Jump to content

Boating now heavily restricted


Recommended Posts

When someone does get the virus and develop antibodies will these:

a. Protect them from re-infection

b. Super sensitize them to new infection so you get smacked harder in round 2 (think dengue fever which many cruisers are sadly familiar)

c. Absolutely no idea what effect it will have (perhaps the honest answer with current knowledge?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. "The Economy" is not a thing. https://kmccready.wordpress.com/2014/02/18/open-letter-to-colin-james-cc-rod-oram/

The world, COVID or not, is a place of abundance. If we share our toys nicely everyone benefits.

COVID provides us with a wonderful opportunity to reset how we run the world. Big improvements for the majority are possible if we have the political will to make them and the intellectual honesty to reassess our notions of how the world should run.

2. If you want to speak on behalf of disabled people and you're not disabled you should be very very careful. In particular don't make generalisations about all disabled people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BOIGuy said:

A vaccine like what everyone wants is pretty much hypothetical, safe with high effectiveness, rarely happened before why should this be any different?

Current Flu vaccines barely register as effective, certainly not enough to let loose a deadly virus on, and there have been a number of safety issues along the way.

Other recent vaccine experiments have had some questionable results, HPV, SARS.

I would like to see a bit more narrative on treatments as an effective measure too in the absence off a miracle vaccine. There are a number of drugs that seem to help people get through the illness, I think this is realistically going to have to be an acceptable way forward to opening borders. And going Boating 😀

These sort of viruses tend to mutate to become less deadly, it helps their own survival. Just another flu may not be far off the mark in the long run ( definitely not yet, don't take this the wrong way)

Fixed it, for Aleanas benefit

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not surprising that special time hasn't been spent writing fine-grained rules about  leisure boating that make everybody happy.  This is a massive global crisis and it was urgent, and broad brushstrokes on a luxury pastime is no surprise.  

ScottieE, I'm not sure your science and economics are sound.  If we eliminate we will be visiting rest homes sooner than if we wait for herd immunity and antibody testing protocols etc etc, especially if we pace herd immunity at a speed where ICUs aren't overrun (don't understand where you got your 0.1% mortality rate - the global numbers show that to be way wrong). 

Hindsight is great, but Sweden is still an experiment, and if our govt had tried it they would have been ripped apart like Boris J was when he (briefly) announced a herd immunity strategy.  Also not sure why you think NZ's economy is so harmed by elimination compared to alternatives, nor why you single out just the PM as a "twit" on these points.  In the days leading up to the lockdown there was heavy industry lobbying for a lockdown.  Major industry and exporters wanted it.  This is partly why the opposition agreed with it.  Tourism and flights were collapsing whatever we did and the key was to minimise health and economic carnage elsewhere.  The travelling barriers with elimination are small beer compared to the peril of having a long, slow pandemic spread through the community with business after business shut down again and again.   Nail it quickly and NZ has a major competitive advantage.  Hindsight or medical study will inform things for sure, but this strategy is what industry and scientists were telling the government to do loud and clear.  The opposition agreed and their criticism has been on detail of implementation, not the overall plan.  Most international commentators praise it.  Either all of them are twits, or none, but not just the (female) politician you don't like.

We were going to have a recession the moment this blew up in the major economies.  We may yet choose to take a different approach over time (you can go from lockdown to Sweden's approach but not vice versa).  But I don't think there were any loud political or industry voices saying it was stupid to lock down, quite the opposite.  As for mocking it as being "kind", we did what China did (locking down Wuhan) and the Chinese government will have been focused on the economy.  Twits also?  

Back to boating, here is a prediction: absent a vaccine, Americans will find global cruising miserable for a long time now because their approach has been terrible.  Wouldn't surprise me if they (and others) face serious barriers to visiting smaller island states that can eliminate.  We may just have the chance of cruising up to the islands like the old days.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wayne-o said:

It's not surprising that special time hasn't been spent writing fine-grained rules about  leisure boating that make everybody happy.  This is a massive global crisis and it was urgent, and broad brushstrokes on a luxury pastime is no surprise.  

ScottieE, I'm not sure your science and economics are sound.  If we eliminate we will be visiting rest homes sooner than if we wait for herd immunity and antibody testing protocols etc etc, especially if we pace herd immunity at a speed where ICUs aren't overrun (don't understand where you got your 0.1% mortality rate - the global numbers show that to be way wrong). 

Hindsight is great, but Sweden is still an experiment, and if our govt had tried it they would have been ripped apart like Boris J was when he (briefly) announced a herd immunity strategy.  Also not sure why you think NZ's economy is so harmed by elimination compared to alternatives, nor why you single out just the PM as a "twit" on these points.  In the days leading up to the lockdown there was heavy industry lobbying for a lockdown.  Major industry and exporters wanted it.  This is partly why the opposition agreed with it.  Tourism and flights were collapsing whatever we did and the key was to minimise health and economic carnage elsewhere.  The travelling barriers with elimination are small beer compared to the peril of having a long, slow pandemic spread through the community with business after business shut down again and again.   Nail it quickly and NZ has a major competitive advantage.  Hindsight or medical study will inform things for sure, but this strategy is what industry and scientists were telling the government to do loud and clear.  The opposition agreed and their criticism has been on detail of implementation, not the overall plan.  Most international commentators praise it.  Either all of them are twits, or none, but not just the (female) politician you don't like.

We were going to have a recession the moment this blew up in the major economies.  We may yet choose to take a different approach over time (you can go from lockdown to Sweden's approach but not vice versa).  But I don't think there were any loud political or industry voices saying it was stupid to lock down, quite the opposite.  As for mocking it as being "kind", we did what China did (locking down Wuhan) and they will have been thinking solely about the economy.  Twits also?  

Back to boating, here is a prediction: absent a vaccine, Americans will find global cruising miserable for a long time now because their approach has been terrible.  Wouldn't surprise me if they (and others) face serious barriers to visiting smaller island states that can eliminate.  We may just have the chance of cruising up to the islands like the old days.

Whatever you think of the Chinese government It's incredibly offensive and racist to say China would be thinking solely of "the economy". And anyway, there is no such thing as "the economy" - it's an intellectual construct, not a real thing. https://kmccready.wordpress.com/2014/02/18/open-letter-to-colin-james-cc-rod-oram/

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wayne-o said:

Sorry Kevin - I thought it would have been obvious I meant the government's policy response but have amended to clarify.  It must get exhausting correcting people every time they say "the economy"!  

:-) Too funny!

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

right - I feel responsible for the original post that sent this off on a tangent and so I shall do my utmost to bring it back.  

Heard today that for a number of weeks now CAA has been working on enabling owners of aircraft to continue to maintain their aircraft, including maintenance flights.  DG of Health has approved this (clearly he now runs the country) even at level 4. 

There is a framework around how to go about doing this.  So would seem consistent that maintenance of vessels should also be permitted. I would deem that to include being able to run an engine under load "at sea", test running rigging etc. to the owners satisfaction.  MNZ are only looking at commercial operations rather than recreational vessels (there is nothing on their website) and so as usual there's no assistance from them there.  Nobody (and regrettably I'd have to include YNZ in that) is lobbying on recreational vessel owners' behalf to be able to carry out maintenance as far as I can tell.

discuss!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The aircraft rules only allow those aircraft for which the engine, without being run in 30 days, is no longer allowed to fly and will require a strip down.

If the manufacturer of the boat engine has the same rules, enforced by Maritime NZ, that a vessel cannot legally be operated if the engine has not been run within 30 days then the same rules should apply. You apply to maritime for an exemption and one person is named to take the boat for a short run under engine. Fairs fair. Owners of such boats line up here.......

 

In our aeroclub of 100 members owning 75 aircraft between them, 6 have been given permission

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to post incase I take it off topic again.

But I will say that the economy is like gravity, there is no logical explanation for it, its hard to understand its existence, but you can measure its effect, and ignoring it can be very painful...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Deep Purple said:

In our aeroclub of 100 members owning 75 aircraft between them, 6 have been given permission

Same. The circuits only call was for currency and getting motors working only and then only for private aircraft, none of the club aircraft are allowed up ... but they have been up for the motors I'm told.... which will be a hard to counter cover story for the Instructor lassies n lads to just go for a hoon :)  Every flight has to jump thru hoops before they can get wheels up. 

 

18 hours ago, ScottiE said:

  Nobody (and regrettably I'd have to include YNZ in that) is lobbying on recreational vessel owners' behalf to be able to carry out maintenance as far as I can tell.

The problem is us yachties do not have a true national body to advocate for us. Yes there is YNZ but they exist for Olympics and clubs, their membership and constituents are not us the yachties. Sure they try to spin it that way but it simply is not the case, as they will tell you.

Look at the activities with good strong true national bodies, cycling, hunting and the others. All have gone to bat for their constituents and have have had wins, sure with limitations but there would be few arguing a no holes free for all right now is good for anyone. Anyone who thinks taking your laser for a blast along the beach is more dangerous than hunting or cycling is a prime muppet, sadly NZ yachties are governed by assorted bunches of muppets, all of whom are currently in prime muppet brained form.

Link to post
Share on other sites

YNZ's focus has definitely changed so I'm not sure I entirely agree with you.  Traditionally you are correct but a quick look at the history of constitution shows that since about 2012 YNZ has begun to alter its focus from what's percieved as "just Olympic classes" or racing, to include recreational boating "advocacy" as described on their website.  It's interesting because I think that ISAF may have had quite a bit to do with influencing YNZ's focus in the past.  In the 2006 rule change we had this little gem:

"To recognise and support ISAF by (c) refraining, and using reasonable endeavours to persuade others within Yachting New Zealand's jurisdiction to refrain, from actions that are inconsistent with ISAF's objects, rules, regulations and decisions."

wrt to recreational boaties we have these two which look like they came in when the constitution was redrafted 2012 - "To represent and promote the interests of its Members; TO advocate for free access to coastal and inland waters for yachting and boating;" 

Re-reading Dave A's comment on the 22nd, I think that I was wrong to include YNZ not lobbying, they at least tried to get our case across in some form. "It was disappointing to learn yachting and boating activities will not be permitted at level 3, because Yachting New Zealand have been strongly advocating to Sport New Zealand and the Government on behalf of the sector to have a safe and graduated return to activity."

The example I put up was flawed and rightly put down.  Perhaps if more of us were willing to be members of YNZ affiliated clubs, YNZ might have more clout to be able to influence SNZ.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ScottiE said:

Re-reading Dave A's comment on the 22nd, I think that I was wrong to include YNZ not lobbying, they at least tried to get our case across in some form. "It was disappointing to learn yachting and boating activities will not be permitted at level 3, because Yachting New Zealand have been strongly advocating to Sport New Zealand and the Government on behalf of the sector to have a safe and graduated return to activity."

Your belief that there was some serious and genuine lobbying is one I can not share with you sorry. It's also one many clubs don't judging by some emails I'm seeing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sabre said:

I think if they lobbied any harder in this case they would look like dicks. 

Also important to note that YNZ recieves government funding so maintaing a good relationship is far more important than gaining 2 weeks of sailing in L3 imo

At which club are you management/Flag officer of Sabre?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes...that's correct, don't bite the hand that feeds you.....in which case exactly what is their function ? Oh that's right organise the 5 ring circus for the top dogs in the Olympic Classes plus token appearancs via "Regional Managers" at centreboard regattas.  YNZ IMO lost their way many years ago once they got into the big $$$$ salaries. For sure the YNZ fee that the YC's I belong to  is very hard to justify as far as the rank and file are concerned.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like YNZ to take a more pro-active stance with Maritime NZ and ensure that MNZ receives effective feedback from a yachties point of view.  I'd also like to see YNZ have an effective voice when dealing with councils, marina owners and their association, the insurance industry and everybody else that has power over decision making regarding our sport/pastime/passion/profession/livelihood.  I'd also like to have Taylor Swift bring me breakfast in bed and I think I have just as much chance of that happening.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sabre said:

I dont think you need to be management/flag officer of a club to have an opinion KM....

I wouldn't have thought so, why do you ask?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/04/2020 at 1:28 PM, ScottiE said:

YNZ's focus has definitely changed so I'm not sure I entirely agree with you.  Traditionally you are correct but a quick look at the history of constitution shows that since about 2012 YNZ has begun to alter its focus from what's percieved as "just Olympic classes" or racing, to include recreational boating "advocacy" as described on their website.

wrt to recreational boaties we have these two which look like they came in when the constitution was redrafted 2012 - "To represent and promote the interests of its Members; TO advocate for free access to coastal and inland waters for yachting and boating;" 

Re-reading Dave A's comment on the 22nd, I think that I was wrong to include YNZ not lobbying, they at least tried to get our case across in some form.
 

 

Actually, I’d suggest the changes on the website and YNZ’s constitution were brought about by complaints from clubs rather than YNZ changing their ways. 
 

The club here has had various discussions with YNZ over charging non racing members (maybe 5/6ths of membership) a fee for over 20 years now. It was brought to their attention, I think at a YNZ agm, that the people they claim to represent - launches and cruisers, were not mentioned in YNZ’s constitution at all, any where, even once. 

Changing their website is fine, have they actually changed their behaviour? Examples?

I can’t see anywhere in DA’s speil where he has advocated to anyone on behalf of cruising boats. I only read ‘sport’ and racing related advocacy, mostly regarding dinghies. Not that I think we should necessarily be boating in level 3. I just think our national body should have a position on it. Maybe do what other governing bodies are and come up with procedures that would make boating safer at level 1 & 2 and provide those to Sport NZ, in the hope that gets boating the green light a soon as practical. I also think if they claim to advocate for a group of people, and charge them an annual fee to do so, then they should do it.
 

This is likely the absolute best opportunity they will have this decade to advocate on behalf of a somewhat disgruntled group of their membership, and prove they are at least trying to do something on their behalf to proved a path or some certainty to that part of boating, but they haven’t really lifted a finger. Have they?

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...