New PWC restrictions! Please leave a comment.

Quinc

Quinc

Buy a Superjet
Location
California
Found this on pwctoday
http://www.pwctoday.com/showthread.php?t=426367
Hi all,

Here in Northern California we are in dire need of help. NOAA is proposing expanding the current sanctuary which ends at Bodega Bay to extend all the way to Point Arena. This means NO PWCs are allowed. Currently they have a provision to set aside some zones where we can still ride, but opposition is building up fast and they are very vocal. Please go to this address and leave a decent comment, stating that you support the MPWC zones as proposed.

We need to stop this here, otherwise it will continue on with lakes, rivers, etc. Marin County has already outlawed them on every single body of water. Soon they will be in your area trying to stop you from riding.
Please leave a comment by clicking on the link below. We need as many as possible, and we only have until June 30th. Thanks!

http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=NOAA-NOS-2012-0228-0321

MODS, PLEASE MAKE THIS A STICKY. THANKS!
 
Quinc

Quinc

Buy a Superjet
Location
California
Tyrant1919 said:
Is there even a good spot there to ski?
Click to expand...

I asked the same thing:
http://montereybay.noaa.gov/resourcepro/resmanissues/mpwc/faq.html#mpwc_faq05
mpwc1_lg.jpg
 
P

PWC1

Location
In a Government Yard in Sac Town
Hi, my name is Danny, I am one of the guys who found out about this last year while NOAA were trying to sneak this past us, the people. I have sent numerous letters to the Dept. Of Commerce, NOAA and the local agencies, and it might just pay off it we stick together.

I would like first of all to thank Quinc for pointing me to this forum, it's good to be here. Thanks, Quinc!

This is not only our battle, here in NorCal. They have been and will systematically close as many lakes and bodies of water, not to mention ATV riding areas and gun control. Here is a short history of what has happened since I first discovered this:
- first came across the proposal in June last year. At the time, all comments by the public had been closed and a decision was pending
- We wrote many letters, and opened up a thread in a fishing forum, urging everyone to send letters.
- That thread got over 382,000 views, and I'm guessing that at least 2,000 sent letters, but I hope more did
- Last week I checked the status again, expecting the worst. I was amazed to discover that they added a provision for jet ski riding zones which would work for us!! Why the sudden change of heart??

Now, the problem is that the knuckleheads are coming out of the woods opposing these zones and pushing for total prohibition of MPWCs. We need to leave enough comments to counter them, it's that simple. We only have until June 30.

Gentlemen, thanks so much for leaving comments in support of the cause!!

@Benny: Amen!
@sleepsinbloods and Tyrant1919: Thanks!!
@FPF: completely right! While they do everything they can to ban us, 300 tons of nuclear waste has been pouring into the ocean EVERY DAY from Japan since 2011! Beat that!

A bit of reading material: here is what a genius from a local advisory committee (the chair of Bolinas Laguna Advisory Committee) said at one of the public hearings that took place May 22, you are NOT going to believe this guy's rant:


Two, motorized watercraft pollute. Out of every
10 gallons they put in their machines to ride around and
say "wahoo," three to four gallons go into the top of
the ocean. I don't think anybody here has the right to
give pollution a permit to go around and pollute the top
layer of the ocean.
And three, it would mean in the instance of
their activities which frightened marine mammals that we
would be authorizing, through this legislation, the
right for those people to take marine mammals, which is
prohibited under the Marine Mammals Protection Act.
It's also prohibited under the Endangered Species Act.
So motorized watercraft are noise pollutants,
sea pollutants, and illegally taking marine mammals.

What?? MPWCs are illegally taking marine mammals? Guys, stop taking orcas or sea lions on your stand ups!

If you want to read the whole transcript of that public hearing and the aberrations in it, you can find it here:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NOAA-NOS-2012-0228-0403
 
550/440

550/440

Maybe I'll get it all the way around NEXT time....
Location
Arizona!
"GFNMS regulations prohibit the operation of all motorized personal watercraft (MPWC), except for emergency search and rescue missions or law enforcement operations (other than routine training activities) carried out by the National Park Service, U.S. Coast Guard, Fire or Police Departments or other Federal, State or local jurisdictions. MPWC, which are often referred to as “jetskis”® or simply “skis,” include several small vessel designs that share similar performance characteristics. NOAA has restricted the use of MPWC within various sanctuaries when MPWC operation poses a unique and significant threat of disturbance to sanctuary habitats and wildlife through repetitive operation within sensitive environments. NOAA's assessments of MPWC impacts indicate that unrestricted access to all reaches of the sanctuary by such craft are likely to pose a threat to wildlife and other ocean users. Some MPWC operators commonly accelerate and decelerate repeatedly and unpredictably, travel at rapid speeds directly toward shore, and may maneuver close to rocks. Thus wildlife disturbance impacts from MPWC tend to be more likely than those from motorboat use, due to impacts in ecologically sensitive areas, often in nearshore locations. More detailed information on the impacts of MPWC can be found in the discussion of the proposed action in the DEIS published concurrently with this proposed rule."

So, I can plow around in my 60' yacht and push 4' wakes across the entire region, but accelerating and decelerating rapidly on my ski (that makes a 3-6" wake) is somehow more damaging? I've seen more litter and crap left behind by fishermen and campers than I've ever seen left behind by a jet skier, and my wakeboard boat puts far more fuel through it than my ski. I don't honestly think these people are doing much more than attempting to restrict access to these areas for jet ski owners. I really don't like the way this reads - it is subjective and categorizes only a select few jet skiers, not all. I've seen boat pilots do all of these same things.
 
P

PWC1

Location
In a Government Yard in Sac Town
550/440 said:
"GFNMS regulations prohibit the operation of all motorized personal watercraft (MPWC), except for emergency search and rescue missions or law enforcement operations (other than routine training activities) carried out by the National Park Service, U.S. Coast Guard, Fire or Police Departments or other Federal, State or local jurisdictions. MPWC, which are often referred to as “jetskis”® or simply “skis,” include several small vessel designs that share similar performance characteristics. NOAA has restricted the use of MPWC within various sanctuaries when MPWC operation poses a unique and significant threat of disturbance to sanctuary habitats and wildlife through repetitive operation within sensitive environments. NOAA's assessments of MPWC impacts indicate that unrestricted access to all reaches of the sanctuary by such craft are likely to pose a threat to wildlife and other ocean users. Some MPWC operators commonly accelerate and decelerate repeatedly and unpredictably, travel at rapid speeds directly toward shore, and may maneuver close to rocks. Thus wildlife disturbance impacts from MPWC tend to be more likely than those from motorboat use, due to impacts in ecologically sensitive areas, often in nearshore locations. More detailed information on the impacts of MPWC can be found in the discussion of the proposed action in the DEIS published concurrently with this proposed rule."

So, I can plow around in my 60' yacht and push 4' wakes across the entire region, but accelerating and decelerating rapidly on my ski (that makes a 3-6" wake) is somehow more damaging? I've seen more litter and crap left behind by fishermen and campers than I've ever seen left behind by a jet skier, and my wakeboard boat puts far more fuel through it than my ski. I don't honestly think these people are doing much more than attempting to restrict access to these areas for jet ski owners. I really don't like the way this reads - it is subjective and categorizes only a select few jet skiers, not all. I've seen boat pilots do all of these same things.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what is going on. All the snobs in Marin County own 30+ foot yachts powered by quadruple Cummins diesel engines which use like 3 gallons per mile and easily get 50 mph. How about the container ships coming into the SF and Oakland ports plowing through the sanctuary waters at a rate of 1 every 2 hours, and those leave 10 foot wakes behind in addition to the trash and fuel residue they dump behind. But that's ok, guess why - because the great City of SF is making big money from every one of them ships docked there - in which case to hell with the wildlife. But they need a scapegoat so what the hell, them jet skier "wahoos" fit the bill...
 
550/440

550/440

Maybe I'll get it all the way around NEXT time....
Location
Arizona!
It's about the occasional PWC rider that chases birds.... we all know "that guy". Don't be that guy. ;)
 
550/440

550/440

Maybe I'll get it all the way around NEXT time....
Location
Arizona!
Although I live in AZ, and will most likely never find myself on these waters, I strongly urge all of my fellow riders to go and post on this website and gently persuade the people who are proposing the new regulations to kindly rethink their preconceived bias towards PWC.

Here are my hastily written comments:


Hello,
I read through this entire legal document, and have taken exception to the personal watercraft clause. This seems to target reckless riders and does not truly address the real issue of PWC. They are boats. They do not pose any more hazard than another boater, and this regulation targets the PWC unfairly. The piece appears written with someone who has a bias towards PWC operators in general.
There are many other types of boats and boaters that would be allowed to operate without regulation. I propose that this section be omitted from the regulatory document, and in its place, higher forms of penalty be placed upon anyone who annoys or otherwise recklessly causes disturbances to the wildlife that we are attempting to protect. Do not single out one form of conveyance due to a preconceived notion or bias.

Jason Crossland
 
Quinc

Quinc

Buy a Superjet
Location
California
A lion used to prowl about a field in which Four Oxen used to dwell. Many a time he tried to attack them; but whenever he came near they turned their tails to wone another, so that whichever way he approached them he was met by the horns of one of them. At last, however, they fell a-quarrelling among themselves, and each went off to pasture alone in the separate corner of the field. Then the Lion attacked them one by one and soon made an end of all four.
United we stand, divided we fall.​
 
P

PWC1

Location
In a Government Yard in Sac Town
Quinc said:
A lion used to prowl about a field in which Four Oxen used to dwell. Many a time he tried to attack them; but whenever he came near they turned their tails to wone another, so that whichever way he approached them he was met by the horns of one of them. At last, however, they fell a-quarrelling among themselves, and each went off to pasture alone in the separate corner of the field. Then the Lion attacked them one by one and soon made an end of all four.
United we stand, divided we fall.​
Click to expand...

Very well said and above all, true!! Thanks, Q!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom