Co Poisoning in the channel

[C-2]

I think you can vote more than once!

[HighRoller]

The problem has nothing to do with CO or alcohol or one way traffic. It has to do with TOO MANY F%^ING PEOPLE ON THE LAKE!!!!!!!If 50 million people insist on jamming themselves into an area designed for a thousand, WTF do you think is gonna happen? I'm still in favor of limiting the number of boats on the lake on any given weekend. They can make "controlled access points", link them by computer and when they reach the magic number BANG! Nobody else gets on until somebody leaves. It might suck for those who get stoned at the ramp gate, but since people refuse to control themselves something has to be done. It's either that or have the whole place shut down eventually.

[NOTALENT]

I would not mind the limiting fact, as long as people with residencys are aloud on all the time..kind of like Lake Arrowhead but maybe a littles less strict .

[Ivan Dan]

On-Line Poll Results
"What do you think is the best option for dealing with carbon monoxide concentration in the Bridgewater Channel?"
51.4%
Closing the Channel to boat traffic during busy weekends?
27.4%
Prohibit boats from idling in the Channel? $
8.6%
None of the above?
7.6%
Install air monitors and signal lights and alarms to alert people when CO concentrations are dangerously high?
4.9%
Strict enforcement of the "No Swimming" restriction in the Channel?
1495 total votes
I voted to Install air monitors and signal lights and alarms to alert people when CO conecntrations are dangerously high

[GASHGAZER]

That's a good idea for now, but what if your that last boat that can't get on... picture that you've just driven 4 hours, spent $$ on hotel, waiting in 110 degree weather and get denied... you don't think tempers will flair?? Havasu is a big place with lots of water, and the channel is part of the fun. For the most part I enjoy sandbar and being able to walk around and socialize and watch the attractions. And once I am on the water, I don't get off until way after sundown...
BTW I was not trying to segregate one group of vessel (river lice), but if there is visible pollution coming from a boat, they should be denied access. Let's face it, when it's hot as hell on a non-windy day, that smoke just sits. And to the lamen, that is construed as CO, even though CO is oderless and colorless. Plus that stuff just stanks!! I'm just all about having fun and relaxing... and hiding the keys while I enjoy the day with a couple coldies of course

[GASHGAZER]

Also, how can you prevent boats from idleing in the channel?? Do they mean the boats that are already beached?? Cus the traffic is always moving, whether it's a snails crawl, it moves.

[HavasuDreamin']

Originally posted by HighRoller
I'm still in favor of limiting the number of boats on the lake on any given weekend.
That isn't going to work either. The problem with that is diagnosed in your post. Hypothetically speaking, if it is determined that the lake can hold 5,000 boats, and 5,000 boats are allowed on, but then decide to all hang in the channel, and sandbar, then you are still faced with the same problem.

[HavasuDreamin']

Originally posted by GASHGAZER
Let's face it, when it's hot as hell on a non-windy day, that smoke just sits. And to the lamen, that is construed as CO, even though CO is oderless and colorless.
Playing devils advocate, what if they did ban the 2 strokes. My bet is the channel is still over the safe CO limit because of all the 540 chevys with large cams either cruising through slowly, or idleing to recharge the batterys, etc. Now you still have the same problem.
The only way to ensure there is a safe CO level is to reduce the amount of CO emmissions in that "area" either through (1) less CO emissions, or (2) dispersing the current high CO levels through fans, etc.
What if they limited the amount of boats that could be in the channel at one time in addition to monitoring the idleing of boats while in the channel. IE.....one in, one out.
HD

[RiverKitty]

Results of Poll:
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/...00/414poll.JPG
Funny, I never posted this article until now but since the subject came up....again, I figured now would be as good as time as any to post it. This article was pulished by "Soundings Magazine", which interestingly enough, is mainly distributed to the Eastern Coast. The photographer in the article is ME!!! If you want to take a better look at the pic, go here (http://www.***boat.com/image_center/...eekend2003.jpg). Warning: The pic is "kinda" large! The article was published, October 2003 and the pic was taken Memorial Weekend 2003.
In this pic you can clearly see a light blue fog of CO across the channel.
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/...gsMagazine.jpg
Although installing monitors & warning lights might cost the City some extra money in the beginning, I think it may well be worth it in the long run. No different than installing Carbon Monoxide Sensors in our homes....but a little pricier! I feel it would help boaters to be a lot more aware of their surroundings. I know if I looked over and saw a red light showing that the carbon monoxide poisoning was dangerously high, I would take whatever measures necessary to lower it. That combined with one way traffic as well as no boats idling in the channel should drastically reduce the amount of CO poisoning in the atmosphere surrounding the channel. However, one cannot force a fellow boater to act responsibly. The City can only do so much; the rest is up to us.

[Chase]

There was just an article relating to this in a recent power boat magazine as well....