Do you wear a life jacket while fishing

[cram]

Common sense. Govern yourself.

 

If i'm sitting in a canoe in front of my cottage....not going anywhere, enjoying the like-glass water and sunny day.....and not wearing a jacket -- you want me to get fined?

 

If someone is drunk in a boat, falls off, and drowns......its their fault. Not mine.

 

If someone horses around in their boat, falls off, and drowns.....their fault, not mine.

 

Why are you impinging on my freedoms? I will wear a life jacket when its wavy (often do), and when in general i feel like i need it.....but i don't see why i should need/want the government enforcing me to do that. I can make the judgement calls myself, thank you.

Edited August 12, 2009 by cram

[knightfisher]

Wow....I didn't think this thread would create this much reaction.

Great to see so much interest.

To me, it all boils down to common sense.

As I stated I may take my jacket off if I am anchored and safe.

I don't wizz standing on the side, I use a cup, and get rid of it

quick, as not to mistake it for....

I do believe in freedom and power of choice, and hope most use

common sense.

I know the various Bass Masters groups have to have a PFD on when

the main engines are moving the boat.

 

I totally agree with TJ and others that the government has imposed

to many restrictions upon us already

This licence and that card. This tax and that fee.

 

Heck us Canadians can't go outside unless we have our ''Outdoors Card''

 

Lets all use common sense people and I think this thread has convinced

some to wear their PFD more often.

 

Dan

 

[musky_man]

If I am by mself and the water is starting to cool -- yes. Otherwise, no.

 

There has been a very high casualty rate for boaters/fisherman in Ontario recently.

It's been in the papers and on the news. Most of the people were not wearing a life jacket.

 

I personally always wear mine whether in the canoe or tinny. I may take it off if I'm going

to anchor for while, however if there are rough waters or wakes from other boats the

life jacket stays on.

 

Do you wear one ? Do you think it should be mandatory ?

 

This question has probably been asked before.

 

Just curious about your views.

[Twocoda]

That statistic is really quite meanless. It is what I would refer to as a "half of statistic".

 

In order for that information to be of any use what so ever we would have to know both the percentage of people who wear PFD's and the percentage of drowning victims who were wearing PFD's. Even then it would have limited use if no stats for size of boats and whether conditions, etc. were not factored in.

 

Based on your information, 15% of drowning victims were wearing PFD's. If, 10% of boaters wear PFD's and 15% of victims wear PFD's, that would indicate that wearing a PFD makes you 50% more likely to drown. On other hand if 30% of boaters wear PFD's and 15% of victims were wearing a PFD, that would indicate that wearing a PFD makes you 50% less likely to drown.

 

Knowing that 85% of victims were not wearing a PFD without knowing what percent of boater were wearing a PFD is 100% useless information.

 

 

 

lol...whos on first !

[Headhunter]

After reading all this and again, some of our members comments, I am starting to wonder where I have to line up to get my "government chip" installed in my head so the "authorities" can simply scan my skull and automatically issue a fine. Sure would save all that wallet removal time and in turn, save me from falling over board removing it from my pocket.

No one's arguing the merit of PFD's, but every little step the "authorities" take, to protect us, removes our freedoms.

You have to pick yer battles and I get the sense here that this is a battle many folks are ready to fight!

HH

[solopaddler]

After reading all this and again, some of our members comments, I am starting to wonder where I have to line up to get my "government chip" installed in my head so the "authorities" can simply scan my skull and automatically issue a fine. Sure would save all that wallet removal time and in turn, save me from falling over board removing it from my pocket.

No one's arguing the merit of PFD's, but every little step the "authorities" take, to protect us, removes our freedoms.

You have to pick yer battles and I get the sense here that this is a battle many folks are ready to fight!

HH

 

 

Hey bud don't you realize that the government installs those chips at birth!!!!

You better believe it.

If you wrap tinfoil around your head you may be able to deflect some their probing rays.

 

 

Respectfully yours, Lundboy (oops I mean solopaddler yeah that's it!)

[Fisherman]

Wow....I didn't think this thread would create this much reaction.

 

 

So, next time think before you stir the pot..

[JohnF]

I'm not going to read all the replies, just offer my own opinion.

 

If a person does not have a high comfort level with deep water they should wear one. IOW if you can't pass some kind of basic swimming test and still want to be out in a boat, wear a pfd.

 

When I say high comfort level I mean something like this. It really isn't too much to expect of oneself. To get a scuba cert most or all of the agencies require a demonstration of reasonable swimming proficiency. As I recollect we had to be able to swim something like 300 yds (any stroke, no time limit), tread water for 10 or 20 minutes, and be able to remove and replace our dive gear on the bottom in 10-12' of water surfacing between the doffing and donning. This was done without fins and mask.

 

Perhaps a swimming test should be part of the Boater Card test. I'm joking of course.

 

I don't like the idea of mandating pfd use at all times. If we allow gov't to do all our thinking for us before long we'll just be drones. When do we draw the line - when the gov't mandates condoms for all single men when dating?

 

As several have already stated wearing a pfd should be a matter of common sense. If one can't swim adequately well or is nervous about it then wear a pfd when on the water. If the conditions are adverse (current, wind, waves, temps) then wear a pfd. If one is in a vessel that is prone to capsize (canoes & kayaks in certain conditions or fast boats being driven fast).

 

Wearing a pfd should be a personal decision inviting no negative commentary from others. I'll reference scuba diving again. Smart competent divers have an expression I'll paraphrase "Anyone can thumb a dive any time, no questions asked, and no criticism allowed." IOW if I don't feel right about a dive I can end it or cancel it and my buddy goes along with my decision like it or not. The same thinking should apply to wearing a pfd. If I want to wear one regardless of the conditions and circumstances it's my decision solely and no one else has a right to an opinion about my choice except the operator of the boat who is within their rights to insist that any or all passengers wear pfd's.

 

JF

[Headhunter]

Dang Solo! All these years I thought it was just my "Aspertame" lump!

HH

[camillj]

Kinda like quitting smoking for me ... took me 25 years to actually get around to it even though I always knew I should ...anyways I always have it with me .. sometimes even put it on ... but rarely keep it on for long ... if its that dodgy out there its time to head for shore ...

 

as for my kids ... they always had them on

[Jonny]

I shouldn't be surprised that there are experienced fishermen, who also have experience of how government likes to intrude into things that are basically none of their business, who are perfectly fine with the idea of making everyone wear lifejackets all the time. I can think of so many situations where that is NOT common sense.

 

But when all is said and done, we don't have to worry --- this discussion is academic. We'll never see such an unenforcable law. It's about as nutty as it would be to make a law that you have to wear sun block.

 

Outdoors card... check

Lifejackets... check

Paddles... check

Fox 40 whistle... check

Flashlight... check

Anchor... check

30 ft of rope... check

Sunblock... no sunblock? ... $50 fine. You could get skin cancer, you know.

[JohnF]

I shouldn't be surprised that there are experienced fishermen, who also have experience of how government likes to intrude into things that are basically none of their business, who are perfectly fine with the idea of making everyone wear lifejackets all the time. I can think of so many situations where that is NOT common sense.

 

But when all is said and done, we don't have to worry --- this discussion is academic. We'll never see such an unenforcable law. It's about as nutty as it would be to make a law that you have to wear sun block.

 

As nutty and unenforceable as the motorcycle helmet law?

 

JF

[Jonny]

Nuttier and less enforcable.

 

Patrolling highways is light-years easier than patrolling lakes.

[knightfisher]

So, next time think before you stir the pot..

 

It was posted specifically to get people's reactions.

From the responses it's pretty obvious that we are

for the most part responsible and use common sense, as

to when and where we wear our PFD.

It's important in my estimation to bring up topics like this

as to ensure the community is aware of the possibility of

more unnecessary government interference, and take a

stance against it, if necessary.

We should not all lose our freedom of choice because of a

few who were reckless and shouldn't have been on the water in the first place.

[Jonny]

We should not all lose our freedom of choice because of a

few who were reckless and shouldn't have been on the water in the first place.

 

Exactly.

 

But the regulation-happy crowd often use that "If it only saves one life" argument. Pretty stupid.

 

If we really wanted to manage all risks, we'd start by reducing the maximum speed on our highways to 60 km/h. That would save more lives than just about anything else, but would we actually like to see it?

[TJQ]

It was posted specifically to get people's reactions.

From the responses it's pretty obvious that we are

for the most part responsible and use common sense, as

to when and where we wear our PFD.

It's important in my estimation to bring up topics like this

as to ensure the community is aware of the possibility of

more unnecessary government interference, and take a

stance against it, if necessary.

We should not all lose our freedom of choice because of a

few who were reckless and shouldn't have been on the water in the first place.

 

I think its a great topic...

[JohnF]

I think its a great topic...

 

I agree. As a potential boat owner I really don't want to be told I must wear a pfd every minute I'm on the water and it's only by keeping it in front of the involved public that boat owners will avoid apathy/complacency setting in. There's nothing our respective levels of gov't like better (other than an easy tax grab) than unnecessary safety legislation that makes them look proactive. We're letting them get away with the HST obfuscation. That should be enuf apathy for a few years or more.

 

JF

[big daddy]

I WEAR A MANUAL AT ALL TIMES, IRREGARDLESS OF WATERBODY - BOUGHT THE COLLAR-STYLE, DON'T EVEN NOTICE IT ANY MORE.

[Greencoachdog]

Common sense. Govern yourself.

 

If i'm sitting in a canoe in front of my cottage....not going anywhere, enjoying the like-glass water and sunny day.....and not wearing a jacket -- you want me to get fined?

 

If someone is drunk in a boat, falls off, and drowns......its their fault. Not mine.

 

If someone horses around in their boat, falls off, and drowns.....their fault, not mine.

 

Why are you impinging on my freedoms? I will wear a life jacket when its wavy (often do), and when in general i feel like i need it.....but i don't see why i should need/want the government enforcing me to do that. I can make the judgement calls myself, thank you.

 

 

IMHO. I don't think you need to worry about getting your PFD out of the storage compartment.. ever!

[oates]

I didn't wear a jacket before, I remember the boat getting shaky (with two guys 250LB + moving around), almost falling in - never really cared, can't swim well, probably could survive floating and swimming but 50/50 - I should try it in shallow water (like 5ft) to see if could swim 300 yards or float for 10 mins at a time to rest.

 

I now always wear it? Why you may ask? Because I got swept downstream whilst wading and ended up losing my rod and drowning fast before having to swim to shore in a current wearing waders which were filled with water down to the boots, I made it to shore - not a fun exp. it was so tiring it took me 10 mins to get my breath.

 

So I learnt from that, don't underestimate the water, unless you can swim like a fish then no worries (but what if the water temp is like 12c? can you still swim 5km?)

 

I like the idea like they do with bicycles, helmet is mandatory to a certain age, then optional - I think by doing this, kids will grow up with it and maybe 20-30% of them will keep doing it as adults, it will cut down some occurences and still leaves people the option, I don't think it should be treated like seatbelts because honestly, it is extremely rare unless alchohol is involved.

 

My 2 cents.

[Whitespinnerbait]

No