Beware Oakland County Gun Board

[TAC]

I won't judge you personally edub, but I really think you should read this:

Boating Under the Influence

http://www.duifoundation.org/drunkdriving/bui/

[donald150]

Drinking though technically illegal, is a normal part of boating for the majority of boaters and nothing bad ever comes of it save for the occasional dick cop.

If any of you have ever been to the sand bar in Cass Lake you will see about 300-400 boats anchored with everyone drinking.

This has got to be the stupidest thing I have seen this week.

[sullyxlh]

[quote=edub]My CPL was actually restored on appeal. But the gun board tried to lie to me every step of the way and tried to trick me as I explained. And, while I was waiting, I heard them do the same thing to a number of other people. One guy was denied on some citizenship grounds and they used the same "we need to research this" line to fool him as well.

I'm just trying to help out people who might find themselves in front of them.

As far as the boating issue, I really don't think any of you know what you are talking about. Drinking though technically illegal, is a normal part of boating for the majority of boaters and nothing bad ever comes of it save for the occasional dick cop. I have spoken to Sheriffs about this and most of them say they really don't care. In my case, everyone down the line thought the whole thing was a joke. All the Sheriffs at the jail were laughing and saying "you gotta be kidding me." The prosecuting attorney even thought it was a joke and the Judge even ordered that I be allowed to carry during my short probation. BTW, the probation officers thought it was a joke too.

If any of you have ever been to the sand bar in Cass Lake you will see about 300-400 boats anchored with everyone drinking. The same is true of St Clair where even more drinking goes on. And then there is of course Torch Lake, Higgins lake and hundreds more. All summer, there are more drunk people on the water than in the bars. If you don't know this it's because you aren't fortunate enough to have ever been there.

Bottom line [deleted]

[CyborgWarrior]

you don't have to drink to have fun

[donald150]

He admits that he knows it is illegal to drink and drive a boat and still condones it.

Since he has no regard for the law, that tells me that he probably carries while drinking and drinks while driving.

He will only get away with it for so long then we will see his face in the paper.

[thatguy423]

It's not Petrone... It's spelled Patron dummy..

[1-2many]

My friend's mom killed her best friend while boating and drinking. She only had to do one year in the pen so it wasn't so bad...

[hopeitsfast]

While Edub comes across as a clown, in my opinion he is at least partially correct. I lived by lake St.Clair for 20yrs and trust me, booze is a major part of the boating scene. Just because it's not the brightest thing to do, doesn't mean he's wrong. All you have to do is look up Jobby nooner to get a glimpse. Now that is 'officially' twice a year but it happens every nice weekend, just on a smaller scale. Gull island, Muscamoot (sp?)Bay, the list can go on forever. Have you ever been on a boat and had a raft come floating by with a couch and stripper pole on it? It happens...trust me.

[brass hat]

I have been on and around boats my entire life,alchohol has never been involved,never saw a need to mix the two,same with cars,hunting,guns,atv's,chainsaws,bicycles,lawnmow ers,ect. I never knew or would hang around anyone who would BUI either. certain things just don't mix period.

[edub]

Rejection of Cass Lake sandbar rules upheld


Brooke MeierAugust 05, 2009 - The Michigan Natural Resources Commission (NRC) has upheld a state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) denial of special watercraft rules for a Cass Lake sandbar that were requested by the city of Keego Harbor — the first such appeals hearing decision in the state.

The decision was made following a hearing during a July 9 NRC meeting.

"The commission voted unanimously to uphold the DNR's decision on Cass Lake," said Mary Dettloff, public information officer for the DNR. "Commissioner Mary Brown did most of the talking for the NRC and said that the department followed the process under the law and arrived at the conclusion that any reasonable person would arrive at."

According to Dettloff, Keego Harbor can pursue the matter in circuit court.

"The NRC met for less than one hour to hear oral arguments from the DNR and the city of Keego Harbor," said Keego Harbor City Manager Dale Stuart. "Immediately upon conclusion of the hearing, without any discussion by the commission on the merits of the appeal, the commission voted unanimously to uphold the decision of the DNR on the request of the city of Keego Harbor for special rules for the Cass Lake sandbar.

"The city of Keego Harbor is disappointed that the entire appeals process took an inordinate amount of time," he added. "It's clear to the city that the DNR and the commission don't understand the severity of the problem that exists on the Cass Lake sandbar."

City officials and [a few] Cass Lake riparian residents waited more than a year to have the appeal heard before the NRC.

A letter written by DNR Law Enforcement Division Lt. Andrew Turner, dated May 8, formally denied the city's proposed special watercraft regulations for the sandbar.

"(Watercraft controls) are authorized only when necessary to assure compatible use and to protect public safety where enforcement of existing statutes cannot," the letter stated. "Ongoing safety problems for Cass Lake have not been documented at this time. The concerns regarding user conflict as they relate to marine safety issues can be addressed with the existing boating laws currently in place."

The special rules the city asked the DNR to authorize included a channel/buoy system that would allow east shore property owners to navigate their boats onto the main portion of the lake unimpeded. Other ideas included limiting the number of boats allowed to anchor at the mile-long sandbar, and breaking up the sandbar in a few places to create openings with deeper waters.

The sandbar is located off the northeast shore of Cass Lake, between Cass-Elizabeth and Orchard Lake roads. Portions of the lake are also situated within Waterford and West Bloomfield townships and Orchard Lake Village.

"People are out there drinking all day long," Stuart said of the need for sandbar rules, adding that sometimes there are between 200 and 500 boats anchored and tied up at the sandbar. "There is a danger of drowning. There is a danger of other safety issues. Last year, we had a lady who lost her finger out there, and it was very difficult to get her into shore because of the scramble of boats.

"The city has no problem with people who are out there with their families to enjoy the shallow water," Stuart said. "But it's not fair to have anybody expect that they have to sit on every nice weekend and listen to vulgarity and loud music."

Turner's rejection letter stated, "Cass Lake receives more marine enforcement and public safety attention than any other inland lake in the entire state."

Under legislation passed two years ago, if the DNR determines there to be a need for special watercraft rules, the department proposes a local ordinance for municipal adoption. If watercraft controls aren't recommended, the municipality is notified of the reasons for coming to that conclusion. Such a determination, under the PA 237 of 2006, can be appealed to the NRC.

"To have special local regulations you have to meet certain criteria, and in this case our officer felt that they weren't meeting the criteria," Dettloff said. "If there's been ongoing safety problems on the lake they've not been documented. The current existing concerns with the user conflicts, as they relate to marine safety, can be addressed with the existing boating laws that are in place."

"In the last few years there was legislation in the state House that would allow for a certain procedure to ask for special rules on bodies of water where the existing rules didn't satisfy and (local watercraft controls) were needed to solve the problem," Stuart said. "The city took advantage of that and asked for a public hearing by the DNR to determine what kinds of special rules are necessary. We prepared a resolution and sent that to them, and they held a hearing and then issued an opinion (stating no need for local watercraft controls)."

Keego Harbor's appeal is one of two to have been filed since the 2006 law was enacted. The other is a case from Traverse City that will be heard before the NRC later this year.

Because Keego Harbor's appeal was the first in the state, a process had to be put in place by the NRC to ensure a fair hearing of the city's appeal. It was drafting that appeals policy that delayed a decision on the city's appeal for more than a year.

In December 2008, Stuart expressed his frustration with the process, stating "This is a new procedure for the NRC based on a new statute, but this is ridiculous. There should be some scheduling or something put together. To hear nothing for months is inexcusable. I'm frustrated that they are not dealing with it, but what can we do? We've filed everything we are supposed to file; we have to wait for them to do the scheduling."

"This is something, procedurally, that hasn't been done in awhile, if ever, so there are some procedural things they need to clarify first," Dettloff said of the need for an NRC appeals policy.

In June 2009, an appeals policy finally was adopted by the NRC.

Dettloff said the new policy will make future appeals easier because the steps to appeal are clearly defined.

"We didn't have a policy on the books," she said. "Now that people are wanting to appeal, we need one. The policy will give an appeals process that they can go through when they don't agree with DNR decisions on permits, etc. It also gives the NRC a process to follow. There are two basic policies, one that the NRC can conduct a hearing, gather evidence and make a decision. The other is, if the NRC chooses, it can refer the appeal to an administrative judge if they feel it's a complex legal issue."

The policy preamble states, "Certain decisions made by the DNR may be appealed to the NRC under the authority of Part 11 of the Natural Resources Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), 1994, PA 451, [MCL 324.1101] as follows: 1. The issuance, denial, suspension, revocation, annulment, withdrawal, recall, cancellation, or amendment of a permit or operating license issued as defined by Part 13 of the NREPA; 2. Special Watercraft control determinations made under authority of Part 801 of the NREPA."

According to the policy, the procedure for an appeal before the NRC varies depending on whether a contested case hearing was conducted before the DNR made it's decision; or the NRC chooses to refer the matter to an administrative law judge to conduct a contested case hearing and prepare a Proposal for Decision (PFD).

In order to appeal a DNR decision the appellant must submit a notice of appeal. The notice must be in writing and sent to the NRC. The following must be included in the appeal notice: the decision being appealed; the grounds for the appeal; the basis of the appellant's standing to appeal; and the action that the appellant is asking the NRC to take.

Then, the NRC assistant who receives the appeal will open a file on the appeal; provide to the appellant written acknowledgement of receipt of the appeal; provide information regarding the date, time, and location of the NRC's review of the appeal; and publish information regarding the appeal to the agenda of an NRC meeting and to the department calendar.

Once these steps are completed the NRC steps in.

The NRC begins its role by reviewing written arguments received from the appellant and the DNR. This review is based on the record and statutory criteria governing the DNR's decision as stated in the applicable statues, according to the policy. The commission may then hear oral arguments; determine if additional information is needed from either party (if so an extension is granted); and may request and consider advice from legal counsel to the NRC on legal and procedural matters pertaining to the appeal.

A decision will then be released based on a majority vote of the commission. The decision will be issued in writing.

Patricia Spitzley, chief of the DNR's Office of Legal Services, said the policy dictates that each side in an appeals case will have a total of 15 minutes for oral arguments before the NRC. The DNR will argue first, followed by the municipality's attorney. If either side wishes to respond to the other's arguments, they must reserve a portion of their 15 minutes for rebuttal.

"Each side submits briefs supporting their position," Spitzley said. "After the arguments, the NRC can ask some questions, but really the NRC has three options — they can affirm the department's decision, overturn the decision, or remand it back to the department because there isn't enough information."

An NRC decision can be made directly after the appeal hearing or at a later time. The only other option for the city, if the DNR's denial decision is upheld, is to file a lawsuit.

Two weeks after the adoption of this policy the NRC scheduled a hearing for the Cass Lake sandbar case.

"The process has been very slow, and it's unfortunate that the state took this long to get through the process," Keego Harbor's Stuart said. "We hoped the NRC would see that a case was adequately made and allow us to take care of a situation that's difficult for the residents that live there."

According to Stuart, any further action by the city of Keego Harbor will depend on whether there are problems at the sandbar this summer like there have been in the past.

"Lt. Dan Toth held this position prior to me and dealt with most of the Cass Lake sandbar issues," said Sgt. Matt Snyder, commander of the Oakland County Sheriff's Department Marine Division. "What we've done in the past and what we continue to do is not single out anybody — we deal with each incident separately. You're dealing with a lot of crowds out there and a lot of drinking. Even though you have that, there may be only a few individual problems. Our goal is to have a presence and educate people to deal with their problems individually."

As of July 1, Snyder said there hadn't been any problems reported at the Cass Lake sandbar.

"It's been fairly quiet, but on Sundays it can get quite busy," he said. "What we're doing is adjusting our patrols based on the amount of activity there."

From January 2008 through December 2008 there were 1,183.5 Marine Division patrol hours recorded on Cass Lake. During that time there were four boat accidents, 1 fatal accident [not alcohol related], 112 violations cited, 325 warnings issued, 42 complaints received, 400 safety inspections conducted, 45 boater assists recorded, 17 search and rescue hours logged, and 32 body recovery hours recorded [body dumped in lake].
The majority of the violations were moving violations that included reckless operation, no observer while towing and operation while under the influence of alcohol, according to statistics from the Oakland County Sheriff's Department.

While the Keego Harbor appeal was denied, Stuart said "It's too early to tell what the city will do now, but we will explore all of our options."

So, there you have it. By all accounts, hundreds of boats with everyone drinking and only four boating accidents with none being listed as alcohol related. The one fatal accident was a drowning.

The reality of the situation is that boats seldom operate close enough to each other to have an accident even if you are drunk. Now getting in your slip without hitting the dock may be a challenge but everyone on the water knows that unless the guy is a total moron being drunk isn't going to get you in an accident. Most experienced boaters rank towing kids as more dangerous than being drunk.