>But if my boat sinks or runs aground, I have no one to blame but myself. As a prudent boater I will have made provisions for disaster (or not). But I will not expect that some good Samaritan will come to my aid responding to a yelp on my VHF. That's good. I assume you also do not expect or want any government organization, which we all pay for, to go out and look for you or render assistance if they find you? Because if they do, that's MY gas they're burning in the helicopter they bought with MY money, and it's being flown by a crew that I paid for. Since you are determined not to be a burden on any of your fellow citizens, I assume then that you will ask for NO aid when or if you get into trouble? Because if you do, you are directly affecting ME because my taxes will eventually start creeping up as a result of the government spending more money to look for people like you who get into trouble because you choose to do things in a manner that increases the odds of your getting in trouble. >But if Congress passes such a law, boater licensing is not far behind. Here's another controversial subject that will cause everyone to crank up their keyboards since it's too cold to go boating. I can kill people or myself if I plunk down the money for a car and head out not knowing how to operate it and don't know the rules of the road. So I had to take a test proving I could operate a car and knew the rules of the road, and I was given a license proving these two things. I can kill people or myself if I plunk down the money to buy an airplane and take off not knowing how to operate it and don't know the rules of aircraft operation or navigation. So I had to pass a test (actually a lot of tests, one for each rating) to prove I could operate a plane and that I knew the rules and requirements applicable to each rating. And I was given a license proving these things. I can kill people or myself if I plunk down the money for a boat and head out without knowing how to operate it or the rules that govern boat operations. And that's okay. In today's world, I think this is one of the dumbest, most anachronistic things around. But--- everyone says--- just having a license doesn't mean a boater won't do stupid things. Absolutely, no question, dead on correct statement. How many road accidents do you see or hear about on your daily commute to work? How many aviation accidents are chalked up to pilot error? So is the implication from boaters who howl in outrage at the thought of mandatory testing and licensing of boaters that vehicle licenses should no longer be required? How about airplanes, too? Let's let a fellow who can afford it buy a Cessna Citation or a Gulfstream and start zipping around. As long as that guy in the left seat of the 777 you're getting on to fly to Hong Kong can start the engines, get the thing in the air, and keep it more or less under control, that's all that should be required, right? Hopefully he'll eventually find Hong Kong and he won't hit anything along the way. Oh, but that's different, right? You could get seriously dead trying to fly an airplane and not knowing how to, or not knowing the air rules. Well, just peruse this forum. How often to we read about the 60' sportfisherman plowing up something like the ICW, throwing out a huge wake that actually does damage or injury to people in the boats they pass? Sure, you can get their boat name and call the USCG and maybe--- but probably not--- they'll get dinged for their bad behavior. But there's no real penalty, other than if some authority actually bothers tracking them down to have to pay some damages, which to the owners of most of these things is probably just pocket change. We boat in relatively uncrowded waters up here in the PNW. But every year we see--- or hear about from other boaters or hear on the radio---- a huge number of examples of boaters doing dangerous and occasionally fatal things. Most of them are out of stupidity or ignorance. As comedian Ron White says, "You can't fix Stupid." But you can fix ignorance. Our boat weighs 28,000 pounds, has two engines and all I needed in order to be able to operate it was the money to buy it. I didn't have to know what side to pass other boats on, I didn't need to know what all those pretty buoys and lights out on the water meant, all I needed was for the check not to bounce. Personally, I believe this is absurd, and I would be absolutely delighted if anyone who wanted to operate anything other than a skiff, canoe, kayak, or dingy with a 4-horse engine had to pass an operational and knowledge test and earn a license before they could actually take that boat they just bought away from the dock on their own. A license that, if they roared their big sportfisherman up the ICW and beat up all the boaters around them, could be suspended or revoked with the same kinds of penalties for operating without one that we have today for people who do the same thing with vehicles and planes. People say, "but it will require a huge bureaucracy to administer this and it will cost too much." Right on, no question, absolutely. So lets make a dent in the mounting national debt and eliminate the FAA and all the state departments of motor vehicles and driver licensing. After all, if anyone with the money to afford one can be trusted to operate a super-powered 60-foot sportfisherman with no experience, training, or licensing, even my dog can understand the logic eliminating the same requirements for operating a puny little Smart Car or Subaru Outback. They only argument I ever see against boater licensing (outside the expensive bureaucracy one, which these days is an irrelevant argument because you can't go to the bathroom anymore before first setting up an expensive bureaucracy to administer it), is deprivation of personal freedom. That's a fair point, but if a person truly believes that, then they shouldn't whine when someone rolls their boat over 45 degrees with their wake. Because the wake-thrower is, after all, simply exercising his personal freedom to operate a boat in whatever manner he chooses. You can't have it both ways.

You make sense. I live in Charleston SC. A place where we can use our boats nearly 12 months a year. There are lots of boats here and lots of people who have no clue as to what they are doing. One day we will have an awful wreck of a nice family being killed by a couple of crazies who had no idea how to use their boat. Then someone will say, Maybe we should require some basic training. Too late for the drowned people.

There is one additional issue here that I do not think has received the attention it should, and that is the concept of advancing the "greater good". I cruise with both pilothouse VHFs on, one monitoring 16 and the other monitoring the local Canadian Coast Guard channel. I do this not ONLY so I can hear someone hailing me (which let's face it is mighty rare) but so that I may be of assistance if someone else needs help. So far, in 5 summers of boating, there HAVE been times when help is required. One was a tow, and a few times when I was able to provide a relay to a boat out of range of the CG. Now, you might argue that this is not really a "requirement", and you would be right. But on the other hand, if I ever have to call for help, it sure would be nice if my fellow boaters were listening. In fact, it might mean the difference between life of death for me, or my mom, or my dad, or my son. You might want to think about that the next time you turn your radio off. Scott Welch "Things turn out best for people who make the best of the way things turn out." - John Wooden