Standup Zone Forum
Stand Up Paddle => SUP General => Topic started by: hbsteve on February 05, 2018, 03:18:25 PM
-
I got stopped again this morning by the same Sheriff as last time.
Thanks to all of you and the manufacture of the pfd I have, I'm smarter now. So, I quoted the Code of Federal Regulation 175.15, that says my type III
inflatable can be carried on the board. We had a brief discussion and then they left. A few minutes later, they came back. He showed me a booklet "ABCs of California Boating".
Oh Oh. When I asked if their office carried the booklet he gave his copy to me.
Here it is:
"California boating law requires that all Type I, II and III lifejackets must be readily accessible...." And then "Note: An inflatable life jacket must be worn to be considered readily accessible."
I'll start wearing mine.
-
Anything about smoking pot while operating a human powered watercraft?
-
I got stopped again this morning by the same Sheriff as last time.
Thanks to all of you and the manufacture of the pfd I have, I'm smarter now. So, I quoted the Code of Federal Regulation 175.15, that says my type III
inflatable can be carried on the board. We had a brief discussion and then they left. A few minutes later, they came back. He showed me a booklet "ABCs of California Boating".
Oh Oh. When I asked if their office carried the booklet he gave his copy to me.
Here it is:
"California boating law requires that all Type I, II and III lifejackets must be readily accessible...." And then "Note: An inflatable life jacket must be worn to be considered readily accessible."
I'll start wearing mine.
Interesting. You should have quoted California's Regulation and Section Codes regarding PFDs since they can supersede the federal ones. So what's the actual California Section Code and/or Code of Regulation number for this provision containing this language? We would all benefit from knowing this specific detail. Thanks!
-
2Rivers, you are right.
I've spent over an hour trying to find the exact code. That isn't so easy. Finally, I emailed State of California and asked for that information.
We'll see.
-
hbsteve: This information from the California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways differs from what you were told:
https://dbw.parks.ca.gov/pages/28702/files/ABC's_2016_RequiredEquipment.pdf (https://dbw.parks.ca.gov/pages/28702/files/ABC's_2016_RequiredEquipment.pdf)
On page 24, under "Required equipment" for "Sailboats and manually propelled vessels", it states
"Note: A type V life jacket must be worn to be considered readily accessible"
Only some inflatables are Type V, so according to this info you should only be required to wear a Type V inflatable.
Lots of times, publications--even those by the regulatory agencies--are sloppily written, so the only way to know the answer for sure is to look up the actual regulation. (And the people patrolling and regulating also often don't know the specifics.) I don't know if California has its own regulations, or it just uses the federal regulations (which as you said, says you don't have to wear a Type III inflatable).
So it will be interesting to see what you find when you see the actual regulation's wording.
-
"So what's the actual California Section Code and/or Code of Regulation number for this provision containing this language?"
Think that is what should govern the actual requirement. The ABC pdf is not to be used for law enforcement or litigation etc. So would wait until you get an official code that states that specific wear requirement. But as noted for us we always wear an inflatable PFD anyways on a SUP. So is kinda moot for us. But is always good to get definitive clarification.
-
It's probably a typo.
The person who wrote the booklet made a mistake. It should specify that only type V inflatables are required to be worn.
.
-
They will try anything to pay for that Ca. bullet train.
-
I buy, and wear, an inflatable pfd mainly to keep the law happy.
I use a tiny ultra-light one and that isn’t even fully legal but because I always wear it law enforcement is very happy with it. I get checked dozens of times a year. In the end it’s a lot about the relationship you develop with the officials.
I must admit I find it odd to take an inflatable on board but not wear it. They don’t even float.
If I were to carry a pfd onboard I’d use any old cheapo on hand. One you’ll never wear and can always be wet and smelly.
-
I buy, and wear, an inflatable pfd mainly to keep the law happy.
I use a tiny ultra-light one and that isn’t even fully legal but because I always wear it law enforcement is very happy with it. I get checked dozens of times a year. In the end it’s a lot about the relationship you develop with the officials.
I must admit I find it odd to take an inflatable on board but not wear it. They don’t even float.
If I were to carry a pfd onboard I’d use any old cheapo on hand. One you’ll never wear and can always be wet and smelly.
I also don't get why someone would carry a belt type inflatable on board but not wear it. I don't even know mine is there.
-
Melissa Miranda from Parks.ca.gov got back to me today via email.
I haven't figured out how to include the email here. So here is the basic information.
California Code of Regulations, Article 4, Equipment Requirements 6565.5.
She did say "we have previously written that the inflatable must be worn to be considered accessible, but please follow the manufacture's instructions on the label and/or the owner's manual because some do say they must be worn to count toward the carriage requirement and others may not say that".
Code 6565.5 follows USGS regulations regarding types I, II and III. Code 6565.6 talks about type V. The regulations do not make any mention of inflatable.
-
Hi Steve,
Thanks for writing us to learn more about California boating law. You are right that we have previously written that the inflatable must be worn to be considered readily accessible but please follow the manufacturer’s instructions on the label and/ or the owner’s manual because some do say they must be worn to count toward the carriage requirement and others may not say that. Please see the citations below for your reference.
California Code of Regulations, Article 4, Equipment Requirements, § 6565.5. Personal Flotation Devices Required:
Except as provided in Section 6565.6:
(a) Effective January 1, 1998, no person may use a recreational boat unless at least one PFD of the following types is on board for each person:
(1) Type I PFD,
(2) Type II PFD, or
(3) Type III PFD.
(b) Prior to January 1, 1998, a Type IV may be carried in lieu of any Type I, II, or III PFD, for each person on board a recreational boat less than 16 feet in length or any canoe or kayak of any length.
(c) No person may use a recreational boat 16 feet or more in length, except a canoe or kayak, unless
(1) One Type IV PFD is on board, and
(2) At least one PFD of the following types is on board for each person:
(i) Type I PFD;
(ii) Type II PFD; or
(iii) Type III PFD.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 652 and 669, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 652, Harbors and Navigation Code.
§ 6565.6. Exceptions.
A Type V PFD may be carried in lieu of any PFD required under Section 6565.5 provided:
(a) The approval label on the Type V PFD indicates that the device is approved:
(1) For the activity in which the boat is being used; or
(2) As a substitute for a PFD of the Type required on the boat in use;
(b) The PFD is used in accordance with any requirements on the approval label; and
(c) The PFD is used in accordance with requirements in its owner's manual, if the approval label makes reference to such a manual.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 652 and 669, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 652, Harbors and Navigation Code.
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Melissa Miranda, Boating Education and Outreach Coordinator
California State Parks Division of Boating and Waterways
1 Capitol Mall, Suite 500 ç Sacramento, California 95814
Melissa.Miranda@parks.ca.gov ç (916) 327-1832
-
This is an interesting topic to me, so I’ve done some deeper research and here’s what I’ve concluded.
First thing to know is CA’s Definitions under CCR (CA Code of Regulations) Section Code 6565.2.
There are specific descriptions for a “boat”, a “recreational boat”, and a “vessel”.
Under CG rules paddleboards are deemed as a vessel, not a boat or recreational boat. Also remember that CA conforms to the definitions and regulations established by the CG as defined in Section 652(b) of the CA Harbors and Navigation Code.
Here are the critical aspects:
CCR Section Code 6564 (PFDs) contains the only reference to a “vessel” under CA state law.
Pursuant to Section 652, Harbors and Navigation Code, a vessel being operated on the waters of this State shall carry personal flotation equipment as prescribed in Sections 6565 to 6566, inclusive.
I've concluded that Section Codes 6565 (PFDs for Boats), 6565.5 (PFDs Required), and 6565.7 (Stowage) do not pertain to vessels like paddleboards, only boats and recreational boats (and 16"+ canoes & kayaks). Now if paddleboards were perhaps considered recreational boats, we would still be required to carry a Type I-III PFD on board. There's no specific language regarding inflatable PFDs, but that leads me to my next detail.
Under Section Code 6565.6 (Exceptions) it allows the use of a Type V PFD in lieu of a Type I-III, but it has to be used in accordance to the requirements on the label and owners manual. This is the most important detail pertaining to the "wearing" requirement.
Type V PFDs that are allowed to be used in lieu of a Type I-III PFD are generally required to be worn in order to meet the CG carriage requirements. This holds especially true for inflatable PFDs (shoulder and waist) since the majority of them are Type V. This “wearing” requirement will be indicated on the label and in the owner’s manual.
In summery I feel the only CA PFD laws that are applicable to adult paddleboarders fall under Section Codes 6564 and 6565.6.
6564 code violation – Not carrying a Type I-III PFD (inflatable or foam) that’s readily accessible.
6565.6 code violation - Not wearing a Type V PFD by not following the requirements on the label and owner’s manual requiring it to be worn to meet CG carriage requirements.
-
I have never been checked or even looked at... and I paddle well over 100 days a year.
Mostly on Cape Cod, but also in VA, SC and Florida
I like it this way.
-
Now if paddleboards were perhaps considered recreational boats, we would still be required to carry a Type I-III PFD on board.
I find this interesting... Under Section Code 6565.3, and in the context in which it's written, it implies that CA would deem a paddleboard as a "recreational boat". So like I stated in my quote above, Section Code 6565.5 would then be in effect.
https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I5F64EED0D48611DEBC02831C6D6C108E?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)
So on that note, if one were to not carry a Type I-III that's easily accessible, then they would be in violation of two section codes... 6564 and 6565.5
-
Now if paddleboards were perhaps considered recreational boats, we would still be required to carry a Type I-III PFD on board.
I find this interesting... Under Section Code 6565.3, and in the context in which it's written, it implies that CA would deem a paddleboard as a "recreational boat". So like I stated in my quote above, Section Code 6565.5 would then be in effect.
https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I5F64EED0D48611DEBC02831C6D6C108E?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default (https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I5F64EED0D48611DEBC02831C6D6C108E?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default))
So on that note, if one were to not carry a Type I-III that's easily accessible, then they would be in violation of two section codes... 6564 and 6565.5
First of all, you have to be pretty weird to be interested in this stuff...
Thanks for the link to the definitions. Just so it's handy, I copied what seems to be the whole relevant section below.
The first thing that pops out is that you're right, a SUP is a "vessel", because it is definitely NOT a "recreational boat" because those carry more than 6 passengers.
So the whole email that hbsteve got is wrong, because the person who wrote it didn't check the definitions, and gave him the regulations for the wrong type of craft.
However, the big one to me is that most SUPs would clearly meet the definition of a "racing shell, rowing scull, racing canoes and racing kayak" and those are exempt from needing to carry ANY pfds.
Here's the code:
§ 6565.2. Definitions.
As used in sections 6565.2 through 6565.8:
(a) “Boat” means any vessel manufactured or used primarily for noncommercial use; leased, rented, or chartered to another for the latter's noncommercial use; or engaged in the carrying of six or fewer passengers.
(b) “Recreational boat” means any vessel manufactured or used primarily for noncommercial use; or leased, rented, or chartered to another for the latter's noncommercial use. It does not include a vessel engaged in the carrying of six or fewer passengers.
(c) “Vessel” includes every description of watercraft other than a seaplane on the water, used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on the water.
(d) “Use” means operate, navigate, or employ.
(e) “Passenger” means every person carried on board a vessel other than:
(1) The owner or his representative;
(2) The operator;
(3) Bona fide members of the crew engaged in the business of the vessel who have contributed no consideration for their carriage and who are paid for their services; or
(4) Any guest on board a vessel which is being used exclusively for pleasure purposes who has not contributed any consideration, directly or indirectly, for his carriage.
(f) “Racing shell, rowing scull, racing canoes and racing kayak,” means a manually-propelled boat that is recognized by national or international racing associations for use in competitive racing and one in which all occupants row, scull, or paddle, with the exception of a coxswain, if one is provided, and is not designed to carry and does not carry any equipment not solely for competitive racing.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 652 and 669, Harbors and Navigation Code. Reference: Section 652, Harbors and Navigation Code.
-
Now if paddleboards were perhaps considered recreational boats, we would still be required to carry a Type I-III PFD on board.
I find this interesting... Under Section Code 6565.3, and in the context in which it's written, it implies that CA would deem a paddleboard as a "recreational boat". So like I stated in my quote above, Section Code 6565.5 would then be in effect.
https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I5F64EED0D48611DEBC02831C6D6C108E?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default (https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I5F64EED0D48611DEBC02831C6D6C108E?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default))
So on that note, if one were to not carry a Type I-III that's easily accessible, then they would be in violation of two section codes... 6564 and 6565.5
To me, that doesn't imply that a paddleboard would be considered a "recreational boat" because by definition "recreational boats" have more than 6 passengers.
-
for whatever it's worth, Idaho has a little line specifically for sup's in their rule book that if you strap your pfd down to your board it is not readily accessible and therefor not in compliance. Throw it on deck (non inflatable pfd) you are good, but once you throw a bungee around it you are not. I kind of think it is in there because of some debating at some point between users and law enforcers.
-
for whatever it's worth, Idaho has a little line specifically for sup's in their rule book that if you strap your pfd down to your board it is not readily accessible and therefor not in compliance. Throw it on deck (non inflatable pfd) you are good, but once you throw a bungee around it you are not. I kind of think it is in there because of some debating at some point between users and law enforcers.
That makes a lot of sense. ??? So if it's under a bungee, so it stays on your board but can be pulled out with one hand in a second, that's bad, but if it's lying there so it falls off out of reach as soon as you fall, or gets washed off without you even knowing by the first boat wake, you're great.
I do think they'd have a point if you strap it down with five yards of duct tape, as I've seen before.
I wonder what they allow if it's in a boat, stuffed under a seat so nobody can see it, behind the beer cooler--fine as long as no bungee?
-
MAYBE, I can answer the tied down question.
One day this week, there were several officers on the Harbor Patrol dock. So, I stopped to ask a question.
The officer that spoke said that I was okay with my type III strapped under my bungee cord. He seemed to understand the wash off potential.
An officer in a bad mood could say otherwise.
But, that is like caring, or not, about the pfd being worn backwards. Everyone I know that has shown they are wearing a pfd have had it backwards and never had a problem. YET.
-
I probably shouldn't have said "throw a bungee around it". Here is what it says tho.
The comment about "leash can not be used in lieu of a life jacket" is the line that makes me think there have been people challenging their tickets and I think there is enough vagueness in "strapped" that a bungee might get you a ticket, common sense or not. Some would write you up, some wouldn't and might depend on how their day is going and all that.
Can't find an easier link to post this from.
In the middle of the screen "My boat, What's required"
I clicked out of state. Choose "stand up paddleboard", and "display and print" and the rules will show up on your screen.
https://parksandrecreation.idaho.gov/activities/boating
I found this as well and skimming through there was an interesting thing or few.
http://sca.nasbla.org/2016/05/16/stand-up-paddleboards-leashes-life-jackets-legislation/
-
The part about RACING CRAFTS written in law a long time ago may be the best way to get out of it all- as long as that law is still valid in your state.
I know that in Hawaii, that's how we got away with not wearing a vest - for years.
Perhaps the real debate shouldn't be about the law but should be based on circumstances.
Do you want to make a lifeguard wear a PFD and will that really make him more agile to render help to you?
Do you want to wear a leg leash in a river, or would it be better to be without a leash, or at least with a waist leash (with a quick release)?
If you are going to make someone wear a PFD, are you sure that 50, 60 or 70 newtons of buoyancy is gonna be enough?
If you are uncomfortable and/or afraid of the water, should you really wear a 70 newtons PFD and venture 2 miles offshore, with offshore wind?
Should you really paddle with the best PFD on a nice DW, yet not have to put on a leash?
Better yet, how about putting the best PFD and best leash money can buy - to find yourself attaching your leash with a shoelace???
Last one I can think of: has your leash plug gone though testing for reliability? Are you sure?
Blindly passing a PFD law, or blindly using a PFD may help with your safety, but clearly: we have a long way to go. It may all start with education - instead of laws (or dare I say STUPID LAWS)
-
First of all, you have to be pretty weird to be interested in this stuff...
Thanks for the link to the definitions. Just so it's handy, I copied what seems to be the whole relevant section below.
The first thing that pops out is that you're right, a SUP is a "vessel", because it is definitely NOT a "recreational boat" because those carry more than 6 passengers.
So the whole email that hbsteve got was wrong, because the person who wrote it didn’t check the definitions, and gave him the regulations for the wrong type of craft.
I'll admit that I'm a bit weird about the PFD laws around here. Where I paddle is commonly in State and County parkways and I often encounter the rangers that are patrolling the launch areas and waterways. I also have some ranger friends that have some mixed interpretations of the established laws. It seems like there's always a new ranger though that has their own perceptions, so being precise and knowing the exact laws has paid off thus far.
So I have to ask where is it defined that a “recreational boat” carries more than six passengers? All it says is that it’s a vessel that’s not engaged in carrying six or fewer passengers like a “boat”, nothing more.
As it’s written it could be interpreted that a “recreational boat” is neither a vessel engaged in carrying six or fewer passengers nor a vessel engaged in carrying more than six passengers and is something completely else.
Also the Feds and CA have nearly identical definitions for “recreational boats/vessels”…
Under US Section Code 175.3 the definitions are identical to the State’s Section Code 651(d) and (t) when combined. Both also deem “recreational vessels” as vessels for pleasure purposes only, so couldn’t a paddleboard be considered as a “recreational vessel” in this context?
Under US Section Code 175.11/175.11(c) and CA Section Code 6565.3 the PFD requirements are applicable to “recreational vessels” that can be propelled by “paddles”, so couldn’t this be interpreted that a paddleboard is considered as a “recreational vessel” in this context as well?
My point with these questions is to highlight that these “grey” areas are exactly what the authorities are misinterpreting.
Btw, you mentioned that hbsteve got the wrong regulations from the state. I’ve looked into it and there’s only one state regulation within CA’s legislation regarding PFDs (under Title 14) and it’s directed at “boats” and mainly “recreational boats”, not “vessels”.
Nowhere can I find any language and the associated regulations directed at “vessels” such as paddleboards, kayaks, and other watercraft of this type. Even CA's Section Code 6564 only pertains to PFD equipment requirements as prescribed in sections 6565 to 6566 which are also not directed at "vessels".
I should point out that the US Section Code 175.15 would also not be applicable to paddleboarders then if they are not defined the same as a “recreational vessel”. The Feds uses nearly identical language as CA does under Section Code 6565.5 and it's only referencing a “recreational boat/vessel” and the PFD carriage requirements upon them.
Nowhere does it mention the PFD requirements for “vessels” as defined by both the Feds and the State.
-
First of all, you have to be pretty weird to be interested in this stuff...
Thanks for the link to the definitions. Just so it's handy, I copied what seems to be the whole relevant section below.
The first thing that pops out is that you're right, a SUP is a "vessel", because it is definitely NOT a "recreational boat" because those carry more than 6 passengers.
So the whole email that hbsteve got was wrong, because the person who wrote it didn’t check the definitions, and gave him the regulations for the wrong type of craft.
I'll admit that I'm a bit weird about the PFD laws around here. Where I paddle is commonly in State and County parkways and I often encounter the rangers that are patrolling the launch areas and waterways. I also have some ranger friends that have some mixed interpretations of the established laws. It seems like there's always a new ranger though that has their own perceptions, so being precise and knowing the exact laws has paid off thus far.
So I have to ask where is it defined that a “recreational boat” carries more than six passengers? All it says is that it’s a vessel that’s not engaged in carrying six or fewer passengers like a “boat”, nothing more.
As it’s written it could be interpreted that a “recreational boat” is neither a vessel engaged in carrying six or fewer passengers nor a vessel engaged in carrying more than six passengers and is something completely else.
Also the Feds and CA have nearly identical definitions for “recreational boats/vessels”…
Under US Section Code 175.3 the definitions are identical to the State’s Section Code 651(d) and (t) when combined. Both also deem “recreational vessels” as vessels for pleasure purposes only, so couldn’t a paddleboard be considered as a “recreational vessel” in this context?
Under US Section Code 175.11/175.11(c) and CA Section Code 6565.3 the PFD requirements are applicable to “recreational vessels” that can be propelled by “paddles”, so couldn’t this be interpreted that a paddleboard is considered as a “recreational vessel” in this context as well?
My point with these questions is to highlight that these “grey” areas are exactly what the authorities are misinterpreting.
Btw, you mentioned that hbsteve got the wrong regulations from the state. I’ve looked into it and there’s only one state regulation within CA’s legislation regarding PFDs (under Title 14) and it’s directed at “boats” and mainly “recreational boats”, not “vessels”.
Nowhere can I find any language and the associated regulations directed at “vessels” such as paddleboards, kayaks, and other watercraft of this type. Even CA's Section Code 6564 only pertains to PFD equipment requirements as prescribed in sections 6565 to 6566 which are also not directed at "vessels".
I should point out that the US Section Code 175.15 would also not be applicable to paddleboarders then if they are not defined the same as a “recreational vessel”. The Feds uses nearly identical language as CA does under Section Code 6565.5 and it's only referencing a “recreational boat/vessel” and the PFD carriage requirements upon them.
Nowhere does it mention the PFD requirements for “vessels” as defined by both the Feds and the State.
Don't worry, when I said you have to be weird, remember I've probably got a couple hundred pfd posts on old threads here myself.
Earlier in this thread ( https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php/topic,33097.msg372443.html#msg372443 (https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php/topic,33097.msg372443.html#msg372443) ) I put the code section that says passenger boats are defined as carrying more than six passengers:
§ 6565.2. Definitions.
As used in sections 6565.2 through 6565.8:
(b) “Recreational boat” means any vessel manufactured or used primarily for noncommercial use; or leased, rented, or chartered to another for the latter's noncommercial use. It does not include a vessel engaged in the carrying of six or fewer passengers.
So there is no "gray area" as far as a SUP being considered a "recreational boat"--it can't be because it doesn't meet the code's own definition of one due to not carrying more than 6 passengers.
When I said hbsteve got the wrong regulations from the State, I didn't mean they used the wrong code. I meant they gave him the correct code's wrong section. They gave him the rules for "recreational boats" instead of the rules that apply to SUPs, which meet the definitions of vessels and boats (per the link above) but not "recreational boats".
I didn't look up the pfd requirements for "boats" or "vessels" because that exemption for racing equipment (from the link above again) should apply to most SUPs, meaning they don't have to carry any pfds at all.