HELP ME FIGHT RULES BANNING SUP'S FROM ALL OF ORANGE COUNTY

[PonoBill]

I believe that citizens have a right to expect good regulation from government--we pay for it, both in taxes and unintended consequences of regulation. Good regulation is hard to do but easy to define, it's regulation that works positively. For example, the current coast guard memo for SUP is bad regulation--it does nothing to increase general safety of the activity and adds a burden. It has also led to a lot of equally bad and nonsensical enforcement action.

Safety by itself is not an effective goal, but lazy regulators and bureaucrats cite it constantly.  It's harder to articulate that an activity should be regulated so it does not endanger people who are not assuming the risk, or cost society more than the benefit it delivers. But that's a rational goal and a reasonable aiming point.

In the motorcycle world regulators have forced helmet laws that are simply stupid and inconsistent, and so they are easily overturned if anyone cares to do so. If the goal was rational, we'd have enforceable helmet laws that would be difficult to overturn. For example--anyone under 21 must wear a DOT-approved helmet, anyone over 21 must wear a helmet unless they are an organ donor.  In Hawaii you can (and I have) get a ticket for driving in your airbag-equipped truck with no seat belt, but you can have a dozen people in the pickup bed with no protection whatsoever. 

I'd propose that we work to overturn the OC regs, but also get this coast guard memo rescinded and corrected.

I have been trying to get the details, but I am starting to suspect that the recent drowning in Hood River may have in effect been related to this regulation. We'll probably never know what happened, and I I certainly don't want to take advantage of a tragedy to press a point, but from what I'm hearing in the news it appears the board and a life vest were recovered--that implies the vest was attached to the board, which is proper according to the regulation, and does absolutely no good if the board gets away. The solution is rational regulation that requires EITHER a leash or a WORN or personally carried life vest outside the surf zone.

We would also need to deal with the "vessel" appellation and clarify how it relates to the surf zone.

I built a little website called www.SUPright.com some time ago to offer etiquette rules. I haven't touched it in ages, but I don't think it sees much use. I'd be happy to donate this site and it's hosting to the cause, and I'll work as the webmaster until someone else volunteers. It's a pretty good domain name. I can easily set up forms for people to register and a way to electronically sign onto petitions and such. I have wordpress set up as the backbone of the site, which makes it easy to add features and content. I'll remove all reference to Ke Nalu until there is a sponsor page for any and all manufacturers, shops and individuals that contribute to the effort.

[Strand Leper]

UPDATE:

No response yet from county counsel or Ms. Ray but the day is young.  I did, however, receive a call from a county employee with intimate knowledge of our issues who agrees that the county of Orange is going too far.  The county employee suggested that I give the Parks Department a little bit more time before suing... He suggested that by immediately suing, I might alienate potential allies.  To that end I have placed a call to county counsel Jack Golden and look forward to working with him.  Don't worry, I have not lost my spine... I am just keeping my eye on the prize... After all, we will have to work with these people as the new Ordinances are established.

Thanks,

Tim (Stand Leper)

By the way, the only reason that this county employee knew of the situation was because of this blog (or John Ashley's blog) ... thanks proprietors!!!!!!

[EnduroDoc]

For now, I think that's the right course of action---try to work within the bureaucracy if possible.

I joined this forum last night specifically to respond to this thread. I'm a prone guy---putting out regularly from Newport and Dana. I really don't understand what the problem is with SUP. It reminds me of mountain biking in the mid 80s where the Sierra Club and equestrians wanted to ban wheels from all trails. Eventually, they realized that we had the numbers and the $$$ to help save and improve wilderness.

Just keep fighting the good fight. One way or another, you'll persevere. Who knows......maybe I'll even try SUP just to exercise my rights! 

[PonoBill]

I was watching an old Warren Miller movie a few days ago--jonesing for a little snow--and a good third of the movie was about how skiers, monoboarders and snowboarders are finally coming together after years of fighting. Snowboarding was helped tremendously by better lessons (explaining etiquette and how not to knock over skiers) and the economic boost they provided to ski areas. When surfers start to understand SUP can be complimentary to their interest they'll lighten up--many already have.

I strongly advise holding off on lawsuits until you need one. You need to be ready to go all the way once that starts, and that doesn't mean just wining a lawsuit but removing people from their jobs--or at least making them understand you're willing to work on that.

Here in Portland we have one of the few race tracks inside city limits in the United States--it's actually a city park. It operates under noise restrictions, but not very draconian ones. The politicians have made swipes at it a few times, and found the reaction unbelievably dangerous. Every time one of them makes some noises about eliminating PIR they discover a huge number of people--all dedicated and some very well-heeled and influential--ready to work very hard to get them unelected. Friends of PIR has made the track a loudly buzzing third rail.

That's what you want to accomplish. Make the people in charge understand that if they are friendly and helpful towards SUP that we can work with them, not only to form good regulation and do self-policing, but also to aid their political career. And if they are not then we'll find someone else that would like their job and help them.

And Leper, you don't sound like you're backing off at all. You sound like a persistent junkyard dog. My kind of guy.

[Tom]

I agree with Bill, hold off on the law suit for now. I'm sure the people you are dealing with have other issues to deal with. I would suggest you switch to the 'good cop' routine. Ask her what kind of information you can supply her so that she can make a decision and what her time frame is. 

[andygere]

Tim, while we have not yet seen this type of action from state or county lifeguards in Santa Cruz, I applaud your effort and think you are taking the correct approach.  Sadly, I doubt that the county administrators will care about or even consider local economic issues when rendering a decision.  Unfortunately, the local government M.O. is all about shedding risk and liability, civil liberties be damned.  Jobs and the local economy is someone else's problem as far as they are concerned.

Many have indicated that the good name and practice of our sport is often sullied by kooks on rental boards that act inconsiderately or dangerously in crowded line ups. I'm generally against the concept of rental boards, be they SUPs or regular surfboards.  To qualify that a little, I am against the rental of surfboards or SUPs to inexperienced surfers in the absence of supervised instruction (note that I am vehemently against the massive surf schools as they are operated in my town, but that's a different topic for a different day).  The reason is this:  there is virtually no barrier to entry, meaning any operator, good or bad can buy a dozen boards and let them out to any kook with a Visa card.  These are folks that otherwise would not enter the ocean on a SUP, surfboard, or by other means beyond their trunks.  I see them every day, and these folks are a far greater hazard than any waterman regardless of craft, that has taken the time to learn the rules and etiquette, practice in safe and uncrowded conditions, and surf with the safety and respect of others in mind.  Call me old school or a curmudgeon, but I firmly believe that surfing is a sport learned one on one, and that a certain level of commitment is required.  If laying out some cash for a used board is the first level of commitment, so be it.  Most folks, before doing that, will have gathered some information about how and where to learn, and hopefully enlisted the help of an experienced surfer to provide a lesson or two in the appropriate conditions, and teach them the etiquette and safety aspects of the sport.  What about traveling surfers you say, or the ability to demo a board before buying?  What about income for surf and SUP shops trying to earn an honest living?  I certainly would not want to deny competent and safe folks access to rental equipment for these reasons, nor would I deny anybody the opportunity to make an honest living.  With the proper level of discretion on the part of the rental shop, perhaps these things can be overcome.  "Have you ever surfed or SUPed before?"; "Are you familiar with the conditions at the beaches in our area?"; "Do you understand wave safety and surfing etiquette?"; "Are you a strong swimmer?".  Depending on the answers rendered, the eager would be SUPer or surfer may wind up renting a boogie board until they gain some experience, or signing up for a one-on-few lesson at an appropriate location. 

Before we owned our own sea kayaks, my wife and I took a course offered by the local university that provided all the relevant safety and proficiency instruction.  It lasted a few weekends, and covered paddling technique, self rescue, safety, etc. We later found that this was a really smart investment, since none of the local outfitters would rent you a closed-deck kayak unless you could prove that you were safe and proficient.  I carried that little certification card around for quite a while, and found that I could demo or rent any type of  boat just about anywhere, because the rental operator had some assurance that I knew what I was doing.  I've often wondered why most board rental shops don't adopt a similar policy. 

Similarly, in the early days of snowboarding (mid 1980's) most ski resorts did not allow them.  Like the lifeguards mentioned above, many just didn't know what to make of snowboarding, and you got different interpretation of the rules on different days.  Burton was very smart in adopting the self-policing theory.  They partnered with a major resort near their headquarters, and set up a snowboarding program, all at Burton's expense.  Burton provided instructors, and set up a licensing program where riders had to demonstrate proficiency to be allowed off of the few green slopes designated as learning areas.  You had to take a little test with an instructor to get a lower mountain license, and a second, more difficult test to get an all-mountain license.  Although these were really only supposed to be valid at one mountain, all of the neighboring resorts quickly accepted the "Burton License" if you wanted to ride a snowboard.  Within a year or so the entire thing became moot, because the resorts all realized that it really wasn't necessary and snowboards became universal participants at ski resorts. The point of this story is that the self-policing program works, and although the model is a bit different in the ocean, the concepts all apply.  This requires the industry, shops, rental houses and SUP surfers to all work together to ensure wide acceptance of the sport.  Part of that process may be proactive education of the folks that make the rules at our beaches and are tasked with beach safety.

[ooohhhno]

Tim,

Good work.  I live in Ventura and have often surfed Orange County and in fact use to have an apartment in Costa Mesa.  I will email you with my contact info and you can add me to your list.  I am retired and if I am not traveling, can drive to Orange County for whatever reason.

Stan
Ventura, Ca.

[clayfeeter]

"a natural progression of events in another ocean sport.
just gotta keep breathing aloha into it"
                          -outcast

[Strand Leper]

UPDATE:

I had a hearing in Orange County Superior Court this morning... So I figured I would drop by the County Counsel's office before heading back to my office.  It is in the same complex.  I am waiting for him as we speak.  I want to try and get a little bit of clarification by the weekend.

Tim  (Strand Leper)

[outcast]

Thanks Clay

Good luck Tim....hate to see you doing it by yourself.

Maybe we need a vehicle as Pono Bill said.   Maybe we need a clear presence with Surfrider Foundation...best advocates for access that i can think of...I'll start separate thread.

[venice mace]

gotta fight for the right. show aloha first, show respect.  when all else fails, swing the paddle and aim for the head.

[outcast]

.....the knees!!!!   Sweep the knees!       

Some got too hard head.......just look at Stoneaxe!  Doctor musta busted his saw on that one!

[Strand Leper]

Update:

I was in court in Orange County this morning, so I took the time to drop by County Counsel's office and meet with the attorney assigned to the case Matt Miller.  Matt was gracious enough to see me even though I did not have an appointment, (a good sign).  He looked like a surfer, was fairly young, and pretty mellow.

He had a ten o'clock conference call, so I only had about twenty minutes of his time.  He stated that he had been reviewing the regulations at issue that morning, but had not yet had the opportunity to speak with Leslie Ray at the Parks Department.

I told him that I would not be going into court tomorrow in the hope that we can work the matter out amicably by next week.

He agreed with me that the ordinances that I have analyzed are the only ordinances at issue, and that the are "vague."  I politely corrected him, that the ordinances are not vague, they just do not say what the county wants them to say.  I told him that I wanted to ensure that use and enjoyment of County resources are enjoyed to the maximum extent possible, while maintaining safety for all involved.

I took some time to educate him on the differences between open ocean SUP racing and cruising and SUP surfing.  I also took the time to educate him as to the size and danger factor of novice surfers in the line up and contrasted this danger with persons who SUP (or SUS as I saw someone say on Ashley's blog).  I told him that my SUS board was inside my car and I would be happy to bring it up to his office and show him.  He declined, citing a 10:00 conference call.

I spent some more time educating him on the sport, talking to him about our goals, and sharing with him how ski resorts coped and eventually integrated snowboarding into their resorts.  (thanks for that information fellow SUZ contributor).

VERY positive meeting.  We shook hands and I confirmed that he would give me their position on MONDAY of next week.

I suggested that if the County of Orange is considering new ordinances governing SUP and SUS egulations, we should set up a meeting of SUS and SUP community "leaders" so that the County fully understands the nature of the sport and the distinctions within the sport prior to adopting new ordinances.  He agreed and stated that he looked forward to working with me.  I thanked him for his time.

He was quite blunt in stating that if the County adopted a position that I believed to be in violation of its own Ordinances, he understood that I was perfectly within my rights to have the issue adjudicated by the Superior Court.

Lastly, he said that the Parks department usually is very responsive to concerns of similarly situated people and fairly evaluate my concerns.

I am going to start a thread in the General Discussion area as to what we should call our SUS advocacy group... and if we should make it just for SUS or also for SUP?  I thought of kind of a cool name "Surfers With Sticks... ("SWS") an paddlesurfing advocacy group."  Too vanilla?

Tim (Strand Leper)

T

[Strand Leper]

Outcase, I missed your post... I will go to your separate thread... I don't think that Surfrider Foundation will represent our interests AT ALL.  Many, many of those guys are haters... but if you get a dialogue going, let me know.

Tim

[Strand Leper]

OutcasT,

You may be right... their mission statement seems to jive with what we want... if folks think that SF will advocate for SUP'ers (even in South County... home of the 5'11" potato chip) then I will get them involved.

Tim