Guest 000 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 There was a recent article in the Herald that stated that MNZ/Auckland Council was going to toughen up on the wearing of lifejackets in boats under 6 metres and start issuing $300 fines for non compliance. It also said it would be compulsory to carry some means of communication. As I understand it, if I row ashore from the boat at anchor, I have to have a lifejacket in the dinghy - I don't have to wear it because I'm the skipper and I'm allowed to give myself an exemption. Crazy? I also have to have with me either a handheld VHF or a cellphone. Both these requirements are a bit problematic. Generally we go ashore for the purposes of a long aimless walk and as such am reluctant to leave two expensive auto inflating lifejackets in my dinghy. A good score for bad people passing by! Likewise communications. I do not have a portable VHF and I don't own a cellphone. Never have, never will. So, since we will be flouting the rules and also not wanting to fork out $300, I wonder who has the authority to issue the infringement notice for these fines and what the level of risk would be of getting caught when out cruising in the wider Gulf. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Clive 13 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I am planning on jumping in the water if I get stopped! Question is are you allowed to swim alongside a dinghy without life jackets in it? Are you allowed to then get back into the dinghy? The HM was checking at Kawau last weekend. ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Clive 13 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I think we need a Baoties Action Group to address these issues. Are AYBA or YNZ doing anything? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Island Time 1,246 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Even if swimming the dingy has to have the lifejackets etc I'm told. Its crazy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 405 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 No swimming alongside my dinghy I am legal and no one in dinghy -so no need of lifejackets, must be a new uniform man up Kawau way it seems, lucky he didnt see me sailing the baby lugger out of Bon Accord last weekend. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ScottiE 174 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 what if I'm using my dinghy as a staging platform to hop into and out of the water to mop down the hull? Do I have to wait until I hop INTO the water before taking off my life jacket or is there a grace period of 30seconds or so where the LAW doesn't apply. Similarly do I have to put the life jacket back on in the water before getting INTO the dinghy? I've beeen grapling with these issues for months now! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
armchairadmiral 411 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Like the speed tax this new lifejacket legislation will be used to raise money.How it will go is softly softly then warnings then tickets. And to prevent false names boats will be registered and skippers licensed. In Oz that's how it goes and fees will start at about $100 and ratchet up from there.Quickly ! The enforcement has to be paid for. New swimming pool legislation requires 3 yr inspections. These won't be free. Estimated to save 6 lives every 10 yrs. Maybe ,maybe not.But this is the 'logic' the bureaucracy will use on lifejackets. They'll say any figure which doesn't have to be proved.And we boaties in tenders will be an easy mark. Boats with names are easily identified in marinas.Arrant nonsense. It will be an interesting discussion the first time a pointy head stops me in my tender. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ScottiE 174 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 just found the article that Chris refers to http://www.nzherald.co.nz/bay-of-plenty-times/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503343&objectid=11732513 NO EXCUSES! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mattm 98 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I have already had a ticket. I was swimming from the inflatable, getting a couple of Paua if I recall. Was about 5m from the beach and I got back into the dinghy from standing on the bottom (say 1.7m deep, I'm about 2m tall). Guy on HM boat said I would 'get a letter from the HM regarding not carrying a life jacket in dinghy'. A month later a fine showed up. Had I still been in the water, no problem. A mate that was with me in the dinghy had a wetsuit on, he didn't get a fine as 'that's a grey area'. Was a tad annoyed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 405 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Once again Keith Manch quoting very dubious statistics to justify a kerb to our freedom, and looking no doubt for a new revenue stream now that he has driven most of the smaller charter operators out of business, all to pay for more pin striped suits in wellington! KM's suggestion the best yet - painter round my ankle one oar dropped and stand up paddle board with unusual amount of freeboard, though I guess most of you would prefer to see the Bikini paddleboarders of Takapuna to the rum tum figures of myself or one or two others paddling up Bon Accord for more supplies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mattm 98 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Why can't you be a 'sit down paddle boarder'? If I recall the point that made paddle boarding OK was being tethered on? In an inflatable you have maybe 3 seperate air chambers, far more free board, more sea worthy, more visible, two paddles, normally secured to the boat, all that's lacking is the tether.... Also interesting people in rowing skiffs (Olympic style) don't need a life jacket either... Guess they are kind of tethered... By their feet, in shoes, screwed to the boat.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
waikiore 405 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Ha never thought for a minute whilst drinking red wine and creating our nutshell dinghies that one day using them as designed would be taken as civil disobedience.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Clipper 345 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Clearly, not having lifejackets on the main vessel is a bad idea, but not having them in a tender is not a safety issue. We wore them as kids, my daughter wears one, im not against lifejackets, just anti nonsense. Is it safer to swim ashore towing my daughter in a dinghy? Hardly. But legal. What The f*ck Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Clipper 345 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I think we need a Baoties Action Group to address these issues. Are AYBA or YNZ doing anything? Ill help. Where do we start? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mattm 98 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Clearly, not having lifejackets on the main vessel is a bad idea, but not having them in a tender is not a safety issue. We wore them as kids, my daughter wears one, im not against lifejackets, just anti nonsense. Is it safer to swim ashore towing my daughter in a dinghy? Hardly. But legal. What The f*ck I agree. How can being in a boat be more damgerous than swimming? Particularly if you have just been and are about to swim. Sure if you have full wet weather and gumboots on then different.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin McCready 83 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 I support the trial. It's aimed at cultural change which is what we need. Imagine the outcome if all the energy you guys are expending here went into lobbying for a proper set of rules which defined various PFDs, so that when you actually needed a LIFE JACKET it would save your life. http://kmccready.wordpress.com/2014/01/15/lifejackets-lifejackets-and-sissies/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest 000 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Regrettably, we are stuck with this lifejacket legislation. For it to change, one of the mindless gnomes responsible for it will have to admit to making an ill-considered ruling, and we all know that beaureaucrats will never ever ever admit to being wrong. So we are left with trying to manage the situation. As per my OP, I imagine that Kawau, Oneroa, Motutapu could be problematic in terms of policing but what would the risk be in, say, Rocky Bay, Man-O-War or TeKouma? And what powers do Harbour Masters have anyway, powers of arrest? Am I obligated to give my name and address if asked? If I refuse to give it will he call for police backup, and will the coppers really steam all the way out to TeKouma on such a minor matter? Hopefully it's all just piss and wind. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
wheels 543 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 The no excuses trial will be run for about five days by each council taking part in the trial at different times during summer. After summer, the trial will be reviewed and decisions made about whether it will be extended in future. Not to worry guys. It's only for 5 days. We just have to work out which 5 days and after that we'll be sweet. The idiots have made it all too confusing and open ended. First off, so we now have a Nationwide law requiring Lifejackets. But each regions Council has it's own version of the law. Why the heck didn't they just make one set Law. Not differences between regions. Then there is the "you must wear" but it's OK not to if the Skipper says it's OK. That's stupid in itself. But OK, so taking that one step further. If the Skipper says, yeah it's calm, no need and then for some reason the Boat flips and someone drowns, is the Skipper now responsible and likely to be done for manslaughter? By the way, the 5 days thing I was only joking about. The 5 days no excuses is actually a funding period being payed by MNZ to the various regions HM's to be able to get out on the water. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The big T 41 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Will be up to Council staff to police and, having been in that role more than a few years ago, can say it is not a revenue earner. Anyone has the right to contest an infringement notice by going to court which immediately costs Council.. Should every ticket issued be taken through the court system, the costs would be immense as would the burden on already stressed courts. And you can bail out and pay at the last minute if you want to (applies to all infringement notices including traffic). And you can ignore the first ticket and pay on the second which must be served on you. When in the job it was seen that laws like this set a standard/guideline and the law could be used if and when required - referred to by my then police colleagues as failing the attitude test. Have been harassed about life jackets in Bon Accord by the over zealous dickhead up there trying to impress the female crew member alongside him while in my inflatable dinghy on a calm summers day going from Kawau club to my boat. Dumb insolence left the guy with no real option but to call Deodar - an option that was not pursued. Just go ashore for a walk - they cannot wait all day. In saying this, the rules are there to cater for the load of people in a 12ft tinny going fishing in the face of a storm - a scenario that has more than once resulted in multiple fatalities. It should be about education, not enforcement, and I am sure the current campaign is more about getting the message out, not penalizing. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
armchairadmiral 411 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Well, go find the 12ft tinny and leave you alone in your inflatable. Likely that the load of people in the tinny will die of hypothermia in their lifejackets anyway. This is more about power and control over todays society. And all about revenue raising in the future. Pointy headed bureaucrats with uniform,clipboard and ticket books just can't help themselves. Talk about the attitude test !!!!!! good advice on how to work the system 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.