Life Jackets

[Dambo 44]

To make me and my crew wear lifejackets in a sport that has virtually no drownings is knee jerking at its worst, why should any reasonably normal adult need to wear a lifejacket rowing in a tender on a typical day out? I can assure you that coming back from barrier in a 30kt Northerly on a boat with no lifelines, everyone on deck will have one on and be tethered as well. The bleeding heart liberal lifejacket will solve everything brigade needs to direct their energy towards the highest risk groups such as swimmers and fishermen, not yachties who are caught in a fine meshed net made of moralising twaddle dragged through society by ignorant bureaucrats and interfering idiots. 

 

           

 

 

Coastguard Northern Region

1 hr ·

Lifejackets have undoubtedly saved the lives of three people on-board the vessel that capsized on the Manukau Bar earlier today.

All three have made it to shore safely, we commend the skipper for logging a Bar Crossing Report which meant Coastguard Radio was able to raise the alarm when we didn't hear from the vessel to close their report and confirm that they had safely crossed the bar.

 

Yeah, the bigger issue was the decision to take a 6m boat across the bar when there was a 4m swell running.  I mean, well done for logging a trip report and well done for all on board wearing life jackets - my understanding of the current laws means the skipper would have been criminally negligent had he or those on board not been wearing them because taking that size boat across the Manukau bar in those conditions is blatantly stupid and irresponsible. "..Maritime rules provide that it is the skipper's legal responsibility to ensure that lifejackets are worn in situations of heightened risk, such as when crossing a bar.." 

We don't need anymore laws on this.

[John B 106]

Its numpties in fishing tinnies that are the problem, leave us alone, and that includes our dinghies to and from shore , and our paddleboards doing the same or gunk holing through the rocks .

I mean how stupid do you have to be to not understand ? If you're on an inflatable paddleboard leashed to your ankle, you have about 10 lifejackets worth of bouyancy strapped to you already.Simple.

[DrWatson 375]

I'm not trying to make light of the terrible loss that some families are suffering because of the following, but it's another situation of a death that will be attributed to drowning.

 

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/74702331/man-dies-after-truck-goes-over-the-edge-of-wharf-at-south-port-in-bluff

 

Sailing is a very low risk activity for drowning compared to driving.

[John B 106]

I watched Garner prattle on about the subject last night. Its almost as if they want to use a skipper who did everything right , making sure they had jackets on for a situation that required it, (crossing the manukau bar in a big sea) , as justification for the book learners who want to make us all wear jackets in a dinghy going between boats in a calm anchorage.

Blanket rules don't work.

[Battleship 100]

Yes listened to Garner yesterday, what they failed Highlight was the Guys tried to go back in the Bar on the outgoing tide at almost low, with a large swell from the west, worst possible time to go in.

Like we have been saying hard to legislate against stupid.

[Pumbaa 9]

Like everyone else I've been watching this with caution, I think it's Maritime NZ doing something to show the powers that be that they are a government dept doing proactive forward thinking work. Life jackets are low hanging fruit, if they can bring in a law to make them mandatory their dept will have a public victory that will be perceived much like the one with seat belts. The difference is that the most people aren't affected by life jackets like seat belts. The wider public will think it's all very simple and the fact that the very small voiceless yachting fraternity will have to wear lifejackets whilst eating their breakfast, sleeping, having sex and doing a poo won't even cross their minds. A public safety victory to Maritime NZ and it'll be a poorly executed and poorly enforced rule.

[Clipper 343]

And a well ignored rule

[Addem 95]

Here's a brief list of laws off the top of my head which protect the ignorant: compulsory eduction, insurance law, consumer protection law, industrial standards law, unfair contracts law - the list goes on.

 

These are not laws protecting the ignorant. They are laws protecting the victimized. An example of an attempt to protect the ignorant is credit contracts. And that has been successful

In stopping the stereotypical ignorant in signing up for 30% loans from sharks?

 

I don't have statistical support but I don't for a moment doubt that boating is generally safer on a per capita or per event basis than this list:

 

Scuba diving (there needs to be a law making it compulsory to have a buddy and a dive computer.)

Rugby (there should be a law outlawing scrums and hard tackles)

Showering (there should be a law outlawing slippery surfaces and soap)

Recreational Welding, grinding, skill sawing, drilling and belt sanding ( there should be a law making eye protection compulsory)

 

These are all things which have higher injury and death rates than boating, when one excludes the truly ignorant and euphemistic "12 foot tinnie fishermen"

[Fish 0]

Welcome newbie Addem,

Very good examples of laws we do need, on the basis they would have greater benefit / reduction of harm than life jackets.

[Island Time 1,235]

Scuba diving (there needs to be a law making it compulsory to have a buddy and a dive computer.)

Rugby (there should be a law outlawing scrums and hard tackles)

Showering (there should be a law outlawing slippery surfaces and soap)

Recreational Welding, grinding, skill sawing, drilling and belt sanding ( there should be a law making eye protection compulsory)

 

 

 

Sorry, I don't agree. We already have too many laws, and these would be more that you could not (easily, without great expense) police. Laws that cannot be policed are, in my view, a waste of time, and add to the already stupid amount of bureaucratic nonsense we already have, increasing our costs and providing no benefit.

 

I'm an advocate of personal responsibility - if you are  a muppet, and it kills you, there are always Darwin awards!! 

[Black Panther 1,586]

I suspect the tongue was firmly embedded in the cheek there.

[Sail Rock 28]

I have just read through this lively debate and here is my 2 cents worth.

Firstly we already have a framework of rules and regulations in the form of the Maritime Transport Act of which the following are key elements (copied from Maritime NZ website):

 

Every boat, even a kayak or small sailing boat, has a person in charge who is called the skipper (or in legal terms, the master). The skipper is legally responsible for complying with the maritime rules and bylaws, and with relevant regulations relating to the use of the boat and to people on board.

 

If you have an accident, ignorance of the law is not accepted as an excuse. In serious cases, heavy fines and prison are possible for breaches of maritime rules.

 

Almost all rules about behaviour on the water apply to both recreational and commercial vessels ... including:

 

Section 19 Duties of master

The master of every vessel is responsible for safety and for complying with all maritime rules and regulations applicable.

 

Note the key word "responsible" which to me implies taking personal responsibility for your acts, omissions and their consequences.

 

In any human endeavour we are faced with risks in which we have to assess the likelihood of them occurring and the resultant consequences. The ability of a reasonable person to assess these risks is dependent on their knowledge, experience, intelligence (reasoning ability) and mental state which can be affected by stress, fatigue, alcohol, seasickness, etc.

 

Knowledge can be improved with education. Experience takes time to acquire but could, for example, be supplemented by taking more experienced people with you in situations that you might not be familiar with, e.g. first time racing in 25+ knots. Intelligence - well, that's dependent in one's genes. Mental state - sometimes difficult to manage.

 

In light of this, we skippers have a legal and, I would argue, a moral responsibility, to manage our own personal safety and that of other persons on our boat or who might be affected by our actions or inactions. We have to continually assess the hazards and risks that present themselves in a changing environment, e.g. take the commonly cited example of rowing the dinghy from ship to shore.

 

Scenario 1. I am anchored in a sheltered bay with no current. It is summer and the water is warm. I am a strong swimmer and just wearing shorts and T-shirt. I am a single guy with no dependents. I therefore reason that the likelihood of falling in the water is low and even if I did the worst probable consequence is injured pride. Even in the VERY REMOTE possibility that I drown, my family and friends will of course be upset but I won't have left any orphans. I assess the risk as being very low and so choose not to wear a life jacket.

 

Scenario 2. I am now married with a child. I have just returned to my swing mooring at, say, Stanley Bay. It is spring so the water is quite cool. There is a 15kn SW blowing against incoming tide so it is bit choppy. Plus there are wakes from ferries and gin palaces passing by. I am wearing warm clothing, wet weather gear and sea boots because I know I will probably get splashed when I row to shore and will need to wade the last few metres. In my assessment there is higher likelihood that my dinghy could be swamped or overturned. Even though We are strong swimmers we would find it quite difficult to swim to shore in wet clothing, foulies, boots, cool water and a strong current. If as a consequence I drown, my child will be orphaned. Therefore in order to reduce the risk of drowning I choose to wear a life jacket and direct my friend to do the same. There are further ways I could possibly reduce this risk but I choose not to, e.g. wait for the tide to turn, wait for the wind to drop, ring and ask someone to come to the shore to look out for me, carry my PLB, call Coastguard to tell them what I am about to do, etc.

 

There are an infinite number of scenarios between and either side of these two, but the point I am trying to make is taking responsibility for one's actions, assessing the risks and being mindful of the potential consequences to yourself and others.

 

I don't think mandating the use of life jackets by regulation is appropriate because these are only one of numerous ways of managing safety on the water. If it were to be the case and we were to draw parallels with the use of motor vehicles then we should also require vessel registration, annual WOF checks, skipper licensing, and law enforcement resources and infrastructure (speed traps on the Waitemata?). Quite apart from those with civil liberties objections, NZ simply couldn't afford this. Fortunately the frequency of drownings off boats is relatively small compared to road traffic deaths. Therefore we should continue to prioritise our limited public resources on managing road safety, e.g. mandating and enforcing the use of seat belts. Because our public resources are limited, I believe we should concentrate on educating boat users to better assess and manage their risks (knowledge) and develop their experience. This would include reminding skippers of their legal and moral responsibilities, including criminal prosecution if they are found negligent - carrot and stick if you like.

 

Sorry, my 2 cents has turned into $20 worth!

[Addem 95]

Are you charging by the paragraph or the word?

[Black Panther 1,586]

I thought that was a pretty useful$20 post

[Dambo 44]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/75055639/Yachties-in-the-drink-on-way-home-from-AC-DC-concert

Here we go.

[John B 106]

There's a new index just out where we in NZ come second in ' most freedom'as a nation.second to canada incidentally.

Which is great , but make no mistake , this sort of nefarious removal of our rights to make our own decisions as to our own safety by legislating to do this and do that is what will send us down the track we don't want to go down. Cops on the water telling us what to do, erosion of our lifestyle and freedom.

[Sail Rock 28]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/75055639/Yachties-in-the-drink-on-way-home-from-AC-DC-concert

Here we go.

[Sail Rock 28]

Now what was I saying about skipper competence and mental impairment due to alcohol?!? One might also ask whether this guy could / should be prosecuted under the Maritime Act.