certain height? Is this really true? So my 25 foot bowrider with high freeboard is exempt? Not something I would ever test out but I would love to hear the interpretation of this one.

SAMIAM · 07-31-2007, 09:40 AM

kjbathe...according to your logic....everyone should be required to wear one.Certainly a 50 year old person could be "knocked unconcious" as well as a 12 year old.I'll bet you wear a helmut when you mow your lawn.

KonaChick · 07-31-2007, 10:10 AM

12 and under has always been the official rule of our family as far as PDF's go...so it's nice to see this law won't change our boating habits. That's when we're in good conditions. I would not hesitate and have insisted when in rough waters everyone puts them on. It's all about common sense. I guess with some people possessing so little of that we need laws...

kjbathe · 07-31-2007, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

kjbathe...according to your logic....everyone should be required to wear one.Certainly a 50 year old person could be "knocked unconcious" as well as a 12 year old.I'll bet you wear a helmut when you mow your lawn.

My logic is this... The 50 year old will have had the benefit of 38 additional years with which to choose when it's appropriate to put on the vest. We're talking about our children here and giving them the advantage of actually living long enough to make that decision on their own. Once they get to 13, they can lawfully choose between being cool and being safe -- hopefully with 12 years and a predisposition to being safe under their belts.

NightWing · 07-31-2007, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazelnut

Phew!!!! I always have the boys in their PFD's and their little sister. I always will. I was freaking out when I read that. I went to bed so mad and now the light of day and a few folks here have brightened my day.

So while we are clarifying laws here:

Someone please explain the law that states PFD's are not required when the bow rail/gunwale of the boat is a certain height? Is this really true? So my 25 foot bowrider with high freeboard is exempt? Not something I would ever test out but I would love to hear the interpretation of this one.

Not freeboard, but the distance from the rail or gunwale to the deck. Read the last paragraph in post #6 for clarification.

Misty Blue · 07-31-2007, 01:19 PM

Hazelnut:

Here is the deal on railings. I could find the proper wording but this is it in a nut shell.

The youth PFD requirement does not apply for a vessel which has a continuous rail around the vessel which is at least three feet high and has no openings so that it can reasonably contain the ocupants. For example:

The Mount does not need the PFDs because she has side rails that run continuously around the vessel that will reasonably hold in a child. Same with the Doris and Sophie.

Remember the Queen of Winnipesaukee? A beauty of a sloop that sailed out of the Weirs for years. She was compliant because she had rails with cables around her with nylon mesh from the deck to the top cable to keep people in.

I need PFDs on the boats that I operate because they are pontoon boats and their rails are only 2 1/2 feet high. It's cheaper to buy PFDs than rais the rails.

If your boat can meet the standard than you are OK.

Misty Blue.

Somehow I knew that I was opening a can of worms. But it's getting the word out and that's OK.

pmj · 07-31-2007, 03:14 PM

This is a case in point on how easy it is for a wake to throw someone from the boat..from todays Channnel 9 website:

Quote:

OSSIPEE, N.H. -- A Massachusetts teenager was safe after an unusual boating rescue on Ossipee Lake.

The 15-year-old boy from West Newbury, Mass., flew out of his boat Monday afternoon while crossing the wake of another boat, the Marine Patrol said. After he landed in the water, his boat circled around him, coming so close that he had to dive under to avoid being run over.

Another boater, Kevin Nilamd, of Riva, Md., drove his pontoon boat between the boy and the menacing boat, impaled the boat on his pontoons and rescued the boy, the Marine Patrol said.

The teen's name was not released. No one was hurt.

hazelnut · 07-31-2007, 03:22 PM

Lanyard? When my boys start driving this is a good example as to why I will insist they will wear a lanyard attached to a kill switch.

Misty, time for me to break out the tape measurer. Truth be told it is a curiosity factor most of all. I would never ever ever let my boys on the boat without a PFD. Anything can happen out there. Just think how fast stuff happens on the water and next thing you know you have a 4 year old in the water.

Yesterday one of my twins "nudged" the other and he fell in between the boat and the dock. I guess the rule that the kids wear Life Jackets on the dock was a good one on my part. He bopped his head off the boat but he was fine. I keep thinking, what if, what if, what if. Scary thoughts.

boat_guy64 · 07-31-2007, 08:24 PM

$363.00 later, We're ready to comply with the new rules. Needed additional real PFDs for friends and "dry" PFDs so that the kids don't have to wear wet PFDs after tubing and swimming. Now I need a bigger boat so that I have enough storage room

Lakegeezer · 08-01-2007, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boat_guy64

$363.00 later, We're ready to comply with the new rules. Needed additional real PFDs for friends and "dry" PFDs so that the kids don't have to wear wet PFDs after tubing and swimming. Now I need a bigger boat so that I have enough storage room

Since it is an unfunded mandate, you can deduct the cost to comply from your state income tax.

tis · 08-01-2007, 07:02 AM

LOL, Samiam. And goggles and ear plugs!

07-30-2007, 04:08 PM	#1
Misty Blue Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 658 Thanks: 121 Thanked 283 Times in 98 Posts	New PFD rules? 'Got a e-mail from the CG the other day asking to update my public education lesson plans to inform students of the new requirement that all childred 12 years old and under are required to wear a PFD while the vessel is underway. It said that the rule becomes effedtive on August 18th. Asside of that message I have heard nothing else on the matter. Nothing in the paper or for that mater here, so I called the MP headquarters and the very courtious officer acknowledged that he had heard talk about it but hadn't seen anything official. I question the need for this rule, I have never heard of a child who drowned from a boat that was underway but if it does nothing more than bring NH laws more into alignment with our neighboring states it's OK with me. The problem is that if true the rule becomes effective in just a couple of weeks. Many boaters cover the youth PFD rule (over age five) with Type II PFD, I use type I PFDs. You can't get kids to put up with wearing them. They are uncomfortable and way un-cool. So now you have 18 days to get your hands on type IIIs. They are not available! I have to score 20 youth PFDs of various sizes for commercial use so I can meet the law with the type Is and also keep the kids happy. Most stores are sold out by this time of year, particularly for youth PFDs. Picking up 20 at West Marine prices would cost a pretty penny. Finially one vendor helped me out and is getting quality PFDs (and doing me a favor with the $) UPSed by week's end. So now that I have rambled: Does anyone have any more information on this new rule? And keep in mind that you may have to scramble to get new ones. Misty Blue.

07-30-2007, 04:17 PM	#2
Lin Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Massachusetts & Moultonborough Posts: 673 Thanks: 41 Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts	Misty Blue, I just read last week a little blurb in our local paper about it. But that paper is a Massachusetts paper. I didn't see anything announcing it while in NH the last three days though. __________________ Lin

07-30-2007, 05:10 PM	#5
Misty Blue Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 658 Thanks: 121 Thanked 283 Times in 98 Posts	Who's rule? This is a New Hampshire rule. The CG just want's all instructors to be aware and put out the new information in our classes. Misty Blue

07-30-2007, 05:51 PM	#7
gwood Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 25 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	PFD for under 12 CT has this rule. I think it makes sense. I've hit some wakes ocassionally that could send a small child flying out of the boat when they're not paying attention.

07-30-2007, 09:01 PM	#12
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	Holy What The Heck?!?!?! Wait someone please clarify this broad legislation for me. What is the part about not being able to transport children under 5????? Ummm I live on an Island and i transport my three children, all under 5, every day!!!! Are you kidding me?!?!?!? God forbid I ever get this ticket because I will SNAP!!!!! What are we legislating against here? I am a responsible operator who has over 23 years experience on this lake on boats from 10 feet to 60 feet now the NH legislators are telling ME that I can't take my kids to and from my house?!?!! Live Free or Die???? HA HA HA HA YEAH RIGHT

07-30-2007, 04:44 PM	#3
jrc Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NH Posts: 2,689 Thanks: 33 Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts	Is that a Coast Guard rule or a State of NH rule?

07-30-2007, 04:46 PM	#4
Kamper Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Thornton's Ferry Posts: 1,302 Thanks: 67 Thanked 171 Times in 127 Posts	Smaller sizes are sometimes located in with pool suplies.

07-30-2007, 05:48 PM	#6
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Hb 519 The RSA will be ammended effective this upcoming August 17th and the age will indeed move from 5 up to 12 years of age. Here is the proposal as finally passed: CHAPTER 176 HB 519 – FINAL VERSION 27Mar2007… 0350h 2007 SESSION 07-0384 08/05 HOUSE BILL 519 AN ACT requiring children 12 years of age or under to wear personal flotation devices. SPONSORS: Rep. Campbell, Hills 24; Rep. Rodeschin, Sull 2; Sen. Odell, Dist 8; Sen. Hassan, Dist 23 COMMITTEE: Children and Family Law ANALYSIS This bill extends the age where children are required to wear a personal flotation device from 5 to 12 years of age. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics. Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.] Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type. 27Mar2007… 0350h 07-0384 08/05 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Seven AN ACT requiring children 12 years of age or under to wear personal flotation devices. Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened: 176:1 Persons 12 Years of Age or Under. Amend RSA 270:30-a to read as follows: 270:30-a Persons [5] 12 Years of Age or Under. [No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under] No child 12 years of age or under shall operate, control, or be transported on the deck of a boat or vessel which is underway upon the public waters of the state unless said child is wearing a personal flotation device of a type approved by the United States Coast Guard; provided, however, boats, vessels, and ships with continuous side rails enclosing the perimeter of the boat, vessel, or ship, 3 feet or more in height and enclosed between the deck and the top of the railing in a way that would reasonably prevent passage of a small child are exempted from the provisions of this section. 176:2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage. Approved: June 18, 2007 Effective: August 17, 2007

07-30-2007, 07:32 PM	#8
boat_guy64 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Windham and Meredith Posts: 225 Blog Entries: 5 Thanks: 33 Thanked 89 Times in 42 Posts	Just great. When my kids heard about this they both decided that they don't want to go boating with us anymore. Thanks legislature. BTW...My 12 year old son is 5'10" and a better swimmer than 90% of the adults on the lake. Since he can pass for 15+, we'll just ignore this rule unless we now have to carry a birth certificate on board.

07-30-2007, 08:12 PM	#10
pmj Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 240 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I interpret that to mean that the operator of the boat cannot transport a child under 5 alone..that there needs to be another adult with a child under 5. It makes some sense to me that if the operator of the boat is paying attention to operating the boat he may not be able to properly supervise a little one and keep them safe. As far as PFD's..this is not a bad thing in my opinion. I have seen sooo many little children riding on the bows of very bouncy boats. This lake is just too busy with big wakes to deal with,that can put kids in danger who ride the on bow. Granted , if they fall from the bow it could be deadly in itself but a life jacket increases the chance of a good outcome.

07-30-2007, 08:29 PM	#11
NightWing Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 410 Thanks: 4 Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts	No, this is the final draft of the new law. Read the headers above it. The wording has been changed from a child 5 years and under to 12 years and under. Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics. Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.] Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type. 27Mar2007… 0350h 07-0384 08/05 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Seven AN ACT requiring children 12 years of age or under to wear personal flotation devices. Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened: 176:1 Persons 12 Years of Age or Under. Amend RSA 270:30-a to read as follows:

07-30-2007, 09:11 PM	#13
jrc Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NH Posts: 2,689 Thanks: 33 Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts	No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under This is not a rule! This part of a sentence removed from the old rule. It has no meaning, it's just confusing editing. Old Rule 270:30-a Persons 5 Years of Age or Under. No person operating or in control of a boat or vessel upon the public waters of the state shall transport a child 5 years of age or under unless said child is wearing a personal flotation device of a type approved by the United States Coast Guard.... New Rule 270:30-a Persons 12 Years of Age or Under. No child 12 years of age or under shall operate, control, or be transported on the deck of a boat or vessel which is underway upon the public waters of the state unless said child is wearing a personal flotation device of a type approved by the United States Coast Guard....

07-31-2007, 07:21 AM	#15
Misty Blue Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 658 Thanks: 121 Thanked 283 Times in 98 Posts	Gotcha... Thanks Skip and Nightwing. I have scored the PFDs and will be ready to comply. Misty.

07-31-2007, 07:23 AM	#16
pmj Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 240 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks for the clarification..that makes more sense now.

07-31-2007, 09:07 AM	#20
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	Ok So Phew!!!! I always have the boys in their PFD's and their little sister. I always will. I was freaking out when I read that. I went to bed so mad and now the light of day and a few folks here have brightened my day. So while we are clarifying laws here: Someone please explain the law that states PFD's are not required when the bow rail/gunwale of the boat is a certain height? Is this really true? So my 25 foot bowrider with high freeboard is exempt? Not something I would ever test out but I would love to hear the interpretation of this one.

07-31-2007, 09:40 AM	#21
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,891 Thanks: 334 Thanked 1,673 Times in 584 Posts	kjbathe...according to your logic....everyone should be required to wear one.Certainly a 50 year old person could be "knocked unconcious" as well as a 12 year old.I'll bet you wear a helmut when you mow your lawn.

07-31-2007, 10:10 AM	#22
KonaChick Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 518 Thanks: 19 Thanked 62 Times in 15 Posts	12 and under has always been the official rule of our family as far as PDF's go...so it's nice to see this law won't change our boating habits. That's when we're in good conditions. I would not hesitate and have insisted when in rough waters everyone puts them on. It's all about common sense. I guess with some people possessing so little of that we need laws...

07-31-2007, 01:19 PM	#25
Misty Blue Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 658 Thanks: 121 Thanked 283 Times in 98 Posts	PFDs not required... Hazelnut: Here is the deal on railings. I could find the proper wording but this is it in a nut shell. The youth PFD requirement does not apply for a vessel which has a continuous rail around the vessel which is at least three feet high and has no openings so that it can reasonably contain the ocupants. For example: The Mount does not need the PFDs because she has side rails that run continuously around the vessel that will reasonably hold in a child. Same with the Doris and Sophie. Remember the Queen of Winnipesaukee? A beauty of a sloop that sailed out of the Weirs for years. She was compliant because she had rails with cables around her with nylon mesh from the deck to the top cable to keep people in. I need PFDs on the boats that I operate because they are pontoon boats and their rails are only 2 1/2 feet high. It's cheaper to buy PFDs than rais the rails. If your boat can meet the standard than you are OK. Misty Blue. Somehow I knew that I was opening a can of worms. But it's getting the word out and that's OK.

07-31-2007, 03:22 PM	#27
hazelnut Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,348 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 508 Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts	Lanyard? Lanyard? When my boys start driving this is a good example as to why I will insist they will wear a lanyard attached to a kill switch. Misty, time for me to break out the tape measurer. Truth be told it is a curiosity factor most of all. I would never ever ever let my boys on the boat without a PFD. Anything can happen out there. Just think how fast stuff happens on the water and next thing you know you have a 4 year old in the water. Yesterday one of my twins "nudged" the other and he fell in between the boat and the dock. I guess the rule that the kids wear Life Jackets on the dock was a good one on my part. He bopped his head off the boat but he was fine. I keep thinking, what if, what if, what if. Scary thoughts.

07-31-2007, 08:24 PM	#28
boat_guy64 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Windham and Meredith Posts: 225 Blog Entries: 5 Thanks: 33 Thanked 89 Times in 42 Posts	Okay, Okay.... $363.00 later, We're ready to comply with the new rules. Needed additional real PFDs for friends and "dry" PFDs so that the kids don't have to wear wet PFDs after tubing and swimming. Now I need a bigger boat so that I have enough storage room

08-01-2007, 07:02 AM	#30
tis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,700 Thanks: 751 Thanked 1,454 Times in 1,011 Posts	LOL, Samiam. And goggles and ear plugs!