lottawatta

Those old flat kites are cool. Believe it or not, Kite tournaments were part of AWSA back in the day. Slalom was judged with the kite flyer navigating around streams of water where turn bouys would be. I know this guy is not starting out and landing on skis, but it is cool nonetheless:

Who's got the video?

Many years ago I was down in Florida taking a few sets a Peterson's when I blew out a Connelly jump binding. I jumped in the car, went over to performance, and Bill not only sold me what I needed, but took the time to help me take the binding apart and put it back together to get me back on the water ASAP. When I got home, there was a new set of foot beds in my mailbox from Bill as he didn't have any in stock when I was there. Since then, I always check with Performance before I buy anything. Bill has always supported 3-event skiers.

I guess it is all well and good for those who buy the lake policy through Global or have coverage through a property owner's association, a farm policy, or an extension of their homeowner's policy...........But for those who ski on public or semi-private water, and rely on the basic liability coverage a sanctioned practice or tournament provide, skiing just got more expensive. What abut the clubs who ski on public water? This year they all had to become trained drivers to satisfy USAWS. Next year they may have to buy a liability policy in order to satisfy USAWS. I know of one club specifically who has an active membership of skiers who ski into -35 and -38, don't ski tournaments (or haven't for some time), but satisfy USAWS requirements for the illusion of insurance it provides. The club's sanctioned practice insurance gives the local authority a warm fuzzy feeling and allows them to keep installing their slalom course year after year. Good luck trying to get an affordable liability policy for a group of five familes who may keep a slalom course and a dock on a body of water where John Q. Public can fish, cruise, or ride their PWC's. Additionally, I don't have liability coverage off my property when I uproot my ski club's equipment and take it to a couty park to host events like the Jr. U.S. Open or Disabled Worlds. Where does that leave me?

Sorry, it was the BallOfSpray vs. AWSA thread, not the USAWS vs. Ball of Spray thread as I erroneously stated above.

FYI to lake owners and tournament organizers: USAWS possibly looking to mandate Site Liability Insurance Source: In the USAWS vs. Ball of Spray thread, OB posted the board packet for the upcoming meeting. That packet contains the minutes from the EC meeting held this past December. Page 28: "Action Item #2: HQ will investigate whether mandating site liability insurance might possibly reduce the cost of our insurances for those sites hosting tournaments,"

I don't pretend to be an insider. However, the last I heard, was that our only remaining benefit from our alignment with the usoc was limited support in the form of healthcare benefits for a limited few of our elite athletes. I don't know if that is true or not.

If I understand GregDavis' proposal above, he wants to have a floating cable mainline, and individually anchored skier buoys? If so, then I would second that. I do respect his opinion either way as he is a verteran course installer. If the thought is to put all 26 anchors in individually, this is a method I would only recommend on a drained private lake. I put many courses in the Great Miami River over the years, and the biggest headaches came with the individually anchored course. The individual anchors (2'x2'x6" concrete with rebar) almost always had something caught on them, were constantly washed downstream by trees when the water was high, and were a pain to place and move. We fooled with various subfloats and counter balances. The best river course design we came up with was a high quality mainline with lots of tension and lots of weight at each end. I think our last slalom course mainline anchors were over 1000 pounds upstream and 800 pounds downstream with enough tension that you could walk on the mainline from boat guide to boat guide. Then we individually anchored the skier buoys using tires filled with concrete and rebar stakes through them. Subfloats were at 4' depth, and had light bungee line to the skier buoy that would break away easily when the fishermen tried to pull it out of place. I will admit though, our Great Miami River site has more current, more flow, and more trash than either of your two pools on the Scioto. 10' of rise and enough current to trick ski with a rope tied to a post was not uncommon for our site after overnight rains up north. I have the survey equipment and have placed many courses in private lakes as well. There is no greater value than a well engineered, high quality, floating course from EZ slalom. Period. There is no reason that with the right anchors, tension on the mainline, and river current adapters, your floating course can not be made accurate. I wish I had his products to work with in the early 90's when we fought that river year in and year out. At the very least, use one of his heavy duty mainlines, then individually anchor the skier buoys to elimiante current and wind problems. As far as permits go, I always think it is better to ask forgiveness than permission. As of right now, in Ohio, your permit would have to go through the local authority (presumably Columbus). However, in the near future, all courses in the state (public water OR private lakes) may have to be permitted through the ODNR. Proposed legislation is still pending on that. Best of luck, Lottawatta

The MWR just started, so most midwest skiers have not yet skied.

I should probably clarify the fact that I can never really pump water in to my lake for any period of time as my lake is the water table, I can only "borrow" water from a neighboring lake as it just seeps right back out through the sand/gravel almost as fast as I put it in. When I raise my level 1 foot, if I stop the pump, I lose 4" the first day, 2-3" the second day, 1-2" the third, etc. So in order to maintain that 1' of water pumped in, I have to run the pump at speed for 2.5-3 days, then at idle for 2-3 days during the tournament. My gas powered pump uses around 3 GPH at speed, and 1 GPH at idle.

If my math is correct, you have 2,172,192 gallons of water in every inch of depth in an 80 acre lake. Assuming an evaporation rate of 1" a day, you would need a pump capable of 1508.5 gallons a minute. A typical 6" centrifugal pump available at any contractor's rental place should be in that rage. An electric pump is WAY cheaper to run that a gas or diesel fueled pump. I have a 50hp electric powered pump capable of 2200 gpm I can make you a deal on if you have access to 3 phase electric service. I bought a 6" gas powered irrigation pump to pump water into my lake for tournaments during a couple of dry years. For reference, it cost me close to $1000 in fuel to raise my 17 acre lake 1 foot.

My Dad always told me not to criticize the leaders unless I was willing to get involved and change things myself. (He was on the AWSA BOD for one term, pre usa-ws.) At this point, I am not willing to do that. I choose to give back to the sport in other ways. But as a lake owner, judge, driver, competitor, and promoter of the sport, I am going to make my stance known to them. The leadership needs to focus on removing barriers of entry into our sport. They need to make it easier for a young family with a ski boat to join a club or private lake, enter tournaments and enjoy the lifesytle many of us know and love. The rule book has drastically expanded in the last 17 years I have been a regular judge. The impositions on the lake owner continue to increase. The insurance regulations continue to change. The technical requirements for tournament sites are continually becoming more smothering. We need to be eliminating the barriers of entry into our sport, not telling drivers who want to drive during practice (not even in a tournament) that they must submit to a background check and have attained trained driver status in order to pull their kids in the slalom course at 20mph on a private lake with no one else around in order to meet insurance requirements. USAWS as a whole, had a net loss of 438 active members last year. Of that net loss 362 of them were AWSA skiers. Show skiers added 141, and Disabled added 2. The rest of the disciplines lost members. I am sure some of it is economy related, but it looks like we are driving members away, not attracting them.

EXACTLY, they are working on the details, but the mandate is already in place. Just like the health care law, they had to pass it to know what is in it! One thing I find particularly offensive is this: from the board packet with emphasis added by me: "USA-WS's insurance partners (Global Marine and ESIX) have agreed to provide screening criteria used by other NGB's to assist in the development of USA-WS' screening criteria. It is anticipated that the screening will be undertaken by a third-party agency, which will independently determine (subject to appropriate rights of review as to the accuracy of the underlying information) whether a particular candidate passes or fails the applicable criteria." Our leaders passed this without knowing the exact criteria by which a driver would be judged! Further, they presumably knew about this from Dec24th, the date of the proposal, until the board meeting, kept it under wraps, and passed it without input from the sport disciplines or general membership.

ummmmm No, this doesn't look like a proposal to me. In fact the board meeting minutes list the motion to accept the proposal and implementation schedule as "approved". Therefore, according to the implementation schedule, it is effective immediately.

I think the clarification has to come from the insurer as it appears they are the ones in charge here.

Sure, it is in the board packet as posted on the front page of USAWaterski.org in PDF form. Pages 48-50 and/or 107-109. http://www.usawaterski.org/graphics/downloads/2012JanuaryUSAWSBoardMinutesandPacket.pdf I call particular attention to page 6, Task #2 which states: 2. Jeff Smith and Headquarters will work with Larry Meddock regarding driving standards and educational materials to insure that USA Water Ski’s programs meet or exceed U.S. Coast Guard standards.

Actually, it is not in the comments section, it is part 3 of the risk management proposal: 3. Educational Program Updates. USA-WS and its Sport Divisions shall review and update all USA-WS driver's training and instructional programs to include the following: A. State boating law requirements, e.g., PFD and fire extinguisher requirements; B. Basic boating safety and "rules of the water" training;se C. Safety checklists, and operating requirements and recommendations from towboat manufacturers; Ohio boating law requires registration, even on private lakes. And while most of us on private lakes will continue to NOT register our boats, I can see the fact that we don't have registration in accordance with our state law as a means for the insurance company to deny a claim. Additionally, I went to a USCG courtesy check a few years ago, and the first thing they told me was that my registration was expired and that a current registration or a USCG documentation was required to be on the boat at all times to serve as proof of ownership to be considered USCG compliant.

@jdarwin I should have been more clear, that would apply in Ohio. I am not sure about other states regulations. However, it could be inferred from the comments section of the risk management proposal that the USCG regulations would apply to all states as well.

Let me clarify my position. I am not anti safety. I can even see the need to further or better qualify a tournament driver. But to do it by a BMV background check is not a solution to the perceived problem. Further restrictions on the average skier, and serious course skier who may seldom or never ski tournaments, but may belong to a private club, does nothing but discourage participation. I have no problem submitting to a background check to keep my driver's rating. I do have a problem with losing members to my ski club because someone sitting behind a desk at some insurance company decides they are a risk to the organization based on whatever criteria they decide to impose.

This impacts the everyday skier. If one of my members brought a guest to my lake, who may or may not have been there before, but has been active in tournaments before, and that guest ran into the back of the turn island, in order for me to have any coverage (as lake owner) from USAWS affiliated club policy, then the practice has to be sanctioned. Last year we sanctioned practice every day from sun up to sun down during ski season.

Covered practice = sanctioned practice. Most lake owners around here rely on some coverage from USAWS for regular practice. Here is what clubs had to do last year in order to realize the coverage USAWS membership provides: IMPORTANT PLEASE READ - NEW CLUB PRACTICE/EXHIBITION SANCTION REQUIREMENTS: Your USA Water Ski club affiliation makes your club eligible to host and sanction tournaments, practices, clinics and exhibitions/ski shows and related activities through USA Water Ski. As part of sanctioning, USA Water Ski provides General Liability and Participant Accident coverage. USA Water Ski is pleased to announce the release of a new online Practice and Exhibition sanctioning program. The program streamlines the Practice and Exhibition sanctioning process for USA Water Ski-affiliated clubs by giving them the ability to apply for Practice and Exhibition sanctions online, and immediately receive an approval via e-mail with their sanction number. It also allows clubs to maintain their Practice and Exhibition sanctions by adding new dates, locations and officials. Beginning in 2011, clubs will be required to formally sanction ALL club practices and exhibitions through USA Water Ski and adhere to the sanctioning requirements for insurance coverage to be in place for these events. NEW for 2011!

@ob My comments above about registration apply to Ohio as, technically, you have to register in ohio even on private lakes. @jcamp I DO find this onerous as half the members of my ski club do not ski tournaments. I make them join USAWS as active members and make them adhere to the boat insurance guidelines in order to give me the fuzzy feeling of SOME slight coverage, were an accident to happen during skiing on my lake. If I ask my non-tournament skiing members to enroll in a USCG class, get an ohio boat operator's license, register their boat which is normally only used on my private lake, take a trained driver clinic, and get a motor vehicle background check they may decide private lake membership just got too expensive. I already set minimums on liability coverage on their boat owner's policy, make them name me as additional insured, join USAWS, and pay yearly dues. Around my area, half (or more) of the membership in ski clubs is made up of skiers who don't ski tournaments. These people are already questioning why they need USAWS and they ONLY reason they will tell you is because the lake owner requires it for insurance purposes. If my lake owner's policy is through USAWS, I need to have the practices sanctioned as "covered practices". They can't be covered practices without all these additional requirements. These additional requirements on drivers just eliminated half of the membership of my club including the two guys I ski with the most. Thanks USAWS.

According to the comments section in the board packet, it looks like there will be no standard in what constitutes a risky driver. Nor will there be any input allowed by usaws, the decision will be up to the insurance company.

This is right out of the board packet as published on USAWS website USA WATER SKI RISK MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL December 24, 2011 1. Drivers Rating Requirements. In addition to meeting all other applicable requirements, e.g., USA Water Ski membership, drivers shall meet the following requirements: A. All boat drivers (towboats, pick up boats and other watercraft) in USA Water Ski "covered practices" and sanctioned events shall comply with, and meet all requirements, for boater's training and/or licensing under state law applicable in the driver's state of residence; B. Additionally, all towboat drivers (drivers towing event participants) at USA Water Ski "covered practices" and sanctioned events shall: i. hold a current USA Water Ski trained driver's rating or Sport Division driver's rating (a "Rated Driver"); or, ii. be accompanied (in the boat) and under the direct supervision of a Rated Driver as a part of a driver's training or instructional program. 2. Driver Screening. In addition to meeting all other applicable requirements: A. Rated Drivers shall: i. have a current and valid motor vehicle operator's license at all times while they hold a USA-WS driver's rating (or, in the case of a Rated Driver who does not currently hold a motor vehicle operator's license, demonstrate that the reason that he/she does not currently hold this license is not due to the fact thathis/her motor vehicle operator's license privileges have been suspended or revoked); and, ii. undergo a motor vehicle (motor vehicle operator's license) records review following the adoption of this requirement, and thereafter in connection with any new driver's rating application and at least every two (2) years thereafter in order to maintain their driver's rating (except in the case of NWSRA event drivers who do not hold an ongoing USA-WS driver's rating, in which case the NWSRA event driver shall provide proof of a current motor vehicle operator's license prior to driving the event) and every two years thereafter; and, iii. meet minimum "safe driving" standards established by USA Water Ski at all times while they hold a USA-WS's driver's rating. B. Any USA-WS Driver's Rating shall be immediately and automatically deemed revoked upon the failure to meet these requirements; C. Rated Drivers shall immediately report to USA Water Ski any suspension or loss of their motor vehicle operator's license.

FYI: As I read the board meeting minutes and risk management proposal, in order to drive, not only for a tournament, but for a covered practice, you will need to; a. be in a USCG complaint vessel with proper equipment and registration, b. have a valid motor vehicle operator's license issued by your state of residence, c. have passed a background screen administered by USAWS's insurance company, who, AT THEIR SOLE DISCRETION, can deceide whther you are are too risky based on your driving record (who has two accidents on their record regardless of fault?), d. have a driver's rating of trained driver or above, e. have a valid watercraft license in the state of residence - which in Ohio is required of you are born on or after 1/1/1982, This is another huge hurdle for bringing new skiers into the tournament scene. Many, many club skiers are going to be excluded in covered prctices as a result of this. How many wives who pull their husbands in the evening are trained drivers? How many collegiate waterski programs or ski clubs rely on having the "covered practice" status for insurance to ski on a leased waterway?