Number of PFDs in your dinghy

[David B]

I don't particularly care about the regulations (as long as I am compliant).

When we head off in the dinghy, we have one each on. A person can drown quite nicely on a warm, sunny, calm day.
Accidents come out of nowhere - that's why they happen, and why people die.

We forget we are wearing our PFD's, and those are the sort to have.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by Scubaseas

Don't go to the pacific coast of Panama in the Santa Catalina area. Local cops use PFD enforcement as their retirement fund.

Good to know...I only encountered one port captain on that entire coast, and he just wanted to make sure I went twenty miles up his river to check in with him. No one even mentioned PFDs, not even in the Canal Zone.

[Ded reckoner]

We have one for each person in the dinghy. They typically aren't worn unless it's nighttime or it's exceptionally rough. We have a locker built into our dinghy and they're usually stored there.

[itnem80]

How do you go out to dinner while at anchor in the US with such a stupid rule?

Carrying the PFDs to the restaurant or while you take a stroll in town? Leaving them on the dinghy to get stolen?

I get the safety concern, but this does not seem practical at all!

[Chotu]

People steal a lot of stuff, but ratty, $5 pfds floating in some bilge water in the bottom of a dinghy aren’t very high on the list.

I carry one per passenger and leave them strewn about the bilge of the dinghy. All haphazard. At like $25 for a pack of 5 or whatever they cost, no one wants to steal them. Zero value.

[nortonscove]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

I spent more than 20 years as a representative of the "Nanny State" as you like to call it doing search and rescue as a pilot in the Coast Guard. I would ask you to consider, before flippantly throwing out that term, what the impacts of going to a Somalia style "free world" model. Certainly I rescued a few people who were morons, although I wouldn't wish death on any of them as punishment. But lots of folks we rescued just got into bad situations that there was no way they could plan for. Most mariners seem to think that a "Nanny State" providing search and rescue services to prevent unnecessary deaths on the water is beneficial. I'm guessing even you wouldn't turn us away if you were in distress?

Oh, but providing search and rescue service isn't "Nanny State", it's just requiring life jackets be carried in all boats? Again I'd ask you to consider what you're putting me and my crews through when people don't wear life jackets. If we know about where you are, we'll find you (or your body) in a life jacket pretty quickly. No life jacket, you're almost impossible to find and we will have to expose ourselves to dangerous conditions for considerably longer to either find you or meet the standards of an exhaustive search before abandoning it. And then there's the mental impact of pulling a dead child out of the water who wasn't wearing a life jacket and performing CPR on their dead body for 30 minutes it takes to get to the hospital, I know a rescue swimmer who still suffers from PTSD from having to do that several times. Forget about the child themselves, who wasn't old enough to know better. Sure, we get paid big bucks to go put our life on the line and suffer from PTSD, so I guess we should just suck it up in order for you to have the freedom to, what, not take 10 seconds to put a couple life jackets in your dinghy? But the child, what about them?

Can you rail about how much your "freedom" is getting trampled by the "Nanny State"? Sure. Is it considerate or respectful of the people who put their life on the line to protect the freedoms that really matter to you? Maybe not so much? Just asking you to consider it from another viewpoint, that's all.

Best post this year. 👍

[Jim Cate]

On the other hand my dog wore his religiously.

Interesting! What denomination was your dog? I"d guess he was a Shaker... at least that's what most dogs do when exiting the water!

Jim

[Pegu Club]

We do one for each person, that is two of us the majority of the time, and add as needed.

Fair winds,

[David B]

Originally Posted by nortonscove

Best post this year. 👍

Agreed. I can understand in the old days, the reluctance to wear, but these days, we really do forget we are wearing ours (nothing flash - Plastimo Pilot from memory).

People drown on bright, blue, calm, sunny days - let alone when the decks are awash. We see it as no different to doing up our seat belts for a short drive (required by law here in Australia). It's no big deal.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Marathon1150

A 20-year study by the Canadian Red Cross found that 50% of boating deaths could have been prevented simply by wearing a life jacket.

That's wishful thinking used in support of heavy-handed enforcement. Bah.


If a drunk individual falls off a dock and drowns, is it:
1) a boating accident that could be prevented by wearing a PFD?
2) a drinking accident that could be prevented by banning beer?
3) evolution in action
4) you can't fix stupid, or

5) blame it on the bull rails


If you answered #1 you are correct at least in the USA where that sort of thing ends up in the boating safety statistics.

[Marathon1150]

Originally Posted by nortonscove

Best post this year. 👍

Agree.

And drunks falling off a dock might distort the statistics but that is a bad statistics issue created by bureaucrats. Yes, there are lies, damn lies and statistics but risk mitigation is best informed by measured reality to the extent possible acknowledging that the measurements will vary.

Let's say only 40% of boat accident deaths might have been prevented by PFDs. Still seems worth wearing one.

I recently encountered this piece of information from another boater with long standing experience in the fishing industry and then the Canadian Coastguard. He also believes that wearing a life jacket is a good idea:



There is certainly a chance that some factor other than wearing a PFD contributed to this outcome, but the probability of the converse, is high.

[Benz]

At issue for me is not whether life jackets have saved lives or might save lives--what bugs me is other people trying to require me to wear one.
The logic that says "everyone should wear one so rescue people have an easier time of it" is baloney. I know a few snowflakes will melt, but seriously, those who can't handle the sight of blood shouldn't be ER nurses either.
Everyone who wants to should wear a lifejacket. Everyone who doesn't want to should be allowed to take their chances. Everyone who wants to force others to adopt their personal safety standards should go boil their heads.

[chrisr]

here in australia the law requires to carry a lifejacket for each person in the boat. if you are solo, you must wear one...if more than 1 person you don't.

as there is usually just the two of us, we carry to PFDs in the dink (the oldest cheapest legal ones i could find). never wear them...just needed to comply

on the rare occasion that we do elect to wear one, we take an inflatable pfd from the mothership stock.

there are some weird rules about lifejackets here... a kayak less than 100m from shore = no jacket. a 4m RIB anywhere = must wear a jacket...a kayak more than 100m from shore = jacket...swimming using the kayak as a kickboard = no jacket...paddling a SUP = no jacket

oh well...

cheers,

[flightlead404]

Originally Posted by Benz

But I object strongly to anyone deciding for me what is safe and what isn't.

If SAR etc could determine you decided not to wear a PFD and say "to heck with that moron we're not leaving the ground" I'd support you.

Unfortunately for the rest of us they can't.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by flightlead404

If SAR etc could determine you decided not to wear a PFD and say "to heck with that moron we're not leaving the ground" I'd support you.

Unfortunately for the rest of us they can't.

Would that they could--it'd be fine with me.