texasfishingforum.com logo
Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
Headogears, Rebecca Carroll, Billy S, Boomersooner89, Chapman0820
111000 Registered Users
Top Posters(All Time)
TexDawg 91,404
hopalong 81,082
Pilothawk 78,477
John175� 72,352
JDavis7873® 67,395
Derek 🐝 62,647
Tritonman 58,713
Bigbob_FTW 57,739
Mark Perry 56,209
facebook
Forum Statistics
Forums60
Topics756,786
Posts9,502,544
Members111,000
Most Online36,273
Jan 23rd, 2013
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Legislative Alert - HB 337 #13162000 05/21/19 08:13 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,864
B
BrianTx01 Offline OP
TFF Celebrity
OP Offline
TFF Celebrity
B
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,864
HB 337 has passed both the House and Senate and his heading to the governor. If passed, it will require kill switch lanyards to be worn at all times the motor is running. I for one think this would be a pain when throwing the net or setting anchor. Please call Governor Abbott at (512) 463-2000 and ask him to veto this bill.


Fighting Texas Aggie Class of 2001
Proud UNT Alumni
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162014 05/21/19 08:28 PM
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,364
A
ACAMS Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
A
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,364
How did this happen .... they are mostly Republican and have common sense, and therefor should know we have common sense.


><\\\(º>___><\\\(º> http://myfolderz.com/Jigs/Jigs.php_<º)///><___<º)///><


Free image uploader for TFF members: http://myfolderz.com/TFF/pics.php
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162017 05/21/19 08:38 PM
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 7,113
GIG'EM AGGIES Online Content
TFF Celebrity
Online Content
TFF Celebrity
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 7,113
Originally Posted by BrianTx01
HB 337 has passed both the House and Senate and his heading to the governor. If passed, it will require kill switch lanyards to be worn at all times the motor is running. I for one think this would be a pain when throwing the net or setting anchor. Please call Governor Abbott at (512) 463-2000 and ask him to veto this bill.

Good luck on enforcing it. We're not even required to wear PFD's unless we're in a tournament. Next they will want us to wear helmets.


I am a Senager. (Senior teenager) I have everything that I wanted as a teenager, only 50 years later. I don't have to go to school or work. I get an allowance every month. I don't have a curfew, I have a drivers license,a PU truck and I have a bass boat. I am blessed.

Conscience never acquits, it either accuses or excuses.
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162033 05/21/19 08:57 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,864
B
BrianTx01 Offline OP
TFF Celebrity
OP Offline
TFF Celebrity
B
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,864
I am one of the few that wears a life jacket all the time, but that is my choice. I can also see a valid reason for kill switches. I just prefer the state let me decide when to wear one and when not to.


Fighting Texas Aggie Class of 2001
Proud UNT Alumni
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162158 05/21/19 10:34 PM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 75
T
Texas Grown Offline
Outdoorsman
Offline
Outdoorsman
T
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 75
What about some of the older motors, especially small ones, that don't have kill switches? How will that be handled?


G3 river Jon - "The Wild Thing"

"The fish are biting, and there's hogs to be kilt. Gotta go!"
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: Texas Grown] #13162206 05/21/19 11:35 PM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,263
B
BillS2006 Online Content
TFF Team Angler
Online Content
TFF Team Angler
B
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,263
Originally Posted by Texas Grown
What about some of the older motors, especially small ones, that don't have kill switches? How will that be handled?


Install one. I'm all for the law, maybe it will save a few lives on the party lakes.



Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162246 05/22/19 12:37 AM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,296
J
JCBfromTHF Offline
TFF Celebrity
Offline
TFF Celebrity
J
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,296
Law with good intention but not a fan of it. I wear mine all the time but my first boat that was made in 1986 did not have one. If they force people to install one that's BS!

Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162284 05/22/19 01:25 AM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,799
B
bronco71 Online Content
Extreme Angler
Online Content
Extreme Angler
B
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,799
I don't mind as long as is with the big motor in gear, not idling and not the trolling motor. I like to keep my kill switch attached to my life jacket and take it on/off went I am ready to go or get where I am going, MLF style.


1999 Triton TX21/225 Mercury Optimax
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162334 05/22/19 02:08 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 60
J
jdr418 Offline
Outdoorsman
Offline
Outdoorsman
J
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 60
Here is the bill as passed. Will not require a boat that was not fitted with a kill switch originally to be retrofitted. If you have seen the video shot by Skeet Reese of the accident this past weekend on Table Rock you may think twice about not using the kill switch. I think they should have worded it as above idle speed instead of while underway.


86R3566 AAF-D

By: Larson H.B. No. 337



A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT
relating to the use of emergency engine cutoff switches on
motorboats.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Subchapter D, Chapter 31, Parks and Wildlife
Code, is amended by adding Section 31.1071 to read as follows:
Sec. 31.1071. OPERATION OF MOTORBOAT WITH EMERGENCY ENGINE
CUTOFF SWITCH. (a) In this section, "engine cutoff switch" means
an emergency switch installed on a motorboat that:
(1) is designed to shut off the engine if:
(A) the motorboat operator using a lanyard
attachment activates the switch by falling overboard or otherwise
moving beyond the length of the lanyard; or
(B) the motorboat operator or a passenger using a
wireless attachment activates the switch by falling overboard and
submerging a man-overboard transmitter; and
(2) attaches:
(A) physically to the motorboat operator through
the use of a lanyard worn by the operator; or
(B) wirelessly through the use of a
water-activated man-overboard transmitter worn by the motorboat
operator or any similarly equipped passenger on the motorboat.
(b) A motorboat operator may not operate a motorboat less
than 26 feet in length and equipped by the manufacturer with an
engine cutoff switch while the engine is running and the motorboat
is underway without first verifying that the switch is operational
and fully functional and:
(1) if using a lanyard attachment, properly attaching
the lanyard, as appropriate for the specific motorboat, to the
operator's body or to the clothing or personal flotation device
being worn by the operator; or
(2) if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching
to each individual on the motorboat an operational man-overboard
transmitter.
SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2019.

Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162366 05/22/19 02:33 AM
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 592
L
Littlefeather Offline
Pro Angler
Offline
Pro Angler
L
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 592
Quote from Act: while motor is running and motorboat is underway.
Underway is defined in maritime law is when outdirive is engaged and vessel is moving. So, idling while throwing a net or anchoring or anything other than motor in gear should be fine.

Disclaimer: I’m a huge proponent of personal choice! Same with motorcycle helmets. I like to choose when to wear it.
I did wear my life jacket today. Just a personal decision.


Just dropping by to see what condition my condition was in. Willie Nelson
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162610 05/22/19 12:57 PM
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,420
F
Fishin' Nut Offline
TFF Celebrity
Offline
TFF Celebrity
F
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,420
Alabama made me install one on my boat. Took me all of 30 minutes. 10 minutes was me crying because I had to drill a new hole in my console.




Kirk Long (Kikr) March 4, 1959 - June 19, 2009
I guess the Lord needed a fishing buddy more than me.
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BrianTx01] #13162635 05/22/19 01:24 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,864
B
BrianTx01 Offline OP
TFF Celebrity
OP Offline
TFF Celebrity
B
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,864
I think underway could be interpretated to mean not at anchor, aground, or tied off to a fixed object. I think they should have used the term "underway under power".


Fighting Texas Aggie Class of 2001
Proud UNT Alumni
Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: jdr418] #13162764 05/22/19 02:36 PM
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 77
Boomerbrewer Offline
Outdoorsman
Offline
Outdoorsman
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 77
There are a lot of fishing activities that need the operator to be a few feet from the helm at very slow speeds (2-3 mph) like downrigging or trolling. If you have to kill the motor and come to a stop to land a fish with 4 lines out, think of the tangled mess.....

The way this reads also contradicts itself. I could handle this if I got a wireless kill switch but I don`t want on on every person in the boat.

"(B) the motorboat operator or a passenger using a wireless attachment"

"if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching to each individual on the motorboat"

So which is it? this is a poorly worded bill that is not thought through very well. Add "on plane" or at speed greater than 5 mph and I would be fine with it.

Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: Boomerbrewer] #13162786 05/22/19 02:56 PM
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,263
B
BillS2006 Online Content
TFF Team Angler
Online Content
TFF Team Angler
B
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,263
if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching
to each individual on the motorboat an operational man-overboard
transmitter.
Originally Posted by Boomerbrewer
There are a lot of fishing activities that need the operator to be a few feet from the helm at very slow speeds (2-3 mph) like downrigging or trolling. If you have to kill the motor and come to a stop to land a fish with 4 lines out, think of the tangled mess.....

The way this reads also contradicts itself. I could handle this if I got a wireless kill switch but I don`t want on on every person in the boat.

"(B) the motorboat operator or a passenger using a wireless attachment"

"if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching to each individual on the motorboat"

So which is it? this is a poorly worded bill that is not thought through very well. Add "on plane" or at speed greater than 5 mph and I would be fine with it.

The way you wrote it, changes it original meaning. You should post it as it is written.

if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching
to each individual on the motorboat an operational man-overboard
transmitter.



Re: Legislative Alert - HB 337 [Re: BillS2006] #13162945 05/22/19 05:13 PM
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 77
Boomerbrewer Offline
Outdoorsman
Offline
Outdoorsman
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by BillS2006
if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching
to each individual on the motorboat an operational man-overboard
transmitter.
Originally Posted by Boomerbrewer
There are a lot of fishing activities that need the operator to be a few feet from the helm at very slow speeds (2-3 mph) like downrigging or trolling. If you have to kill the motor and come to a stop to land a fish with 4 lines out, think of the tangled mess.....

The way this reads also contradicts itself. I could handle this if I got a wireless kill switch but I don`t want on on every person in the boat.

"(B) the motorboat operator or a passenger using a wireless attachment"

"if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching to each individual on the motorboat"

So which is it? this is a poorly worded bill that is not thought through very well. Add "on plane" or at speed greater than 5 mph and I would be fine with it.

The way you wrote it, changes it original meaning. You should post it as it is written.

if using a wireless attachment, properly attaching
to each individual on the motorboat an operational man-overboard
transmitter.


It is a direct quote, I did not rewrite anything. I was just pointing out the part that confused me. Perhaps it would have been better to repost the whole thing and highlight those sections.

It seems to me that if interpreted as all people in the boat have to wear a MOB device, that is much more restrictive than just the operator wearing a lanyard. It does not make sense that there would be additional restriction just because the connection to the kill switch is wireless instead of a lanyard.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread


© 1998-2019 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3