Boating mishap

[Glory]

That could have been much worse. Without the video few would have learned about it.

[Tim Powell]

Could've been a container ship captain. They're used to driving and not seeing what's in front of them. Or maybe a USN destroyer captain.

Is it true they do not drive them just bellow out orders... I guess if the shoe fits just ware it devil made me do it

[Walter P]

If because of bow rise, you are disabled to the point you cannot properly maintain a lookout, you should not be boating.

Smacks of failure to keep a lookout and avoiding an accident. Of course the fishing boat has some responsibility as well since they did not keep a look out until the last moment. No effort was made to avoid the accident by either boat. You know, defensive driving?

If you have ever taken your boat from Red Bank NJ up the Hudson on a Sunday you know full well that people in smaller fishing boats will stop right in front of you and expect you to be burdened. They get so thick and petulant inside Sandy Hook it's unnerving. We've heard 5 blasts from tankers and cargo ships in Ambrose channel trying to get people to move.

Then there are the fishers that cut across your boat trolling for Mahi etc. in the stream.

Dan, We used to do Coast Guard Aux patrols all along the areas you mention and you are absolutely
correct. In fact it got so bad that the Coast Guard instituted a new (at that time) addition to our patrol
requirements which was called "Clear Channel". Whenever a large ship would be coming or going we
(the CGAUX) were required to be ahead of the ship with enough distance to direct any boats in the
channel to move out of the channel. If they claimed their engines would not start (true or false) we
would take them in tow far enough so they wouldn't create a hazard to navigation. Any resistance
was futile as the ships had orders to keep in the channel and ram the boats (after the crews were
removed). There were a couple of cases where that actually happened and the message got out
loud and clear that if you elect to fish in the channels you did so at your own peril. The pilots on the
ships love the program. I think it is still in force. The reason was that a major oil spill would be a
catastrophe and a large ship aground in a busy port would cripple maritime commerce for a time.

While the majority of the responsibility for the unfortunate collisions falls upon the large yacht that did
the ramming, in most cases under admiralty law there is "shared blame" and the percentage of blame
is usually ruled with a small percentage being put on the boat that got hit. (hittee as opposed to
hitter..lol). I personally think that is very fair, especially since it looked like the guys in the small boat
could have gotten out of the way and then cussed out the large boat or called the CG to report them.
Monday morning quarterbacking is easy to do but we were not there under the stress.

Walt

[Westfield 11]

I've watched the video a couple of times now, and what strikes me is just how fast the other boat was upon them. From the time the videos begin, which appears to be the moment they became aware it was going to hit and not pass close by, to impact was only 3 or 4 seconds. They were legally drift fishing and the engine might have been off and the captain/guide helping the anglers and thus not sitting at the helm able to make an instant start.

[Walter P]

I've watched the video a couple of times now, and what strikes me is just how fast the other boat was upon them. From the time the videos begin, which appears to be the moment they became aware it was going to hit and not pass close by, to impact was only 3 or 4 seconds. They were legally drift fishing and the engine might have been off and the captain/guide helping the anglers and thus not sitting at the helm able to make an instant start.

Which is why I mentioned monday morning quarter backing and the stress factor. One thing for sure
is that there's going to be a bunch of money changing hands but we probably will never hear about it
again because it will be a settlement and not a trial......except possibly/probably charges filed by the
Coast Guard for failure to have an adequate watch, which as everyone knows is a big violation of the
Nav Rules.

Walt

[Dan Mapes]

If you are fishing in a channel would you shut down and drift without keeping a lookout?

[krush]

I don't really fish, but stopping to fish in the channel or main throughway sounds just as smart as stopping in the middle lane of the interstate to look at map (or txt).

[racclarkson@gmail.com]

If you are fishing in a channel would you shut down and drift without keeping a lookout?

Maybe I missed it. I saw no ATONS, they looked fairly close to a bank and the river is wide there. Both boats drew no water to speak of. Were they in the channel?

I can see where the fishermen may have been slow to react. I think we all have the expectation of the other guy paying attention. On the other hand, that's why I installed a big-ass air horn on my boat. But with me that's always been the case of other boaters not keeping watch astern. Kayakers with earbuds really have strange looks on their faces when they hear that blast and turn around--who knew they could move that fast!

[Dan Mapes]

Looking at the video, *maybe* they were in the channel.


ColumbiaRiver.jpg