Environment vs. Safety

This year 1 person has drowned at Mavericks, Sion Milosky, and another came very close, Jacob Trette; resurfacing the long drawn out issue of personal watercraft (PWC) use in the Monterrey Bay National Marine Sanctuary since 2003. Trette was rescued by a PWC that was illegally out in the water that day and those present during Milosky's death claim that this vehicle would have saved his life.

The history of this controversy dates back to the '90s there was a wave of environmentalism created the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that brought forth the idea of banning PWCs in what we now call the Monterrey Bay Sanctuary.

This issue was a hot topic in 2003, 2008, and today. I could not find when the law was officially passed but the current law states that "PWCs are allowed at Maverick's in the months of December, January and February whenever the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issues a high surf advisory." But sometimes while waves can reach up to 25ft, this might not be considered a surf advisory. You can check out the rest of the rules and regulations of the Monterrey Bay National Marine Sanctuary at its website.

Described on Frank Quirarte's blog, a well known surf photographer at Mavericks, the controversy is between the Surfrider Foundation in San Mateo County and local surfers. The Surfrider Foundation is concerned about harming marine life in the sanctuary and point to a number of problems with inexperienced PWC operators and emission problems of the PWC models at the time.

Local surfers, often sponsored by large companies like Quicksilver and Ripcurl, believe that it is an issue of safety and that lives could have been saved if these vehicles were allowed in the water.

It is great to see the Foundation, during the last decade, be so successful in protecting Monterrey Bay but maybe they have gone a bit too far with their resources.
Quirarte points towards larger issues: oil spills, commercial fishing, and garbage to name a few, that the Surfrider Foundation should be focusing on instead of going after surfers. I think the Surfrider Foundation is walking a fine line between supporting surfing and strictly the environment. Although, its mission statement

"the protection and enjoyment of oceans, waves and beaches through a powerful activist network" definitely leans more towards protecting the oceans for the broader public rather than surfers in general.

Taylor Paul, from Surfing magazine, suggests finding a middle ground where professional and qualified operators are allowed to drive PWC during big wave surf sessions.

Many could say that the environment should precede those few who want to put themselves in dangerous situations but what has changed is the environmentally friendliness of today's PWC.

Now, Paul does mention that with our State's budget crises there isn't a lot of money to go around and offers a solution where Surf Comapnies who have a vested interested in the sport should step in a pay for the equipment, training, and supervision of operating PWCs during heavy surf conditions.

I totally agree. Even if there were no sponsors--because there are individuals who feel that large corporations tarnish the sport-- I believe that these companies have some sort of social responsibility to protect those individuals that are pushing the limits of surfing and enhancing its image which directly effects these companies.

Prince!

So I admit it. I'm not embarrassed. Last night I went to see Prince at the LA Forum.

Some of my buddies had an extra ticket and dragged me along--this was their 3rd straight week in a row to see Prince. At first I was skeptical, I didn't really know any of his songs which would definitely be no where on my itunes (at least then they wouldn't) but, how can you not go when tickets are $25. Plus, I always imagined him as the wierd Michael Jackson type and he might be gone tomorrow.

And although Prince is a short little guy in some sort of elaborate jumpsuit (depending on the song), this guy rips on the guitar. And it was such a wierd experience that it was awesome. When I say wierd I am referring to the crazy girl with the larger than life afro that opened for him to his band on stage. He also played 3 encores after the show. It's always cool when artists are good to their fans.

I am officially a Prince fan. Maybe when I see him play next week I'll get to meet him; stranger things have happened.

The Tijuana Dentist

A day trip to Tijuana, Mexico for some tacos or churros? Definitely. Surf trip to Ensenada? Of course. Taking your car to the mechanic 10 minutes south of San Ysidro? If it's cheap, why not. Crossing the border to get your teeth looked at? I don't know about that.

I have one buddy of mine who has been down there to get his teeth fixed but he's kind of a strange guy so I didn't pay much attention to him.

But maybe it's way better than we think. At least the writers of The Real Tijuana think so in How to Choose a Dentist in Baja California.

Apparently dentists are better trained and regulated according to the Asociacion Dental Mexicana  with 5,000 certified dentists just in Tijuana. Although be aware that there are others who aren't regulated.

A few interesting things that I learned are that dentists in Tijuana often take cash but also U.S. dental insurance as been known to work and that the scope of practice is much larger. All sorts of procedures can be done in the same office along with non-dental ones as well; "tummy-tuck, Botox injections, and porcelain veneers all at the same time."

Plus, it was noted that "your Mexican dentist will spend more time with you, answering your questions and putting you at ease, and will take extra pride in the painlessness of their work." Apparently it's a cultural thing.

Although cultural differences can cause problems. My favorite examples they gave were:

"Every Halloween...one of the most successful practices in Tijuana decorates its waiting room in north-of-the-border macabre, going so far as to play sound effects of women being tortured over the sound system. Only gringos might think that the screams were coming from patients inside. Nor are people in Mexico put off by realistic anatomical images or by cartoon drawings of teeth in pain: on the contrary, as they walk between the roots of a molar in order to enter a building, they are reassured that they’ve come to the right place."

But don't worry, these guys all speak English!

I think what this writer is pointing out that Baja California is a great option for healthcare, not just to save some money (which you inevitably will) but in order to get quality care that might be hard to come by in the States.

Either way, it was a very informative article but I still don't think I'm ready for this.

Newport Lifguards

I just got this email forewarded from the San Diego Lifeguard Association (SDLA)

Friends,
I am reaching out to ask for help on behalf of the Newport Beach Full Time Lifeguards.
The City recently presented a plan that cuts the full time lifeguard staff by +50%: from 17 to 8 positions. This will affect the quality and safety of the lifeguard services in Newport Beach for years to come. The City Manager, Dave Kiff does not seem to share our concern as noted in the Daily Pilot and an ABC7-TV interview:
"I don't think the city's taxpayers should have to fund someone's choices to go swimming in January or December when the waves are rougher, there's more risk…," said Kiff.
As a professional lifeguard, a 20+ year city resident and a parent of 3 children who use the ocean year round, I find his comment abhorrent and misleading. The apparent disregard for life speaks for itself. I believe his comment is misleading in that the City's Taxpayers do not pay for beach safety services. Revenues from the beach users, including beach parking, citations and TOT (bed-tax paid on weekly rentals) are more than sufficient to cover the beach safety service and have been increasing even in the down economy.
Here is just a glimpse into what the proposal entails:
• Junior Lifeguard Supervision Cut by 50%: the proposal has the Junior Lifeguard Captain position eliminated and replaced by a non-Safety person. This will affect the high standards of this self-funded program and could lead to a future reduction in participants to maintain supervision and safety ratios.
• The cuts will affect Peak Season supervision and patrol of the beaches: The proposal calls for only three full time lifeguards daily to staff, manage and supervise 70 seasonal lifeguards.
• Fall through Spring there will only be 3 lifeguards on duty per day: to respond to all emergencies, beach & marine calls and EMS for the 7 miles of oceanfront. Any sick days, vacations, injuries, or training would require overtime backfills costing more money.
As professional Lifeguards, we believe that these cuts are not in the interest of the City, the taxpayers and the visitors to Newport Beach. We see Newport Beach as a world-class destination that should have safe and clean beaches. Our priority is to provide safe beaches and protect lives in this year round destination that we call home...

Mike Halphide
VP Newport Beach Lifeguard Management Association
www.newportbeachsafety.org
mhalphide@gmail.com
nblifeguards@gmail.com

This is horrible, a big mistake, and Dave Kiff's comment is completely wrong.

Yes, if an individual uses common sense they should come to the conclusion that in the winter there are larger waves so it's more dangerous, and that they should re-consider entering the ocean. I also agree with the opinion that it's someone's decsion to enter the ocean and put themselves at risk.

But, the fact is that the average person is unknowledgeable, ignorant, and even stupid about the ocean. And because the city has the duty to protect its citizens, we must provide adequate security and personnel to staff our beaches. Another concern are accidents that are sometimes unavoidable, that can happen to the most experienced people. Lifeguards need adequate staffing to be able to respond to these emergencies.

I don't know how many rescues Newport lifeguards made last summer but I am sure the number is very large.

Also, 3 lifeguard supervisors for 70 seasonal lifeguards is ridiculous. The City is trying to put more responsibility on the shoulders of seasonal lifeguards that have no where near the experience that these year round supervising lifeguards have. Plus, throughout the day, these seasonal guards should be receiving training to improve their lifesaving skills and with only 3 supervisors, that is very unlikely to happen.
As a lifeguard, I've seen many people put themselves in dangerous situations without even realizing it. Another problem is that when people do go to the beach they "check-out." By "checking-out" I'm referring to how people come to the beach to relax and have fun and they become less perceptive and aware of their surroundings as they normally would be.

One great example is when people walk on the beach (they could be talking on their cell-phone) and they stop or set up their towel right in front of a lifeguard truck. I mean, come on, you would never do that in the street but on the beach people aren't expecting it and therefore are oblivious to it.

Most people at the beach don't know how to swim very well or are completely without knowledge about swimming in the ocean. And many will even enter the water drunk. Many people just don't know how to be safe (cutting the Junior Lifeguard Program budget won't help either) and it's unethical to let them put themselves in situations that can be harmful to themselves.

If you disagree with my opinion I'd like to hear why.