On July 16, 2023 around 14:09, I (Warden) observed two personal watercrafts in the no-boat zone near the beach at Keyhole.  I contacted Operator1 on the beach and Operator1 stated he and Operator2 were each driving a personal watercraft.  Operator2 was walking very slow and was clearly in pain.  I asked Operator2 multiple times if he was okay and he stated yes.  There was a language barrier during the encounter.

I walked down to the shore line, inspected the two personal watercrafts, and spoke with Subject1.  Subject1 revealed that Operator1 and Operator2 had an accident right before I arrived.  I took pictures of the two watercrafts and spoke to the owners, operators, and witnesses nearby.  Subject1 helped translate for Operator1 and Operator2.

Boat 1
Color: White 
Make: Yamaha  
Model: Wave Venture 1100
Owner: Operator2
Operator: Operator1
Damage:  The majority of damage was observed on the bow hull of the watercraft.  There were scratches in the center above the bow eye with same red paint transfer and black transfer (likely from the rub rail of boat #2).  More red paint transfer was located on the hull, port side, near the bow.  Angled scratches (some red transfer) are visible on the port hull that angle from port to starboard.  There is one gouge on the hull port side about midway aft, but there is no obvious damage on the stern of the PWC.  POI is likely the bow of the PWC.
Operator injuries: None.

Boat 2
Color: Red 
Make: Kawasaki  
Model: Sport Tourer 1100 STX
Owner: Subject1
Operator: Operator2
Damage:  Substantial damage was observed on the starboard side towards the aft of the PWC suggesting this was the POI.  The main damage was comprised of gouges, cuts, and scratches in the fiberglass.  White transfer paint is apparent transfer lines run fairly straight from the starboard to port (very slight angle towards the bow in spots).  There was also a cut in the black rub rail.  
Operator Injuries:  Scrape and bruising on lower right back.  Marks are apparent angling from the lower right hip, upwards and to the left, to the middle of the spine.

Statements: 

Subject1:

Subject1 stated Operator1 and Operator2 took off from shore in a parallel fashion and that Operator2 cut in front of Operator1.  Subject1 said Operator2 was looking back and to the right (she thought to look for the visibility spout) and that caused him to cut to the right in front of Operator1.  Subject1 stated Operator2 was driving her PWC and that her PWC has a water spout on the side and not the vertical spout Operator2 was used to on his.  Subject1 stated the accident happened close to shore and almost immediately after they left the shore line.

Operator1
Operator1 and Operator2 left shore (south of the swim beach at the edge of the no-boat zone) and took off on PWCs side by side with Operator2 on Operator1’ left side.  As they were coming up to speed, Operator1 said he was trying to stay on the line of the buoys and Operator2 cut in front of him thinking they were going to go to the right.  As Operator1 was about to hit Operator2, he turned the handle bars hard to the left.    Operator1 said he hit towards the rear Operator2’s PWC and went off to the left instead of going up and over.

Conclusion:
After reviewing the evidence, it appears Operator1 (operator of Boat 1) struck the starboard aft of Boat 2 (operated by Operator2).  Damage suggests the point of impact likely occurred between the bow eye and keel of Boat 1 and the starboard side of Boat 2 towards the aft.  It is likely that upon initial impact, Boat 2 rolled under Boat 1 and caused Boat 1 to pitch up and ramp to some extent.  This is bolstered by the injuries observed on Operator2’s back, paint transfer on the seat of Boat 2, and paint transfer on the hull of Boat 1.  Operator1 stated he attempted to turn left prior to impact and that Boat 1 rolled off the stern of Boat 2 after he struck the operator of Boat 2.  Pant transfer on the hull of Boat 1 suggests that Boat 2 was moving to the right when Boat 1 was ramping on top of Boat 2; or it suggest that Boat 1 slide sideways to the left after the initial contact. After talking to witnesses, it is likely the accident was caused by inexperience, inattention, lack of communication, and operating two PWCs too close together.



Violations:
Operator2 (Operator Boat 2)
VIC 901 Operate unnumbered boat 41-13-102
VIC 905 Careless operation of watercraft 41-13-203
VIC 915 Fail to provide fire extinguisher 41-13-213

Operator1 (Operator Boat 1)
VIC 905 Careless operation of watercraft 41-13-203

Keyhole Reservoir
Pine Haven                    