Army Corps considering manditory life jacket wear

This is going to down right blow!


The following is text from the BoatU.S. Magazine January 2008, pg 6. (http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/boatus/200801/index.php)

The millions of visitors to lakes and reservoirs managed by the Army Corps of Engineers may have to wear life jackets to go boating, if the agency's chief has his way. The Corps, which has jurisdiction over 456 waterways in 43 states, is currently contemplating mandatory life jacket wear for all boaters on their waters. Major General Don riley, Director of the Corps' Civil Works, is concerned that despite several decades of safety education aimed at swimmers and boaters, the water -related fatality rate at Corps facilities has not improved in the last few years.

Nationwide, the Corps has a 10-year average of 164 water-related fatalities a year. The majority of these deaths occur among swimmers outside designated swim areas, as well as from falls off docks, banks and land. Boating-specific deaths are approximately 42% of the annual water-related fatalities. The boating category includes deaths attributed to swimming from a boat, falling or fishing from the boat, nighttime capsizing, and capsizing in general.

At press time in late November, Corps staff was conducting research into existing state laws, enforcement capabilities and the effectiveness of education and outreach efforts. If the Corps decides to create a federal life jacket standard for its waters, the proposed change in Title 36 of the federal regulations would require a public comment period. However, if an individual district commander, leading one of the 38 districts of the Corps, decides to implement a life jacket requirement for all boaters in their own geographic district, they can enact this change merely by signing a statement to that effect.

BoatU.S. is part of the ongoing discussion with the Corps; if a comment period is announced, BoatU.S. will post the notice at BoatUS.com/gov.

They are complaining about 164 darwin winners? This was posted a while back, but sounds like it is a little more urgent that the boaters respond.

(Message edited by psudy on January 11, 2008)

Lawyers at work...

With that logic, no one would die if you banned everyone from being in or around the water.

Doe this include rowing sculls? Sculling rowers don't wear life jackets. They just can't row with the darned things on.

The rowers on our lake are complaining about wakes. I would LMAO if they had to wear life jackets.

Making boater's licenses mandatory would prob save more lives...that would be an extra expense I'm willing to pay

So for 164 deaths they want to make millions uncomfortable and not enjoy their leisure time on the water. How many of those deaths could have been avoided by common sense and will most likely still occur with the law in place. I hope this can be fought.

(Message edited by Bazel on January 13, 2008)

They are complaining about less than half of l64 about 69 fatality's(42%) Do they take in account for population increase?

Quote: Doe this include rowing sculls? Sculling rowers don't wear life jackets. They just can't row with the darned things on.

The rowers on our lake are complaining about wakes. I would LMAO if they had to wear life jackets.

Wow, I'm amazed that wakeboarders and rowers are even allowed on the same lake in the first place. Most rowing clubs make their oarsmen and women take a swimming test before getting into a boat so this may be one way of them being able to be able to exclude themselves from the law that may get passed. Otherwise it will kill the sport off - as you say, you can't row with a vest on.

My lake is an amazing water sports lake. The qualities that make it good for wakeboarding also make it good for rowing. It's long, straight, in a modest valley, it’s narrow. That means calm water most of the time. Boats have to go north or south. If you go east or west and count longer than ten you’re on shore and need to buy a new boat. Because the lake is narrow everyone has to fly in formation, so to speak. That sends the wakes all in the same direction to shore, a good thing.

The rowers are very organized and they have financial backing from the very flush Ohio State University Athletics department. They don't care much for wakeboarders. I'm a wakesurfer - they really don't like me. I've already curtailed my wakesurfing in an attempt to keep the peace.

There's a potion of the lake that is no wake. Novice rowers are required to stay in that area until they pass a boat flip or roll over test.

There are rowing clubs on major rivers with barge traffic and clubs near sea posts with ocean going vessels. Those clubs seem to be able to get along with wakes much larger than I'll ever make with my puny 22 foot boat.

Chattanooga has significant rowing activity on the Tennessee River. They face constant traffic including barges and lots of 30 - 50 ft cruisers (some larger). I try to stay away from them on the opposite side of the river. There are acouple events each year where the river is designated no-wake for rowing contest. Barges do not have to comply with the no wake rule.

Won't make too much a difference in Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife who patrol lakes, do not enforce any ACOE law, only State of Texas.

I think the ACOE lakes (any lake for that matter) could be much safer if they would create a licensing system like the roadways. I would gladly take a course, test (written or practical), or any other education needed to obtain a license. Any license would HOPEFULLY contain safety precautions and life jacket information.