Re: [Paddlewise] Kayak Navigation Lights

Craig,

Thanks for a read of the actual regs, it's important for us to know the
actual rules rather than the ones that we think we know. It's also useful
to know the applicable differences between the various regions (colregs,
inland waterways, etc.)

Here's my cheat link when I'm trying to find a particular citation. I just
use Google and put this into the search box:

"vessel under oars" site:.gov

It's interesting to see how many states have their own regs.

> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 08:05:44 -0700
> From: Craig Jungers <crjungers_at_gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayak Navigation Lights
>
> I had to pause and think about the light issue. It's clear to me that many
> paddlers want a light even though it's not required. Some think it is
> required, of course, but even some of those who recognize that it's not
> required still want to use them. Even if there are (or may be) legal
> issues
> with using them. So why was I being such a strong advocate for strict
> compliance with the Rules?
>
> My history as a merchant marine officer and sailboat cruiser could account
> for it. Maybe I was just slavishly paying attention to a set of rules that
> were no longer pertinent to the modern situation.
>
> Do I think that the ColRegs are likely to be changed in light of so many
> paddlers out there at night using lights that do not strictly conform to
> the
> current version of the Rules? Yes. It's quite likely that some wording to
> clarify what "under oars" means will come along whenever the various
> governments get together to do it.
>
> The two points of thought on this issue seem to be:
>
> A) Obeying the strict Rules keeps your legal liability low and also keeps
> you from being seen as a target; and,
>
> B) Putting a light up makes you safer because other boaters will see you
> and
> doesn't cause any harm.
>
> I fall into group A), obvously.
>
> At any rate, I still feel that the Rules - which professional mariners are
> supposed to learn (even though retired ones may forget some of the
> specifics
> now and then) are worth paying attention to.  And this, conveniently,
> means
> I don't have to shell out any money for a kayak light.
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Paul Hayward <pdh_at_mmcl.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> Craig & Others
>>
>> Don't get too excited about the legal consequences of a moving white
>> light
>> -
>> you just haven't remembered the rules correctly ;-)
>>
>
> Actually, the "legal" consequences don't change. Just my illustration of
> how
> a paddler might get into trouble.
>
>>
>> A single white all-round light is, as you say, good for an anchor light.
>> However, it is also good for a powered vessel underway - if that vessel
>> is
>> under 7m and incapable of exceeding 7 knots.
>>
>
> I had thought I remembered this part of the Rule and looked for it but
> didn't find it.
>
>
>> So, the concept of a slowly moving small vessel being marked by a white
>> light is absolutely valid. The leap to using this on a kayak (or on a
>> row-boat or small sailing craft - under 7m) surely comes down to the
>> definitions of 'exhibiting a lighted lantern' and 'in time to prevent a
>> collision'.
>>
>
> Yes, but it doesn't fit the definition of a vessel being propelled by
> oars.
> While this makes my point about a moving white light somewhat moot, it
> doesn't change the fact that the light is not authorized for kayaks. If
> there were not an explicit Rule dealing with a vessel propelled by oars
> you
> would be on more solid legal ground. But there is.
>
>>
>> I see no issues with choosing to do the same in one of the 'un'-powered
>> small craft. You can never be accused of failing to display it in time -
>> and
>> at worst you may be confused with a small (and slow) powered vessel
>> underway. Or, of lesser concern, you might be confused with a row boat
>> or a
>> small sailboat.
>>
>
> The only issue would be liability. If you, as a paddler, get into any sort
> of kerfuffle with another vessel and are not in accord with the letter of
> the Rules the liability in the situation could be shifted; and not in your
> favor.
>
> In many states of the USA there are traffic laws which mandate the use of
> headlights when visibility is limited (fog, blowing sand, etc.) but which
> also forbid the use of parking lights in that situation. Nevertheless,
> many
> drivers use their parking lights instead of headlights in the situation
> and
> those who get into accidents can find that the issue makes a difference
> when
> assigning blame for the cause of the accident. (The theory is that parking
> lights, being smaller, distort the apparent distance the vehicle is from a
> viewer.)
>
>>
>> It seems low-risk and manageable - you are visible as a slow-moving
>> obstacle.
>>
>
> Just not in strict compliance with the ColRegs.
>
>>
>> The only drawback to being indistinguishable from a small powered vessel
>> is
>> in the right-of-way rules. I've never figured out how two vessels - one
>> powered & one sailing - both legally showing a white all-round light or
>> lantern are going to work it out. I guess the cases just don't make the
>> front pages ;-)
>>
>
> A sailing vessel in these circumstances is supposed to shine the light on
> the sails to show that it is under sail.
>
>
> Craig Jungers
> Moses Lake, WA
> www.nwkayaking.net
>

Saul Kinderis
saul_at_isomedia.com cell 206.313.0107

http://www.isomedia.com/homes/saul
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************