Quote:
Originally Posted by kmoose
We could go all day on tit for tat... building codes, bridges, planes,.... pic your topic. Bottom line PLDs are already mandated for documented and commercial vessels regardless of size so there is no big stretch or unreasonable expense to apply that to recreational vessels venturing offshore past state waters. It's reasonable, applicable and you won't find a seasoned mariner that has spent any amount of time offshore denying their value.
I read an interview with a SARs team Coastie stating that EBIRBs and type 3 pfds with strobes provide the best chance you will sleep in your own bed if faced with an maritime emergency. There is a lot of weight in that statement and it should bare consideration to those owning vessels capable of venturing beyond the last channel marker.
Should there be a mandate to extend the federal mandates to all vessels venturing into federal waters? Personally I think there is merit to consider such in some degree. You and Tryader, obviously not. Maybe a registry of boaters not wanting to comply would be in order so that the CG doesn't have to waste millions of our tax dollars for boaters that would opt to make SAR more difficult and costly than it has to be. But then again I don't feel a dime should be spent treating treating traumatic head injuries suffered by motorcyclists who don't wear helmets nor should any recovery attempts be made if I don't surface from a 350 ft trimix dive.
|
Also just for the record, I would not be against the mandate by any means, I have had an EPIRB or equiv for well over 20 years along with a few PLB's, never leave the dock with them, on my boat or others. I am just not for more govt regulations on items that should be common sense. As for reducing search and rescue, sure, but much like everything else there will always be folks that do not adhere to govt rules and will need help regardless. all of this seems like a knee jerk reaction to the recent events, which suck (the events not the knee jerk)