RedactedNarrative: Operator of V1 claimed that V2 was not operating with navigation lights on, he was unable to see V2 until the last minute and was unable to avoid a collision.
  
  In conclusion I believe that the accident was caused by several factors. First was the speed that the vessels where traveling. Operator 1 stated that he was traveling approximately 25 mph and Operator 2 stated that he was traveling at approximately 9 mph. If Operator 1 would have been traveling slower the accident may have been avoided. If Operator 2 would have been traveling faster, he may also have been able to avoid the collision by being much more maneuverable. Operator 1 stated that he was keeping a good look out for other boats and that the reason that he did not see vessel #2 until it was too late was because the boat did not have any navigation lights on. It was not cloudy on that night and there was a half moon, that area of the river is dark and sometimes coming through the causeway can interfere with night vision. Another factor that contributed to the accident was Operator 2’s experience. Running a vessel that size at that speed makes it very hard to turn and if he would have been on plane he may have been able to steer away from the on-coming boat. Based on the damage to both vessels if he would have turned to the right he also may have avoided a collision.
  
  The statement that vessel #2 did not have navigation lights on when the accident occurred is not able to be verified by any evidence beyond sworn statements because of the damage to vessel #2’s electrical system. Officer  noticed that the switch to control the navigation lights on vessel #2 was in the on position when he arrived on scene. Officer believes that vessel #2 was running with his navigation lights on but the damage to the electrical system of the vessel prevented him from being able to determine with certainty that they where even functional at the time of the accident.