Boat collision off Sooke?

[GDW]

Does anyone know where on the water this occurred? Was this one of the idiots who likes to run through the fishing grounds off Otter or Possesion (etc.) or did it happen somewhere that you wouldnt expect a fleet of sport boats to be setting up in the early morning?

GPS' are great but too many people (even me sometimes) drive their boats watching the screen instead of watching what's coming at you. So lucky it wasnt an even smaller boat that got hit.

 

[Shepnoir]

Not 100% but I understand they were coming out of Beecher making a turn east heading towards Bedfords / Church. Thinking the Grady possibly went wide west side of Lamb and the Sea west went east side and the met towards the Bedfords. Again not 100%. My understanding was that everyone was under full power. The point or lesson in all of this is that (I personally know the guys in the Grady and) they are not yahoo's or reckless and would be considered as responsible as the average fisherman on this forum. It had more to do with glare and I don't think many of us realize how it can be such a factor in situations like this even for a split second.

 

[reelfast]

I guess it didn't occur to them that since they could not see they should slow down. responsible????

 

[Shepnoir]

Again I know the guy and yes he is. I really don't give a rats butt what you think. Take it as you will but it was more to prove a point that these things happen to people that one would consider "experienced". For instance it seems like the most experienced carpenters that I know are walking around with 9 1/2 fingers. I guess they aren't responsible either. I also would guess you have never made a mistake.... Must be something about living south of the 49th. Gee wonder why I don't call that country home anymore.

Anyway, ever think that perhaps the sun was low over the hills in the east and if some one ran up your port side not that you know the area then it wouldn't be anymore that chitty luck. hindsight is always 20 20. I'm just saying that it could very easily happen. And yes slow down out there.

 

[Peahead]

Reelfast...... try not to assume . Glare or reflection on the water may have created a situation such that they felt they actually weren't hindered much, if at all and felt they could see ok but they were fooled and the other boat may have been camouflaged in the colour/ shade/highlight of the water. Remember this may have only occurred for a few seconds too. I think you absolutely sholdn't be pointing fingers too harshly on this yet without knowing the situaton they were presented with.

Saying that though, I do feel that many boaters travel too fast and are often playing the odds game ! Just recently I was able to steer very sharply around a nasty log I saw at the very last second. Had I been doing 35 knots instead of my 23 knot cruise, I would have hit it for sure. Aslo, what if that log had happened to be a low profile low floating kyak navigating in choppy water in lower contrast lighting that had a colour that blended in with the water colour ?

Also I hope nobody is texting while running !!!

 

[Saxe Point]

I guess it didn't occur to them that since they could not see they should slow down. responsible????

As I said earlier, if you can't see well, then you slow down, and probably a lot. If you can't see at all, for any reason, you must stop. There's a big difference. And frankly, if I can't see well, I may very well have to stop anyway. What's so hard about this? It is negligence of the highest order to advance in a vehicle or vessel when you can't see or see well what is ahead of you.

 

[gallows]

See it all the time, young yahoos only have two speeds stop and full speed, nothing in between. Nothing between their ears either! lol

 

[profisher]

Now that it has been described as both boats travelling at speed it makes more sense that this accident happened. I thought the boat that got hit might have been trolling or setting up gear. Hard to understand running into a large slow moving object as you should see it well in advance and give way. I give them both the benefit of the doubt...when you get a sudden full on sun while driving your first impulse is not to hammer on the brakes...you reach for the visor, squint, look off to the side slightly and slow down gradually. You are more likely to get plowed into from behind in you hammer on the brakes because the guy behind you is having the same problem. Accidents happen they will continue to happen otherwise all of us a spending a sh8t load of money on insurance needlessly.
What gets me is the high percentage of boats that run in the early morning darkness without any working running lights. I wish the RCMP would sit outside Whiffen Spit a few mornings each summer and nail those guys....dumb.

 

[Peahead]

As I said earlier, if you can't see well, then you slow down, and probably a lot. If you can't see at all, for any reason, you must stop. There's a big difference. And frankly, if I can't see well, I may very well have to stop anyway. What's so hard about this? It is negligence of the highest order to advance in a vehicle or vessel when you can't see or see well what is ahead of you.

What's so hard about this you ask? .... not your statement about safe boating speed but that you seem to assume your safety comment ( which is correct BTW) is related and would have saved this collision ( otherwise what's your point?) You are absolutely correct in your post about safety but it is irrelevant in this case at this point because we don't know all the facts of what lead up to the accident.
You seem to be assuming the guy had lots of time to adjust speed once vision may have became impaired. You also seem to assume guy hadn't started to drop speed when vision may have become impaired. You also seem to assume a level of impaired vision and assume there was no other vision issue present like an unkown eye site issue or an object/structure/person that suddenly decreased good vision, or a noise that distracted the boater to look down for a second - you seem to assume that the operator was careless and reckless.
Read Profishers post above .....that's what I am talking about....Benefit of the doubt! Innocent until found guilty. So many people want to paint someone as an idiot and a reckless amateur right away because it makes it easier for them to accept it. They want to feel like it won't happen to them as "it only happens to careless and reckless idiots and not a good boater like me".

All these stories here of crazy fast reckless boaters are true but assuming this guy falls into that category at this point is shocking to me ? Gees I am loosing faith in you guys.....what if it happened to you, would you want the rest of us here to give you the benefit of the doubt or slam ya before the facts were gathered ?

 

[Peahead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0lR5hPJkQc

Check this out - Coast guard auxillary just let the guy on their right plow into them full on. amazing.

 

[thawk]

Not sure of any of the situation surrounding the crash however I was out by the second tide line about center of the bay and I heard it quite clearly. I looked around and didn't see anything thought it might have been an excavator or something on shore. Super calm day out there and that sound sure travels. Saw the pics. and one of the boats when I got back to the dock. I hope everyone is Ok.

 

[Saxe Point]

What's so hard about this you ask? .... not your statement about safe boating speed but that you seem to assume your safety comment ( which is correct BTW) is related and would have saved this collision ( otherwise what's your point?) You are absolutely correct in your post about safety but it is irrelevant in this case at this point because we don't know all the facts of what lead up to the accident.
You seem to be assuming the guy had lots of time to adjust speed once vision may have became impaired. You also seem to assume guy hadn't started to drop speed when vision may have become impaired. You also seem to assume a level of impaired vision and assume there was no other vision issue present like an unkown eye site issue or an object/structure/person that suddenly decreased good vision, or a noise that distracted the boater to look down for a second - you seem to assume that the operator was careless and reckless.
Read Profishers post above .....that's what I am talking about....Benefit of the doubt! Innocent until found guilty. So many people want to paint someone as an idiot and a reckless amateur right away because it makes it easier for them to accept it. They want to feel like it won't happen to them as "it only happens to careless and reckless idiots and not a good boater like me".

All these stories here of crazy fast reckless boaters are true but assuming this guy falls into that category at this point is shocking to me ? Gees I am loosing faith in you guys.....what if it happened to you, would you want the rest of us here to give you the benefit of the doubt or slam ya before the facts were gathered ?

I wasn't commenting on the specific facts of this accident. I was only trying to emphasize a point that seems to be blurred, if not lost, by others posting in this thread. If you can't see, stop. If you can't see well, slow down a lot, or stop. Unlike motor vehicles, boats are not forced to share roads or lanes on them. With so much space, I find it awfully easy to keep my boat a very safe distance from other boats. If you can't see where you are going, or can't see well enough, slow down or stop. It's really that simple.

 

[Aces]

I wasn't commenting on the specific facts of this accident. I was only trying to emphasize a point that seems to be blurred, if not lost, by others posting in this thread. If you can't see, stop. If you can't see well, slow down a lot, or stop. Unlike motor vehicles, boats are not forced to share roads or lanes on them. With so much space, I find it awfully easy to keep my boat a very safe distance from other boats. If you can't see where you are going, or can't see well enough, slow down or stop. It's really that simple.

I agree with you, especially regarding lack of lanes. So often i see boats doing 20+ kn on fog with less than 100ft visibility. The whale watching guides in our area are the worst!! I see then shooting across my radar screen!

 

[Peahead]

I wasn't commenting on the specific facts of this accident. I was only trying to emphasize a point that seems to be blurred, if not lost, by others posting in this thread. If you can't see, stop. If you can't see well, slow down a lot, or stop. Unlike motor vehicles, boats are not forced to share roads or lanes on them. With so much space, I find it awfully easy to keep my boat a very safe distance from other boats. If you can't see where you are going, or can't see well enough, slow down or stop. It's really that simple.

I agree with yours and others comments about slowing down and safe speed as I have said earlier. The comments about reckless boaters behavior is interesting to read too. Perhaps that will evolve into another thread. I appreciate your input and I am not sure your saftey points are getting blurred in any way - I sure hope not - but you do seem to recognize and have clarified that your saftey comments were not intended to be related or directed at what occurred in the sooke collision .
Cheers

 

[reelfast]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0lR5hPJkQc

Check this out - Coast guard auxillary just let the guy on their right plow into them full on. amazing.

that happened on lake Michigan a couple of years back. as I remember, it was not an AUX boat but a USCG vessel. in this case the USCG boat should have yielded. remember the admonition, '...if you can see red, stop...' one of the more useful rules of thumb on the water.

far too often, I see and hear the jerks running at speed with visibility severely limited. happens N and S of the 49th, BTW, as latitude has nothing to do with stupids on the water. my stomach is always in a knot on foggy days and often, inspite of all of the electronic equipment, i'll just stay on the beach instead of dealing with the idiots running around blind.

I guess the story will be told, eventually, when these folks get to court. until then its wise of them to simply remain silent.

 

[beemer]

All parties are considered to be at fault until proven otherwise in a marine incident. Regardless of who was the give way or stand on vessel both parties have the obligation to avoid collision. Luckily no one died.

beemer

 

[GDW]

Thanks for clarification Shep. It's still an odd accident you'd think somebody from one of the two boats would have noticed the other before that moment of glare. I suppose we're always looking forward under power though not necessarily at what's out coming up our side as we expect somebody approaching from the side/rear will see us. In this case perhaps both boats were coming up each others side.

It may not be applicable here but I try to ALWAYS tell everyone on my boat to help me keep a look out. Four eyes are better then two and six eyes are better then four. Some passengers like to sight see or mess with gear on the run out - don't do too much of that help the captain watch all ships have a lookout man it's usually not left up to the captain to see everything.

 

[reelfast]

good point GDW. I always ask those on board to help me out by looking and watching and telling me when or if they see something, anything. it really is a big help to have multiple folks looking about for issues that could result in trouble. glare is something that has gotten to me with floating debris, never saw it until it bounced off of the hull, very lucky that day. a week or so ago, another set of eyes spotted a just sub surface full sheet of ply wood moving with the current. amazing how much junk is out on the strait everyday for all of us to avoid.

 

[Saxe Point]

Can someone explain something to me. I go to Nootka almost every summer. I fully understand how everyone likes to get the "morning bite" and that dawn is perhaps the best time to be out there. But I still can't believe how guys will run full out in the pitch dark to get to their spot. You can't see anything! Even assuming some of them have radar, what about the deadheads and other stuff that is barely submerged? I think this is just inviting disaster. You may be lucky, even for a long time. But one night (it doesn't even qualify as morning when it's pitch black) when flying along at 30 knots in the dark, the odds are going to catch up with you. Whatever you hit will either wreck your boat or send you into the water, or both.

Why are people doing this? It seems to me to be highly dangerous, and quite frankly madness. Isn't it supposed to be fun-that's why they call sport or recreational fishing! We wait for some daylight and we still catch our fair share.

 

[reelfast]

my automatic responses to early morning running are: radar reflector deployed; nav lights on; radar running and checked out; rhumb line functioning. the crew is briefed on lookout duty or if new, safety features or both. I am never in any hurry when it is barely light enough to see as I know its a matter of time before I could run across floating debris in that dim light. experience has also taught me where debris tends to stack up given the constant currents so those places I give an extremely wide berth. take it easy, the fish are moving with the currents, time is your friend, go have fun.