Regulation of UK Leisure Boating - a good idea?

[peteR75]

Originally Posted by Cookee

Whilst navigating down the East coast on our Round Britain trip it was obvious that every single fishing boat in the area (despite regulation) had failed to turn their AIS on - it's very unnerving to see fishing boats pass by lifting and setting crab pots in thick fog! It seems that if they turned it on the competition would see where they are fishing!

Just a bit of trivia
The cobbles from Newcastle to Sherringham (worst around whitby ) have drift nets about 1/2 mile long floating on the surface, some are protected by shot guns (seals)!

You need to check the wind , if its offshore the net is inshore of the cobble, onshore its outside the cobble.

[Sixy_the_red]

All the training in the world doesn't stop people being idiots and the tale from C2 ribs is a perfect example of this. I've seen so many similar incidents (although not so severe) I've lost count - the most severe of which occurred at The Camber, with a husband and wife trying to launch a 6ish metre RIB off a trailer. He was on board barking instructions at her, she was clearly not sure of herself and ended up letting go of the winch handle. She then attempted to grab hold of it again whilst it was freewheeling...! Thankfully she didn't actually manage to get close enough to break her arm.

The skipper being qualified doesn't help if the crew are unqualified, clueless and unwilling / unable to take instruction. This seems to be the case with husband and wife crews (not all) where the husband is busy being all in charge and the wife doesn't want to be told what to do.

Mandatory training will just end up with the standards being reduced to meet the lowest common denominator and a niche of 'approved' training providers making a mint.

IMO A far better use of resources would be placing infomercials on sites like EBay telling people how to prepare before putting to sea and maybe even having personnel at popular slips during the summer weekends to actually TALK to people and offer advice.

All that said, I'm a fan of Darwin. We live in a society that is far too protective and there are no consequences to peoples stupidity. If people want to go out and kill themselves on a boat, let them.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Sixy_the_red

All the training in the world doesn't stop people being idiots and the tale from C2 ribs is a perfect example of this. I've seen so many similar incidents (although not so severe) I've lost count - the most severe of which occurred at The Camber, with a husband and wife trying to launch a 6ish metre RIB off a trailer. He was on board barking instructions at her, she was clearly not sure of herself and ended up letting go of the winch handle. She then attempted to grab hold of it again whilst it was freewheeling...! Thankfully she didn't actually manage to get close enough to break her arm.

The skipper being qualified doesn't help if the crew are unqualified, clueless and unwilling / unable to take instruction. This seems to be the case with husband and wife crews (not all) where the husband is busy being all in charge and the wife doesn't want to be told what to do.

Mandatory training will just end up with the standards being reduced to meet the lowest common denominator and a niche of 'approved' training providers making a mint.

IMO A far better use of resources would be placing infomercials on sites like EBay telling people how to prepare before putting to sea and maybe even having personnel at popular slips during the summer weekends to actually TALK to people and offer advice.

All that said, I'm a fan of Darwin. We live in a society that is far too protective and there are no consequences to peoples stupidity. If people want to go out and kill themselves on a boat, let them.

At last I've been banging on in the same vein since we started out in the LED thread. I work in an industry that has so many training schemes & tinpot qualifications it's unreal. It's a money making machine & doesn't result in fewer accidents. We just have overqualified idiots You can't buy experience in Tesco

[Anchorhandler]

Ermmm i think people are getting a bit confused here as to what myself, Tonto and maybe a few others are wanting....

Sure its easy to find examples of a lack of ability in the way people HANDLE their boats.... Christ i can show you pictures of that nearly every day. Some people are naturally going to more skilled and coordinated than others.

What i want to see is a mandatory certificate covering all basic safety topics and basic rules of the road... Only yesterday one of our launches was attempting to exit the Hamble and was nearly ran aground on the NW side of the mouth of the river by a couple of sailboats entering the river. They gradually (and blatantly) pushed our launch to the North to the point that it nearly ran aground off Hamble point marina.....
I can supply you enough examples of this type of behaviour to keep you guys entertained for months.
I wonder how many shouts the RNLI get per year to people that were ill equipped or ill informed each year....hmmmm

And on the subject of introducing a 'drink boating' law........ Well keep the great excuses against it coming guys, its putting a wonderful smile on my face.....Most entertainment iv had in months. You guys must have expressed similar views when the seatbelt law was introduced or when the motoring drink drive law was toughed up..... Bet you don't look back now and complain that you were being over-regulated as you soberly 'clunk-click' before you drive off though do you?

I also presume you lot agree with the law that Masters of commercial shipping should be held accountable if found drunk in charge?..........hmmm, .interesting.

Simon

[BruceB]

Originally Posted by Anchorhandler

And on the subject of introducing a 'drink boating' law........ Well keep the great excuses against it coming guys, its putting a wonderful smile on my face.....Most entertainment iv had in months. You guys must have expressed similar views when the seatbelt law was introduced or when the motoring drink drive law was toughed up..... Bet you don't look back now and complain that you were being over-regulated as you soberly 'clunk-click' before you drive off though do you?

I have worn a seat belt on every trip since I was 17, long before it became a mandatory requirement, I also don't drink. However any law has to be enforceable and proportionate to the risk and this one isn't.

Originally Posted by Anchorhandler

I also presume you lot agree with the law that Masters of commercial shipping should be held accountable if found drunk in charge?..........hmmm, .interesting

Well actually, yes. You are at work not at play and the consequences of an incident potentially far worse. In certain circumstances special, and enforceable, rules need to be made. I accepted when I worked for the railway, as did everyone else, the fact that we could be fired for half the drink driving limit. special circumstances, special rules.

However where do you draw the line on madatory training. A kid on an inflateable canoe? A man and his boy out on a small dinghy with a small motor? A SIB with an outboard? A RIB? a sailboat?
The commercial size of >21m seems sensible to me.
I doubt any drink driving law can be enforced and if it cannot be enforced there is no point, especially as the risk is so small in comparison to many other activities such as skiing or climbing.
There has to be some element of taking responsibility for yourself when not at work and I would only support prosecutions when folk are found to be under the influence if involved in an accident rather than chasing folk about with a bag.
I understand where you are coming from as professional seagoers and the prejudice against "leisure" boaters, however I used to go to sea on large working vessels and professionals are not innocents in this respect either. Don't get me started on examples!

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Cookee

Whilst navigating down the East coast on our Round Britain trip it was obvious that every single fishing boat in the area (despite regulation) had failed to turn their AIS on - it's very unnerving to see fishing boats pass by lifting and setting crab pots in thick fog! It seems that if they turned it on the competition would see where they are fishing!

Cookee, I thought it was only commercial boats over 300gt that had to carry AIS by law. Have they phased it in for all commercial boats now?

[Cookee]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

Cookee, I thought it was only commercial boats over 300gt that had to carry AIS by law. Have they phased it in for all commercial boats now?

I may be poorly informed ...........

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Cookee

I may be poorly informed ...........

It'd explain why the crabbers & small boats weren't showing up

[tonto]

Originally Posted by BruceB

I have worn a seat belt on every trip since I was 17, long before it became a mandatory requirement, I also don't drink. However any law has to be enforceable and proportionate to the risk and this one isn't.

Well actually, yes. You are at work not at play and the consequences of an incident potentially far worse. .

I understand where you are coming from as professional seagoers and the prejudice against "leisure" boaters, however I used to go to sea on large working vessels and professionals are not innocents in this respect either. Don't get me started on examples!

So why was the seatbelt law brought in? there was a lot of advertising, remember "clunk click every trip" so if the training advertising route is so effective why did the government decide that we needed a law, because people did not listen to the campaigns and do listen when it affects thier pockets.

Todays seafarers have changed out of all recognition to when you were probably at sea. When I 1st started in 1985 it was more or less maditory to get drunk most nights, and there have been shocking examples, as there is in any industry. However due to a capt joe hazelwood (Exxon Valdez), who was incidentally found not guilty of being drunk in charge, we now have very tight rules. Half the UK driving limit, at all times, when on or off duty. People rarely drink to excess, and we do have alcohol on board, but it is controlled.
We also have random drug testing, and I have not heard of anyone in a company of 25 ships dismissed in the last 5 years due to drugs. Not sure all lesiure boaters could pass a screening test either.

However i do resent the comment that we are predjudiced against the lesiure boaters. I enjoy boating, and although I dont have a RIB at present am actively looking for one, so am I predjudiced against myself? not at all. I do spend half my life on the ocean, and at sea, so a guess i know a little about it, and conditions encountered.

We train the hell out of people, and we are professional. Yes the commercial skippers who drink are getting caught, and they normally go down for it, a year or so is the norm, plus their jobs and salaries are ruined, and rightly so.
However the safety issue is still there for both lesiure and commercial vessel operators. A fully loaded RIB, or sailboat, maybe 6 persons or more, travelling at 30+ knots has the potential to kill them all, plus anyone else they decide to crash into, plus the rescue services have to put themselves at risk as well.

I cannot recall any fatal accident on a commercial vessel that was a cause of the skipper being drunk in the last 5 years, (in British waters) but according to the MAIB, 45 dead in 6 years on lesiure boats where alcohol was a factor, and you tell me it is not a problem?

There have been a number of incidents over the last few years with small vessel running aground, and some collisions mostly where the OOW has been fatigued or tired, and there was recently a small coaster had a collision with a ferry in ireland, but no fatalities. The ones running aground, usually cause damage to the ships, however for lesiure craft damage if people are drunk they would not report it to MAIB, so those figures are not available. Incidentally the guy who was drunk and collided with a ferry is looking at 2 years.... No injuries, and no pollution, but then he deserves being thrown in jail because he gets paid to work on ships.

I just do not see the difference between potentially killing half a dozen on a lesiure boat, or potentially killing people with a merchant ship. They would still be just as dead.

One final point then I suppose if i was driving a car for lesiure that means I dont need to follow the drink drive rules then.........

[willk]

Originally Posted by Cookee

it's very unnerving to see fishing boats pass by lifting and setting crab pots in thick fog!

Not half as unnerving as it would be to be hauling lines in the nice quiet fog and then the Sterling bursts onto the scene...

````........ L_____/

[jwalker]

Originally Posted by Cookee

..... it's very unnerving to see fishing boats pass by lifting and setting crab pots in thick fog!

Get radar on yer boat Cookee.... However, your point that regulation doesn't necessarily lead to improved safety, is taken.

[Cookee]

Originally Posted by willk

Not half as unnerving as it would be to be hauling lines in the nice quiet fog and then the Sterling bursts onto the scene...

````........ L_____/

............. We were bursting onto the scene at all of about 5 mph! That is our minimum speed when both engines are in gear ..........

With respect to our sponsors products I don't think fitting a radar would be a clever move - it might suffer a bit with the speed and violent changes of direction!

[jwalker]

Originally Posted by Cookee

.... With respect to our sponsors products I don't think fitting a radar would be a clever move - it might suffer a bit with the speed and violent changes of direction!

Hehe, is that code for, "Our sponsors don't think the boat will look so cool with a bucket on the roof." ?

[Cookee]

Originally Posted by jwalker

Hehe, is that code for, "Our sponsors don't think the boat will look so cool with a bucket on the roof." ?

Not at all although I'm sure Raymarine could find me something to stick up there if I wanted to - it would certainly be good PR if it survived!

[Simon B]

OK, how about this one, all leisure users need to be sea checked and they can cough up a small sum to the RNLI for this. RNLI do it already and it covers all the basics nicely.

Allow HMs or whoever to do spot checks, no sea check "cert" then you get a fine.

The amount of edifice creation and legislation is small, RNLI get a bit more money and a basic form of regulation will have been introduced, the Darwin enthusiats may also have had their needs met!

[Doug Stormforce]

Originally Posted by Simon B

OK, how about this one, all leisure users need to be sea checked and they can cough up a small sum to the RNLI for this. RNLI do it already and it covers all the basics nicely.

Simon, nice of you to volunteer the RNLI to carry out your idea, have you asked them if they want to deliver a mandatory inspection program on behalf of the government.
[QUOTE=Simon B;473679
Allow HMs or whoever to do spot checks, no sea check "cert" then you get a fine.
[/QUOTE]
Do you think that a harbour master has the skills time and training to do the job of the police force? Would you also propose that car park attendants were asked to stop and carry out spot checks to motorists and issue faxed penalty fines to motorists?

[DGR]

There are plenty of laws/regulations that aren't effectively enforced - because they can't be, but they make MOST people think - which IMHO is the real issue.

Drink driving is really badly enforced - but IF you are caught, you don't get much sympathy these days - and you get the book thrown at you.

If there was some sort of rule or requirement - covering a basic level of knowledge, including safety kit, and ability - then HM's/local councils etc could check their validity when registering the vessel (like they already do with insurance - at least they do here).

Then, at some point in the future, there were problems, then those individuals could be held liable by the authorities. I.e. Idiot crashes into Safe Water Mark, RNLI launch and tow into harbour, met by CG and local police - enforce at that point.

[Anchorhandler]

Well i wasn't going to comment any further but after reading the last few pages of posts again, its quite surprising that the only real arguments against mandatory certification/drinking at sea revolve around only two or three percieved idea's.

1) Mandatory training/certification is unnecessary and un-enforceable.....

After returning home from my voyages around the world on supertankers/ferries/cruiseships/offshore vessels i have spent the last 5 years living (yes, literally living) in the middle of the Solent, well for 6-7 months of each year anyway. This gives me and my colleagues a better view than almost anyone else around of people's boating (bad) habits so please believe me when i say that after seeing the things i have seen over the last 5 years, a minimum standard is most definately needed.
There is a dismal level of appreciation of even basic rules of the road or ColRegs and I have lost track of how many times the Lifeboat has been launched to people who had either no working VHF (or had no knowledge of how to use it), no flares, no experience of basic boat/outboard/inboard operation etc.... Wake up people and stop living in denial
Speak to anyone that spends as much time as us on the water and they will surely concur.

2) A BUI (boating under influence) law would be impossible to regulate or enforce.

Do you lot really believe this when many other countries around the world already succesfully do exactly that?

Try boating while intoxicated in the USA, France or Australia and see where it gets you. (im sure if i Googled this i could find many, many more but these are three that i already know of)

Think of a boat much in the same way as a campervan and you soon realise that its not that difficult to police. Your perfectly entitled to park up in a van and enjoy a few glasses of wine so long as your not behind the wheel and you dont resume your voyage if your BAC is over the legal limit.

We have a very good working relationship with the Southampton Police marine unit and i'll speak to them shortly to guage their opinion as to how difficult it would be to enforce. I'm quite confident they will confirm that, so long as an appropriate law and limit is in place, they will have no problem prosecuting people for being drunk in charge of a boat. A random check of an individual's basic safety certificate (if ever implemented) could also be undertaken during routine stops.

I'm not looking to ban people from drinking alltogether when out on the water, i just want to have the reassurance that when i'm transiting a narrow entrance to a harbour with my wife, three year old son and dog on board, that the driver of the large motorcruiser approaching me as he exits isnt that rat-arsed that he's going to collide head on with us.


Simon

[BruceB]

Whats a routine stop? I have never seen a marine police boat or policeman outside the Upper Clyde area and rarely even then.........
I have never been stopped and inspected in around 20 years of RIB use and frankly would be mightily pi88ed if,
1. I had to pay even more tax to employ folk to do so properly, and
2. I started getting stopped and and bugged out on the water when the point is to relax and enjoy myself in the nice empty waters around Scotland.

It may be enforceable in the Solent but not around here, you generally don't need qualifications, insurance or permission to go out on the water in this country and I want it to stay that way.

I have to repeat, I don't drink and am well equipped and qualified, these proposals don't affect me one jot.
However I am not working commercially and want to be left alone to enjoy myself based on my personal assessment of the risk, not some governmental bod deciding what I can and cannot do.
Common sense seem to be fairly uncommon these days and the natural reaction once rules are in place is to continually tighten them, so just don't start down that road. If you want to base it on risk then any effort would be better spent on regulating the road journey to the boat, this is where the real risk on a trip lies.

As I said, where do you draw the line at mandatory training, when would you need it? this sort of thing was proposed for climbing 20 years ago and knocked on the head, everyone including the government and the Mountain Rescue teams realised that not only was it impossible to enforce but the eventual effect was not only to basically stop climbing but to prevent folk assessing the risk themselves and just follow some rules they got taught on a course which they were told would make them safe.
This would increase the danger not reduce it.

I would have to say I don't know many idiots locally apart from some visiting jetskiers, the seas tend to weed out the stupid and inexperienced quite quickly up here.

Incidentally its not that long since I was last at sea, 2005/6 I think was the last time 250 miles off the west coast of Ireland, before that the Artic Circle.

[BruceB]

Originally Posted by DGR

Then, at some point in the future, there were problems, then those individuals could be held liable by the authorities. I.e. Idiot crashes into Safe Water Mark, RNLI launch and tow into harbour, met by CG and local police - enforce at that point.

This has bee considered in many pastimes that sometimes go wrong. General opinion is that having enforcement bodies associated with anything that is an accident without injury stops people calling the rescue services and the delay makes the incident worse.
I doubt the RNLI would like this idea.