One can only conclude that the CG has turned a blind eye on a public safety problem that is thoroughly documented in their own work. Compared to a marine surveyor, who in the heyday of wooden vessels, would have the capability to survey no more than perhaps 50 wood pasenger vessels in a year, the CG is inspecting over 1400 annually. And in the process it has to be accumulating an enormous volume of critical data, all of which it has apparently chosen to ignore. Moreover, the prior inspections of EL TORO II do not appear to have been affected by a high rate of turnover with inspectors, for the CG report takes pains to indicate that their inspectors had 6-8 years of experience. Responsibility For Vessel Safety One of the most inviolable cannons of maritime law is that vessel owners and others involved with vessels carrying crew and passengers are charged with the highest level of responsibility.
Utmost regard is the phrase used.
Yet by its own admission, the utmost regard of the CG concerned the economic viability of the vessel owner. They did not wish to submit the owner to the expense of pulling planks or fasteners even though their own studies and records show that older woooden vessels are at high risk. These costs can be considerable for owners of small vessel, especially those which carry few passengers and have low value. The impact . . . could drive them out of business . . . Unfortunately, far too often this is the cozy relationship between the regulators and the regulated.