rjp
-
Content Count
43 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Media Demo
Forums
Gallery
Calendar
Store
Posts posted by rjp
-
-
I have a yet to be installed C Head.
Any issues with insects, flies with your NH?
Our experience has been 3 summers of use for the seasonal holiday week plus alternate weekends on board. With this usage (3-4 people on board) it has been operating on 1 'charge' of peat/coir per summer season and a second for the 'winter' use. The boat is kept in the BoI for the summer period. Winters the boat is back in Whangarei and except for the coldest 1-2 months the head is left operate able. We have not had any issues over winter. Summer years 1 and 2 we used Hauraki Gold Peat. The first we had a small infestation of midges in early Feb. We treated with Diatomaceous Earth and cleared it up almost overnight. Year 2 we proactively added some DE before the weather got warm and had a very few midges at all. This last season we changed to Coconut Coir to see if a more 'refined' product had less issues (Peat is more woodsy smelling but while dirt cheap takes up larger volumes when stored dry and if the bags are holed is a fine powder that can get everywhere. The CC is a pressed briquet approx 1/4 the volume of the dry peat. It also has the benefit of even less smell). This year we had no issues with insects until just after Easter when we went to bring the boat home again. We did not have the DE on board so used a quick fly spray and ignored it for the delivery. The head is sitting at home composting a bit more before emptying. I just opened it and there is no sign of insects.
So, not perfect but so far not a deal breaker issue -easy to resolve and a minor inconvenience. My hypothesis is that with full-time use of the head a simple proactive addition of DE when temps were 20+ish would avoid the insect issue. I am planning on using CCoir again next time I charge the head.
Would I do it again -my wife would not let me do otherwise! It has been painless to operate. The only negative I find is that the ability to use on both tacks is a bit more limited than the old Raritan head (fine on stbd but needs a bit less heel on Port than the old head) although this is related to our needing to mount it on a slight angle because of space.
-
My wife's uncle is the NZ agent for Natures Head. Partly for that reason but mainly because of continual family complaints about holding tank smell we looked for alternatives. At that time we were still in the US and we had sailing friends with both the Airhead and Natures Head units installed. For us the Natures Head was a better sized product for our available space. Life intervened and it wasn't until we returned to NZ (boat was shipped not sailed unfortunately) that we installed a Natures Head. Now, several season in we can't say enough good about it. The height is better than the old manual head, the smell is a little woody (less so with Coconut Coir), it is low maintenance (except for emptying the pee bottle every couple of days) and has been well worth the change and the cost.
-
Fear=$. These dicks are just job creating with rate payers $ and will achieve absolutely nothing.
No not rate payers aren't paying. The full $480k annual cost is being levied on owners of moorings and slips/berths.
-
Any idea what it was that landed you the invite? Does this group have an agenda already in place? Do they really carry any weight?
I live in Whangarei and have better than layman knowledge of the issues. I am compiling my NRC submission and have plenty to say.
I am concerned that this appears to be a limited, non-public advice gathering group that purports to be Regional Council / MPI associated. Is it simply going to reflect/justify what the NRC is already trying to make into regulation? We need a transparent and open 'best practice', 'scientifically sound' and real world implementable solution seeking process to address these biosecurity issues. For example the current NRC proposed solution for Fanworm appears to ignore the realities of localised endemic reservoirs, inability of current antifouling to inhibit larval attachment, and the relative contribution of natural mechanisms vs boat hulls in its spread.
-
I think there are two relevant points that are not been discussed here -Paint type and Removal of any detected Fanworm.
It has been pointed out that a haul and wash in the last month qualifies. But no one is talking about the fact that the vast majority of sailboat owners are cruisers and in turn most of those use ablative paints (just look at the breakdown of product on the shelf in your local marine store to see what people buy and use). While most owners select an ablative because of ease of application, lack of buildup and as having good performance in the slip/on the mooring without the need for regular diving they are not compatible with in water cleaning and even less so a haul and pressure wash. This means we are not talking about a simple haul/wash before visiting the Coromandel or Northland on holiday but for a lot of people reading it is a haul and repaint. The cost just jumped exponentially.
For those that use a hard paint and dive in water this is not the solution either as if a fan worm is found you are not allowed to remove it (In an earlier post I described a 20mm fan worm being found on my prop only 22 days after the last in water wipe down). No, the vessel must be either dived by a certified diver who has been trained (I have been told training is not available to recreational divers) -yes read $$'s and often a requirement to take the boat to their operating area, or preferably get hauled at a yard and the offending fanworm removed on the hard (time to move the boat during the week, time to get a slot, money). Again the lack of a pathway to allow boat owners to comply (no training, no grids) means increased compliance costs and a disincentive comply.
When will the rule makers realise that as sailers we respect the oceans and environment we have and we will do our part if you make it easy to comply. It is this constant regulation, the need for a certification before anything can be done, and lack of a way for the average man to do the right thing on his own dime that just encourages the cowboy attitude.
-
2
-
-
ALL the Auckland marinas are sources of the fanworm now. I see little to no chance of it being removed.
I keep Island Time Clean myself - Antifoul every year, and get in the water and remove slime regularly before anything can grow. Extra lifts are expensive. Evidence of cleaning is only in the ships log - which is a legal document... plus any inspection will find nothing.
IT, that has been my approach here in Parua Bay/Whangarei also. I thought I was doing my bit and I wouldn't be part of the spread. So imagine my surprise to get the following email last week...
Kia ora
During a recent dive survey a few juvenile fanworm were found on the hull of your vessel ‘’ on the above mooring. We have scheduled it for a further inspection in a few months’ time, however if you were planning on leaving the area, it would be advisable to have your vessel lifted and cleaned prior to any journey.A ‘Notice of Direction’ will be issued shortly which will detail what action you will need to take to ensure fanworm is not transported from your vessel.If you require further information, please contact either myself or email marinebiosecurity@nrc.govt.nz.Thank you.When I enquired I found out that this was a form letter and that an inspection dive had found one 20mm juvenile on the prop hub (One juvenile is not really a 'few' and has a huge difference in the impression the letter leads to). This was 24 days after I had last dived her and wiped off the slime layer (Sea-Barier 4000 applied Nov 2015). Obviously the hub is the hardest place to clean with a piece of carpet so the location at least makes some sense. All that said there is no photo just a note in the divers log. If there are going to be fines and forced cleaning, in the future, I would hope that some more irrefutable proof will be provided.My biggest take-home from this experience is that it raises real questions about any of us being able to meet these standards with the antifouling we have to use /is available to buy. As Wheels points out the local businesses will be the ones making out like bandits. Realistically if many owners are forced to haul and power-wash clean (and if they used an ablative like #5 they will need to repaint as well) several times a year then all it will do is encourage people to consider how far the boundaries/rules can be pushed. Fan worm is a pest. I don't hear anyone arguing with that -I would argue that MPI has some culpability here as it apparently released the source vessel with contamination then plead innocence and no responsibility when ARC made them aware. But people need to be given the tools to deal with it rather than being forced to use external service providers that simply push the fiscal and time cost of responsible boat ownership out of the reach of many. -
Bill / ScottiE: If your still getting an order together I have 4 Barlow 27-46's that I believe also take the same pawls (hutton #01-400). I've installed my last spare and would be keen to get another set as well if the chance exists. rob
Zero discharge toilets and onboard waste treatment options for a yacht
in MarineTalk
Posted
A cup of DE added seems to be enough. I purchased a 4L ice cream container of the stuff at home and just leave a couple of 1C portions in ziploc bags on board.
Re the Coir -yes I use the compressed briquets. They are available at the local M10 and one spare on board takes up about the room of 1 sneaker. All in the 'supplies' (Coir, DE and a couple of heavy plastic bags in case I need to empty the bin) take up less than a shoe box of volume. A huge saving over the old holding tank.