... looks like only NY State regulates paddlesport instruction per se -- you have to hold some first aid cert.
Regarding just padlding (as opposed to instructing) there are a lot of PFD laws, and one state requiring compass and whistle (which has been stripped from the MA bill, for good reason).
Maine, of course, has the celebrated Maine Guide cert for guides. But as far as I know, there's absolutely nothing in the Maine Guide regs about teaching paddling. True?
Just to compare, the MA law will require first aid and water safety certs, but only if you instruct closed cockpit kayaks, single or double cockpit. No certs will be required if you teach canoing, or SOT paddling, or triple-cockpit kayaks, or surf-skis, etc.
And, of course, MA will require wet exit training, thus inserting the legislature into the extremely technical and complex issues of exactly what safety procedures and skills are to be taught under what circumstances.
Any info from other states?
I hope I can use this to help fight the MA law.
Oh yes, someone asked why closed-deck cockpit kayaks are being singled out. Of course, it makes zero sense, but the ostensible reason is that one person died in a class when they were unable to release their sprayskirt.
regs do not mention instruction per se that I'm aware of so I suppose you could instruct in a swimming pool but if you take a group of paddlers out on the ocean and charge them money for it, then you would have to have a guides license, even if you were just "instructiing them"---its the money part of it that puts it under the guiding regs. You can do anything you want with other paddlers on the water and if you don't charge them, youre ok.
Not sure if you realize it, but In the ocean or any other waterway that the coast guard has jurisdiction.
The law requires that you must have on your boat a US Coast Guard approved PFD, (you don’t have to be wearing it) and also a “suitable bell, whistle or other signaling device”
Regardless of what the states may or may not require.
Yes, I realize the CG requires… … a pfd on board, and a signalling device.
The pfd on-board but not-necessarily-worn part is probably due to the situation on most boats – you’re likely to have at least a minute or two to don your pfd when you know you’re headed for a swim but have not yet hit the water. Obviously, that doesn’t apply to most paddlecraft. So, kayaks and canoes are not really much on the CG’s mind, or at least weren’t before the sea-going variety became popular.
So the question here is what states go farther than the CG for paddlecraft? (But actually, for MA it’s now moot, as pfd and signaling provisions have been stripped from the bill – only instructor regs remain).
kayaks still aren’t much on the CGs mind—I’ve been paddling on the ocean for seven years now pretty much 90% of the time and have never been checked by the coast guard or heard of anybody being checked for safety equipment—btw in Canada not only do you need a pfd and a sound signaling device but also 15 meters of line.
MA is only talking about "instructors for hire", not all instructors.
"And, of course, MA will require wet exit training, thus inserting the legislature into the extremely technical and complex issues of exactly what safety procedures and skills are to be taught under what circumstances."
They could quite possibly (and quite reasonably) rely on the standards of the certifying agency regarding the wet-exit technique.
There is nothing in the MA legislation that indicates anything about enforcement (note that enforcment (fines/jail terms) have to be explicit in the law). There is also nothing indicate that the motivation is to get fees (that too would have to be explicit).
It's possible that the intent of the MA law is to provide a legal basis for suing instructors if accidents happen as a consequence of the lack of wet exit training.
That is, the only "enforcement" intended is a clear and legal reason to sue negligent instructors. Basically, the law is saying to "instructors for hire", "if you don't teach the wet exit and something bad happens, here's the law that makes it easy for people to sue you".
If New York could figure out a way to put up a toll booth on the Hudson River they would do it.
Anyway, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) require PFD, paddle, anchor, whistle, etc. Although not an anchor for a kayak. These are reasonable because with a paddle you can get to the shore and drop and anchor to keep from being swept out to sea.
SCDNR are the only ones to enforce these laws. The other week they shook down a small John Boat with two overweight passengers and left me alone because I was already wearing a PFD.
But Kayaks are not singled out for a different set of safety standards. Most people here know the safety issues. Most of the drownings are swimmers at the beach (rip tide) or in boats the break down and people drown trying to swim back to the landing or dock without a PFD.
I don’t want to be forced to wear one all the time either.
Kayakers are much more responsible than most other boaters and everyone treats us very well.
The "Maine Guide" thing is different than the "instructor for hire" thing.
I suspect that the primary motivation of requiring certification of guides is to provide some guarentee of quality. Tourism is a very important industry in Maine. Most of that tourism is based on outdoor recreation. If you want people to keep coming to "Vacation Land", you might want to make sure they get quality guides.
In other states, guiding (as a way to make money) is generally a very small industry. The reputation of tourism in those states does not depend on the reputation of the guides.
It would seem pretty obvious that the paddle sports industry would have no interest at-all in “manditory instruction”.
The reason is that making it manditory will keep people from buying boats.
Many people buy boats as an impulse purchase and use them rarely (or not at all). Manditory lessons would drastically reduce the number of boats they would sell.
"you're likely to have at least a minute or two to don your pfd when you know you're headed for a swim but have not yet hit the water"
In small boats, it's not uncommon to be knocked into the water without any warning. It's generally concidered next-to-useless not to be wearing the PFD when an accident occurs.
I think the CG has the "you don't have to wear it" rule because too many people would have objected to it. The other reason is it allows larger boats (eg, ferries) to carry passengers without requiring the passengers to wear PFDs.
The reason the PFD has to be on the boat is that there is at least some chance that it could be of some use if it's available.
The GC rule is a compromise. I think the CG would prefer that wearing the PFD was a requirement.
Have you ever seen Coast Guard personel on any boat less then their 75 foot patrol vessels? The crew is always wearing PFDs—even on the 47 foot rescue boats.
I once went out on a CG safeboat in AK to look at a dead gray whale that had allegedly been shot. The crew made me wear an external PFD, even though I was already wearing a mustang suit (which IS a PFD). I didn’t complain: they wore 'em too and they were already wearing those snazzy drysuits that they are issued up there.
