12 ms·

Charter boat captains don't have to share location with government, court rules

72 points by mhb 4y ago

walterbell 4y ago
> The court concluded that the GPS requirement "violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it is arbitrary and capricious, in turn because the Government failed to address Fourth Amendment issues when considering it and failed to rationally consider the associated costs and benefits." Would similar reasoning apply to cars?
- gabereiser 4y ago
  IANAL but I believe it would set a precedent so that one could argue the legality of gps tracking on cars. Especially without your consent.
  - vuln 4y ago
    It would set a precedent that the government could not force you to install a gps tracker on your car at your own expense.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  It does according to US v Katzin...
- kube-system 4y ago
  The government does need a warrant to put a GPS tracker on a car. Although, these days, your car already has one or more GPS devices in it sending that data to third parties. And there are many organizations that run plate readers on public streets.
  - mhb 4y ago
    > And there are many organizations that run plate readers on public streets. Yes. Like Flock Safety (YC S17)
    - dzhiurgis 4y ago
      Listen to a podcast about them, it's quite amazing what they able to achieve: https://podcasts.apple.com/lt/podcast/garrett-langley-standing-guard/id1123461944?i=1000495769639 https://podcasts.apple.com/lt/podcast/garrett-langley-standi... TLDL: licence plates can be stolen, but they still can identify cars by unique features like scratches, dents, mods, tyres, etc.
patja 4y ago
The costs seem inflated. There are no monthly charges for operating an AIS transponder, which costs about $1000 and is simple to install. The Coast Guard collects all AIS track data, and publishes it on a 6 month delay via the NOAA Marine Cadastre program. Maybe the requirement was for some other technology rather than AIS.
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  I'm not sure what the requirements were but the article claimed in an attempt to bolster the argument that the government was imposing unreasonable costs on charter boat operators that charter boat income was only $26000/year and that seems suspect. Sounds like a lot of unreported income for those charter boats. If I were an auditor I would definitely be booking random fishing trips with the busiest charter boats in these states and double-checking the package cost. Fuel, food, and other things provided on the trip should be easy to cost out so one could determine just how badly these guys are screwing Uncle Sam.
  - jcampbell1 4y ago
    It is a seasonal thing to take vacationers fishing. Charge $1000 a trip, maybe fish 80 days a year accounting for weather. After expenses there isn’t much left over. It is a labor of love. How much do you think people who guide people on backpacking camping trips earn? I have been a mate on charter boats. My pay was $100 plus $100 expected tip. The workday was 14 hours long. Any fish caught couldn’t be sold commercially. Taking people out fishing is not a lucrative career but it does provide work for people who lost their jobs commercial fishing.
    - doodlebugging 4y ago
      Using a website where ordinary Joes like myself can book charter boats [0] at various ports from Texas around The GoM to the Atlantic seashore, where the article was focused, doesn't support the article's contention that they do all this work and only make $26000/year. In fact it is a bit preposterous. As a mate onboard you may not get the big bucks but someone is making bank here. As far as backpacking camping trips go if you book through a normal site like through REI [1] they can be pretty expensive depending on duration, destination, etc since there is a lot of logistical stuff that has to be handled. It is not cheap, in the thousands per person for multi-day operations. I have not personally booked a trip like that since I lived in a tent in Nat'l Parks, motel parking lots, KOA or similar campgrounds off and on for several years. I can do my own thing and don't need assistance. Same thing goes for whitewater rafting trips. The costs range from really low for half-day trips to thousands for multi-day trips. A good friend of mine has been river guiding in Idaho since the late 1970's. I would think that if he had been in danger of failing in that business that he would have fallen back on his college degree in the sciences years ago. I have rafted several of the great rivers in the western US and it is fantastic fun. [2] [0] https://fishingbooker.com/ https://fishingbooker.com/ [1] https://www.rei.com/adventures/a/backpacking https://www.rei.com/adventures/a/backpacking [2] https://www.iwuraft.com/ https://www.iwuraft.com/ I don't see that $26000 annual income is relevant for anyone except the lowest paid seasonal guide. That has to be a low number.
lokar 4y ago
Amateur hour. Simply say you will restrict coastguard emergency services if you voluntarily comply. They won’t be able to get insurance. The market at work.
- mansion7 4y ago
  Much like politicians openly threatening internet sites to censor their own users, or the government will do it for them. Wonder what such a tactic should be called; perhaps "constitutional rights laundering".
  - undersuit 4y ago
    Or seatbelts, drunk-driving laws, and speed limits! Constitutional rights laundering to interfere with our god given freedom to do anything we want! I'm being facetious. Politicians threatening to censor internet sites unless they censor themselves is completely different than withdrawing the support they provide to a system.
lucb1e 4y ago
The first thing that pops into your head when reading "private vehicle's location need not be streamed to government" is: why would it? What did I miss? These are the relevant sentences from the article: > It seems preposterous, but the Department of Commerce and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) this privacy-infringing protocol in 2020. [Yes, the verb is missing here, but okay it's some law.... but why?] > What benefits does the Government point to in response? Next to nothing. [great, lots of detail there] > The regulation—issued pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976—was proposed by NOAA. [okay we got a headline of a potential reason behind it now, but are rental boats really the culprit in overfishing? Wouldn't it be fishing companies? Why only in 2023? Sounds fishy] And that's all we get. After 518 words on the topic, the page "goes on" to report on decriminalizing pscyhedelic [sic] plants in some cities. So.... asking as someone out of the loop... what's this all about in the first place?
- solarpunk 4y ago
  Here's what NOAA has to say about things: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaas-office-law-enforcement-offers-rewards-information-unpermitted-fishing-charters https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaas-office-la...
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  Since this involves agencies regulating fisheries I suspect that they are trying to get accurate data about aquatic life taken during fishing activities so that they can make accurate estimates of a species ability to thrive in an area and perhaps to drive legislation that would protect areas from over-fishing. I don't think they give a shit about knowing which boat was where unless that boat is engaged in illegal activities. Smuggling in the states that are mentioned is still a thing since that is on a direct path from the Caribbean and northern parts of South America where illegal drugs originate. Knowing which boat was where allows them to determine who might be meeting the smugglers. Once you shut down the airspace to traffickers it is a natural extension to try to limit their ability to shift to maritime assets to ship their products into the country through small ports or marinas in backwater locations. I don't see this monitoring as an invasion of anyone's privacy. I see it more as an extension of border enforcement mechanisms to domains which have historically been difficult to control.
getcrunk 4y ago
in our coming future of things like star shield the government won’t need gps or phones to track us. Enough satellites in space to have high res images of all high population areas and real time ai tracking of all objects. Lol crying emoji
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  If you don't build the technology then it can't be used against you. If you do build it then you need to build in effective controls so that you can limit or minimize these types of undesirable impacts. None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. We were doing fine without it and the potential for abuse is so high that there should be a pause on adoption until stakeholders, including ordinary citizens, have an opportunity to legislate concrete protections for privacy.
  - vkou 4y ago
    > None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. Overfishing doesn't need to exist either, but unfortunately we live in a world where it does.
    - doodlebugging 4y ago
      This is true and we have to have processes in place to understand who is responsible for the fishery destruction and to prohibit their activities, levying penalties and jail time for the most egregious violators.
      - notahacker 4y ago
        We have processes in place, although a Louisiana court just ruled the main one unconstitutional, mainly on privacy grounds...
        doodlebugging 4y ago
        Louisiana. Pretty funny. I'm sure given the history of politics in the state that keeping things private is a high priority. Don't feed the prosecutors unless they're your kin and in that case, invite them for some gumbo.
gumby 4y ago
> Boat-tracking regulation is a warrantless search, court says. Ah, but ubiquitous ALPR is OK. Got it!
nashashmi 4y ago
I saw a documentary on YouTube about boats leaking into industrial oil into oceans far from land instead of disposing them properly via hazmat. And this was done in bulk intentionally to avoid the cost of disposal. For the longest time a non profit was finding this on satellite images. But could not trace it until transponder data started appearing publicly. Came across the video through some random recommendation engine when I was not logged in. wont find it now.

72 points by mhb 4y ago

> The court concluded that the GPS requirement "violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it is arbitrary and capricious, in turn because the Government failed to address Fourth Amendment issues when considering it and failed to rationally consider the associated costs and benefits." Would similar reasoning apply to cars?

gabereiser 4y ago
IANAL but I believe it would set a precedent so that one could argue the legality of gps tracking on cars. Especially without your consent.
- vuln 4y ago
  It would set a precedent that the government could not force you to install a gps tracker on your car at your own expense.
aidenn0 4y ago
It does according to US v Katzin...
kube-system 4y ago
The government does need a warrant to put a GPS tracker on a car. Although, these days, your car already has one or more GPS devices in it sending that data to third parties. And there are many organizations that run plate readers on public streets.
- mhb 4y ago
  > And there are many organizations that run plate readers on public streets. Yes. Like Flock Safety (YC S17)
  - dzhiurgis 4y ago
    Listen to a podcast about them, it's quite amazing what they able to achieve: https://podcasts.apple.com/lt/podcast/garrett-langley-standing-guard/id1123461944?i=1000495769639 https://podcasts.apple.com/lt/podcast/garrett-langley-standi... TLDL: licence plates can be stolen, but they still can identify cars by unique features like scratches, dents, mods, tyres, etc.

patja 4y ago

The costs seem inflated. There are no monthly charges for operating an AIS transponder, which costs about $1000 and is simple to install. The Coast Guard collects all AIS track data, and publishes it on a 6 month delay via the NOAA Marine Cadastre program. Maybe the requirement was for some other technology rather than AIS.

doodlebugging 4y ago
I'm not sure what the requirements were but the article claimed in an attempt to bolster the argument that the government was imposing unreasonable costs on charter boat operators that charter boat income was only $26000/year and that seems suspect. Sounds like a lot of unreported income for those charter boats. If I were an auditor I would definitely be booking random fishing trips with the busiest charter boats in these states and double-checking the package cost. Fuel, food, and other things provided on the trip should be easy to cost out so one could determine just how badly these guys are screwing Uncle Sam.
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  It is a seasonal thing to take vacationers fishing. Charge $1000 a trip, maybe fish 80 days a year accounting for weather. After expenses there isn’t much left over. It is a labor of love. How much do you think people who guide people on backpacking camping trips earn? I have been a mate on charter boats. My pay was $100 plus $100 expected tip. The workday was 14 hours long. Any fish caught couldn’t be sold commercially. Taking people out fishing is not a lucrative career but it does provide work for people who lost their jobs commercial fishing.
  - doodlebugging 4y ago
    Using a website where ordinary Joes like myself can book charter boats [0] at various ports from Texas around The GoM to the Atlantic seashore, where the article was focused, doesn't support the article's contention that they do all this work and only make $26000/year. In fact it is a bit preposterous. As a mate onboard you may not get the big bucks but someone is making bank here. As far as backpacking camping trips go if you book through a normal site like through REI [1] they can be pretty expensive depending on duration, destination, etc since there is a lot of logistical stuff that has to be handled. It is not cheap, in the thousands per person for multi-day operations. I have not personally booked a trip like that since I lived in a tent in Nat'l Parks, motel parking lots, KOA or similar campgrounds off and on for several years. I can do my own thing and don't need assistance. Same thing goes for whitewater rafting trips. The costs range from really low for half-day trips to thousands for multi-day trips. A good friend of mine has been river guiding in Idaho since the late 1970's. I would think that if he had been in danger of failing in that business that he would have fallen back on his college degree in the sciences years ago. I have rafted several of the great rivers in the western US and it is fantastic fun. [2] [0] https://fishingbooker.com/ https://fishingbooker.com/ [1] https://www.rei.com/adventures/a/backpacking https://www.rei.com/adventures/a/backpacking [2] https://www.iwuraft.com/ https://www.iwuraft.com/ I don't see that $26000 annual income is relevant for anyone except the lowest paid seasonal guide. That has to be a low number.

lokar 4y ago

Amateur hour. Simply say you will restrict coastguard emergency services if you voluntarily comply. They won’t be able to get insurance. The market at work.

mansion7 4y ago
Much like politicians openly threatening internet sites to censor their own users, or the government will do it for them. Wonder what such a tactic should be called; perhaps "constitutional rights laundering".
- undersuit 4y ago
  Or seatbelts, drunk-driving laws, and speed limits! Constitutional rights laundering to interfere with our god given freedom to do anything we want! I'm being facetious. Politicians threatening to censor internet sites unless they censor themselves is completely different than withdrawing the support they provide to a system.

lucb1e 4y ago

The first thing that pops into your head when reading "private vehicle's location need not be streamed to government" is: why would it? What did I miss? These are the relevant sentences from the article: > It seems preposterous, but the Department of Commerce and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) this privacy-infringing protocol in 2020. [Yes, the verb is missing here, but okay it's some law.... but why?] > What benefits does the Government point to in response? Next to nothing. [great, lots of detail there] > The regulation—issued pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976—was proposed by NOAA. [okay we got a headline of a potential reason behind it now, but are rental boats really the culprit in overfishing? Wouldn't it be fishing companies? Why only in 2023? Sounds fishy] And that's all we get. After 518 words on the topic, the page "goes on" to report on decriminalizing pscyhedelic [sic] plants in some cities. So.... asking as someone out of the loop... what's this all about in the first place?

solarpunk 4y ago
Here's what NOAA has to say about things: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaas-office-law-enforcement-offers-rewards-information-unpermitted-fishing-charters https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaas-office-la...
doodlebugging 4y ago
Since this involves agencies regulating fisheries I suspect that they are trying to get accurate data about aquatic life taken during fishing activities so that they can make accurate estimates of a species ability to thrive in an area and perhaps to drive legislation that would protect areas from over-fishing. I don't think they give a shit about knowing which boat was where unless that boat is engaged in illegal activities. Smuggling in the states that are mentioned is still a thing since that is on a direct path from the Caribbean and northern parts of South America where illegal drugs originate. Knowing which boat was where allows them to determine who might be meeting the smugglers. Once you shut down the airspace to traffickers it is a natural extension to try to limit their ability to shift to maritime assets to ship their products into the country through small ports or marinas in backwater locations. I don't see this monitoring as an invasion of anyone's privacy. I see it more as an extension of border enforcement mechanisms to domains which have historically been difficult to control.

getcrunk 4y ago

in our coming future of things like star shield the government won’t need gps or phones to track us. Enough satellites in space to have high res images of all high population areas and real time ai tracking of all objects. Lol crying emoji

doodlebugging 4y ago
If you don't build the technology then it can't be used against you. If you do build it then you need to build in effective controls so that you can limit or minimize these types of undesirable impacts. None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. We were doing fine without it and the potential for abuse is so high that there should be a pause on adoption until stakeholders, including ordinary citizens, have an opportunity to legislate concrete protections for privacy.
- vkou 4y ago
  > None of these things - AI, software to remotely track users, etc needs to exist. Overfishing doesn't need to exist either, but unfortunately we live in a world where it does.
  - doodlebugging 4y ago
    This is true and we have to have processes in place to understand who is responsible for the fishery destruction and to prohibit their activities, levying penalties and jail time for the most egregious violators.
    - notahacker 4y ago
      We have processes in place, although a Louisiana court just ruled the main one unconstitutional, mainly on privacy grounds...
      - doodlebugging 4y ago
        Louisiana. Pretty funny. I'm sure given the history of politics in the state that keeping things private is a high priority. Don't feed the prosecutors unless they're your kin and in that case, invite them for some gumbo.

gumby 4y ago

> Boat-tracking regulation is a warrantless search, court says. Ah, but ubiquitous ALPR is OK. Got it!

nashashmi 4y ago

I saw a documentary on YouTube about boats leaking into industrial oil into oceans far from land instead of disposing them properly via hazmat. And this was done in bulk intentionally to avoid the cost of disposal. For the longest time a non profit was finding this on satellite images. But could not trace it until transponder data started appearing publicly. Came across the video through some random recommendation engine when I was not logged in. wont find it now.