# Truck Through on White Lake



## icefishermanmark (Mar 2, 2005)

Did anyone see this story? Apparently at about 2:00AM Tuesday some idiot drove his Durango onto White Lake. Needless to say, he fell through. To truck couldn't get him out and as of this morning it is still in the lake. How dumb do you have to be?


----------



## sticknstring (Nov 27, 2006)

wow what were they thinking:banghead3


----------



## outdoor junkie (Sep 16, 2003)

What is wrong with people. I'm bettin alcohol had a hand in this. Isn't it true if this happens you have to pay a major fine.


----------



## Firemedic (Apr 5, 2005)

He will have to pay fines if it is not removed within a certain time, or if any fluids, such as gas, trans fluid, etc. are leaked into the lake. The EPA will get some cash from this guy!


----------



## Gutz (Mar 22, 2006)

outdoor junkie said:


> What is wrong with people. I'm bettin alcohol had a hand in this. Isn't it true if this happens you have to pay a major fine.


hmmm...2AM sounds like last call to me.


----------



## kcarlson (Dec 7, 2006)

How thick was the ice?


----------



## Kind of a big deal (Nov 20, 2007)

kcarlson said:


> How thick was the ice?


 
Not thick enough!


----------



## sticknstring (Nov 27, 2006)

obviously not enough i wouldnt drive my vehicle on 2 ft of ice


----------



## kcarlson (Dec 7, 2006)

How thick was the ice?


----------



## icefishermanmark (Mar 2, 2005)

If the ice was anything like the other local lakes, which it usually is, then 5 or 6 inches. 7 tops.


----------



## Adam Gibbs (Jul 13, 2006)

all ice in this area is 8 inches or less. i have not heard any more than 8 inches, and some larger, deeper lakes you cant even walk on in some areas.


----------



## kcarlson (Dec 7, 2006)

Yeah, 6" is a little on the thin side for a truck. I would drive on 15". Wonder how he was feeling when he went through? :lol:


----------



## JDHUNTER (Mar 25, 2004)

A darwin award is in order:lol:


----------



## sea nympho (Aug 7, 2006)

As I understand it, EPA regulations state owner has *24 hours to remove vehicle(*or anything that burns gas/oil), after that owner incurs fines of *$3k PER DAY* until vehicle is removes from waterway.

...which I think is good. Keep your toxic fluid leaking jalopy truck out of our lakes!


----------



## USMarine1171 (Feb 16, 2007)

I think anyone whose vehicle goes through the ice should have to pay a fine. Regardless of how long it was in the lake. If it's in there long enough for any type of police or DNR to find you...you should get a fine. Maybe then we wouldn't have vehicles going into lakes and leaking petroleum based compounds. Even though it wouldn't have made a difference in this idiots case...what a d'bag!


----------



## walleye (Aug 12, 2006)

How do you feel about petroleum based compounds leaking out of boats in the summer?


----------



## Duck-Hunter (Mar 31, 2005)

"MAnnnn them snowmobiles been out there." then the finally words that always lead to something stupid "watch this ****!"


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

sticknstring said:


> wow what were they thinking:banghead3


You mean what were they drinking


----------



## lookin for the gills (Jan 21, 2003)

sea nympho said:


> As I understand it, EPA regulations state owner has *24 hours to remove vehicle(*or anything that burns gas/oil), after that owner incurs fines of *$3k PER DAY* until vehicle is removes from waterway.
> 
> ...which I think is good. Keep your toxic fluid leaking jalopy truck out of our lakes!


Not to defend this idiot but the toxic fluids are in the lake anyway. They are there from us driving everyday.


----------



## sarge300 (Nov 2, 2007)

walleye said:


> How do you feel about petroleum based compounds leaking out of boats in the summer?


Exactly walleye, some of the boats out there look like an oil slick is following them.


----------



## Burksee (Jan 15, 2003)

Sunday Lunch Report from the WLI! 

Yes Dean, I stayed on the road to and from the WLI! 

The vehicle is still out there! Not in the water but up on the larger of the two islands waiting for the ice to get thick enough to be towed off the lake. Issue now is the since the islands are privately owned this clown besides already pending enviromental penaltys is now looking at trespassing charges! :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW - someone made a comment about it not being a local? From my experiance just about everytime this happens, and it does at least once a year, 99% of the time its always someone who lives in the area!


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

sea nympho said:


> *IF* it's true, that's pretty amazing. And ominous.
> 
> Nonetheless, no one will be expected to stop using thier outboards.
> *But* people should be expected _not_ to sink their vehicles in lakes and rivers.
> ...


 improvements are being made as required by the epa. the first round has already been done as of 2006. the next phase comes into effect in 2011.

That is a big part of the fuel economy of the optimax and the etech. of course the best option is 4 stroke. It will take decades to get the old motors out of the picture though.

I agree that idiots who sink a vehicle should be hit hard. Someone else brought up the comparison of that to boats. That comparison was even more significant than they realized. It was apparent that they were not aware of the true numbers involved. It seems that people are having a hard time accepting those numbers. do a google search on outboard fuel emmisions, theres no shortage of info out there. the industrys dirty little secret isnt so secret anymore.

I use them old outboards myself. someday maybe I will be able to upgrade but at this point I might as well wait for the improvements due in 2011.


----------



## USMarine1171 (Feb 16, 2007)

Just for good measure:​ 
Pleasure boats exhaust 1,590,000,000 Liters (420 million gallons) of unburned gasoline and other hydrocarbons into U.S. waters each year -A volume equivalent to 40 Exxon Valdez-size oil tanker
spills (Melc 1993).:yikes:​ 
Ain't that a bitch. So get a four-stroke fuel-injected motor or an electric and it will help a little. Oh yeah, and don't drive on the ice!:nono:​


----------



## ih772 (Jan 28, 2003)

sea nympho said:


> So are you saying it's *OK* for someone to sink their vehicle, or that is does minimal damage?
> 
> Most of the posts on this thread support clean water in every _practical_ way. And keeping one's truck from falling thru the ice is very practical.
> 
> ...


Go back and re-read my posts, leave your emotions out of it, and then maybe you'll understand what I'm saying.

This is the last time I'm going to say that to you, otherwise I have a feeling that to continue engaging you, will only be feeding your need to argue with others.


----------



## sea nympho (Aug 7, 2006)

ih772 said:


> Go back and re-read my posts, leave your emotions out of it, and then maybe you'll understand what I'm saying.
> 
> This is the last time I'm going to say that to you, otherwise I have a feeling that to continue engaging you, will only be feeding your need to argue with others.


There were never any emotions displayed. 

I merely pointed out the fact to you that the issue concerns personal responsiblity, and there is a popular consensus that keepeing one's vehicle from falling thru the ice is expected of those operating vehicles.

This thread was not "...a representaion of what goes into the lake in a sesaon...", it was about a "truck through on white lake". Most voiced their displeasure at the unresponsibility displayed by the operator, and their support of the consequenses, as did I. 

_Obviously_, the damage the truck is doing to the lake, or any vehicle submersion, is debatable-and forums like this one are a fine place to debate such an issue. That is what happened. _You_ "engaged" _yoursel_f in that, don't blame me. 

Nonetheless, info was offered that challenged the established percption of the level of pollutant introduced by 2-stroke outboards. IF it's found to be true, then the discussion was certainly worthwhile, because people learned something. And that's the point.

I re-read your posts, _again_, as requested. What is it, exactly, that you are saying or stand for You clearly compare the emmisions from every other source for the whole year against one sunken truck, only to pose the questions "so how much really ends up in the water" & "but what really does more polluting"

*MY clear question to you: What difference does that make?*

You don't seem to be supporting *ANY* solid position, just here introducing irrelavent & worthless comparisons, and judging everybodys' emotional state.:lol: You didn't even introduce the useful INFO/researchable FACTS that led to people learning outboards are worse than we've been told. 

Think what you want, say what you want, I don't care. I was never here "fulfilling a need to argue" and I don't appreciate some dude saying so, and telling everybody they are "emotional". If you don't want to "engage" with folks who might think differently than you, you're in the wrong place. People can disagree graciously, without agrguing, and -in general- that is what happens here m-s.com. _But when you come in to a discussion and start labeling people,_ *THAT IS ARGUING*.

Good day, sir. I believe we're done here.


----------



## Snocross418 (Feb 16, 2006)

Burksee said:


> BTW - someone made a comment about it not being a local? From my experiance just about everytime this happens, and it does at least once a year, 99% of the time its always someone who lives in the area!


I was in Jacks getting a hair cut Friday and some guy in there knew the guy that owned the Durango. I'm pretty sure he's local. When your looking for some good info go to the local Barber shop.


----------



## NittanyDoug (May 30, 2006)

I loved going to Jack's when I lived up that way. It's to far now for just a clip.


----------

