I don't think very many people realistically think the screens physical size or location was a key factor.  They can be in a perfect position for optimal forward view, if you stare at them instead of where you're going you can still get yourself into trouble.

You mean like texting and driving?

 

Yea pretty much... I'd actually say it's worse in a boat because you don't have brakes to slam on if you do notice something at the last second.  

2 hours ago, TOXIC said:

Just another thing to consider, if the screens were deemed to be a contributing factor, wouldn’t every manufacturer of the dual screen mounts be open to lawsuits? 

Probably.  Especially if their instructions include recommendation/option for mounting on the steering console.

2 hours ago, TOXIC said:

Just another thing to consider, if the screens were deemed to be a contributing factor, wouldn’t every manufacturer of the dual screen mounts be open to lawsuits? 

Probably.  Especially if their instructions include recommendation/option for mounting on the steering console.

2 hours ago, TOXIC said:

Just another thing to consider, if the screens were deemed to be a contributing factor, wouldn’t every manufacturer of the dual screen mounts be open to lawsuits? 

Potentially.  Especially if their instructions include recommendation/option for mounting on the steering console.

Probably off topic but you can’t make people to use common sense.

I fished a lot of local tournaments and had the mandatory equipment. The item I had was a certified PPD and only wore it when launching  the boat at take off because I had to. My PFD made a seat cushion and I know better.

Doing the safe thing takes discipline  to establish a routine habit. As a racer I always wore my safety equipment because I would loose my insurance and license without it, it was  mandatory.
If Bass tournaments made wearing the PFD when the big engine is running or a kayak at all times mandatory DQ’d without it everyone would comply. 
Tom

13 hours ago, WRB-2.0 said:

If Bass tournaments made wearing the PFD when the big engine is running or a kayak at all times mandatory DQ’d without it everyone would comply. 

As far as I know all the major trails have this as a rule, at least on the boats, I don’t know about yaks.  

Ummmmmmm where's the fog?

It was said pretty early on that fog was not an issue.  It was just an incorrect assumption that got repeated.

1 hour ago, TOXIC said:

As far as I know all the major trails have this as a rule, at least on the boats, I don’t know about yaks.  

Yes, They all do. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Mike

 

I think the fog issue is being misunderstood. I see it differently as stated below:

 

It has been brought into the lawsuits over liability on the part of the tournament organization MLF.

 

Smith lake has more than 500 miles of shoreline and is 35 miles long. It does not matter if conditions were clear where the accident took place. The lawyers are saying that if there is ANY visibility issues anywhere on that lake, then the MLF should have suspended or delayed the entire tournament until conditions everywhere on the lake are clear.

 

You cannot shut down half the lake while the other half is still open. It does not work that way. Even if conditions were clear at the accident location, does not mean there was not visibility issues elsewhere meaning MLF is negligent if proven beyond reasonable doubt.

 

Lawyers, not police and prosecutors, but at least one victim's lawyers are saying yes there was fog or water vapor and or visibility issues on the lake at the time of the accident and are basically saying the MLF was negligent in not suspending or delaying the tournament. And because of them not doing that is in part behind their liability in this crash.

 

The fog or visibility issue may or may not be brought into the criminal case, so it is still premature for any of us to say it was not an issue. It will be up to the courts to decide in both civil and criminal courts of law as to whether or not fog or visibility issues apply and where blame and liability belong.

 

We may all agree the video shows visibility was clear at site of accident, but that does not show the entire 500 plus miles of shoreline of that lake, and whether or not other locations were with fog or visibility issues the MLF officials may have ignored that could have or might have prevented this accident if it had been delayed by MLF officials.

 

That lake is 35 miles long. And fog and visibility issues were reported on that lake on that morning which is why it is being brought up and included in the lawsuit(s)

 

"Broadly, the suit alleges that Major League Fishing failed to exercise reasonable care as the tour’s second day opened: “By organizing and incentivizing high-speed boat operation in foggy, congested conditions on a public waterway shared with recreational and guided fishing vessels, MLF created a foreseeable risk of serious injury or death,” it alleges. “In the early morning hours of April 16, 2025, dense fog, mist or clouds covered parts of Lewis Smith Lake. MLF nonetheless commenced the day’s launch without delay, limitations, speed limits or public safety warnings.”

 

The suit alleges that at the start of the day, “Tournament anglers launched at the scheduled start time, with many, including Davis, traveling at excessive and unsafe speeds.” It claims that Davis and Holcombe didn’t take enough care while they were in high-traffic areas with low visibility.

Holcombe, Flint and at least one other person were treated at hospitals for injuries suffered in the crash."

 

The suit seeks rulings on a range of counts including negligence and wrongful death.

 

Rules for the Tackle Warehouse Invitationals include a clause that prohibits “boat operation in an unsafe or unsportsmanlike manner.” The rules also require that “safe boating must be observed at all times,” and say that the tournament director is empowered to shorten, postpone of cancel events due to unsafe weather or water conditions.

 

Tournament rules also specify that participating boats must carry insurance, as well as a camera providing a view of the boat’s front deck that tournament officials can monitor throughout the day.

Whether the camera aboard Davis’ boat was recovered and whether it can provide footage of the crash has not been revealed."

 

Those lawyers are going to stick it to the MLF and its officials. Those lawyers are claiming the MLF violated their own rules that led to this tragedy. It is their job to do so. And again, I have to say, it does not matter if visibility was clear at the location of the accident. Fog, dense fog was reported on that lake on that morning and MLF officials ignored it, and ignored their own rules and did not enforce licensing, and basically just turned them all loose without any safety promoting of any kind.

 

MLF is going to get grilled on this. And you can bet it will all revolve around fog and visibility ANYWHERE on that lake and did MLF ignore and break their own rules that led to this tragedy.

 

This is how I see it. I know others see it differently. But we have to take a step back from this and not just place ourselves in Flint Davis driver seat on this one. We have to try and wear some lawyer shoes and look at it as if MLF did some very wrong things. And if these can be proven in courts of law, then we can say for sure whether or not fog was an issue or not. It is way to premature for any of us to second guess it in my opinion.

 

Think about it. That lake is 35 miles long with 500 miles of shoreline. So what if it was clear at accident site. What if 20 miles to the South the Southern end was covered in fog? Or the northern end at the time of the accident? If it can be proven in court, then MLF can be proven to have broken their own rules further placing more and more liability on the MLF and tournament officials.

 

I agree from the point of view of driving that boat it appears clear. But MLF rules were in play, and if there was fog anywhere on that lake and MLF did not enforce their own "safety" rules, those lawyers are going to stick it to them on this point hard core.

 

So its not an incorrect assumption at all. It is key critical detail and core to the civil case(s) maybe not the criminal cases, but let's all wait and see how this plays out. I am just playing devil's advocate here on this one trying to look at it from way outside and looking at all the pieces to the puzzle and not just the immediate driver's seat in question.

 

So I ask each of you, if there was fog anywhere on that lake should MLF officials delayed it? Should they follow their own rules on safety? MLF does not have a specific fog rule, but they do have safety rules to employ.

 

If you were a tournament official and you KNEW there might be fog anywhere and I mean anywhere on that lake, (even 20 miles away) is it a safety issue that would compel you to become concerned enough to call a delay? Where is this line to be drawn?

 

I can assure myself at least, the lawsuits in this case will surely draw that line for all of us very clearly. The criminal cases are pretty much cut and dry. He had clear visibility and he became distracted. End of that story. Guilty as charged on that. But for MLF officials its going to be another story. I do believe fog is going to be an anchor placed around each of their necks on this one! I bet a jury would agree too. MLF will pay. And MLF will have to change how they do business in my opinion.

 

The lawyers are more than likely seeking all the forward view video footage of every single boat participating in the tournament. You can bet side by side comparisons of all footage may show fog visible on one or maybe some camera views. If so, MLF is in deeper trouble. This issue is core to the lawsuit(s)

 

You can bet lawyers are looking for plenty of witnesses from all over that lake to testify that yes there was fog on that lake at time of crash. If they can prove this in court, MLF is toast. They will get roasted in court. It is going to be interesting for sure.

 

This is how I see it right now. Back to regular programming... what fog? Its gonna get foggy in court! That fog!

1 hour ago, Logan S said:

It was said pretty early on that fog was not an issue.  It was just an incorrect assumption that got repeated.

 

Thanks.

 

I read the story a "long" time ago and thought fog was mentioned.

 

After stumbling upon the video yesterday I honestly assumed it was a different accident because there wasn't even a hint of fog.

 

The angler/driver doesn't have a chance in court. 100% negligent.

People have been running each other over with boats & ships for years.

It happens on lakes, rivers, reservoirs, bays, and the open ocean everywhere in the world.

Incidents where there is critical injury and/or loss of life are always intensely sad for everyone involved.

Rules & regulations can and sometimes do change.

But the fact remains that it still happens.

Picking this single incident apart like it was some type of unusual or special circumstance is futile.

Because it was not.

It was a man driving his rig without watching where he was going and he killed people.

Civil & criminal liability will be assigned.

Very little, if anything else, will change.  

All we can do, as vessel operators, is conduct ourselves responsibly

and IAW applicable laws and regulations. 

Additionally, it is crucial to remain vigilant for the countless operators who do not. 

Stay Safe. 

A-Jay

 

 

On 10/5/2025 at 10:50 AM, TOXIC said:

I’ll be the dissenter here and make the claim it wasn’t the graphs that obstructed his view.  The graphs may have distracted him but they didn’t block his view.  He was running a straight line and had been for a long distance. His view would have been above the graphs considering the distance he traveled before the accident.  Simple physics will show how far ahead the graphs could have/would have blocked his view.  In my experience the dual mount graphs do obstruct your view but it is for a limited distance not the span he was traveling.  Height in the seat is also a factor but unless he is really short, most boat seats put your head above the windshield.  Sad,sad, accident.  

Looking at the video. Which is pretty damning.  He must have not been looking up for quite some time. There is just no way he wouldn’t have seen it had he been looking. I almost wonder if he fell asleep.

On 9/11/2025 at 10:13 AM, ElGuapo928 said:

This is why I think the 18’/150hp standard should have stayed….not only were speeds under more control, you thought more about how far you were willing to push it. 
 

And I don’t see the boat manufacturers having an issue with it - during the days of that standard there were a lot more manufacturers. Ranger had what, 8 different 17’10” models in ‘89?

Back when we had the 18 foot 150 hp rule most other pleasure boats were about the same size.
Now you’re out there among offshore boats , cruisers, and 40 foot yachts on Table Rock  and LOZ is just flat dangerous .

My 20 foot 225 horse Skeeter will outrun my old 18 foot champion with a 175 but not by much.

 

On 10/10/2025 at 7:15 AM, rangerjockey said:

Back when we had the 18 foot 150 hp rule most other pleasure boats were about the same size.
Now you’re out there among offshore boats , cruisers, and 40 foot yachts on Table Rock  and LOZ is just flat dangerous .

My 20 foot 225 horse Skeeter will outrun my old 18 foot champion with a 175 but not by much.

 

Good point on the pleasure boats getting bigger. The wake boats now are bigger than a cabin cruiser of 20-30 years ago (yet they rarely ever venture more than a couple hundred yards from the ramp), and the typical 18’ bowrider has all but disappeared around here. 

Driver failure he wasn’t watching where he was going.

Bass boats are fast boats, some modified for more hp and speed then unskilled driver can handle safely. Bass pros for the most part understand their responsibility to drive safely and be good ambassadors for the sport.

A few don’t give a dam about safety and want to be 1st at the spot regardless.

Allison and Bullet bass boats are very fast light weight bass boats owned in most part by hot rodders. You don’t see Allison boats often because the light weight fastest boat are not the best fishing platforms.

Any boat center punching another boat at 65+ mph is usually a fatal accident, doesn’t often but it happens every year by reckless drivers.

Tom

I see Allison and bullets all the time, mostly because both brands are made very close to home 

 

Davis was going 67.8 mph I believe, Allison and Bullet can usually go 85+ 

@Mike L has a story about riding in a really fast bass boat.  The driver literally pulled out one of those old school hockey masks to wear before he said "hold on."  😂

50 minutes ago, gim said:

@Mike L has a story about riding in a really fast bass boat.  The driver literally pulled out one of those old school hockey masks to wear before he said "hold on."  😂

The most scared I’ve ever been in a boat,

Ever!….

 

The fastest boat I’ve ever fished out of was a Bullet. 
We were in a tournament, fully loaded. When my boater put on a hockey goalie’s mask in 80deg temp I knew what was coming. 
 

He told me to hang on with both hands, jam my feet and to ride with my butt off the seat. 
When we finally came down off plane I asked how fast we went, he said 92!!

Never fished with him again. 

Let me just say that the option of rolling back the clock to 225 or even 150hp motors and 18 foot boats wouldn’t have made a difference in this accident. Being hit at 60-50-40mph would have been just as deadly.  Sad but true.  😞

The speed of impact isn't the point.  It's the possibility of avoiding the accident if he had been going slower.  That said, clearly he just flat-out wasn't looking where he was going.  So it's debatable that going slower would've made a difference.

I have to wonder if those poor people had a few more seconds to realize they were going to get hit, maybe they could have jumped out of the boat? We'll never be rid of idiots but we should be able to slow them down.

^ Ya - every time we try to make something idiot-proof, the world builds a better idiot.

On 9/9/2025 at 10:44 AM, FloridaFishinFool said:

I think we all knew this was coming!

 

And Glenn I hope you don't mind me posting this information here. If so, please delete. I hope this post is considered as relevant to this tragedy.

 

I'd add that some people think, maybe myself included, that MLF probably should have held the tournament under caution due to fog, but under pressure may have pushed forward not being as cautionary as maybe they should have been.

 

I wonder if this might add to the MLF liability in this case?

 

Just a tragedy all the way around. Hope it never happens again.

 

There is talk of using GPS location devices to try and prevent this type of thing. Biologists want to do the same in Florida with manatee. Since we can't see them and boaters run all over them injuring them seriously and killing hundreds of them.

 

If they were all tagged with electronic trackers, then boaters could use GPS to prevent future collisions. It has many applications with tournament bass fishing being one of them.

 

Other uses the biologists are considering and may be doing already is to put trackers in invasive species like the pythons and boa constrictors running loose in South Florida. They hope the snakes will lead them to areas the snakes prefer so hunters can use that data to help eradicate them. Other animals like our Florida panther also has some trackers on some of them now already.

 

There is a fine line between freedom and safety and going too far. Tragedies like this one are behind why safety changes to laws happen. The lawsuits and publicity give them the cause to pass laws to change things if we the people do not choose to do it ourselves is when big brother steps in and does it for us. And it could very well be coming too. 

 

After every major plane crash there are calls for changes to try and prevent it from happening again.

 

I should add the biologist I talked to wants to incorporate this GPS tracking into boat controls. So if a boater is flying up river at full speed and the GPS tracking data shows a collision is imminent with a manatee, then the boat controls would give warning first, and then maybe even throttle back on boat to prevent collision if the driver does not want to slow down or change course. The electronics they want to implement might do it for them. Kind of like how drunks can't drive because of the electronics they use in cars.

 

Biologists don't want the manatee going extinct here in Florida because of careless boaters killing so many. So they are looking at future options. GPS tracking maybe could have saved some lives in this tragedy as well.

 

It can be a good idea used correctly, but there is also room for abuse. Law enforcement would love to use it to track criminals. Already are. Cellphones and Apple have been a big help to them in this area. Expect more in future.

 

I'd like to add more of what a state of Florida biologist told me. He said presently the state of Florida in conjunction with various corporations like Sea World and non-profit foundation corporations like Sea to Shore Alliance all have a combined effort for a rapid recovery rescue and response teams all across Florida to try and rescue and save manatees who are injured, starving, or trapped in various places, or even dead. They even want all sightings called in if people would only do so to help them track manatee right now.

 

My son just reported one in New Smyrna Beach directly to state biologists on their report a manatee phone number. He thought it might be trapped because of low tide. But his manatee got out OK.

 

If they could implement the GPS tracking data into AI, they hope to have early warnings on manatees in trouble. They even want the tracking devices to transmit the manatee's vital statistics so veterinarian doctors can know instantly ahead of time what they are getting into and how to respond with their rapid response teams. Every single one of them all across the state would be alerted instantly.

 

What this means for all of us, if they have their way, new boats will come with tracking devices mandatory. And maybe if they can get it some boat controls like an engine kill or throttle back if a collision is imminent and their warnings go unheeded by boat driver. This means they will be watching all of us on the water everywhere we are. And they will KNOW before any of us hit and injure or kill a manatee and they will know who did it too.

 

Every manatee in the state of Florida they can locate are all photographed, tagged, and named. Injuries documented. The biologists take saving the manatee and other animals very seriously and are working hard to change laws more in their favor which means less in our favor.

 

Do these animals deserve to be saved from extinction is the question. GPS tracking of boats may be the only way to do it while also preventing more tragedies like the MLF boat accident.

 

This is what they want to put a stop to as soon as possible:

 

 

 

 

 

I think a lot of us Floridians take it seriously about trying to save and protect the manatee. Some boaters going through manatee slow speed zones don't slow down. Now with GPS they can track that as well.

 

But what I want to say is that I have a 40 plus year association to various biologists in Florida. And, I try and teach my sons ages 12 and 14 to be conservationists. Pick up trash rather than throw it down. Leave things better than you found it type of thing.

 

But one thing I am trying to do for my sons is to use that connection to state biologists to get my sons into manatee rescues as volunteers.

 

When a manatee close by is in trouble and they need an army of humans to rescue the manatee, I would like for my sons to be a part of that rescue. I think it would have a profound effect on them long after I am dead and gone. I think they would think more highly of themselves if they knew they were a part of saving and protecting the manatee.

 

Florida is also designing custom machines to go into remote places to rescue these manatee.

 

 

 

 

To save this stranded manatee, heavy equipment was brought in to dig a water path back to the water.

 

We can all be a part of this effort. Especially all of us boaters on the frontlines. We are the eyes and ears for the alliances. Technology is bringing it all together.

 

Those 3 fishermen killed might still be alive today if the biologists had their way. Who knows, maybe their lives lost will be what it takes to move forward with this type of technology to save future fishermen from the same possible fate.

 

While obviously hitting Manatees is a very bad thing, the tech you are describing would present a boatload of liability issues that nobody will likely ever want to touch.

 

At the end of the day, you are responsible for your actions, if there is a threat of danger by running at speed somewhere, to include hitting Manatees, then you should be operating at a no wake speed. If you cannot help from hitting something, to include sub-surface objects, you are by definition, operating at unsafe speeds and operating recklessly. All that is needed is to have the laws already on the books, enforced.

 

The boat was set up improperly in the sense the drivers view was hindered by screens, everyone from the guy that rigged the boat to the guy that operated it and the MLF that allowed him to take part in their tournament with the boat rigged as it was, will likely end up paying to some degree. Right or wrong, etc...

I agree with you that those large screens can and do present substantial vision blockers, I think the police and criminal case here state Flint Davis had a clear view for about a mile before the accident. So the criminal cases are discounting vision blocking, but it may come up again in both criminal and civil cases.

 

Its my opinion they do block some vision causing blind spots possibly but also present the driver with distractions that is outlawed in some states for on road driving. Not so for boats as yet but it may be coming.

 

The problem here in Florida with manatee is you cannot see them even in clear water they can blend in with water and bottom background. Fast boats run all over them daily.

 

I learned from state of Florida biologists that they would like to see impact preventing electronics brought into use. They are already using GPS tracking for numerous animals from our Florida panthers, to invasive species and beyond. So it is really just a sidestep now to trying to use it to protect the manatee.

 

I was pointing out if the law does go in that direction eventually, it could be used to prevent all types of collisions to include those helpless critters that are being slaughtered by boaters.

 

Florida manatee number from 8,000 to 11,730 left in the wild. And just here in Florida some 70 to 100 are killed every year by boaters. We don't have much time left to save them.

 

Biologists want their new GPS tracking methods implemented as soon as possible to save them from extinction. So the first step is to tag and track each manatee, and then take that GPS data and feed it into boat electronics so up to date boats can be made aware of their specific locations and movement and warned in advance of collisions.

 

Boaters in Florida have no idea most of the time manatee are even there until its too late. And most collisions with them are not reported so the manatee does not receive any medical help. Boaters who hit them don't want to get in trouble and tend to not report what they have done.

 

Biologists are simply trying to save a species from extinction with boats being one of their primary killers. Preventing collisions is something they desperately want implemented as soon as possible. There is some big money behind the private foundations like Sea to Shore Alliance who are connected with the biologists I talked to who are suggesting boaters not only have access to manatee GPS tracking data, but maybe also implement some boat control to prevent collisions.

 

It is already in use in on the road vehicles. Why should boats be excluded? My whole point was that maybe one day soon they will be included. If it had been implemented sooner Flint Davis would have been notified and warned of impending collision ahead of time and maybe could have prevented this tragedy.

 

Its all the same technology already in use. It is mandatory in on road vehicles. Some cars, vans, trucks, buses are already using electronics to brake their forward movement to prevent collisions.

 

"Automatic emergency braking (AEB) will become mandatory on all new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the U.S. by September 2029, according to a new rule finalized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). This mandate requires that all light vehicles have an AEB system that can detect and react to imminent crashes, including pedestrian detection, with specific performance standards for speeds up to 62 mph for vehicles and 45 mph for pedestrians."

 

ALL passenger cars are now required to have it installed by 2029.

 

My whole point is boats are possibly next in line. But will it come in time to save the manatee?

 

Another thing biologists are doing to try and save the Florida manatee is to create healthy new colonies away from Florida in some Caribbean islands and other countries of the world that can sustain them because boaters in Florida are absolutely slaughtering the helpless creatures no one can see. Electronics is their only hope here.

 

I believe this same technology could have also prevented Flint Davis tragedy.

 

The question is are the manatee and human lives worth it? Some say yes. Some say no. Sometimes things like this are out of our control. We may not have a choice in the future is my point. Liability can be dealt with down the road. Saving lives should come first I would hope. But I do agree we need more enforcement of existing laws, but none of them have done much to stop the slaughter of manatee.

 

We would have to turn the entire state into a manatee zone and limit boat speeds on all waters manatee are known to exist would be a great help. That would be impossible to enforce from a human perspective. But not from the electronics perspective if they can get it mandated one day. Satellites see it all.

 

All that data will tell them which manatee is in danger and who is endangering it and where and when precise data that can all be remotely monitored by AI. Unreported manatee collisions will be known if they have their way. And they are also going further by creating electronics that monitor the manatee's vital statistics so doctors and vets can know in real time if a manatee is in trouble and send a rescue medical team to try and save them.

 

Seaworld and Sea to Shore Alliance and others are heavily invested right now in developing specialized manatee rescue teams and custom one of a kind rescue machines to rescue manatee in trouble anywhere in Florida's vast wilderness from swamps to rivers to lakes. Large sums of money is being invested in this. But they are coming for our boats same as our cars.

 

Biologists and big money are in favor of it. They lobby for changes. "Automatic emergency braking (AEB) will become mandatory on all new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the U.S. by September 2029"

 

It is already here. Boats are in line I do believe. We can resist all we want to. But sometimes the greater picture requires actions we may not agree with or want. In this thread I was merely bringing it up as part of the discussion on how to prevent tragedies like this thread discusses.

 

Bass boats by design prevent drivers from seeing manatee. Looking over those consoles and large screens is meaningless to the manatee in the water. Drivers need to see in the water and become aware of manatee long before getting close to them. Electronics and GPS tracking is the only way.

 

It will come down to which side are each of us on? The resistance? Or, the save lives no matter what side? I guess in this thread I am making it known I am already on the side of saving the manatee if possible whatever it takes. And saving bass fishermen and other boaters as well.