Water vehicle traffic and right-of-way disputed by pilot of amphibian.

Attributes
ACN	272169
Time
Date	199405
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : 98g
State Reference	MI
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 150
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	LA-4-200 Buccaneer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	climbout : takeoff ground other : taxi landing other
Route In Use	approach : visual enroute other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 20 flight time total : 1400 flight time type : 200
ASRS Report	272169
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	observation : observer
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	vertical : 150
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

When arriving at our cottage on may/xx/94, sand point near laseville, mi (saginaw bay -- thumb of michigan), I noticed fishing nets perpendicular to the shoreline extending from the north (point runs east/west) to about 500 ft off shore toward the south. We live on the north side of the point. The water was too rough north of the nets or the wind was west and southwest, requiring to land parallel to the shore between the nets and shore, just to the inside of the nets. The next day, the same situation existed requiring takeoffs and lndgs just south of the nets. A few jet skis and 1 boat (the boat was anchored) were also using the same area. My note: on the afternoon of may/xy/94 a boat was stuck on a sandbar 1 mi offshore waving a flag. As I was preparing to land, 2 jet skis came to his aid. I made 1 low (200 ft) pass to confirm his distress. Takeoffs never approached closer than 250 ft on the water and I never flew over any boat/jet ski less than about 150 ft for the lndgs and takeoffs which totaled 4. At one time it was necessary to step taxi to the west while deviating north around the anchored boat before proceeding with the takeoff. A few people complained I was too close to them to the huron county sheriff's department who then came out to our cottage. They were very nice about it and were aware that I was the first to have a seaplane on the point (the point is 5 mi long) and that people would just have to get used to it a little. According to FAA-lansing, a seaplane has the right-of-way over a more maneuverable vessel such as a jet ski! This should be made more clear in the regulations. Current regulations regarding minimum altitudes are fine -- in the state of michigan, minimum vessel clearance on the water of 100 ft is fine too, but this should be based on speed as at 5 mph and docking, no one keeps a 100 ft space between them! All in all, everything was performed safely and, except for a little more noise on the lake, most people are thrilled to watch and ride in the seaplane. I'm thankful for that right and will fight (if necessary) to maintain that right. Also, are we (seaplanes) allowed to make 1 low pass to check the water for obstructions prior to landing? To me, this is part of the landing phase and should be included in the regulations!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WATER VEHICLE TFC AND RIGHT-OF-WAY DISPUTED BY PLT OF AMPHIBIAN.

Narrative: WHEN ARRIVING AT OUR COTTAGE ON MAY/XX/94, SAND POINT NEAR LASEVILLE, MI (SAGINAW BAY -- THUMB OF MICHIGAN), I NOTICED FISHING NETS PERPENDICULAR TO THE SHORELINE EXTENDING FROM THE N (POINT RUNS E/W) TO ABOUT 500 FT OFF SHORE TOWARD THE S. WE LIVE ON THE N SIDE OF THE POINT. THE WATER WAS TOO ROUGH N OF THE NETS OR THE WIND WAS W AND SW, REQUIRING TO LAND PARALLEL TO THE SHORE BTWN THE NETS AND SHORE, JUST TO THE INSIDE OF THE NETS. THE NEXT DAY, THE SAME SIT EXISTED REQUIRING TKOFS AND LNDGS JUST S OF THE NETS. A FEW JET SKIS AND 1 BOAT (THE BOAT WAS ANCHORED) WERE ALSO USING THE SAME AREA. MY NOTE: ON THE AFTERNOON OF MAY/XY/94 A BOAT WAS STUCK ON A SANDBAR 1 MI OFFSHORE WAVING A FLAG. AS I WAS PREPARING TO LAND, 2 JET SKIS CAME TO HIS AID. I MADE 1 LOW (200 FT) PASS TO CONFIRM HIS DISTRESS. TKOFS NEVER APCHED CLOSER THAN 250 FT ON THE WATER AND I NEVER FLEW OVER ANY BOAT/JET SKI LESS THAN ABOUT 150 FT FOR THE LNDGS AND TKOFS WHICH TOTALED 4. AT ONE TIME IT WAS NECESSARY TO STEP TAXI TO THE W WHILE DEVIATING N AROUND THE ANCHORED BOAT BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE TKOF. A FEW PEOPLE COMPLAINED I WAS TOO CLOSE TO THEM TO THE HURON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT WHO THEN CAME OUT TO OUR COTTAGE. THEY WERE VERY NICE ABOUT IT AND WERE AWARE THAT I WAS THE FIRST TO HAVE A SEAPLANE ON THE POINT (THE POINT IS 5 MI LONG) AND THAT PEOPLE WOULD JUST HAVE TO GET USED TO IT A LITTLE. ACCORDING TO FAA-LANSING, A SEAPLANE HAS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER A MORE MANEUVERABLE VESSEL SUCH AS A JET SKI! THIS SHOULD BE MADE MORE CLR IN THE REGS. CURRENT REGS REGARDING MINIMUM ALTS ARE FINE -- IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, MINIMUM VESSEL CLRNC ON THE WATER OF 100 FT IS FINE TOO, BUT THIS SHOULD BE BASED ON SPD AS AT 5 MPH AND DOCKING, NO ONE KEEPS A 100 FT SPACE BTWN THEM! ALL IN ALL, EVERYTHING WAS PERFORMED SAFELY AND, EXCEPT FOR A LITTLE MORE NOISE ON THE LAKE, MOST PEOPLE ARE THRILLED TO WATCH AND RIDE IN THE SEAPLANE. I'M THANKFUL FOR THAT RIGHT AND WILL FIGHT (IF NECESSARY) TO MAINTAIN THAT RIGHT. ALSO, ARE WE (SEAPLANES) ALLOWED TO MAKE 1 LOW PASS TO CHK THE WATER FOR OBSTRUCTIONS PRIOR TO LNDG? TO ME, THIS IS PART OF THE LNDG PHASE AND SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE REGS!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.