Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA05432; Wed, 8 Jun 1994 12:02:35 -0700 Return-Path: <luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU-DeleteThis> Received: from paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU by hplms26.hpl.hp.com with SMTP (1.36.108.4/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1S) id AA19955; Wed, 8 Jun 1994 12:04:23 -0700 Received: (from luigi@localhost) by paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9) id LAA14485; Wed, 8 Jun 1994 11:58:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199406081858.LAA14485@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU-DeleteThis> To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis Subject: Re: Rescue and crissy wind In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 08 Jun 1994 10:21:23 PDT." <9406081318.tn966652@aol.com-DeleteThis> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 1994 11:58:44 -0700 From: Luigi Semenzato <luigi@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU-DeleteThis>
> [...] they [the Coast Guard] are getting increasingly upset of
> having to "continuously rescue those windsurfers." They are talking
> of trying require the purchase of a permits to allow you to launch
> off crissy.
Why don't they just charge for rescues? There must be some profound
reason, but at the moment it escapes me. Most windsurfers would be
able to pay for it, and perhaps even happy to do so if it's cheaper
than their about-to-be-ditched $800 rig.
Perhaps they could charge less than the calculated cost of the rescue,
so it would still be a partly subsidized service. The main benefit
from charging directly is that we would not be subsidizing stupidity,
like wearing thin wetsuits or not replacing worn-out parts.
On the other hand, it's quite possible that most of the people who
need to be rescued aren't doing anything more stupid than average, in
which case perhaps a permit would be a fair solution. Does anybody
have a feeling for which is the case? ---Luigi
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:27:26 PST