Limit of responsibility to assist?

[Sunbird22358]

The only thing I would caution you about is that it is not always the "safest" thing to give someone a compass course based on your own boat's compass, or fro ma plotted course on a chart. The "danger" is that yo udo not know how accurate their compass is, and in this case it sounds like the "boaters" did not really have firm grasp on how to read the compass in the first place. A few degrees off on their compass (Remember, Deviation is different for every boat due to the various magnetic forces on that boat) and they could easily miss the island they were heading for. One thing, you could always just tell them to head due East, that would take them beck to shore and safety until they took a course in basic coastal navigation?

That said, I figure that I too woukd have bee nvery concerned about those two. and probably would have done most of the same things that yo udid to help them. One additional thought, it might have been worth a call (on cell phone if possible for privacy) to the local USCG station or unit to alert them to the situation. Not ask them to "rescue" these two who had no business out where they were, but just to give the USCG a "heads up" to what you observed. That way the USCG could keep an eye out for this boat, while out on patrol, they would most likey alert any USCGAUX Operational Facilities patroling that area as well, again... not to terminate the voyage, but just be aware of their situation. That way if something DID happen and they got "lost", the USCG would have a place to start the search and have a description of the boat. Most likely, if these two were as clueless as you say, they probably would not have let anyone know where they were going and when they planned to return (in other words, leave a "Float-Plan" with someone on shore) so no one would know they were "missing" and overdue until it was too late.

 

[Kings Gambit]

The only thing I would caution you about is that it is not always the "safest" thing to give someone a compass course based on your own boat's compass, or fro ma plotted course on a chart. The "danger" is that yo udo not know how accurate their compass is, and in this case it sounds like the "boaters" did not really have firm grasp on how to read the compass in the first place. A few degrees off on their compass (Remember, Deviation is different for every boat due to the various magnetic forces on that boat) and they could easily miss the island they were heading for. One thing, you could always just tell them to head due East, that would take them back to shore and safety until they took a course in basic coastal navigation?

That said, I figure that I too would have been very concerned about those two and probably would have done most of the same things that you did to help them. One additional thought, it might have been worth a call (on cell phone if possible for privacy) to the local USCG station or unit to alert them to the situation. Not ask them to "rescue" these two who had no business out where they were, but just to give the USCG a "heads up" to what you observed. That way the USCG could keep an eye out for this boat, while out on patrol, they would most likey alert any USCGAUX Operational Facilities patroling that area as well, again... not to terminate the voyage, but just be aware of their situation. That way if something DID happen and they got "lost", the USCG would have a place to start the search and have a description of the boat. Most likely, if these two were as clueless as you say, they probably would not have let anyone know where they were going and when they planned to return (in other words, leave a "Float-Plan" with someone on shore) so no one would know they were "missing" and overdue until it was too late.

Thanks, Sunbird. I thought of that too about compass deviation, but could not do anything about it. There was the chance that since they got lost to begin with, their compass might have been off at the get-go. However, I vaguely recall that I took a bearing on them departing using my hand-bearing compass, and that they apparently were on course toward the west end, at least initially. My main idea was to get them close enough in the direction of Catalina Island to be able to see it. Regarding apprising/reporting to the CG--no cell phone service out there. I would have to hail in the open which I did not feel I should do, they both being adults on their own business, etc. Now, if I thought a report was called for, I think I would try to raise Sector Los Angeles using DSC directly to the sector's MMSI number, which I did not have then, but do now!!

 

[Siamese]

You were nicer to them than I would have been. I'd have told them where they were, and then called it quits when it became clear how ill-prepared they were.

Previous poster argued that those people were ignorant, but not stupid. I'd argue that they were both. If you're going to participate in an activity with inherent risk, LEARN ENOUGH TO BE SAFE BEFORE YOU VENTURE OUT. Failing to do that marks you as stupid.

The best possible advice for this guy would have been, "because you don't know where you are, can't navigate, can't use a radio, and lack basic boating skills and knowledge, you're a hazard to yourself, your passenger, and other boaters. I can tell you where you are right now, and I'll instruct you on how to return directly home, but I won't be a part of prolonging your time on the water".

Information has never been easier to obtain than it is now. If that guy was just a little less stupid, he might have enough intelligence to be ashamed of himself.

 

[Kermit]

You were nicer to them than I would have been. I'd have told them where they were, and then called it quits when it became clear how ill-prepared they were.

Previous poster argued that those people were ignorant, but not stupid. I'd argue that they were both. If you're going to participate in an activity with inherent risk, LEARN ENOUGH TO BE SAFE BEFORE YOU VENTURE OUT. Failing to do that marks you as stupid.

The best possible advice for this guy would have been, "because you don't know where you are, can't navigate, can't use a radio, and lack basic boating skills and knowledge, you're a hazard to yourself, your passenger, and other boaters. I can tell you where you are right now, and I'll instruct you on how to return directly home, but I won't be a part of prolonging your time on the water".

Information has never been easier to obtain than it is now. If that guy was just a little less stupid, he might have enough intelligence to be ashamed of himself.

Wow. I hope you never make a mistake. And when I make my next mistake I hope someone other than you is there to help me through it. I think Mr. Gambit did the right thing.

 

[capta]

I won't tell someone where to anchor, just how much scope I have out, though our collective frowns have seemed, at times, enough to get folks to rethink their intentions of anchoring way too close.
I will take anybody off a vessel that may present a danger to those aboard, but I will very, very rarely tow another vessel with my own boat. I will tow or physically assist another vessel, using my Zodiac, if I believe I can succeed. I will not attempt to help if I believe that my failure will put them in more dire circumstances than they were in before I attempted to help. I will stand by another vessel until professional help arrives, if asked.
If asked, we often suggest good places to go and for those who actually enjoy the sailing, the special places like North Sound, Antigua that are really fun to sail into and out of. Challenging, but fun. If someone asks, we'll share good places to eat and off the beaten path anchorages. Why volunteer information if you aren't asked, because it seems they don't care to know, anyway? You can lead a horse to water, yada, yada, yada...
I do not loan tools, though I may bring them to someone's boat and help them out with their problem., if I can. I have offered water to those without a watermaker, a few times.
As far as the limit of responsibility to help, there is a tradition, if not a mandate, to do whatever one can without risking one's own vessel or crew irresponsibly, to save the lives of others at sea, but there is no mandate to save the equipment. However, it is the responsibility of those needing rescue to ask for it. You cannot force others to abandon their vessel, no mater the circumstances, if they do not choose to do so.

 

[IH82BL8]

We aren't born knowing these things, and assertions that kids like this are stupid and irresponsible are unfair at best.

I respectfully disagree. Even I was responsible enough to take a Safe Boating course before I began my boating career and that was long before I became owner/skipper. These folks may have been under the mistaken assumption that because boaters make boating look easy, all a boater needs is a little intuition. I often ask myself before I begin a new venture, "How can this go wrong and how do I go about preventing that?" In addition to their own safety, they also need to be educated on their responsibilities to other boaters on the water. The fact that there's "no line down the middle of the water" doesn't mean it a free-for-all out there.

 

[pmikolon]

Former Coast Guard SAR coxswain checking in. There were many times when I was flagged down and asked for directions to a certain rig, landmark. or a course to steer. We were not permitted to give courses or directions nor would we provide a chart to look at. I often thought this was a bad policy but it was explained to me that if we provided a course to steer and the person ran aground we could be held liable for damage or injury. And if the boater looked at our chart and we were not up to date on NTM chart updates and the boater hit a submerged object in which an NTM had been posted then we would be liable as well. And this made sense as we had not calibrated the boaters compass or could verify the working order of any navigation or electronics. In these instances I would try to get a feel for the boaters skill level and then offer either a tow or an escort to the channel. The only problem I had was towing in a distressed vessel and the owner/operator was curious as to why we were taking him to port A when he felt we should be taking him to port B which is where he felt he was a couple miles from. I showed him the chart and Loran position where we picked him up and showed him that he was about sixty miles from where he thought he was at which point he did not believe me until we had the jetties of port A in sight. The after two boarding was fun with this one.

 

[Kings Gambit]

Former Coast Guard SAR coxswain checking in. There were many times when I was flagged down and asked for directions to a certain rig, landmark. or a course to steer. We were not permitted to give courses or directions nor would we provide a chart to look at. I often thought this was a bad policy but it was explained to me that if we provided a course to steer and the person ran aground we could be held liable for damage or injury. And if the boater looked at our chart and we were not up to date on NTM chart updates and the boater hit a submerged object in which an NTM had been posted then we would be liable as well. And this made sense as we had not calibrated the boaters compass or could verify the working order of any navigation or electronics. In these instances I would try to get a feel for the boaters skill level and then offer either a tow or an escort to the channel. The only problem I had was towing in a distressed vessel and the owner/operator was curious as to why we were taking him to port A when he felt we should be taking him to port B which is where he felt he was a couple miles from. I showed him the chart and Loran position where we picked him up and showed him that he was about sixty miles from where he thought he was at which point he did not believe me until we had the jetties of port A in sight. The after two boarding was fun with this one.

From the above, I take it that the answer to my original question is that I had no obligation "to render assistance" to the two hapless boaters who were lost at sea but not in immediate danger of sinking or experiencing a medical emergency, etc. Because assistance in that circumstance meant giving advice or direction, the following of which could lead to a second unhappy situation, perhaps one exacerbating the first. As people have noted, there's legal and then there's ethical. I suppose when part of an institution, like the USCG, there has to be an SOP or the higher-ups who bear ultimate responsibility would never know what might/could occur in a given encounter with other members, and the subsequent consequences thereof. As an individual boater/skipper there is no one higher (except perhaps the "Admiral") so you evaluate your own exposure to risk, etc., and bear the consequences if any. I suppose in response to the question of "Where's Catalina Island?", the best (most prudent) answer might have been "east", which is a true statement more or less. To the question of "Is it safe to anchor here?", the most prudent answer would have been "Can't say for sure", and then go below for din din.

 

[Calif. Ted]

"Is it safe to anchor here?" or maybe "sometimes".

 

[Kermit]

Similar to "Does your dog bite?" Although my dog has never bitten anyone I never say no.

 

[Stu Jackson]

KG, you did the right things. A lot of the responses seemed to have gotten into minutia, and different than perhaps what you asked.

Yup, those bozos sure had issues. If it was me, I might have asked them "How'd you even get this far?"

But you were helpful, respectful, not demeaning and gave them useful advice.

What more could anyone ask for?

zeehag and others have mentioned a number of times: "treat others as you yourself would want to be treated."

You did that and more.

"Paying it forward" is part of boating, and life. One never knows when it's gonna come around.

Good for you.

 

[capta]

To the question of "Is it safe to anchor here?".

Again, this is a question you couldn't possibly answer for someone else. Do they have proper anchor tackle? Do they know how to safely anchor, have they ever heard of scope, etc? It isn't about the liability; I live outside the litigious USA, but not having enough information to answer the question satisfactorily.

 

[Kings Gambit]

"Is it safe to anchor here?" or maybe "sometimes".

In this case, I think my alternative answer would be better. When the guy asked: "Is it safe to anchor here?"; he really meant "Is it safe for US to anchor here?" To which I could not say for sure. That is, "what kind of anchor to you have?, how much chain?, how much nylon rode?, do you know how to set an anchor?, do you have chaffing gear?, what is the condition of your nylon?"...etc.; a myriad of questions--so I really would not be able to say for sure.

 

[Jackdaw]

Guys, it's WAY easy to overthink this sitting on shore in front of your PC.

When on the water:
---------------------------
Look at the particular situation you are faced with.
Understand the ramifications
Do the right thing.

 

[njlarry]

Gambit, now you disappoint me. I am amused by some of the silly amateur sea lawyer opinions here. Life is not a court of law. Greater minds than mine have put that moral law trumps legal law. Putting good samaritan laws aside, boaters who refuse to help others are themselves, a major danger to all. Suppose a major SAR in bad weather had to launched for those two. We do not boat in a vacuum anymore than we live in a vacuum. Maybe there will be day when "boat safety"-confiscation-is needed because too many boaters have been hurt. I have yet to meet a man who was perfect and never had a lapse of judgement. That includes myself and experience blue water sailor friends. Not to give information that puts another at risk is wrong. To hold that one can't answer because one does not know ALL the facts is childish and absurd. One never knows ALL the facts, not even what time it is. You will never be able to say anything for sure. So I guess one person can never answer any question of another person. So why do we have this forum? No one knows what tools I have or my skill level but thankfully many are glad to answer my dumb questions without fear. Unfortunately too many cover your *** folks live in constant fear. I recently stopped to help a young lady change a flat tire. She wanted to pay me, told her forget it, I have a daughter her age and hope someone would do the same for her. She told she had recently lost her dad. Someone wants to sue me because their tire came off. Great, get in line. Fear is not how I choose to live.
Let's not be silly, you did the right thing the first time.
Sorry for the rant. That's all I have to say.

 

[frankies56]

Always remember that, To be old and wise you must first be young and stupid, we are boaters whether young or masters of the sea, we must help anyone that needs help, I dont think that is a question that has to be asked, be the better person and help the helpless, who know they might learn from there mistakes.and maybe they will help someone in the future.

 

[jibes138]

Why not use the old saying from up in Maine "Cayn't git ther from heyah." If I didn't spell it right maybe MaineSail can correct it.
I had a similar experience but a lot more hazardous, but still not a distress situation depending on your definition of "distress."
A 17 foot bowrider with a guy, his wife, and two young kids aboard approached me in Block Island sound in pea soup fog. I was near the Watch Hill pass at the time. The guy asked me "which way to the beach?" I asked if he had a compass and he said "no." In pea soup fog without a compass there was no ability to navigate and if the guy headed south by mistake he was heading to either South America or maybe Antarctica. This whole family was at risk if the boat ran out of gas. Also in danger of being run over by a larger boat as a lot of shipping transits that area and any radar signature would have been minimal if at all. Another hazard was lots of rock reefs in the area of Watch Hill pass. I gave him a small hand bearing compass and told him head north where he would run into Napatree point beach, seas were calm so there was low risk of waves swamping him. Another example of stupidity and a Darwin award potential candidate.

 

[CarlN]

I am not an attorney, but my understanding is that there is very broad liability protection in the US and Canada under Good Samaritan laws for helping in this situation. Many other countries have even stronger "duty to rescue" laws. We (and our governments) want bystanders to render aid without hesitation. As long as you don't accept money, are not a presumed expert (e.g. Coast Guard), and act in good faith there is nothing to worry about. Is it possible that something bad could happen? Sure. And it's also possible you could be hit by a meteor. Life is too short for such worries.

If you still worry about such small odds, add an umbrella liability policy to an existing policy. They are a few hundred dollars - the insurance companies don't have to charge much because this stuff just doesn't happen outside of urban legend.

How would you feel if you didn't help and read later that a child drowned?

 

[williamtl]

I am an attorney, but no attorney client relationship is being established by this post.

I'm speaking specifically from a United States point of view. A "duty to rescue" or "duty to aide" scenario did not exist in the OPs statement. So, it doesn't apply. Well, generally. Maybe. This would be such a great law school exam question. Folks have weighed in with their opinions on what the OP should or shouldn't have done in this situation and I'm not going to fan those flames with my opinion.

However, there have been several misstatements and confusing items brought up regarding "duty to rescue" so I hope to clarify a bit.

The duty to rescue is part of tort law, and specifically a tort known as negligence. Generally, in the USA, there is no duty to rescue. Some readers may be surprised to learn that this is a state by state decision. So, each state may be different. However, most have come to the same conclusion with regards to a negligence - duty to rescue.

I found a case in Hawai'i where the judge stated the general rule and the major exception well. It also provides the legal standard for the USCG (spoiler alert - they have the same duty as you and I!):
"The issue of negligence in the context of a rescue of a person at sea is well developed by federal admiralty law. It is clearly settled under admiralty law that the Coast Guard does not have a duty to rescue 884 F.2d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 1989). "The Coast Guard is not held to any higher standard of care in its rescue operations than a private person." Wright v. United States, 700 F.Supp. 490, 494 (N.D.Cal.1988). "[A] rescuer will be held liable only (1) for negligent conduct that worsens the position of the victim or (2) for reckless and wanton conduct in performing the rescue." Berg, 759 F.2d at 1430. The liability of a rescuer of a person at sea is well developed under admiralty law.

Interestingly, even though the court says this is well established in "federal admiralty law" I think it is hedging a bit. But, that my friends is a much larger discussion and is totally off topic.

 

[Bob J.]

I'm not sure why one would even question helping out someone especially to ensure their safety?
We were all inexperienced boaters once upon a time.