Black Panther 1,807 Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 specifically relevant to tendering Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adrianp 137 Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 I did my submission today. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 507 Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 This has been the case in the Waikato for some time, I have stood up in my wooden dinghy and paddle with one oar -therefore a traditional SUP. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Terry B 75 Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 Surfing should be banned obviously, along with all rowing and rowing events including the Olympics and omm Games. Bloody dangerous those narrow hulls - and the rowers never wear life jackets. A poor example to set. I believe children should be made to wear life jackets in swimming pools where the depth is over 4cm. Adults the same in depths over 8cm. These may seem to arbitrary depths - because they are. That's how committee decisions are made. Do try to keep up. In fact, on thinking further, swimming anywhere should be banned, swimming pools should be filled in and turned into children's play areas. And the ground in play areas should be one metre deep in soft rubber in case of falls. A supervisor, suitably trained of course, should be present at all times. The area should be fenced off and only available from 9am until 5pm. Then again, this area could be too dangerous as well. Perhaps we should just fill the pool in and plant trees. Of course we'll still need to fence the trees off in case untutored children of uncaring parents allow them to climb said trees. Unbelievably dangerous. All bicycles should be constructed with airbags to protect the users from crashes with those awful car users. I don't care how difficult that would be, we MUST ensure zero deaths on our roads. And on the subject of roads, more cones please. I say this not because I'm a shareholder in a road cone manufacturer, but because they save lives. And the orange is a lovely colour don't you think? And it gives employment to thousands who might otherwise struggle to find work. Yes it costs millions but rate payers and those few remaining people in paid employment can afford a 10% annual rise (minimum) in costs. And they'll be safer on their (admittedly much slower) way to and from work. I have many other ideas on safety and creating a perfect utopia where no-one ever dies accidentally. Of anything. I'm thinking of writing a book. Or joining Water Safety NZ - they would seem to need my expertise as they're not going anywhere near far enough with safety. Take power boats - please. Yours in safety, Ben Dover 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Clipper 382 Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 Don't you just grab painter and jump over the side? No lifejacket required for swimming (or towing a dinghy) I assume 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Psyche 879 Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 We all know its a ridiculous proposal but there are people out there who really do believe that this is going to save lives so it's justified. Who knows maybe it will save a life but then again so will staying home on the couch. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest 141 Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 Darwin doesn't have a snowball in hells chance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Black Panther 1,807 Posted July 29 Author Share Posted July 29 There's an outfit at Westhaven, close to the toilets. Their motto is something like "eliminating all drowning in Auckland ".I laugh every time I see it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 507 Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 Water Safety NZ , they were making good progress with education and such programmes -then the govt reduced funding and here we are Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem 560 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 https://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/media/oihhxohj/nz-safer-boating-forum-lifejacket-position-statement.pdf nz-safer-boating-forum-lifejacket-position-statement.pdf I don’t think this qualifies as a 'dumb rule.' Yes, it’s inconvenient—but then so is not being able to check my phone at a red light with the handbrake on. Does the inconvenience exist to serve a greater safety purpose? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 507 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 Ah the safer boating forum .... nameless people based in Wellington ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Elenya 48 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 16 minutes ago, waikiore said: Ah the safer boating forum .... nameless people based in Wellington ? Actually a group of people from industry bodies, sporting associations and local and central government from all over NZ. Their names will be on every meeting minutes which is available under the OIA. Yes one or two may even be from Wellington. sadly I was working when a person slipped from his moored yacht while getting into the dinghy one winter day in Auckland. He could not get back into his dinghy, not even with help from a nearby boater. He did not have strength to hold on to his friends dinghy as he was pulled towards the shore and drowned. I cannot imagine the effect that had on his friend who watched him die, the St. John's staff and police ashore and his family. A life jacket may have helped him stay afloat and be towed to shore... 2 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Psyche 879 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 We have been down this track before, "saving lives" is the catch all that bureaucrats use to justify rules like this. How many tender journeys between boat and shore have resulted in death. Very few I would imagine, noise in the data but it plays well among so called marine echo chambers. Lobbyists want to sell lifejackets, pearl clutchers want to save everyone and lawmakers want to be associated with "safety". More people drown in bathtubs let alone swimming pools or patrolled beaches. This is about passing another law to appear to be doing something and solving a non problem. I have sympathy for the person who fell in but thats boating, he could have easily had a heart attack on the water and now we all have to wear smart watches connected to big brother who will tell when we need to seek medical assistance. It is yet another encroachment on personal responsibility as if we haven't got enough people in the political managerial class telling us what to do. We are not children that need parental oversight 24/7. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zozza 372 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 So newsflash... I will be ignoring their rule. What are they gonna do? Have a cop at every dinghy landing to "arrest" me? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zozza 372 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 2 hours ago, Elenya said: Actually a group of people from industry bodies, sporting associations and local and central government from all over NZ. Their names will be on every meeting minutes which is available under the OIA. Yes one or two may even be from Wellington. sadly I was working when a person slipped from his moored yacht while getting into the dinghy one winter day in Auckland. He could not get back into his dinghy, not even with help from a nearby boater. He did not have strength to hold on to his friends dinghy as he was pulled towards the shore and drowned. I cannot imagine the effect that had on his friend who watched him die, the St. John's staff and police ashore and his family. A life jacket may have helped him stay afloat and be towed to shore... Right, so because of that guy, we all should be made to wear a life jacket in our dinghy? If not, I don't see the point of your post other than to pull at emotional strings. I am sorry for that guy, I am also sorry for everyone that dies every day from accidents the world over from slipping in showers to my 99 year old grandad that would have reached a 100 if he didn't fall down the front door steps of his own home. And I am not kidding, that is what happened. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
K4309 439 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 My understanding is that a significant proportion of drowned males are found with their willies out of their pants. Boat in a nice safe anchorage. Possibly had a rhumbo or two, or perhaps a chardonnay on a nice summers evening. Went for a wee. Fell overboard and drowned. Most often at night, in the dark, at anchor. There is so many ways to die, it's not possible or practical eliminate all of them. I think the basic problem for boaties is several govt or local body agencies don't have anyone else to control, but they do have jurisdiction over regional waters. Hence why there are completely different rules between the Coromandel, Auckland and Northland. Each has a different quasi-legal organisation trying to justify their existence. Best example is all the bullshit on invasive species. We all know they come in on commercial shipping, in sea-chests or in bilge water. The regional councils are mandated to control biosecurity, but have no mandate over commercial (international) shipping. So we cop all the stupid rules, and the cause of the problems is utterly unaddressed. Personally I can't see how these rules LJ in dinghy rules can possibly be effectively enforced. The bit that really grates my gears, if society as a whole, and govt were serious about reducing harm and death, we would have a half pie descent mental health service. You'd actually be able to get help for family of friends when it's needed. This nonsense of f**king around with lifejacket rules while the house is burning down is an indictment on where our society has gotten to. Our effort and resources could be so better spent focusing on more pressing problems. 1 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
grant 46 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 so how do you tell the difference between the guy getting into a tender, probably a nice stable inflatable, and going to shore and the $150 tinnie of trade me with two mates (and 2 inches of freeboard) going a out in the Manakau to get a feed? of course the first one is less likely to fall in (but not impossible) the second, all too often do end up in the water. Both are a in small boat near to shore, that's where the accidents happen, simplifying the rules isn't the biggest imposition that every happened for the first ighy and might just save a life or two in the second one , Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zozza 372 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 5 hours ago, K4309 said: My understanding is that a significant proportion of drowned males are found with their willies out of their pants. And I always though 'Free Willy" was about a whale... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Elenya 48 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 It seems to be a common theme of modern times that some people don't think about the effects their own actions may have on others. In this case it is a choice not to wear a life jacket. yeah I know a sunny day rowing ashore etc etc, I could swim it but I can't row a dinghy without a life jacket, and each region is different. I don't think the change in any rule will make some people suddenly wear a life jacket in the dinghy, hell they have been required to carry life jackets in the dinghy for many years (rule 91) but many don't. But of course the current private members bill is on its journey through parliament which could, if passed, require all booties to wear a PFD on vessels 6m or less. No differing regional rules there. Good on those who have put their thoughts in words and made a submission. We never used to wear seat belts as kids in the 70's and now there are all sorts of rules and requirements . Society changes with time. There is a lovely thread on the YBW forum about grumpy old mean moans. Quite entertaining and every subject about boating comes up. Best part is some people have realised they are grumpy old men and are learning to live with it as current view points change around them. for me having a PFD in my dinghy is not a major issue and if I have to wear it all the time, rather than when I have been for drink or it's rough etc, then I shall pop it on. Not a major inconvenience really, and it might just save my life one day. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Psyche 879 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 8 hours ago, grant said: so how do you tell the difference between the guy getting into a tender, probably a nice stable inflatable, and going to shore and the $150 tinnie of trade me with two mates (and 2 inches of freeboard) going a out in the Manakau to get a feed? of course the first one is less likely to fall in (but not impossible) the second, all too often do end up in the water. Both are a in small boat near to shore, that's where the accidents happen, simplifying the rules isn't the biggest imposition that every happened for the first ighy and might just save a life or two in the second one , You cant fix stupid Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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.