# Sad story from SF Lightship Race



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

The boat was a Cheoy Lee Offshore-31 ketch, doublehand daytime race in rough conditions, three dozen boats competing, this one went missing on the way back, one man recovered, one apparently lost;

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/16/MNHDVL22R.DTL&tsp=1

Very sad, condolences to the family.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Interesting quote from the CG.
*"Racing is a thrill sport, and they went out in challenging conditions,"*

Thrill sport??


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

It's worse than I said, both men lost, one body recovered, boat pieces found ashore.

I'd cut the Coast Guard guy quoted a bit of slack, he probably had a microphone thrust at him. Racing isn't wholly a "thrill" sport, but the challenge of sailor and boat against weather (reportedly 30 knots and up to 16' seas here) isn't exactly dull either. The thrill isn't why most of us do it, but its equivalent (some better synonym) is definitely there. So is the risk of casualty in heavy weather.

But again, condolences to both families.


----------



## timebandit (Sep 18, 2002)

I do not think I would race with that org.


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

timebandit said:


> I do not think I would race with that org.


Why do you say that?


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

From 'Lectronic Latitiude

*Two Sailors Lost During DHL Race*

_March 17, 2008 - San Francisco_
The local sailing community is in a state of shock over the news that two sailors were lost during Saturday's Doublehanded Lightship Race. Kirby Gale, 67, and Anthony Harrow, 72, were on the way home from the Lightbucket aboard Gale's ketch-rigged Cheoy Lee Offshore 31 _Daisy_ when they simply disappeared.
As noted in the race report above, conditions were rough for this year's DHL - high winds and big seas. According to other racers, _Daisy_ made it out to and around the Lightbucket in company with the last few boats. But they never made it back. Possibly the last sighting of the boat was from competitors aboard a similarly-rated boat who recall glimpsing back now and then check if a sail behind them was getting any closer. "Then, about six or seven miles out, we looked and the sail was gone," says Rob Tryon, skipper of Aaron Dunlap's Valiant 32 _Feolena._ "We thought it was because we were sailing faster."
_Feolena_ finished about 2:45, leaving only _Daisy_ still unaccounted for. When she had not finished by the race deadline of 5 p.m., nor responded to repeated calls on VHF, the Coast Guard was contacted. They began a search Saturday night that continued through Sunday. About midmorning, they found "debris that fit the description of _Daisy_" near her last estimated position. About an hour later, the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office reported they had discovered the body of Harrow, still wearing his lifejacket, in a tidepool near Half Moon Bay. At this writing, Gale's body had not been found. The search was suspended at 6 p.m. Sunday.
What happened to _Daisy_ and her crew remains a mystery. No distress beacon was activated, there was no 911 cellphone call, no _mayday_ was made by radio. (It's unknown whether _Daisy_ had an EPIRB aboard, but she did have a working VHF when she checked in with the race committee before the start). Authorities also say that, based on inspection of the debris, they do not believe _Daisy_ collided with another vessel, although that couldn't be ruled out.

Latitude 38 - The West's Premier Sailing & Marine Magazine


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

*Sad story from SF lightship race*

I have sailed and fished out of San Francisco for many years. Going out the ship channel during rough conditions can be a truly frightening experience. Waves breaking over the bar can be easily twice the height of the prevailing seas. My guess is that they were either run down by a ship or they got too close to the edge of the channel and were rolled by a big breaker. Years ago I made some unwiswe decisions related to going out when it was rough. I am lucky to have survived. It did cause me to think again, luckly I am still here.

Paul Thomas


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Yep, getting rolled under out there and slamming the mast into the shoals while still being pounded by breakers would do a boat in. This appears to be an instance of a slow boat getting caught out. The winds didn't REALLY come up until most of the other boats had made it in. Unfortunate.


----------



## bestfriend (Sep 26, 2006)

For those of you interested, here is a website that describes the SF bar.

The San Francisco Bar | Coastside Fishing Club

The southern bar is where you see all the photos of the coast guard taking their boats head on into the breakers. Straight off ocean beach. It is also worth note that the bay channels are dredged and dumped north of the south bar, the northern area of ocean beach, so there are shallows there too.


----------



## Alden68 (Mar 21, 2007)

wow - thanks BF. I have never read anything on the SF bar befor. Does no sound llike fun.


----------



## buckeyesailor (Mar 9, 2008)

I agree Dabnis,
I used to live on Alameda while in Diving School and that water is nothing to mess with....I nearly drowned there myself once....'cept by the grace of God alone.
Willy


----------



## Lion35 (Sep 28, 2007)

Very sad, my condolences to the friends and families.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

Ditto, BF, thanks, I didn't realize the SF bar is that far offshore, then I googled a chart. What you posted makes this sound like a very tough area in a strong NW wind and a strong ebb tide, which is what Daisy and her crew, may they rest in peace, experienced.

I sailed SF Bay once, as crew in a race series. I thought the Bay was treacherous, but it looks like the area just off the ship channel, where the "horseshoe"-shaped shoal is, is even worse.


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

The SF bar is often underestimated; even on the NOAA wind/wave reports. I don't know exactly what the conditions were because we did not go out; but in regards to the predicted wind/wave 11-14ft seas every 11s IIRC would have made it treacherous on the SF bar. The shipping channel provides little relief from the swell; it is not what you would call "deep water" and the swell coming across the bar is still steep and can be "confused" due to the horse-shoe shape of the bar itself. There -may- be an area inside the horse-shoe where the swell becomes focused/amplified due to the shape of the bar.

What I don't quite understand is why the race was not sent to one of the pre-determined alternate courses. It seems like the conditions were bordering on unsafe and err on the side of caution would be to stay in the bay or postpone. It also seems like the season is a bit early to hold a race out the gate double-handed; the PNW storm season is not quite over yet. I'm not saying that IYC is fully responsible; each skipper must make the decision to go out or not based on their own assessment of the conditions, vessel, and crew.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Unfortunately, many harbors have serious issues with bars causing nasty conditions to pop up without much warning. My thoughts go out to the families of the sailors lost in this case.


----------



## bestfriend (Sep 26, 2006)

KeelHaulin said:


> The SF bar is often underestimated; even on the NOAA wind/wave reports. I don't know exactly what the conditions were because we did not go out; but in regards to the predicted wind/wave 11-14ft seas every 11s IIRC would have made it treacherous on the SF bar. The shipping channel provides little relief from the swell; it is not what you would call "deep water" and the swell coming across the bar is still steep and can be "confused" due to the horse-shoe shape of the bar itself. There -may- be an area inside the horse-shoe where the swell becomes focused/amplified due to the shape of the bar.
> 
> What I don't quite understand is why the race was not sent to one of the pre-determined alternate courses. It seems like the conditions were bordering on unsafe and err on the side of caution would be to stay in the bay or postpone. It also seems like the season is a bit early to hold a race out the gate double-handed; the PNW storm season is not quite over yet. I'm not saying that IYC is fully responsible; each skipper must make the decision to go out or not based on their own assessment of the conditions, vessel, and crew.


Sometimes I wonder about that buoy out there and the forecasts. I use every source of information possible to go surfing, and it seems like the days I just go and look tend to be the best days. As I said in the college thread, you just never know. The day that Jim Gray went out, and never returned, was supposed to be even calmer. Experience, a little bit of fear, a little bit of luck, and a whole lot of respect for the Ocean.


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Bestfriend,

Your link describes the gate perfectly, especially about the supposed south channel. I saw , from shore, a large sailbout rollede in the breakers there. Another place to avoid is between the south tower of the bridge and Fort Point. There was a video on U Tube of a sailboat being rolled there, but I can't find it now. Perhaps someone knows about it?

Paul T


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

When we planned the delivery of my boat to San Diego early last Spring, we focused on two places along the west coast. The first was was getting out of the SF Bay, and the other was Pt. Conception. We planned to get under the Golden Gate bridge on the slack tide before it ebbed, and watched weather conditions for the best day. Even under those conditions, as soon as we passed under the GG bridge seaward, we found the water full of stong up wellings until we got outside of the Potato Patch (a commonly used name for the SF bar). The Potato Patch is a horse shoe shapped bar (or reef), that completely surrounds the entrance to the SF bay. There is a natural southern pass through the reef, but it should not be used accept on the most waveless days, and I would think on a high tide. Commercial ships only use the main center channel along with recreational boats, and care must be taken when sharing this channel...especially on foggy days. Personally I wouldn't have tried the channel in the conditions of that race, but I guess I'm not that hard core.


----------



## bestfriend (Sep 26, 2006)

Dab - we talked about that boat a while back, I don't have the link. The boat is dismasted and sitting in SF Marina west harbor. The last I heard, the guy was doing lectures on his experience, or how not to be an idiot. When we talked about it b4, someone even chimed in saying that they do it all the time, whats the big deal. Go figure. I won't bore you with the experiences I have had out there on jet skis, boats, sailboats, and surfboards. Lets just say they have been amazing, eye opening, hair raising, and always exhilarating.

Jiff - the Patch is the North Eastern part of the bar. Its silt and sand, not much reef except right by the headlands. There are three shipping channels, the main one being in the center that heads out to the dump site 50 miles out. There is one NW and one SW. Sometimes the channel makes no difference in size of swell. One thing you learn about being in the waters here, anything can come from anywhere at anytime. I took SimonV to the edge of the Patch when we went out about a month ago. It was a very calm day, 3-5 foot swells, but the patch was still roiling with the currents and tide running every which way. I think Simon was pretty amused.

Edit - Actually Dab, there has been way more than one, so we may be thinking of different boats.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

bestfriend said:


> Dab - we talked about that boat a while back, I don't have the link. The boat is dismasted and sitting in SF Marina west harbor. The last I heard, the guy was doing lectures on his experience, or how not to be an idiot. When we talked about it b4, someone even chimed in saying that they do it all the time, whats the big deal. Go figure. I won't bore you with the experiences I have had out there on jet skis, boats, sailboats, and surfboards. Lets just say they have been amazing, eye opening, hair raising, and always exhilarating.


Is this the one you're thinking of?


----------



## JiffyLube (Jan 25, 2008)

bestfriend said:


> Jiff - the Patch is the North Eastern part of the bar. Its silt and sand, not much reef except right by the headlands. There are three shipping channels, the main one being in the center that heads out to the dump site 50 miles out. There is one NW and one SW. Sometimes the channel makes no difference in size of swell. One thing you learn about being in the waters here, anything can come from anywhere at anytime. I took SimonV to the edge of the Patch when we went out about a month ago. It was a very calm day, 3-5 foot swells, but the patch was still roiling with the currents and tide running every which way. I think Simon was pretty amused.


Best, I'm in error. I thought the whole reef was called the Potato Patch...sorry.  I was wondering if there was a channel to the NW, when we saw a freighter move off in that direction the moring we left.


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

I was out there on Sunday in a Halyas 47, nice swell in the channel but not 15-18' as per the sea report. Maybe 8-10' if that, still exciting we lost the Genoa over the side after mechanical failyer and catching water. Steep waves and strong wind, with the ebb tide it was invigorating. Coming in with a skipper who is a well founded sailor, who showed what experience in the area really means. A number of other sailboats where coming in at the same time. With me at the wheel ,Greg had me head towards the Mile rock passing within less than 30 yards North
Once past the rock travel further south into the little bay. Tack north to the edge of the current tack and head south east to the southern pylon. I thought this was a no go area as per that boat that got caught inside but it is deceiving looking at the photos. Staying very close to the pylon the ebb tide was pushing us backwards, it’s a funny feeling sailing backwards, but with each swell we would move forward a little more coming out the other side, the rest of the fleet still battling to get through the gate.


----------



## bestfriend (Sep 26, 2006)

SimonV said:


> I was out there on Sunday in a Halyas 47, nice swell in the channel but not 15-18' as per the sea report. Maybe 8-10' if that, still exciting we lost the Genoa over the side after mechanical failyer and catching water. Steep waves and strong wind, with the ebb tide it was invigorating. Coming in with a skipper who is a well founded sailor, who showed what experience in the area really means. A number of other sailboats where coming in at the same time. With me at the wheel ,Greg had me head towards the Mile rock passing within less than 30 yards North
> Once past the rock travel further south into the little bay. Tack north to the edge of the current tack and head south east to the southern pylon. I thought this was a no go area as per that boat that got caught inside but it is deceiving looking at the photos. Staying very close to the pylon the ebb tide was pushing us backwards, it's a funny feeling sailing backwards, but with each swell we would move forward a little more coming out the other side, the rest of the fleet still battling to get through the gate.


Depending on the ebb, the tide can be ebbing in the center and still "flooding" at the edges. The reverse is also true. Just a factor of the currents, geography and the Bay floor. Did you go south of the tower? If there is going to be waves breaking anywhere right at the bridge, it will be there. Greg knows what he is doing.


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

There is always a reverse current in the area of Baker Beach. So if you are coming in against a strong ebb it makes sense to go into the bay and then gybe and run along the beach and coast to the Gate. The issue on breakers between the south tower and the shore is still there; and the current is strong in that area. If there is any kind of heavy swell coming into the mouth of the bay you should keep the south tower to your starboard when coming in.

It's possible Simon that the wave height appeared less because you were on a bigger boat; or if the swell was subsiding on Sunday it is possible that it was heavier than was predicted on Sat.

When we went out 2 weeks ago the swell was predicted 7-9 feet at ~12 seconds; but with a 3.5 kt ebb the swell was stacking up on the bar. We hit 10-12' swell between the bar and Pt Bonita, and could see steeper waves that had whitecaps on the Bar so we turned back and finished the day sailing the central bay. I've sailed steep waves like those before and it is more scary than fun.


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

JiffyLube said:


> I was wondering if there was a channel to the NW, when we saw a freighter move off in that direction the moring we left.


There is; it's called Bonita Channel. It's between Potatopatch Shoal and Pt Bonita. You are ill advised to sail it if the swell is high because the area can have residual breakers from the bar and/or waves that could sweep you onto the lee shore.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Sixteen foot seas?! Half the length of the boat and they went out in that for a pleasure trip? Hell of a price to pay for a day of "fun".


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Hartly,

That is the video I saw, thanks for finding it.

Paul T


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

dabnis said:


> Hartly,
> 
> That is the video I saw, thanks for finding it.
> 
> Paul T


No problem. It's scary stuff!


----------



## bobmcd (Feb 21, 2008)

I add my sincere sympathies to the families and friends of these two lost soles. I hope that we can all learn from this event so as to be able to survive if we ever get caught out like they were. Given the relatively small amount and the nature of the debris that was found it seems pretty certain that Daisy got rolled and sank. The various comments here about the likely sea conditions in that area on that day confirm rolling/swamping as the mostly likely scenario. What I still can't quite work out is why Dr Gale or Tony Harrow couldn't raise a May Day alert. Dr Gale had just installed a new VHF radio and GPS system with a wireless remote control mic that could be activated from the cockpit. I can image that things happened very fast, but after an initial knockdown I would have thought they could have activated the radio or shot off some flares. I can only imagine that the hatch was open and water flooded the boat so quickly that they just didn't have time to react. Maybe the water shorted out the electrical system so the radio was defunct. We'll have the Coast Guard's report before too long, but I would like to here the thoughts of others in this forum as to what they think happened. Sail on, safely!


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

I don't think the Coast Guard will have too much more to work with than anyone else, unless someone finds and dives or raises the Daisy to see how she sunk and where the water ingress was from (structural failure, hatch or companionway or cockpit locker open or failed, other--since they apparently found a fridge or icebox door in the debris, downflooding evidently happened). Whatever happened must've happened very fast or they'd have gotten a Mayday off, as bobmcd mentions above. And I gather they were last in fleet in worsening weather, so no one behind them to see it and maybe respond.

Speculation, and I'm not local, so I don't pretend to know much, though in a former life I was for a time a Coast Guard investigating officer.

Condolences again. Listening to those who knew them, these were two good and well-liked men.


----------



## bobmcd (Feb 21, 2008)

*Large Pieces of "Daisy" found*

I am not allowed to post links yet, but today's SF Chronicle has an article saying that large pieces of Daisy were found by divers in 63 feet of water near where she was last seen. These were the deck, cabin and mast, but the hull was not found. Could the big wave have ripped the deck away from the hull, or did the separation occur after sinking? USCG says that there is no indication that she hit any of the channel buoys or any of the ships that were in the vicinity at that time. Article also goes to discuss the responsibiliyt (or otherwise) of the race committee to notify the USCG when Daisy did not show up hours after the last boat came in. Lots of food for thought here.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

What kind of boat was Daisy???


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

Here's the link:

Large pieces of missing sailboat found


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

*"I know that I didn't call the Coast Guard," Mewes said. "I didn't have their phone number. Now, I do."*

Hmmmm.


----------



## Lion35 (Sep 28, 2007)

SD, I believe she was a Cheoy Lee Offshore 31


----------



## bobmcd (Feb 21, 2008)

Yes, "Daisy" was a Cheoy Lee Offshore 31 with ketch rig. Thanks for posting that link, djodena. And that quote from the race organizer, T34C. The inaction of the race officials is, perhaps, the most disturbing part of this saga. They hailed Daisy three times, at 15 min intervals, after she had not appeared a good hour after she was expected. They say that it was the family's responsibility to call the Coast Guard, not the committee's. Maybe in some legal sense that's right (not sure even about that), but common sense should have told them that something was wrong. 
As to the boat it's hard to imagine how the deck got separated from the hull. That seems quite strange to me. Other comments?
Sail on!
Bob


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

If every race committe reported every boat that didn't check in after every race or regatta, the Coasties would do nothing else each weekend but chase down wild geese. The committe is absolutely right, it is not thier responsibilty to make a determination of the status of the missing boat and to call the CG. It is a tragedy that this boat was lost and the crew killed, but you race at your own peril and trying to pin the blame on someone else is bullsh*t.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Fstbttms said:


> If every race committe reported every boat that didn't check in after every race or regatta, the Coasties would do nothing else each weekend but chase down wild geese. The committe is absolutely right, it is not thier responsibilty to make a determination of the status of the missing boat and to call the CG. It is a tragedy that this boat was lost and the crew killed, but you race at your own peril and trying to pin the blame on someone else is bullsh*t.


Actually, the issue is not trying to put blame on anyone... The Committee in my opinion was wrong, they should of when all attempts to communicate failed...Having done some of the regattas around here and talking with others that do longer distance race.... communication is key...

I think if you were in the same situation - you'd probably thank the Comittee for doing the extra diligence if the circumstances meant that after 30 minutes your chance of being found would be null...

Yes, accidents happen - but the community should do all it can to ensure the safe arrival and dispatch help when something is amiss, especially in a sponsored race, and in the conditions present with the area... The boat in question wasn't a newbie...in fact they participated often and usually finished last.... but they always finished except that fateful afternoon...

Heck even when I meet up with my Carver friends - since I am always last to arrive - they hail on VHF or call the cell to make sure nothing happens along the way... Its just what you do.... The committee of the race tried hailing - tried calling, and they should of went the extra mile to inform the coast guard - period. It was their civic duty as they were the only individuals to be a point of contact besides the individual racers...

Its the attitude reflected by your comments (and not attacking you personally) - that severely undermine and perpetuate the "Its not our problem and if everyone else did it" attitude that creates these scenarios...That is what the coast guard is there for - when someone calls up and states "here is the situation" - to deal with it... the CG can weed out what they intend to do - but using your synopsis and direction - doesn't save lives - in fact creates the exact environment that occurred that resulted in the already stated tragedy.

I sincerely hope you are never in such a position and the decisions of those that you have no control over, do not do what happened in this scenario....


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

artbyjody said:


> The committee of the race tried hailing - tried calling, and they should of went the extra mile to inform the coast guard - period. It was their civic duty as they were the only individuals to be a point of contact besides the individual racers...


In a perfect world the committe could have been more dilligent in trying to determine the status of "Daisy" but it certainly wasn't their responsibility or duty. The Island Yacht Club race entry form signed by the skipper of the boat states as much and plainly too.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

I don't know, but perhaps the racing rules for that event, or the usual practices of the sponsors, clarify who should be concerned about overdue vessels. Speculation is pointless without that context.

Typically, some thankless volunteers miss all the fun and stick around to man the radio or phone making sure that everyboat in a race has either withdrawn or finished, and take action on those that go missing. (And those volunteers really should be thanked.) And typically rules will have some provisions about "yachts must check in by..." specifying means and times, and if they miss the check someone will take action, including launching SAR assets.

But who is to say what is typical here? In the context of severe wx and some incident so extreme that it ripped a deck off a hull...I wouldn't take odds on surviving that impact, whatever it was. 

"That is what the coast guard is there for - when someone calls up and states "here is the situation" - to deal with it... " And speaking of which, they usually do a damn fine at damn close to volunteer wages.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Fstbttms said:


> In a perfect world the committe could have been more dilligent in trying to determine the status of "Daisy" but it certainly wasn't their responsibility or duty. The Island Yacht Club race entry form signed by the skipper of the boat states as much and plainly too.


Signing off legal liability / responsibility is not the same as moral responsibility period. It doesn't matter what paper was signed... fact is they were the sole communication central - period. The CG would of fielded the call and told them what to do according to how they evaluated it, and instructed what they needed to perform their tasks... at least they would of been informed... sorry but your argument of reasons why blame cannot be accessed - when in fact that particular lack of inaction maybe did cost several sailors their life or at least the opportunity to possibly be rescued doesn't hold salt...but signing a piece of paper to state that you do not hold any responsiblity still doesn't dissolve the moral responsibilities of those concerned...

and should I ref the previously highlighted "I didn't know the Coast Guards number but I do now"... statement made by one of the committee people...


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Jody, "moral responsibility" sounds like a noble concept until you realize it means either a) choosing your friends wisely or b) imposing your will on others. The latter course usually leads to conflicts and wars, but that's what you are advocating.

When someone says "abortion is immoral" that's all very nice, but if the mother doesn't abort, will they adpot the baby and care for it and raise it? No, they don't offer to do that because it is hard work--not just nobility.

In the same way, if an RC tells me they are standing down two (whatever) hours after the first finish, and they aren't going to come look for me, it is MY moral responsibility to deal with that--or not to enter their race contrary to their terms. I can ask them to check me in. I can file a float plan separately. Heck, I can even radio the local USCG and ask them to contact me every hour because the wx is so bad. (And the USCG will do that as best they can, with limited resources.) I can tell the race committee, look, I know you guys want to party but I'll pay you an extra hundred to keep someone on the radio an extra six hours.

Moral responsibility? Cuts both ways. The RC made their position clear, now it falls to the entrants to accept that--or not enter.

I'm sure you mean well, but it is also well-meaning folks who say "No swimming unless lifeguard is on duty" and keep me out of the water when I'm perfectly willing to deal with the ocean all by myself. They think they're protecting me, I think they're imprisoning me. 

I'd prefer freedom.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

And Hello  this where practicing common sense and practicing the dictated will of all others gets in the way (that form signed is because people get sued and when one thinks they can not - then rest of what someone does and does not due is usually duly predicted) - moral responsibility in this case (abortion is not the issue here) is common sense on how to handle a situation...

Case in point...

Last summer a boat was floundering outside my pier. Typically we see lotsa boats approaching and practicing docking procedures. Erratic behavior but when yelling out "Need help" answer is- "Nope just practicing thanks!"

Great right...

Boat does 4 approaches and cuts up and turns out and does it again. Even though the last 30 times I have yelled out "Do you need help" yielded the "Just practicing" - this time the answer was "I have no idea where I am at help me"...

I somehow got them to the pier and tied them off, boarded and called 911 and the whole nine yards... He was diabetic and had suffered a tremendous seizure.... It was not my legal responsibility to assist it was my moral responsibility to help....What happened past that point was their decision however, it was my civic duty to assist in what manner I could...

We can go through the laundry list of reasons why not to do something, and usually they are balanced with some kinda legal implication - as thus our society. But doing the right thing because it is just the right thing to do - common sense - karma - whatever you want to call it... 

Sorry - but you can throw the legaleaze, they knew what they signed, etc... this is a sailing community right? Don't we have an unwritten oath to go above and beyond for our fellow sailor regardless what the circumstance?


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

Well I think there are multiple issues.

One is that the season for going out the Gate is a bit early; especially for double-handed racing. Of course the corollary to that is that if you wait until there is no weather systems coming in there will be no wind.

The issue I have with IYC is that the check-in and USCG call should have been sooner; but of course if the last boat in was 1-2 hours out when the accident happened then even if the call was made immediately after they crossed the finish it would probably have been too late to rescue victims anyway. It seems like a wait of over 2 hours until 5pm (race deadline) to send a distress call for them was too long. I'm not placing blame on them; just stating that the call could have been made sooner since lives could be (and now we know were) at stake.

When Feolena lost sight of Daisy; a call should have been made for radio-check or call in to the RC. It seems to me that it would have been the fastest way to get a distress call started; and we should all be watching out for others when we sail or race. Again; I am not placing blame on them for not calling, just mentioning that it is important to keep a lookout for others who may be in distress.

From what I have heard; the weather forecasts/reports made it a 50/50 decision between going offshore or sailing the alternate inland course. The decision was made by the skippers to go offshore and each skipper/crew knew it would be a rough seas day. I think to go out in those conditions in a 32' wood hull craft with a 67 yo skipper and 72 yo mate was not a prudent choice. It's unfortunate that this has happened and I think it is a tragic loss; but it's a painful reminder that the ocean is very unforgiving when it comes to these things.

Dont forget; when it comes to a vessel in distress it is _your legal responsibility_ to assist if possible the rescue of those who are in peril. It does not matter if you are racing or on a pleasure craft; or if what the person has done is stupid (like sailing a dinghy out the gate, etc). If you can help them then it is your responsibility to do so.


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

KeelHaulin said:


> When Feolena lost sight of Daisy; a call should have been made for radio-check or call in to the RC.
> 
> Dont forget; when it comes to a vessel in distress it is _your legal responsibility_ to assist if possible the rescue of those who are in peril. It does not matter if you are racing or on a pleasure craft; or if what the person has done is stupid (like sailing a dinghy out the gate, etc). If you can help them then it is your responsibility to do so.


The crew of "Feolena" have stated publicly that when they lost sight of "Daisy" they thought they had merely outrun her on the way back in from the Lightbucket. Nobody thought "Daisy" was in distress and therefore any discussion of abdication of moral responsiblity is nonsense.


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

You know; you should not chop up my posts to make it look like I am saying Feolena knew that Daisy was in distress. I have read their public statement that they lost sight of Daisy who was trailing behind them; and I understand that they thought they were sailing faster, etc. I'M NOT BLAMING THEM FOR NOT CALLING.

HOWEVER:

When we sail out into the open ocean it seems like you can see sailboats a fairly far distance off in clear weather (like a few miles) even if the waves are 10-12 feet. You usually can spot the sails but even a bare mast is visible for quite a distance.

So if the situation arises while you are out; (you see a boat nearby and then suddenly don't) you should at least try and make radio call to check. It's possible that you have lost sight; but it's also possible that the boat has capsized or been dismasted. That's my only point; and again, *YOU HAVE THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSIST A VESSEL IN DISTRESS (if safe for you to do so)*


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

KeelHaulin said:


> I'M NOT BLAMING THEM FOR NOT CALLING.


Ummm... sure sounds like you did.

_


KeelHaulin said:



When Feolena lost sight of Daisy; a call should have been made for radio-check or call in to the RC.

Click to expand...

_


KeelHaulin said:


> *YOU HAVE THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSIST A VESSEL IN DISTRESS (if safe for you to do so)*


Are you inferring that "Feolena" didn't render aid to vessel they knew to be in distress?


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Fstbttms said:


> Ummm... sure sounds like you did.
> 
> Are you inferring that "Feolena" didn't render aid to vessel they knew to be in distress?


Fstb..you may have a fast bottom but fast is not what I would describe comprehension here.... you know - sigh... you sure do like to pick a fight when you do not want to look at something from a different perspective... He perfectly represented the what if scenario.. lay off the vino for a bit re-read in the morning...


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

artbyjody said:


> Fstb..you may have a fast bottom but fast is not what I would describe comprehension here.... you know - sigh... you sure do like to pick a fight when you do not want to look at something from a different perspective... He perfectly represented the what if scenario.. lay off the vino for a bit re-read in the morning...


I read it perfectly. What I want is for somebody to post something and then stand by what he wrote. He absolutely made the inference that "Feolena" should have called the RC when they lost sight of "Daisy" but then backtracked when I disagreed. Then the second part of his diatribe about what sailors should or shouldn't do was a litany of responsibilities to render aid. At what point did his post stop being about what "Feolena" didn't do correctly?

If you are gonna make a big point about somebody xxx up and being partially responsible for the deaths of two people, at least make your case clearly or be able to take the criticism because you didn't.

BTW, I don't appreciate you condescension, or your incessant use of ellipses.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

Fstbttms said:


> I read it perfectly. What I want is for somebody to post something and then stand by what he wrote. He absolutely made the inference that "Feolena" should have called the RC when they lost sight of "Daisy" but then backtracked when I disagreed. Then the second part of his diatribe about what sailors should or shouldn't do was a litany of responsibilities to render aid. At what point did his post stop being about what "Feolena" didn't do correctly?
> 
> If you are gonna make a big point about somebody fu*cking up and being partially responsible for the deaths of two people, at least make your case clearly or be able to take the criticism because you didn't.
> 
> BTW, I don't appreciate you condesenion, or your incessant use of ellipses.


I already know that  ()()()()()()...

The point is he is not far off what I stated and I think you are trying to put together snippets to make your case,...overall bunches of people looking back can relate to "maybe if I did something different" but you also approached this with no one who was involved had liability because they signed a piece of paper...

So you are jumping the gun here in and you still need to re-read what he wrote...he was pretty clear in his statements...


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

DUDE!!! TAKE A FING CHILL PILL!!! DID YOU FORGET YOURS TODAY??!!??

Go back; re-read my post. I said clearly; they -should- have called in. My point is not that they were negligent in any way; just that they did not take notice of the situation of a boat disappearing. It happens. It does not mean they were negligent; but they thought something else was going on given their own situation of heavy swell (controling their boat in rough conditions to prevent a broach, etc). Maybe they did not look to their stern for 1/2 hour or more; I don't know. My statement was meant to point out that their best chance of rescue would have been an immediate distress call be it by their own VHF, EPIRB (which did not happen), or another boat on their behalf *if it was noticed *.

Was it Feolenas RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP WATCH FOR THEM, WERE THEY REQUIRED TO KEEP DAISY IN THEIR SIGHT, OR DID THEY KNOW DAISY WAS IN TROUBLE? *ABSOLUTELY NOT! Therefore they were not negligent in their actions; and I said that previously.*

My comment that you have the legal responsibility to assist was separate; (separated by a few paragraphs IIRC) and I am pointing it out here because the question was raised about when/if you are responsible for the safety of others. If you SEE someone in distress; or if you recieve a VHF call and you are nearby and CAN assist then you are required to. 

Hypothetically; if Boat A is trailing Boat B and Boat B broached/sunk, Boat A would not be required to SAR the survivors (given the conditions of rough seas). Of course Boat A would report it; but it may be too dangerous to assist (or even stay on-scene).


----------



## Lion35 (Sep 28, 2007)

I have to agree fully with Jody and Keelhaulin. There's no legal problems here, but in the case of the race committee their lack of prudence and nonchalant attitude of their commodore in the press doesn't sit well with me.

I raced in an offshore series for several years and the YC, even though they didn't have any legal responsibility, took the safety of the participants much, much more seriously.



> "I know that I didn't call the Coast Guard," Mewes said. "I didn't have their phone number. Now, I do."


How is it that a offshore race committee in the bay doesn't know how to contact the Costies? To me this statement shows negligence and a complete lack of taking what they're doing seriously.



> But she also referred to the sailors as "slow-time Charlies" because they were racing in a slow-rated vessel.


This statement just pisses me off. She's slighting these two men who just passed on. How did this make the friends and families feel? Why would you even consider saying something like this. She could have just said they were the last boat out and far behind the pack, plain and simple. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way but somehow this statement makes me feel like Daisy didn't matter as much to us because they were always slow and the last boat.



> They (the costies) also contacted race organizers on Saturday evening, who confirmed that Daisy was overdue but were unable to say whether the boat was equipped with either a life raft or an Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon that could emit a distress signal.


I guess things have changed but in my limited years of racing it was common to fill out a form for the race committee with relevant safety equipment lists.

This is a sad situation and I don't want to turn it into an argument about could have should have. I do think it's reasonable to comment on the race committee with the hope that other committees will learn from the situation and sailors will continue to practice diligence in the organizers of the events they participate in.

BTB: Daisey was a glass hulled Offshore 31, not wood.


----------



## Stillraining (Jan 11, 2008)

Well...lets just hope this incident changes things for different races...One I see would be a simple requirement of carrying an auto activated epirb aboard and registered to each vessel...attached to a breakaway housing somewhere above deck..


Good job at your dock Jody...I will be coming into LaConner...feel free to man the docks...


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

Lion35 said:


> I have to agree fully with Jody and Keelhaulin. There's no legal problems here, but in the case of the race committee their lack of prudence and nonchalant attitude of their commodore in the press doesn't sit well with me.
> 
> She could have just said they were the last boat out and far behind the pack, plain and simple. Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way but somehow this statement makes me feel like Daisy didn't matter as much to us because they were always slow and the last boat.
> 
> BTB: Daisey was a glass hulled Offshore 31, not wood.


Yes, indeed... What also concerns me is that Daisy was in Div D; and IYC started the slowest boats last. That means that the fleet would only be more strung out in time and distance rather than a "pursuit" format where the fastest boats start last and cross the finish line first. It seems to me that in an offshore race you would want the fleet to stay more compact so that if there is a problem it will be recognized by other boats. There will always be someone bringing up the rear; but if the fleet is further apart it is more likely that that last boat will be more distant from any other boat and certainly be left behind. This is just food for thought if any YC organizers are reading...

Thanks for correcting me on the hull construction I thought all of the Cheoy Lee O31's were wood hull and spars.

I'm not bashing IYC; it would be sad to see one of the only "budget" yacht clubs in the SF Bay area go under because of this. I think for the most part they are a great YC and have good leadership and are middle income family oriented. It just seems that there was some mistakes made in the format and reporting procedures that should be corrected for future races. Racing out the gate is far different than the races they hold in the Oakland Estuary; and I hope this is a wake-up call to all the YC's that sponsor offshore races.


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

Is it just me or does anyone else think that Fastbottoms posts are always negative and argumentative.


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

SimonV said:


> Is it just me or does anyone else think that Fastbottoms posts are always negative and argumentative.


I dunno I think fast and bottom and I think alot of gas and farting... so we might agree! But he does adore my D) (or in other words use of ellipses...something he has never been argumentative about...)...


----------



## Vitesse473 (Mar 16, 2008)

Hey folks, maybe try and ignore the fast bottom guy and get back on topic. I've been sailing the SF Bay and surrounding coast my entire life. It is likely one of the trickiest places on earth to sail, as the current, back eddies, bars and bad charts (ie; South Channel) can really cause a great deal of confusion for the un-educated sailor. If you are local, or just visiting, I'd suggest visiting the Bay Model in Sausalito. This will give you an incredible viewpoint of what happens during the ebb and flood. It's just fascinating. It's also a great tool for racing.

Having done the DHL several times, I will say that you really have to appreciate and respect the event. This and the Farollones races have claimed many boats. If you recall, a sailor was (I think during the DHL) lost a while back when they broached on a big wave while coming back into the Bay. One guy who was clipped in went over-board. When he hit the water, his Sospenders auto-inflating vest failed and he was dragged under water to his death. Same kind of conditions, accept that the Coast Guard was a mile away. The other guy was unable to slow the boat enough to pull him aboard, and the Coasties were obviously not able to respond quick enough to help. I'm not exactly sure what they could have done anyway.

Having completed several DHL's, I have also started a couple of others and when sticking our nose outside the gate have turned around and went home. (J90's don't like big seas). The key is that we checked in with the committee to let them know.

What is concerning to me is the following:
1) no epirb
2) they don't seem to have been "clipped" in. May not have mattered, but your odds of survival are astronomically better (granted not when you sink). I speculate that they were both washed over-board and the boat sank as it toppled around well after they were lost.
3) the race committee screwed up. the family on land was probably at home thinking they were in the bar at the clubhouse. The committee was the only group that would have any clue that one boat hasn't finished. When you quit a race, you always check in with the committee to let them know you will be a DNF. Especially in a coastal ocean race in heavy weather. *What should happen because of this is that the rules should be changed so it is the obligation (legally) of the committee to ensure all vessels are accounted for.*

Btw, the Sospender failure I mentioned was because the pin was rusted in place. the tablet dissolved, but the pin was unable to strike the air bottle. Check yours and service often.


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

Vitesse - although I agree with much of your post I find the highlighted part absolutely *wrong*. Why should a group of private volunteers for a private volunteer event be held legally responsible for actions of others?

[Edit/Correction]
Vitesse - sorry, I mistakenly assumed you were referring to changing a law or regulation in my reply above. I now see you meant the "rules" of the racing committee and fully agree with you.

Once again I think of American litiguous society. I have raced in a couple of international flying events over the years, and in all places but the USA I just present my license, logbook (for currency), proof of insurance and sometimes they want to see an FAI endorsement. In the USA they usually only look at the proof-of-insurance and then I have to read and sign about 50 pages of paperwork (not in English, but written in legaleze) before I can launch!

I can just see someone getting sued over this event...


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

SimonV said:


> Is it just me or does anyone else think that Fastbottoms posts are always negative and argumentative.


You are generalizing. I make a lot of helpful posts on this forum. I also call bullsh*t when I see it (and there is plenty of that on SailNet. Spend a little time in "Off Topic" for proof.) and I'll argue a point when I feel it's warranted. To those who's point of view that contradicts, that may seem negative. But since when was being argumentative a bad thing? I suppose you'd be happy if everybody expressed the exact same opinions all the time?


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Fstbttms said:


> You are generalizing. I make a lot of helpful posts on this forum. I also call bullsh*t when I see it (and there is plenty of that on SailNet. Spend a little time in "Off Topic" for proof.) and I'll argue a point when I feel it's warranted. To those who's point of view that contradicts, that may seem negative. But since when was being argumentative a bad thing? I suppose you'd be happy if everybody expressed the exact same opinions all the time?


I have to agree. I find Fast- post generally helpful, and as stated, ready to call BS when needed. Maybe a little quick on the BS button at times, but we all have our turn at that one.

I honestly see very valid points to on both sides of weather the YC should have done more. I can tell you that there will be a couple of rules changes for our races this year as a result.


----------



## Fstbttms (Feb 25, 2003)

T34C said:


> I have to agree. I find Fast- post generally helpful, and as stated, ready to call BS when needed. Maybe a little quick on the BS button at times...


OK, guilty as charged.


----------



## Vitesse473 (Mar 16, 2008)

[Edit/Correction]
Vitesse - sorry, I mistakenly assumed you were referring to changing a law or regulation in my reply above. I now see you meant the "rules" of the racing committee and fully agree with you.

Zanshin - I am absolutely suggesting that the race committee and/or the sponsoring yacht club be held responsible either by law or atleast rule. But for only one thing. That all boats are accounted for before they close the race and go home. Nothing else. That would require reciprocal responsibility by the skipper to call in when retiring from the race.

I agree with you that our litigious society is a burden on everyone, however, this type of law or rule is very measureable. Either you've accounted for all boats or you haven't. Committees know every boats rating, which means they can generally determine when the boat should finish. If a boat hasn't finished well after it should, then the committee should hail the Coast Guard. It's USCG's job to determine what to do. No one should ever make a decision for them.

I only hope that something is changed so this terrible tragedy doesn't occur again.


----------

