Police to limit size of raft-ups????

[DRFerron]

Interesting comments, Gary. I think those comments from DNR that I posted earlier were the opening act to the main event which was discussion of State Bill 127 by Colonel George F. Johnson IV, Superintendent of the Maryland Natural Resources Police. That second discussion was by far more interesting and more questions were asked.

In a nutshell, the bill was introduced as a result of a few events starting with Canal Days at Chesapeake City, Bumper Bash, and Aquapalooza and the phone calls from local elected officials complaining of public drunkenness, trespassing and trash left behind after Bumper Bash.

DNR hopes the bill will, among other things, encourage large groups to hire their own security to hold those people who break the law until DNR or other LE show up.

Also, lots of mays were thrown around:

DNR may require groups to set out buoys to mark their perimeter.
DNR officers may use individual discretion in enforcing the law.
When deciding whether or not to disband a group without a permit, DNR may consider the number of people on the boats in addition to the amount of boats.

[travlineasy]

Thanks Donna,

DNR has always been good with buzzwords such as: may, could, possibly, and of course, study. Glad you were there to report what happened.

Gary

[BubbleheadMd]

The synopsis of Gary's rant is:

The DNR consumes ever more money, while providing ever fewer services, but ever more regulations with no positive result.

I'm inclined to agree, and disappointed. I have a list of questions and statements ready to go, if there's another public hearing on the matter. If this ridiculous bill gets passed, good luck enforcing it. Since they only have 277 officers for the entire Bay, I'll make damn sure that I'm somewhere that they aren't.

Edit: I'm not seeing when the next hearing is. If anyone knows, please post it up here.

[SVAuspicious]

I'm meeting with a small group this evening to advice MD State Senator Simonaire. We're working hard to come up with something reasonable.

I'm there on behalf of SSCA. Boat/US wasn't in the room at the committee meeting so haven't been invited, but I'm coordinating with them to try and get their input.

[wingNwing]

The rule (as proposed as I understand it) doesn't mesh with the stated objective. If the concern is that they need to deploy LEO to cover these events, then they should want "notification" that the event is happening, not requests for permission to hold the event? And that stuff about how they "may" break up gatherings, "may" require buoys, etc etc ... the intent is to give them discretion, but at the cost of transparency (or just some officer having a bad day)? Shouldn't rules apply to all? And how would it play out in practice if, say, someone is safely anchored, and pours a glass of wine, and THEN an officer comes by and tells them to break it up and move their boat? Lots to work out here, seems like they're making it up as they go along.

Dave, many thanx to you and Sen Simonaire for your energy to try and get this right. Donna, thanx for keeping us in the loop on your meetings as well.

[DRFerron]

Originally Posted by wingNwing

And how would it play out in practice if, say, someone is safely anchored, and pours a glass of wine, and THEN an officer comes by and tells them to break it up and move their boat?

Good point. The last time I was on a CG patrol at the 4 July fireworks in Philadelphia, each boat the CG found with an operator under the influence was taken into tow. They spent a bit of time going back and forth.

[bandaidmd]

Update,
Bumper Bash bill hits rough waters • Top Stories (www.HometownAnnapolis.com - The Capital)

[Minnewaska]

Originally Posted by bandaidmd

Update,
Bumper Bash bill hits rough waters • Top Stories (www.HometownAnnapolis.com - The Capital)

"You can't legislate good judgement".

I agree on this issue.

I can't help but add for the sake of other issues, you can't seem to elect it either.

[SVAuspicious]

Originally Posted by bandaidmd

Update

Way out of date. Since then there have been a number of meetings and progress has been made. MD State Simonaire sponsored a community action group meeting that included boating groups and the sponsor of Bumper Bash as well as community groups from the surrounding area and DNR. I met with NRP on behalf of SSCA.

NRP feels strongly about the issue and they make a reasonable case. I don't like it a lot but I think they have taken input in good faith and the amendments released Tuesday this week are better. SSCA at least has two remaining issues and we are working hard to come to agreement with NRP and the MD State Senate Committee.

Of all the people reading this thread, and those who have posted, only two people have contacted me to offer to help, one of whom is a friend of mine and an active volunteer with CGAux and CBYCA. One other that I am aware of has written to protest the bill. No one has appeared at any of the venues to discuss the wording or offer an opinion.

Don't like the bill? At least join SSCA so you're represented by an organization that takes action in your interests.

[jimjazzdad]

As a Canadian on the outside looking in, I can say I don't know much about US Constitutional law, but as my old dad used to say "With every right comes a responsibility".

It seems that the folks here on the forum are taking their responsibities seriously - talking to their elected officals, etc. but clearly the folks at the Bumper Bash or whatever started all this were not taking enough responsibility for their actions. Thats when law abiding citizens and/or law enforcement should become involved, preferably on a case by case basis.