I would think that the protocol was established for a number of reasons: i) to preclude an unexpected salvage claim, ii) where the towed vessel is hiring help and wants to maintain control; iii) where some regulatory issue exists (like imigration, customs, or work-related rules), etc.

There used to be some people that said: "Make sure you pass YOUR line(s) to a vessel providing towing assistance. That way you avoid some surprise salvage claims as to who did what." I've be told that doesn't necessarily change things.

The key to the regulation is that BEFORE you start your towing experience, the parties involved are supposed to agree on who does what and who's in control. That includes discussions of: Where are we going to take the boat? ; How fast are we going to go? ; What are we going to do when we get there?; When we get into traffic (like at an inlet), what's the plan?; What channel are you monitoring for discussion of situations, etc.?;

Going into and inlet from the sea (like the Lake Worth inlet) and then transitting the traffic is not all that trivial -- especially on a weekend "in season". The decision to take the "short cut" to the east of Peanut Island should have been discussed -- if for not other reason than the traffic that Jon Eisberg cited.

I've towed a number of people in to shelter, off of groundings, etc. Usually we discuss what we're going to do, how the skipper of the towed boat wants to be helped etc. I've never used the term "Vessel in Control" though.

On the few times that I've been towed over the years, I've similarly discussed the "plan", especially as we get into "traffic" or go around restricted areas (usually draft of pots). Again, I've never discussed the term "Vessel in Control". Live and learn.