Farrari 4 Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 We received this email from the Starling association. I think it sums it up very well. The survey can be accessed at http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/HaveYourSay/Pages/safeboatinginauckland.aspx Have you say so as the auckland council consultants get a balanced opinion. Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 22:18:36 +1200Subject: Compulsory wearing of life jackets From: xxx To: xxx This email is mainly of interest to people who go boating in Auckland but is also relevant throughout NZ. Auckland Council is considering it's by laws to decide if it should change the current by law which requires every boat to have a life jacket on board for every person, to making it compulsory for everyone to wear them if the boat is under 6.0m long, at all times. That includes rowing ashore in your dinghy, when swimming off your boat, and having a sleep. Two young children drowned recently because they were trapped inside the cabin of a boat which sank and they could not get down through the doorway because they were wearing lifejackets. That is why airlines tell you not to inflate your jacket until you are outside the aircraft.This has been prompted by some well meaning people concerned at the high number of drownings in the Polynesian community, who see compulsory wearing as the only solution, even despite the fact that the current by laws have exceptions for example-: for an unpowered vessel e.g. surfboard, or a windsurfer wearing a wetsuit, or a person training, or a person participating in a sporting event. It is unclear if this includes rowing dinghies. The Council is conducting a survey which I believe asks appropriate questions and to its credit the Council is properly consulting with as wide a body of people as it can. Numbers will count on this. No matter what you opinion on the topic is you should have your say. There are several options including making no changes. Please take the time to answer the questionnaire and make sure your boating friends do as well. For those of you who do your boating outside of Auckland be aware that Councils are increasing their vigilance on this topic. There are reports that it is already mandatory in the Hawkes Bay but with some exceptions negotiated by Napier SC. The Harbour master at Coromandel was recently reported to be handing out fines for boaties accessing the local stream in their dinghies, if they didn't have lifejackets in their boats, and Environment Waikato published draft by laws which made wearing life jackets compulsory. If your Council hasn't already considered this you can expect them to be doing so soon. They just love a bit of regulation. To access the survey you can go to http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/haveyoursay (Please go to ‘Current consultations’ then ‘Safe boating in Auckland’ under Regional consultations). The survey is open until the 31st May. Regards Richard Brown Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Notice the lifejacket manufacturers and lining up alongside this in numbers!! I smell a rat!! Drumming up business!! Link to post Share on other sites
otto 31 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 done hope others do the same and take time to add some constructive comments. I for one are not keen on having compulsory like jackets under 6mtrs. And whether its the current or new rules i don't see how this would be better especially when SUP's are not required to have pfd's. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 What a silly set of questions. Whoever wrote that isn't a boatie. Link to post Share on other sites
erice 732 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 looks like all helen's nannies moved to auckland when the country kicked them out of power in wellington Link to post Share on other sites
otto 31 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 What a silly set of questions. Whoever wrote that isn't a boatie. looks like all helen's nannies moved to auckland when the country kicked them out of power in wellington exactly why i spent more time typing in answers than clicking on theirs. Link to post Share on other sites
Steve Pope 253 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Definitely written with outcomes (already?) decided, Yes I agree that all the safety folk have a definite vested interest in this going ahead. It is interesting that folk like RFD are selling life jackets that are required to be serviced every 2 years, perhaps they know something we don't. perhaps they have an agenda for this to become one of the rules?? Link to post Share on other sites
Chewing Gum 17 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 In sheltered waters I see absolutely no reason to have lifejackets in my yacht tender. It is a Southern Pacific RIB 2.8m and to my mind is safer than any lifejacket. Recently I decided to see what would happen in the unlikely event that one of the rear floats was punctured, leaving the other 2 compartments inflated. I let out all the air and the boat still floated quite happily. The only effect was a slight softening of the other 2 compartments due to less pressure on the compartment bulkheads. Link to post Share on other sites
armchairadmiral 411 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Be very afraid...boat registration with associated cost and licensing with costs plus pointy headed enforcement "just doing their job" will be next.All this to create well paid empires...there is no problem that will be solved by this........ Link to post Share on other sites
banaari 27 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 exactly why i spent more time typing in answers than clicking on theirs. Snap! Link to post Share on other sites
gurge 0 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 In the Waikato regional council area this is already in place. So they are just bringing the rest of the country into the same set of rules. Names for all boats, under 6m must wear a life jacket to name a few. These are policed especially with a loud hailer from the Whangamata wharf . So if you visit this region you are already under the new guidelines. Coromandel included. Link to post Share on other sites
Island Time 1,293 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 More bureaucratic crap. Laws passed must be enforced or they are pointless. That costs. More taxes to pay for them. People being injured or dying due to their own stupidity has always been a part of life. The state is not and should not be responsible. Take responsibility for yourself! I did the survey, typed most of my own answers. I have no problem with education (encourage it), but additional regulation is not required or desired. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Safety at Sea and other marine safety companies were asked if we would support the survey by offering PFDs as an incentive to people to both fill out the survey and record their details. We were happy to do so. Auckland and NZ have quite pragmatic PFD requirements, and I urge as many people to fill in the survey as possible supporting this fact. We need to ensure we don't end up like many Australian states with draconian and complex rules. It should be noted that PFD usage is increasing. Nearly all drownings are the result of either not wearing PFDs, or other circumstances such as poor skipper decisionmaking, overloading, unsafe vessel, storms, groundings etc causing the initial problem. Link to post Share on other sites
Deep Purple 530 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 In the Waikato regional council area this is already in place. So they are just bringing the rest of the country into the same set of rules. Names for all boats, under 6m must wear a life jacket to name a few. These are policed especially with a loud hailer from the Whangamata wharf . So if you visit this region you are already under the new guidelines. Coromandel included. Yep, same in Whitianga Link to post Share on other sites
otto 31 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Auckland and NZ have quite pragmatic PFD requirements, and I urge as many people to fill in the survey as possible supporting this fact. We need to ensure we don't end up like many Australian states with draconian and complex rules. It should be noted that PFD usage is increasing. Nearly all drownings are the result of either not wearing PFDs, or other circumstances such as poor skipper decisionmaking, overloading, unsafe vessel, storms, groundings etc causing the initial problem. I did the survey, typed most of my own answers. I have no problem with education (encourage it), but additional regulation is not required or desired. Hopefully more will take the time to type in answers and comments. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 doneAnd whether its the current or new rules i don't see how this would be better especially when SUP's are not required to have pfd's. FYI, SUP's are classed as vessels and as such you are required to carry a lifejacket/PFD on-board... so for practical purposes you may as well wear it in effect making it compulsory to wear one. I don't necessarily agree, or comply with that, but just saying in case you have a particularly vigilant Harbourmaster. There was talk about changing the rules, so that PFD's/lifejackets don't have to be worn in the "surf zone" i.e. if you are using them to surf close to the shore. Nothing official has happened to further this though. Link to post Share on other sites
otto 31 Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 doneAnd whether its the current or new rules i don't see how this would be better especially when SUP's are not required to have pfd's. FYI, SUP's are classed as vessels and as such you are required to carry a lifejacket/PFD on-board... so for practical purposes you may as well wear it in effect making it compulsory to wear one. I don't necessarily agree, or comply with that, but just saying in case you have a particularly vigilant Harbourmaster. There was talk about changing the rules, so that PFD's/lifejackets don't have to be worn in the "surf zone" i.e. if you are using them to surf close to the shore. Nothing official has happened to further this though. TM perhaps this is proving half the problem and that the rules are not well known, reading the current rules explained on the homepage before clicking on the survey says This rule does not apply in a number of situations, for example: for an unpowered vessel Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 People being injured or dying due to their own stupidity has always been a part of life. The state is not and should not be responsible. Take responsibility for yourself! If this was a Church they would be outside right this moment bashing into the middle of a large pile of firewood a frecking great pole with the words 'IT the Heretic' emblazoned across the top. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.