Boater vs. PWC Conflict Feedback Page 4

Boaters vs. PWCs: Can Some Answers Be Found
in Prior Recreational Conflict Research? A Pilot Paper
Feedback Page 4

This page continues the publication of responses to the PWC conflict article.

Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998
From: Drew 
Newsgroups: rec.boats
Subject: Re: Boats vs. PWC Conflict Research Paper

Harry Krause wrote:
> 
> Drew wrote:
> >
> > Harry Krause wrote:
> >
> > > Uh huh. For every open header V8 Boat there are, what, 5000 PWCs.
> >
> > And that number is getting larger. Isn't that the *real* problem that
> > some conventional boaters have?
> >
> > Thanks, Harrry, for enlightening us.
> >
> > -Drew
> 
> Don't think so. The "real" problem is that PWC's annoy just about everyone else
> on the water.
> 

Sorry Harry.
Don't buy it. I've been waiting a *looong* time to "catch" you saying
this. You may have a couple of anti-PWC arguments- some hold water, some
don't. But the only motivation you have is your animosity towards the
PWC as your market share dwindles and the PWC share soars.
Unfortunately, Harry, there will continue to be more and more PWC on the
water. As boaters we need to work together to solve the problems the
newbie's bring to our areas. The PWC crowd is making an effort- are you?

Here's the cold hard truth:
*PWCs are here to stay and are becoming more and more popular. 
*PWC's make boating easily accesible and affordable for alot of folks. 
Thus more and more people shall opt for the Sea Doo versus the  
Mastercraft.
*The number of new boaters will continue to climb (not neccesarily due 
to the PWC revolution, BTW) and the waterways will become more crowded.
 There will be more idiots and irresponsible operators.
*NOW is the time to act. PWC'ers support minimum ages, environmentally
friendly power sources, education, and appropriate restriction to
certain areas (swimming,  wildlife sanctuaries, etc.)

All boaters need to agree on the above and work for solutions instead of
crying about the problems!!

So quit your whining and belly-aching already. PWC are here to stay, and
you need to accept that fact, stay off the water,  or get your
prescription refilled. We need to work together.

I hate rambling, but the "PWC/Boater Conflict Paper" drew a few
parallels that apply to the PWC revolution. Specifically, I think the
author referred to the reception conventional downhill skiers gave the
snowboarders- very similar to what is happening here. Although many
major ski resorts did NOT allow snowboards, some allowed snowboards in
certain areas. As snowboard popularity grew (see the eerie similariy
yet?) these resorts opened up trails. Then they opened up mountains!
Hell, snowboarding is now an Olympic event!!! (insert eerie music here)

Harry, you and your fellow "tunnel vision" stricken compadres can B&M
all you want. It's just not healthy. We are all big boys and girls here,
and you know what to do if you see a boater acting up. I don't need to
explain that here (no, potato cannons are not the answer).

Accept the fact that PWC's are here to stay, and growing in popularity.
We all need to work together to ensure that our mutual resources are
protected for all to enjoy safely and responsibly.

BTW,
I am 30 years old. I have a very nice little white collar job. I am
considered "upper middle" class. I wanted to purchase a boat.
When I went looking for a boat I was contemplating  purchasing a ski
boat or a PWC. With my lucrative schedule and limited time, I opted for
the PWC. Ease of operation/maintenece- hell, I could throw it in the
water after work, even if I stayed late! Fun factor is high! Bang for
the buck is high! Excellent choice by me. Why am I telling you this?
Because thousands and thousands of people like me are doing it, and will
continue to do EXACTLY what I did.

Sorry.

Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 From: Paul Kamen Newsgroups: rec.boats Subject: Re: Boats vs. PWC Conflict Research Paper Some comments on the paper itself: 1) The paper is a very useful compilation of references and summaries. 2) The conclusions don't really follow from the data compiled. The data certainly suggest some of those conclusions, but if I read it correctly there was no PWC-specific information collected to establish how the PWC controversies might relate to the other examples of recreational conflicts discussed. 3) The animated "No" symbol over the PWC icon really is a bit imflamatory. Suggest replacing the PWC in one of the animations with a canoe or sailboat or windsurfer, to balance the first impression. Or leave the "No" symbol on and have the animation scroll through all the various boat types underneath it. 4) The PWC versus conventional powerboat dimension appears to be the only one considered. But it's really a multi-dimensional problem. PWC versus human powered vessels, for example, might follow the snowmobile versus cross country skiing model much more closely. PWC versus sailboards might yield a very different dynamic, PWC versus powered fishing boats or water skiers might be different again. 5) The step that appears to be conspicuously missing is applying the methodology of the earlier studies to the groups under study here. The same sets of complimentary questions need to be asked of the various paired user groups: PWC/canoe, PWC/small sailboat, PWC/sailboard, PWC/fishing boat, PWC/swimmer, PWC/waterfront property owner, and so on. Interesting differentiations might appear between racing and non-racing PWC and racing and non-racing sailboats and sailboards. As the paper stands, I would have to call it a "survey paper" rather than new research. 6) It was surprising to see no mention of the surfer/swimmer conflict, ultimately resolved by designating certain beaches for surfing and prohibiting surfing from swimming beaches. Also conspicuously absent are references on the more general powerboat/sailboat issue, resolved in some locations with powerboat bans or speed/horsepower limits. Presumably there was simply no good published research available in these areas, but there should be a statement to that effect if that is the case. 7) It was surprising to see the extreme disparity in education level between the snowmobiler and the cross-country skier. (3.6% college graduate versus 40%!) This suggests other social forces at work independent of the recreational equipment being used, if the statistic is really representative. Again, datas from the user groups at issue here need to be collected before parallels can be drawn. Thanx for doing the compilation, let's hope it's a starting point for some more detailed work that can really answer some questions. "Call me Fishmeal" ************************************** Date: Fri, 6 Feb 1998 From: Gary Polson Newsgroups: rec.boats Subject: Re: Boats vs. PWC Conflict Research Paper These comments are in regards to a Boaters vs. PWCs paper on RBBI at: http://www.virtualpet.com/rbbi/white/conflict/conflict.htm First, thank you very much for being one of the very few "constructive comments" about the paper. Most were just about like putting your head in a hornets nest. Paul Kamen wrote: > Some comments on the paper itself: > > 1) The paper is a very useful compilation of references and summaries. Thank you for noticing. I'm not sure anybody else did. > 2) The conclusions don't really follow from the data compiled. The data > certainly suggest some of those conclusions, but if I read it correctly > there was no PWC-specific information collected to establish how the PWC > controversies might relate to the other examples of recreational conflicts > discussed. You are correct. There was no PWC specific information collected. The ideas are just inferences from the other research. > 3) The animated "No" symbol over the PWC icon really is a bit > imflamatory. Suggest replacing the PWC in one of the animations with a > canoe or sailboat or windsurfer, to balance the first impression. Or leave > the "No" symbol on and have the animation scroll through all the various > boat types underneath it. The animated symbol was an attempt to show a "welcome PWC" attitude and a "no PWC" attitude - to illustrate the conflict. It did not accomplish its purpose since most people thought it was a flashing "no PWC" sign. I have just changed the sign and the timing to hopefully better accomplish its intended purpose. > 4) The PWC versus conventional powerboat dimension appears to be the only > one considered. But it's really a multi-dimensional problem. PWC versus > human powered vessels, for example, might follow the snowmobile versus > cross country skiing model much more closely. PWC versus sailboards might > yield a very different dynamic, PWC versus powered fishing boats or water > skiers might be different again. Agreed, there is a need for research in these areas. The paper was just trying to draw attention to the general area. Hopefully some college master and PHD students will pick up on this field. Maybe major organizations and companies involved could provide some funding? The intent of the paper was to lay some groundwork that could then be built upon. > 5) The step that appears to be conspicuously missing is applying the > methodology of the earlier studies to the groups under study here. The > same sets of complimentary questions need to be asked of the various > paired user groups: PWC/canoe, PWC/small sailboat, PWC/sailboard, > PWC/fishing boat, PWC/swimmer, PWC/waterfront property owner, and so on. > Interesting differentiations might appear between racing and non-racing > PWC and racing and non-racing sailboats and sailboards. As the paper > stands, I would have to call it a "survey paper" rather than new > research. See my response to #4. Additionally I retitled the paper to: "Boaters vs. PWCs: Can Some Answers Be Found in Prior Recreational Conflict Research? A Pilot Paper" Thats a "mouthfull" but I think it better illustrates what I was trying to do and also fits with your "survery paper" idea. > 6) It was surprising to see no mention of the surfer/swimmer conflict, > ultimately resolved by designating certain beaches for surfing and > prohibiting surfing from swimming beaches. Also conspicuously absent are > references on the more general powerboat/sailboat issue, resolved in some > locations with powerboat bans or speed/horsepower limits. Presumably there > was simply no good published research available in these areas, but there > should be a statement to that effect if that is the case. I added surfer/swimmers and motor boat/sailboats to the list of conflicts at the end of the paper. > 7) It was surprising to see the extreme disparity in education level > between the snowmobiler and the cross-country skier. (3.6% college > graduate versus 40%!) This suggests other social forces at work > independent of the recreational equipment being used, if the statistic is > really representative. Again, datas from the user groups at issue here > need to be collected before parallels can be drawn. Thank you for recognizing the social forces issue. I was "whipped" for even bringing it up over in the jetski newsgroup. > Thanx for doing the compilation, let's hope it's a starting point for > some more detailed work that can really answer some questions. > > fishmeal You are very welcome, thank you for the excellent suggestions. gary

Return to Boaters vs. PWCs Page

Return to Recreational Boat Building Industry Home Page