Something not quite right here. Alcohol consumption, liquor laws etc. are a Provincial matter in Canada, not Federal.
Methinks it's just political BS and poor reporting that is typical of the media.

 

I was reading up on this yesterday. Captas article I think is accurate.

What I read is they are changing Federal Impaired driving laws to address driving while stoned as part of the package to legalise marijuana. Part of the package is dropping human powered water craft from impaired riving, but in Ontario at least, it will still be illegal, but under the lesser charge of drinking in public.

Or something like that. I don't know all the details.

 

What's the point? That because one Darwin Award proved out the worst possible outcome of kayaking while impaired, therefore Canadian lawmakers are making a huge mistake? Or, hooray we can now openly drink that beer while fishing from the kayak on a peaceful lake at dusk? I like my nothingburger with cheese, please.

 

What could be more Canadian that cracking open a cold one while paddling a cedar strip canoe down the waters of some remote northern river. Sounds idyllic to me .

Take off ya hosehead. :laugh

Seriously … I think it makes sense to me. It’s hard to do much damage to others while paddling drunk. Nice to see a little sense coming from lawmakers.

As for the legal weed, bring it on! About time we did away with this ridiculous prohibition. Decriminalize it all, I say!

 

1st. Darwin was clearly wrong or all the idiots would have self destructed by now.

2nd. A constitutional amendment would be required to take this regulatory power away from the Provinces.


Ain't gonna happen ..... a nothing burger. Just more media hype and BS.

 

I agree with you BP. I don't fully understand how it's working. From what I read it's somehow linked to the negotiations with the provinces with the legalisation with weed. I don't fully understand it. Or maybe it's just Ontario that's changing. Pretty sure in Quebec you could already have a beer in a canoe.

 

First, section 38 of the Constitution of Canada sets out the general amending formula for changes to the Constitution. This formula requires the approval of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assemblies of at least two thirds of the provinces with at least 50% of the population of all provinces.

Quebec never agrees to anything. The Liberals are scared ****less of Quebec

 

I like this quote: "Any damn fool can navigate the world sober. It takes a really good sailor to do it drunk."
-Sir Francis Chichester while loading his boat with gin.

 

Just more proof that Darwin had it wrong.
Having been raised with an alcoholic in the family, I don't find Chichester funny.

 

I think I have it figured out. Although Provinces regulate liquor and roads, the actual charge of impaired driving is a criminal code offence. Its not a provincial offence. Maybe because of its severity. Not sure why its different. And it has been a criminal code offence for a long time. Since 1920. So, yes, I guess the Federal government can change it.

Check it out.

Criminal Code

Still though, I think Capta should have titled this thread- Kayaking while high, since that's the catalyst for the changes |)

 

Methinks the rationale behind this comes from one too many complaints filed by paddlers who HAVE gotten citations, pointing out that drunk motoring laws are there to protect society from a drunk at the helm [sic] of a 4000# missile, or a considerably larger vessel.

As opposed to paddlers, who really can't create a whole lot of damage when they bump into something in the night. Sure, they may drown themselves, but that's their right. The point is that they are pretty much unable to cause harm to anything else, so why even open the door to questioning their sobriety? Or lack thereof.

Watercops could make better use of their time looking into bigger problems.

 

I thought this thread was just to have a bit of fun. Some of you are taking this way too seriously. Have another beer and chill out — preferably in a canoe

Arcb has it right about this being a criminal offence, therefore part of the Criminal Code, which is federal. Seems a bit odd, but does not require a Constitutional amendment to change the Code.

Yes, paddlers can cause problems, but on the scale of things it’s nothing like getting behind a 3 ton pile of metal and driving it at 100 km/hr. Applying the same laws to canoeist is the perfect example of taking a good idea and extending it to its illogical conclusion.

 

With all the crazy things going on in the world and in politics, trust the most newsworthy Canadian political news to be about beer, pot and canoes.

 

There's actually something almost comforting about that; it helps keep us grounded.

We needn't spend all our time sweating the onrushing Apocalypse(s) around the corner...

 

Depends on the definition of 'drunk'.

A few drinks canoe camping in the Boundary Waters and....you could be in deep doo-doo.

 

Canoes and kayaks are no more tolerant to the vagaries of the water witch. In USCG stats for 2016 a good fourth of the fatalities were in this class of "vessel" with 2/4 for open motorboats and the last quarter all others.

Even a little booze can alter our sense of empowerment over nature. Better to be bigger than smaller. Better yet don't drink and drive, even a canoe or row boat.

 

Troy, there is always an onrushing apocalypse around the corner - just like the Galactic Battle Cruisers hovering just outside our solar system waiting to destroy life as we know it on this tiny, little planet. (Damned, I love that movie!)

Back to your regularly scheduled program - the closest I ever came to killing someone with my boat was a drunken kayaker drifting across the Havre de Grace Channel at 2 a.m. on a pitch-black Saturday night. I was returning to the marina late that night because I sat out a storm 30 miles south and when the weather finally cleared, I fired up the engine and motor sailed toward home. This person was damned near unconscious, drifting slowly with the tide and wind right in the middle of the channel, which is heavily used by barge traffic, even during the night. The only reason I didn't crush that kayak like a cockroach was I picked it up on my new 3G radar. I knew there wasn't any buoys where that signal was bouncing back from, so I eased off to starboard, shined by maglight in the general direction, and when I was about 50 feet away, I saw this idiot, sipping from his red Solo Cup. When I went by, he waved and laughed. I guess he eventually made it to shore, because I didn't hear of anyone drowning that night on the local news.

Now, I love my booze as well as the next person, but I didn't live this long without learning some hard, fast lessons about the stupid crap that people do when they're blasted out of their minds on booze.

All the best,

Gary

 

Figure this one out. I love kayaking. I hate kayakers.

Fully support the booze/kayak combo. It should come with a requirement that a kayak has the obligation to remain a min distance from all powered vessels. Moron vacationing kayakers are routinely found gazing at the 20 ton pretty boat, from the middle of the confined channel, and I've assumed they were sober.

As for the wacky tabacky, it will become legalized. Our society will ultimately regret it too.

 

It should come with a requirement that a kayak has the obligation to remain a min distance from all powered vessels.

Can not see this ever happening, not here, our freedom of navigation is too well enshrined in law, both our constitution and other statutes like the Navigable Waters Protection Act and our Crown Lands Act.

Its not possible to own a navigable water in Canada, not the surface, not the river bed underneath it, so I don't think even some private entity buying up real estate could accomplish this. Its not a privilege, its a right to be able to use the rivers. That goes way back in the countries history to protect fur routes as well as the right to hunt and fish for sustenance and to travel water for commerce.

No way the yachtie lobby group will ever have that kind of clout, especially the way young folks are running from the sport of sailing like its a burning barn. Not hard to see why either.

Not only is it protected in law, but the freedom of navigation is something considered important to the average working Canadian, regardless of their political affiliation, and there are a lot more canoeists than sailors, at all income levels.

Food for thought. Check out the photo at the start of this article.The current Prime Minister of Canada canoeing with his father who was the Prime Minister of Canada from 1968 to 1979 and again from 1980 to 1984. Good luck with that lobby.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...inion/commentary/2015/09/05/how-the-iconic-canoe-has-shaped-canada-hepburn.html

 

Based on personal encounters, driving or boating, I find general stupidity to be more hazardous than impairment: driving especially.

 

This thread is intense. I get the point about places like Toronto and Vancouver Harbour where, there is no doubt I have had some challenges with Kayaks, canoes, SUPs and racing sailboats.

But if I am 100 miles up the Coulonge River, where I can guarantee I am not going to encounter any over sized yachts which can be a serious hazard to small craft, and where folks have been having a glass of wine with their lunch since the Canadian economy was based on trading beaver pelts, whos business is that but my own.

Same thing if somebody wants to smoke a left handed cigarette. Not my business.

 

Same thing if somebody wants to smoke a left handed cigarette.

Never heard them called that. Waiting for them left handed ciggys to be sold here in La Belle Province :grin
jon

 

Love that quote! While I never get drunk while sailings would certainly help on long passages......

 

This thread needs to be sent to purgatory.

 

This change in law was part of a question on the radio game show on NPR, "Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me." Stealing a joke from the show, drinking canoers will no longer have to perform the field sobriety tests, including the alphabet test, which goes like this in Canada: Say A....eh?
B....eh?

 

in the state of Michigan you can get an OWI while floating down a river in a tube!!! I can state for a fact it's not enforced in the least!!! New laws went into effect back in 2015..

A package of stricter laws to prevent drunk boating has just taken effect in Michigan.*
The laws lower blood alcohol limits for people driving boats on Michigan waterways –*and provide stricter penalties for violators.
Tony Wickersham, the Macomb County sheriff, said the new limit has gone from .10 percent to .08 percent, *and it matches the standard for drunk driving.*
People*under 21 years of age may not operate a boat with any alcohol in their systems.
"We want to make sure that people are operating safely," said Wickersham. "And if they're going to operate a vessel, that they're not operating under the influence."*
Wickersham said most serious boating accidents involve alcohol.
The new standards also apply to snowmobiles and off-road vehicles.
"The message that we're sending to our fellow citizens and to our tourists is that we take alcohol abuse seriously in these areas," said state Rep. Dave Pagel,*R-78th District, who co-sponsored the legislation.*
Pagel said there can be a tendency to put alcohol together with recreation. But he said if you are operating a boat or off-road vehicle for recreation, *you should be subject to the same alcohol limits as if you were driving a car.

 

Another thing I forgot to add since human powered is pretty much at the top of the COLREGS right away A drunk in their kayak cuts in front of 1000' freighter it be the freighter captain that would be in trouble if there was an accident...

Bob

 

Actually, I doubt that.

He'd be inconvenienced and aggravated by the authorities until it was straightened out, and it wouldn't be any fun for him. But a ship's captain isn't expected to perform miracles; his ship is subject to the laws of physics no matter what the Inland and International Rules say.

This discussion reminds me of the poem we learned in Driver's Ed, back when I was in high school:

Here lie the remains of John O'day,
Who died defending his right of way.
His right was clear, his will was strong,
But he's just as dead as though he'd been wrong.

 

Michigan, I wonder why that would be...

About 1,500 Americans in river party wash up in Canada - CNN

 

WEll just to throw in my 2bits,..I have a 25-30 acre lake on my place but it is completely surrounded by my land so if we want to canoe and have a relaxing beer while drifting we will ,but there are a lot of lakes and cabins in our area bringing way to many power boats and partiers......here In Alberta the fish and wildlife officers as well as the RCMP patrol and enforce very well,,but although I have had to tow and impound everything from quads and golf carts to semis,, I have yet to tow a boat of any sort that is not attached to something ,.....just thinking out loud... RALPH

 

Troy you may be right.

But let's look at this another way.

you are piloting a boat and you see a kayaker on your port side about 100 yards in front of you they are going the same heading as you. What is your course of action? So you decide to pass him on his starboard but as you get closer he crosses your path, you and your lady friend are below deck playing twister and your vessel takes out the kayaker....

you did the right thing right? up to the point of not paying attention to the kayaker till your were clear of him.


Just because the freighter is bigger doesn't relieve him of his responsibilities to give way.... Plenty of actions he could take which may or may not avoid a bad outcome....

I don't drink so I have no skin in the game, and I want the government out of my like as much as possible

But how do you make a law that states no operating under the influence but if you are in a kayak in a stream you can be as drunk as you want?

Law makers are lazy much easier to say you can't operate a vessel while under the influence period...

Bob

 

Troy you may be right.

But let's look at this another way.

you are piloting a boat and you see a kayaker on your port side about 100 yards in front of you they are going the same heading as you. What is your course of action? So you decide to pass him on his starboard but as you get closer he crosses your path, you and your lady friend are below deck playing twister and your vessel takes out the kayaker....

you did the right thing right? up to the point of not paying attention to the kayaker till your were clear of him.

I'm not sure what you're arguing here. If you're overtaking a kayak, you shouldn't be below playing twister with your lady friend - regardless of whether the kayaker has been drinking.

Just because the freighter is bigger doesn't relieve him of his responsibilities to give way.... Plenty of actions he could take which may or may not avoid a bad outcome....

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here, either. If the circumstances were such that the captain had plenty of actions he could've taken, whether or not the kayaker was drunk seems to be beside the point.

I don't drink so I have no skin in the game, and I want the government out of my like as much as possible

But how do you make a law that states no operating under the influence but if you are in a kayak in a stream you can be as drunk as you want?

It's easy: you separate muscle-propelled boats from power boats and sailboats, and write the laws accordingly - just like you treat drivers and bicyclists differently.

Law makers are lazy much easier to say you can't operate a vessel while under the influence period...

Bob

The fact that it's an easier law to write doesn't make it a good or effective law. We should be able to expect at least a little effort from our legislators...