On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:01:48 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:39:14 -0700, "William Andersen"
wrote:

First, the only time the term right of way is used in the Navigation Rules,
is in regards to a vessel coming down a river.
Pleasure craft don't have to yield to commercial craft.

Not true. There is no distinction between "commercial" and pleasure.
There is a distinction between fishing, size and/or maneuverability
with respect to other vessels.

We really don't have enough information on this because Matt didn't
specify if he was upbound and downbound as specified in Inland Rule
#14.

Inland Rule 9(d) covers this, but it's kind of iffy based on Matt's
information.

Inland Rule 10 also might apply. If Matt was in a recognized Traffic
Separation Scheme - your side, my side kind of thing- then the turn
may have been entirely legal, but it appears to be unlikely.

Everyone has to avoid a collision.

International Rule 7 and 8 - exactly right.

Whoops - International/Inland rule 7 and 8. My bad.

wrote in message
oups.com...
First, the only time the term right of way is used in the Navigation
Rules,
is in regards to a vessel coming down a river.
Pleasure craft don't have to yield to commercial craft.
Everyone has to avoid a collision.

************

That statement is so broad as to be misleading. It's almost as loose as
"sail always has the right of way over power."

Without looking up the exact number of the Col Reg, there's an
important one that says "no vessel under..... (about 65
feet....20meters?) and no vessel under sail......(regardless if it's a
150-footer)....shall impede any vessel following a VTS channel." As any
boat can follow the VTS if it so chooses, this reg "could" be stretched
to say that any vessel under sail must yield to any vessel under power
in the VTS- but it never is. In most situations where it could be an
issue, "pleasure boats" under 65 feet and all boats under sail
regardless of LOA must stay out of the way of commercial vessels.

You did the correct thing by backing off. No point being "dead right".


Agreed. Unfortunately the waterways are full of dick-heads who do not know
the right-of-way rules or who just don't care. You have to look out for
yourself and not let these knuckle-draggers spoil your boating fun. Although
by god there are times I really wish I had some small torpedos on board!

--
Peter Aitken

wrote:
First, the only time the term right of way is used in the Navigation
Rules,
is in regards to a vessel coming down a river.
Pleasure craft don't have to yield to commercial craft.
Everyone has to avoid a collision.

************

That statement is so broad as to be misleading. It's almost as loose as
"sail always has the right of way over power."

Without looking up the exact number of the Col Reg, there's an
important one that says "no vessel under..... (about 65
feet....20meters?) and no vessel under sail......(regardless if it's a
150-footer)....shall impede any vessel following a VTS channel." As any
boat can follow the VTS if it so chooses, this reg "could" be stretched
to say that any vessel under sail must yield to any vessel under power
in the VTS- but it never is. In most situations where it could be an
issue, "pleasure boats" under 65 feet and all boats under sail
regardless of LOA must stay out of the way of commercial vessels.

You did the correct thing by backing off. No point being "dead right".


I wonder if you could send a written complaint, listing all details, to
some authority? (Coast Guard maybe)

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Traffic Separation Schemes - usually purple lines though, I'll grant
you. :)


Sure.

Traffic seperation schemes have the same legal force as ColRegs, but
they are usually for approaching busy ports, or transiting waters thick
with commercial traffic (like say, the English Channel fr'instance). In
a narrow inland channel, no such anny-mull.



It souonds to me as though one or possibly both boats were operating at
an unsafe speed. It also sounds as though several people have no clue
whatever what the actual rules are. I strongly suggest buying... and
*reading* it... although flipping thru it casually looking at the
pictures is better than nothing.


Yeah - but I like the little pictures of lights and stuff. :)

Me too.

It's a common misconception that boats have to stay on "their" side of
the channel. It's also a common misconception that other boats can't
"turn in front of" you. I guess people think driving a boat is like
driving a car.

It ain't.

Fair Skies
Doug King

My opinion -- I always say..BIGGER boats always have the right of way!! Just
kidding. I think everyone should try and avoid any collision!!

--
Bill & Debbie
04 -- Yam TTR125 (Electric Start)
04 -- Honda XR400
04 -- Honda XR150
04 -- Honda CRF50 04 & 05 (Grandkids)
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:01:48 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:39:14 -0700, "William Andersen"
wrote:

First, the only time the term right of way is used in the Navigation
Rules,
is in regards to a vessel coming down a river.
Pleasure craft don't have to yield to commercial craft.

Not true. There is no distinction between "commercial" and pleasure.
There is a distinction between fishing, size and/or maneuverability
with respect to other vessels.

We really don't have enough information on this because Matt didn't
specify if he was upbound and downbound as specified in Inland Rule
#14.

Inland Rule 9(d) covers this, but it's kind of iffy based on Matt's
information.

Inland Rule 10 also might apply. If Matt was in a recognized Traffic
Separation Scheme - your side, my side kind of thing- then the turn
may have been entirely legal, but it appears to be unlikely.

Everyone has to avoid a collision.

International Rule 7 and 8 - exactly right.

Whoops - International/Inland rule 7 and 8. My bad.

William Andersen Jun 27, 1:32 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: "William Andersen" - Find messages by this
author
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 22:32:29 -0700
Local: Mon,Jun 27 2005 1:32 am
Subject: Question: Right of way
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

Chuck,
He said it was a narrow channel and the other boat cut across the
channel,
on a collision course with him.
Clearly, the other boat was wrong.
Clearly, he did the right thing by avoiding a collision.

*********

I agree with those points. My comments had to do with the breadth of
the comment implying that commercial vessels had no special rights of
way- when under a number of common and important circumstances they do.
There is almost no way to know whether any or all of those
circumstances may have applied in this case, but all boaters should be
aware that when encountering a vessel constricted in its ability to
manuever (as by draft, etc) or a power driven vessel following a VTS,
there will be many cases where the vessel ordinarily considered "stand
on" must indeed "give way".

wrote in message
oups.com...
Folks,


But then, he cuts across the channel with pretty quick speed and goes
on a collision course with my craft. He did this so his passengers
could have a look at some bald eagles.

I steered out of his way as common sense commands.
But I wonder was that legal of him ? I know pleasure craft have to
yield to commercial crafts. so I have to yield but doesnt the means he
is on HIS side?

There's too much missing info here to make a positive answer, but generally,
if he made that maneuver to get a better look at some
"eagles" and thusly created a dangerous condition for you ..... the maneuver
was NOT legal.
Second point: Pleasure craft are NOT required to yield to commercial craft,
simply because one is "pleasure" and one is "commercial".
It is the condition of meeting that dictates who must yield.

otn

OK, but commercial/pleasure doesn't matter. What does matter is
participation in a VTS, type of power, constrained by draft, etc. Although
commercial vessels are often constrained by draft and restricted to a
channel, etc, it isn't the fact that they are commercial vessels that make
them stand on, it's the fact that they are, for example, constrained by
draft to operation in the channel.


wrote in message
oups.com...
William Andersen Jun 27, 1:32 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: "William Andersen" - Find messages by this
author
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 22:32:29 -0700
Local: Mon,Jun 27 2005 1:32 am
Subject: Question: Right of way
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

Chuck,
He said it was a narrow channel and the other boat cut across the
channel,
on a collision course with him.
Clearly, the other boat was wrong.
Clearly, he did the right thing by avoiding a collision.

*********

I agree with those points. My comments had to do with the breadth of
the comment implying that commercial vessels had no special rights of
way- when under a number of common and important circumstances they do.
There is almost no way to know whether any or all of those
circumstances may have applied in this case, but all boaters should be
aware that when encountering a vessel constricted in its ability to
manuever (as by draft, etc) or a power driven vessel following a VTS,
there will be many cases where the vessel ordinarily considered "stand
on" must indeed "give way".

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 10:17:07 -0400, DSK wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Traffic Separation Schemes - usually purple lines though, I'll grant
you. :)


Sure.

Traffic seperation schemes have the same legal force as ColRegs, but
they are usually for approaching busy ports, or transiting waters thick
with commercial traffic (like say, the English Channel fr'instance). In
a narrow inland channel, no such anny-mull.

Nope - had this discussion once already years ago. Rule 3 specifies
the following: 3(o) "Inland Waters" means the navigable waters of the
United States shoreward of the navigational demarcation lines dividing
the high seas from harbors, rivers and other inland waters of the
United States and the waters of the Great Lakes on the United States
side of the International Boundary." 3(p) "Inland Rules" or "Rules"
mean the Inland Navigational Rules and annexes thereto which govern
the conduct of vessels and specify the lights/shapes/sound signals
that apply on Inland Waters..."

In short, any river, stream or tributary inland of the Demarcation
Line that can be transited by any vessel of any size or shape is
considered to be "inland", bound by the Rules and under the
jurisdiction of the USCG.

Which, oddly enough, brings up Rule 9 which governs Narrow Channels.

And so forth.

Now, ask me how I know this - you will be amazed.

It souonds to me as though one or possibly both boats were operating at
an unsafe speed. It also sounds as though several people have no clue
whatever what the actual rules are. I strongly suggest buying... and
*reading* it... although flipping thru it casually looking at the
pictures is better than nothing.

Yeah - but I like the little pictures of lights and stuff. :)

Me too.

It's a common misconception that boats have to stay on "their" side of
the channel. It's also a common misconception that other boats can't
"turn in front of" you. I guess people think driving a boat is like
driving a car.

It ain't.

Oh so true. And try to get some of these clowns to understand the
Right-of-Way rules is - well, it's like pounding your head into a wall
again and again and again.... :)

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:22:59 GMT, "William Smith"
wrote:

My opinion -- I always say..BIGGER boats always have the right of way!! Just
kidding. I think everyone should try and avoid any collision!!

That's a given - common sense and all that.

In fact, it wasn't but a few years ago - I want to say around ten or
thereabouts, where the rules were changed because some idiot on Long
Island Sound in a sail boat cut right across the bow of a tanker and
was sunk. It was even caught on video tape.

The idiot on the sail boat sued the tanker owners on right-of-way
issues and won - thus the rules change.