WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

My brother just got a ticket for too much wake going under the bridge at topock

bajaleo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
51
Reaction score
27
Kind of a bullshit ticket. We were going really slow. Other boats were going faster than us. Just an FYI.
 

stephenkatsea

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
8,007
Reaction score
11,575
Wakeboard boat, status of tanks/bags etc.? Speed does not always determine height of wake. What did the LEOs have to say about the ticket?
 

Taboma

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
20,786
Haven't been up there in so long I forget if that's a "No Wake" zone or posted speed ? No wake is extremely ambiguous, since every boat is going to leave a wake, so 100% compliance is virtually impossible. So have him take it to court and see if the judge can make a determination if 'No Wake' means 0" or 1" or 4" --- then get back to us please :D

Maybe Boatcop will see this thread and chime in, he's knows all this good shit :thumbsup
 

Cole Trickle

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
15,825
It's bullshit.....impossible to not have a small wake with the flow of the river.

I got a warning last year and it's maybe idling at 900 rpms
 

Taboma

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
20,786
It's bullshit.....impossible to not have a small wake with the flow of the river.

I got a warning last year and it's maybe idling at 900 rpms

Is this no wake zone to protect some feature or the Topock Marina, or simply to prevent collisions with the bridge or other boats due to the bridge ?
Or because of the jumpers ?

It's obvious the speed restrictions or no wake in the Gorge is to reduce accidents, so who gives a crap if you're idling at 900 rpm or 600, wake or no wake isn't the point, safety is.
 

2Driver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
16,684
Reaction score
29,944
bullshit.jpg
 

bajaleo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
51
Reaction score
27
I understand and agree with the safety aspect. It's just that we were with several other boats going about the same speed and we got the call to pull over. 21' Essex. Plain looking boat. We're old and not playing loud music.
 

havabrew

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
76
Reaction score
43
I guess using oars would make them happy and keep you under the no wake LAW!
:bowdown:
 

Tahiti247xs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
153
Reaction score
148
Wake less speed is defined as minimum speed possible to maintain headway.
 

BoatCop

Retired And Loving It.
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
5,243
Reaction score
9,005
Haven't been up there in so long I forget if that's a "No Wake" zone or posted speed ? No wake is extremely ambiguous, since every boat is going to leave a wake, so 100% compliance is virtually impossible. So have him take it to court and see if the judge can make a determination if 'No Wake' means 0" or 1" or 4" --- then get back to us please :D

Maybe Boatcop will see this thread and chime in, he's knows all this good shit :thumbsup

Legal definition:

"Wakeless speed" means a speed that does not cause the watercraft to create a wake, but in no case in excess of five miles per hour.

That clears it up. :rolleyes

Further definition in AZGFD Rules state "No Wake" means the same as "Wakeless Speed".

Got it yet? :skull

Actually it means a breaking wake. Ripples off the back of the boat is not a wake. A roller or breaking "wave" is in excess of wakeless speed.

The reason that "in no case in excess of five miles per hour" is stated is due to the fact that drag boats, hydros, PWCs, and other high planing vessels do not throw out much of a wake at full planing speed.

Hopefully they are looking at conditions. If a boat is throwing off a small wake going against the current or wind and barely making headway, it would be unreasonable to expect the boat to lower throttle and end up going backwards. This is where cell phone video can come in handy.

Probably the best definition and explanation is included in the National Park Service Rules and answers to inquiries:

2. One commenter indicated the term ?Flat Wake Speed? will cause confusion because a wake by definition is not flat. They further recommended the NPS use the term ?No Wake or Idle Speed NTE 5 mph?.

NPS Response: The NPS considered the various terms that have been used to describe zones that are intended to require a slow speed. The determination of these zones is predicated on visitor safety needs and the protection of park resources. The terms include ?no wake?, ?wakeless speed?, ?5 mph?, ?slow speed? and idle speed. Since a boat underway and making way creates some wake regardless of speed, the term no wake and wakeless speed are not descriptive of the desired condition. The term 5 mph may describe the desired condition but is difficult for boaters to identify with since effective speedometers*** are rarely found on recreational vessels. Neither slow speed nor idle speed effectively addresses the desired condition as they are terms that allow for individual interpretation and/or variants in equipment. The term ?flat wake speed? is the preferred NPS term since the desired condition, a minimal disturbance of water by a vessel in order to prevent damage or injury is described. The ability of park staff to understand and educate the boating public as well as take proactive enforcement actions is enhanced.

*** (My notes. BC) One note for those of us who use GPS for speed. We must remember that GPS measures speed over land. Not speed over water. If we rely on GPS to determine that we are going 5 MPH or less, and are going against a 10 MPH current, we would be doing 15 MPH over water. Definitely throwing a wake. But if we reduce to a boat speed over water of 5 MPH, we would be going 5 MPH backward over land. Conversely, if we are going WITH a 10 MPH current at 5 MPH boat speed we would be doing the 5 MPH over water, but 15 MPH over land, and not throwing a wake.

This is where the "reasonableness", that I spoke of above, comes in. Hopefully no one's on the shore, or anchored, with a RADAR gun enforcing the speed limit on a waterway with a current that can run anywhere from 5-10+ MPH.
 

BoatCop

Retired And Loving It.
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
5,243
Reaction score
9,005
Wake less speed is defined as minimum speed possible to maintain headway.


While this sounds like a fair description, using this as a LEGAL formula, if a vessel can maintain headway (and steerage) at 1 MPH, than 2, 3, 4, or 5 MPH could be considered excessive speed.

That's why most jurisdictions rely on a visual breaking wake, coupled with speed no greater than 5 MPH.
 

Tahiti247xs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
153
Reaction score
148
While this sounds like a fair description, using this as a LEGAL formula, if a vessel can maintain headway (and steerage) at 1 MPH, than 2, 3, 4, or 5 MPH could be considered excessive speed.

That's why most jurisdictions rely on a visual breaking wake, coupled with speed no greater than 5 MPH.

But in an area with a 7 knot current you will be churning a wake to maintain headway[emoji848]
 

lbhsbz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
11,667
Reaction score
28,518
Boatcop...on the downriver side of Parker, while they were working on the bridge, they posted a 5 mph/no wake zone. The current is about 4mph, headed up river, anyone maintaining headway is throwing a huge wake.

What's your advice on this situation? I ran through at 80, satisfying the "no wake" requirement....but there were a few times I had to turn back while other boats were doing 5mph, bow up, making wakes so big the rollers would sink me.
 

BoatCop

Retired And Loving It.
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
5,243
Reaction score
9,005
But in an area with a 7 knot current you will be churning a wake to maintain headway[emoji848]

Boatcop...on the downriver side of Parker, while they were working on the bridge, they posted a 5 mph/no wake zone. The current is about 4mph, headed up river, anyone maintaining headway is throwing a huge wake.

What's your advice on this situation? I ran through at 80, satisfying the "no wake" requirement....but there were a few times I had to turn back while other boats were doing 5mph, bow up, making wakes so big the rollers would sink me.

Both of you need to go back and read my full responses on the reasonableness of necessary speed in making way against a current.
 

77charger

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
5,817
Reaction score
6,774
Are they still video enforcing that area too? IMO just got picked out for a "so called safety check" and the wake was the excuse for the stop.
 

Taboma

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
14,608
Reaction score
20,786
Are they still video enforcing that area too? IMO just got picked out for a "so called safety check" and the wake was the excuse for the stop.

It's a reality that no reason at all is needed for a random or targeted "Safety Check".

The OP mentioned several other boats navigating this No Wake area. This can easily create a wake (Wave) resonance whereby each successive vessel's wake although itself small and legal, can become additive to the preceding wake, resulting in a combined "Breaking" wake as witnessed by the LEOs. Navigating against the current's flow would only amplify this effect.

This situation as witnessed and understood by "Experienced" water enforcement officers, especially considering the specific intent (Safety versus property protection), should not result in a citation. The key word here is "Experienced", that is often lacking given the wide range of agencies involved. They also rely on the fact that the vast majority of boaters will not contest these tickets as they rack up points for saving our ignorant asses. (some, not all of course).
 

nowski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
6,954
Reaction score
9,258
If the river is traveling at 3mph and your traveling at 5mph up stream you lose your patience.

So you kick up your speed to 7 mph and still traveling against a 3mph current aren't you really only going 4mph???

How fast did they clock him on the radar gun??? lol
 

hallett3

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
1,251
Reaction score
2,760
Well heck they better cite those casino boats, because they sure leave a hell of a wake. Under havasu bridge an topock bridge. This is so chicken shit. A boat at 5 mph or 7 is not creating a huge wake. Let's get real here. I have been boating for 35 years and I think I've seen a lot of boating. Smart boating and stupid boating. Get the guy that doesn't want to cruise slow through the no wake zone because he is in a hurry, or the idiot that doesn't know it's a no wake zone.
 

TBI

Thumbless Wonder
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
28,304
Reaction score
27,026
I killed a gopher with a trolling plate once....
 

77charger

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
5,817
Reaction score
6,774
Good thing I don't ride my stand up thru there kinda hard to not make a wake even at 5 mph with the ass end down in the water. But a very large boat can go pretty good without not making a wake.
 
Top