One thing to remember with all this survey stuff, and initiating new laws. It's not always about saving lives or protecting the public, or even revenue raising. It's all about looking like they're doing something about it, if they change and implement new regulations and laws, they are being seen to be doing "their job" the job we pay them to do.
IMO, stupid should hurt, either by fines or in actual pain. Further, there are a lot of Police and BSOs out there who would more than likely caution you, rather than fine you for being sensible and not wearing a lifejacket when the conditions dictated it wasn't safe to wear one.
Rather than mandating life jacket wearing, how do we feel about having an actual proper practical boat license test. As in, you turn up and have to prove you can maneuver your boat to the satisfaction of the examiner. It must cost you, and it you must also have a log book showing how many hours you practice before going for your test. The larger the boat you intend to drive, the harder it is to get your license. The test would include mooring, anchoring, navigation of busy channels with other traffic and could even cover some kind of emergency. Might sort the wheat from the chaff so to speak, and give those new to boating a healthy respect for those around them.
Select to expand quoteMichaelR said..
One thing to remember with all this survey stuff, and initiating new laws. It's not always about saving lives or protecting the public, or even revenue raising. It's all about looking like they're doing something about it, if they change and implement new regulations and laws, they are being seen to be doing "their job" the job we pay them to do.
IMO, stupid should hurt, either by fines or in actual pain. Further, there are a lot of Police and BSOs out there who would more than likely caution you, rather than fine you for being sensible and not wearing a lifejacket when the conditions dictated it wasn't safe to wear one.
Rather than mandating life jacket wearing, how do we feel about having an actual proper practical boat license test. As in, you turn up and have to prove you can maneuver your boat to the satisfaction of the examiner. It must cost you, and it you must also have a log book showing how many hours you practice before going for your test. The larger the boat you intend to drive, the harder it is to get your license. The test would include mooring, anchoring, navigation of busy channels with other traffic and could even cover some kind of emergency. Might sort the wheat from the chaff so to speak, and give those new to boating a healthy respect for those around them.
No way. Just another pain in the ass incursion on our freedom and wallets. Can't you see that it doesn't work on the road. Keep the government bureaucrats and dictators as far away from sailing as possible. That's one of the main attractions of sailing to get the hell away from this stuff.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..Yara said..
Many years ago the British stat's were that the majority of yachting drownings occurred from yacht tenders. Anyone know what the British stat's and rules are like today?
There were 630 drowning deaths in the UK in 2020. Just seven were in "manually powered boats" which would include many yacht tenders as well as others. Just 14 in powerboats of all types, including yacht tenders. Two died sailing on boats, while three drowned while kiting or windsurfing. So 27 deaths from leisure boating; under one in 20 of all drownings.
For comparison, 89 (yep, 89) somehow drowned while walking or running; such high numbers are not uncommon so I assume it's people getting caught on the vast sandbanks and caught out by the huge tides, or getting drunk and falling into water, which happened near us last time we were in the UK. I think quite a few also fell into canals.
As usual, a couple of people died from drowning while cycling. Again, cycling along towpaths or while drunk were probably involved. Sixteen drowned in cars. Suicides are involved in plenty of the above, of course.
The weird thing is that this is not the first time that cycling as drowned about as many people as sailing. So since per-capita rates are ignored by Maritime, if they rely on simple statistics then maybe cyclists should wear PFDs. In parts of England the authorities are trying to stop people going swimming at beaches and on lakes during heatwaves to stop drownings. Maybe the authorities here should so the same thing, if they are serious about stopping drowning. Naaaaa, it's much easier to attack insignificant factors.......
There were 248 drowning deaths in Oz, which is similar pro-rata to the UK. Drowning rates in Australia have dropped to 1/20th of what they were in the late 1800s, incidentally. The latest RLS drowning research report indicates that the problematic groups are disabled kids and people from country, indigenous and NESB groups, NOT the affluent anglos who tend to go boating.
Yachting and sailing (not including windsurfing) make up only 4.4% of "activity-based watercraft-related injuries" in Australia. Incidentally, the average person who goes boating has less than a chance in a million of drowning while boating each year.
Incidentally, 2% of boating drowning deaths in Oz in the 2020 report occurred at jetties, so this attempt to avoid any drowning deaths must inevitably mean that boaties on jetties and marinas will have to wear PFDs at all times.
When doing the above research I saw yet another photo about wearing PFDs that showed peopld standing up in tinnies while fishing. Funny how the use of tinnys for fishing, which seems to top the boating-drowning deaths, is never seen as the problem; rather it's what people wear in safer boats.
Thanks for that update. If you can, please forward this data to the relevant "authorities".
Question
As we know its law (in NSW at least) for rock fisherman to wear a PFD. If said rock fisherman/woman falls in and needs rescuing / drowns, then picked up by boat is it classified as a "boating" incident that add to the tally?
Select to expand quotejulesmoto said..MichaelR said..
One thing to remember with all this survey stuff, and initiating new laws. It's not always about saving lives or protecting the public, or even revenue raising. It's all about looking like they're doing something about it, if they change and implement new regulations and laws, they are being seen to be doing "their job" the job we pay them to do.
IMO, stupid should hurt, either by fines or in actual pain. Further, there are a lot of Police and BSOs out there who would more than likely caution you, rather than fine you for being sensible and not wearing a lifejacket when the conditions dictated it wasn't safe to wear one.
Rather than mandating life jacket wearing, how do we feel about having an actual proper practical boat license test. As in, you turn up and have to prove you can maneuver your boat to the satisfaction of the examiner. It must cost you, and it you must also have a log book showing how many hours you practice before going for your test. The larger the boat you intend to drive, the harder it is to get your license. The test would include mooring, anchoring, navigation of busy channels with other traffic and could even cover some kind of emergency. Might sort the wheat from the chaff so to speak, and give those new to boating a healthy respect for those around them.
No way. Just another pain in the ass incursion on our freedom and wallets. Can't you see that it doesn't work on the road. Keep the government bureaucrats and dictators as far away from sailing as possible. That's one of the main attractions of sailing to get the hell away from this stuff.
Most respectfully, how does it not work on the roads, drivers have to do a practical test. I will concede there's some ordinary drivers around but not withstanding they have passed a practical test. To be able to drive a heavier vehicle (truck)you need pass a practical test to operate that class of vehicle. To get a general boating licence all you need is to get most of a tick box exam correct and have a mate or some numb nut from the pub sign a declaration that you can handle a boat. IMHO practical testing & exposure is the way to go. I'm sure everyone would agree that the Rivera operators could benefit from a practical lesson as to how much the wash of one of those beast affects others. Likewise you can grab a cheap yacht and sail of into the sunset without even doing the tick box test ! Survival at sea ( how much easier it is to stay afloat in a life jacket) full dressed in the pool for 10 minutes no pfd is the best way to get the message through
Select to expand quotewoko said..
A far more useful thing for them to do is come up with a permanent solution for the disposal of out of date flares. Can't just hand em to your local BSO anymore. Can't toss em on the bin or overboard what are you supposed to do with em ? Tote an out of date explosive around and see what happens, that is what we do now. Maybe the honourable minister for BS could turn his/ her attention to the issue.
I got rid of a heap of old flares recently with a RMS roundup, the BSO let it slip that each station for collecting the flares cost RMS 10K.
No wonder they don't really want to get involved in collecting out of date flares.
Select to expand quoteUncleBob said..
You may be right but as we saw with the anchoring rules, the good minister (ms Pavey in this case ) was unreachable for discussions and totally disinterested in discussions with such a small minority.
I did get to do a face to face with Pavey but she refused to accept my submissions re anchoring and actually hand them straight back to me!
Select to expand quotenswsailor said..
No wonder they don't really want to get involved in collecting out of date flares.
but they are more than happy to make us buy them every few years...
How about they apply some of the already enacted rules, here's an example for starters
"The POEO Act is complemented by the Marine Pollution Regulation 2006. This regulation is designed to improve the management of sewage pollution from vessels and simplify the capacity requirements for sewage holding tanks.Specific provisions of this regulation include:The discharge of untreated sewage from vessels into navigable waters is prohibited, except into a waste collection facility such as a pump-out or on-shore toiletClass 1 (passenger carrying) and Class 4 (hire and drive) vessels are required to be fitted with toilets and toilet waste holding tanks, or to have an approved plan of management for the disposal of wasteCertain commercial vessels (essentially those built after January 1 2005 and used on the Murray River or Sydney Harbour, or those belonging to either the passenger carrying or hire and drive classes and built after that date) must be fitted with grey water tanksMarinas operating on a commercial basis in the Sydney Harbour locality (regardless of size) are required to provide adequate and accessible vessel waste collection facilities."
And another gem from the same tome,
There are no specific requirements for recreational vessels. However, all vessel operators must ensure that they do not pollute.Roads and Maritime Services recommends the installation of holding tanks, although owners of smaller vessels can use a portable toilet instead.Planning your trip to take advantage of shore amenities is another way of preventing sewage from entering the waterways.
Then when looking at the list, published in the same doccument, of the marina's in Sydney Harbour so many have no pumpout facilities available. 
And so the list of failed and pointless "regulations" goes on.
Ahh but Bob. if you find yourself on the wrong side of the authority's infringement notices can be issued, or worse you could find yourself in court as these failed/ unused regs all seem to have penalty points attached
Select to expand quoteYara said..Chris 249 said..Yara said..
Many years ago the British stat's were that the majority of yachting drownings occurred from yacht tenders. Anyone know what the British stat's and rules are like today?
There were 630 drowning deaths in the UK in 2020. Just seven were in "manually powered boats" which would include many yacht tenders as well as others. Just 14 in powerboats of all types, including yacht tenders. Two died sailing on boats, while three drowned while kiting or windsurfing. So 27 deaths from leisure boating; under one in 20 of all drownings.
For comparison, 89 (yep, 89) somehow drowned while walking or running; such high numbers are not uncommon so I assume it's people getting caught on the vast sandbanks and caught out by the huge tides, or getting drunk and falling into water, which happened near us last time we were in the UK. I think quite a few also fell into canals.
As usual, a couple of people died from drowning while cycling. Again, cycling along towpaths or while drunk were probably involved. Sixteen drowned in cars. Suicides are involved in plenty of the above, of course.
The weird thing is that this is not the first time that cycling as drowned about as many people as sailing. So since per-capita rates are ignored by Maritime, if they rely on simple statistics then maybe cyclists should wear PFDs. In parts of England the authorities are trying to stop people going swimming at beaches and on lakes during heatwaves to stop drownings. Maybe the authorities here should so the same thing, if they are serious about stopping drowning. Naaaaa, it's much easier to attack insignificant factors.......
There were 248 drowning deaths in Oz, which is similar pro-rata to the UK. Drowning rates in Australia have dropped to 1/20th of what they were in the late 1800s, incidentally. The latest RLS drowning research report indicates that the problematic groups are disabled kids and people from country, indigenous and NESB groups, NOT the affluent anglos who tend to go boating.
Yachting and sailing (not including windsurfing) make up only 4.4% of "activity-based watercraft-related injuries" in Australia. Incidentally, the average person who goes boating has less than a chance in a million of drowning while boating each year.
Incidentally, 2% of boating drowning deaths in Oz in the 2020 report occurred at jetties, so this attempt to avoid any drowning deaths must inevitably mean that boaties on jetties and marinas will have to wear PFDs at all times.
When doing the above research I saw yet another photo about wearing PFDs that showed peopld standing up in tinnies while fishing. Funny how the use of tinnys for fishing, which seems to top the boating-drowning deaths, is never seen as the problem; rather it's what people wear in safer boats.
Thanks for that update. If you can, please forward this data to the relevant "authorities".
I might have a go at putting in a submission. It worked (temporarily) the last time they tried to put in a silly PFD law but that time I was representing an association. I'll check the dates and see if I can put anything together in time.
If not, I'll buy a flesh-covered T-shirt. "Sure, when you came into view it looked like I wasn't wearing a PFD, but that's because I wear it under my T shirt so that I can get the T-shirt off to swim faster. Sure, I ducked down below when I saw you coming near - there's no law against that."
Actually my suspicion is that the Maritime guys afloat aren't very happy about this sort of over-reach themselves.
I have saved a fellow crew member in Bas Straight who fell off the boat he had to tread water for a while before we got him back, the people who don't wear a life jacket should try to tread water for a long period of time see how you go........ you will drown after a short while
Chris, I carefully read the survey as I filled it in and the pfd worn at all times while underway was a theme & a clear distinction between anchored ie attached to the sea bed or the shore and being underway
Select to expand quotewhiteout said..
I have saved a fellow crew member in Bas Straight who fell off the boat he had to tread water for a while before we got him back, the people who don't wear a life jacket should try to tread water for a long period of time see how you go........ you will drown after a short while
That has a lot of relevance to wearing a pfd while having lunch on a 50ft yacht on a mooring in Pittwater.
It's the second dot point of option B @Woko.
"All vessels in open waters" are affected...
If I am on my own, I'll teather myself to jack lines before wearing a life jacket. I am also safer with a leg rope to a life jacket using surf craft. I would like to continue having the choice of choosing the best solution for the situation. At school we had to be good swimmers before we could choose a sport. Maybe they were onto something there.
Select to expand quoteJethrow said..
It's the second dot point of option B @Woko.
"All vessels in open waters" are affected...
Yes I see, I put mine on to cross the bar & it stays on. It does seem that I don't need to have it on at anchor
Select to expand quotenswsailor said..UncleBob said..
You may be right but as we saw with the anchoring rules, the good minister (ms Pavey in this case ) was unreachable for discussions and totally disinterested in discussions with such a small minority.
I did get to do a face to face with Pavey but she refused to accept my submissions re anchoring and actually hand them straight back to me!
For what its worth I just stumbled on this,
Occupation of waters by a vessel
Please note the following NSW marine legislation that deals with the occupation of NSW waters by a vessel:Marine Safety Regulation 2016; clause 17A; Restrictions on time at anchor:The operator of a vessel must not allow a vessel to be at anchor in NSW waters for more than 90 days in any calendar year.The operator of a vessel must not allow a vessel to be at anchor in any one place in NSW waters for more than 28 days in any calendar year.Transport for NSW considers 'at anchor' to include a vessel made fast to the shore, and 'any place' is considered to be a single bay or section of a waterway where the river is clearly recognised in sections
Now this is different to what was claimed previously, that is that all of a waterway was deemed to be one place.
Found in the mooring and anchoring on NSW waterways maritime document.
Select to expand quotewoko said..
Chris, I carefully read the survey as I filled it in and the pfd worn at all times while underway was a theme & a clear distinction between anchored ie attached to the sea bed or the shore and being underway
Woko, I can't do the survey again, but I can't recall such a distinction. It's said that Option B is;
"Option B' will require mandatory wearing of lifejackets by adults:on vessels less than 6m in enclosed waters when underway; andon all vessels in open waters in the open area of the vessel when underway; andat all times when boating alone, on alpine waters or between sunset and sunrise (heightened risk circumstances)."
Maritime says "By definition, underway means not at anchor, not made fast to the shore and not aground. When a vessel is drifting, it is underway."
The third part of the proposal says "at all times when boating alone". It doesn't say "when boating alone and underway". It doesn't mention "underway" and doesn't state that if you are not underway, you don't need a PFD.
The fact that there's a comma between "boating alone, on Alpine waters....." seems to be significant. It's not saying "when boating alone on Alpine waters." It's saying "when boating alone" and also "when boating on Alpine waters".
Vampire Weekend are aware of the importance of commas, but I'm not so sure about Maritime NSW.
Select to expand quotewhiteout said..
I have saved a fellow crew member in Bas Straight who fell off the boat he had to tread water for a while before we got him back, the people who don't wear a life jacket should try to tread water for a long period of time see how you go........ you will drown after a short while
I don't wear a PFD unless I've got to because of racing rules. I've spent a lot of time treading water, and do it quite often. I also know people who have fallen overboard, including at least one who went overboard at night offshore. I started wearing a personal light when I was 16 and did my first 1000 mile race, back in 1979 when they were basically unknown, so I'm not dissing the danger of going overboard.
HOWEVER, sailing in Bass Strait is completely different to sailing around in 6 knots and flat water on a 37 degree day in Sydney Harbour or Port Stephens, 400m from shore. Saving yourself on a hot day when you can swim to shore is completely different to saving yourself on a cold day 200 miles from shore.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..woko said..
Chris, I carefully read the survey as I filled it in and the pfd worn at all times while underway was a theme & a clear distinction between anchored ie attached to the sea bed or the shore and being underway
Woko, I can't do the survey again, but I can't recall such a distinction. It's said that Option B is;
"Option B' will require mandatory wearing of lifejackets by adults:on vessels less than 6m in enclosed waters when underway; andon all vessels in open waters in the open area of the vessel when underway; andat all times when boating alone, on alpine waters or between sunset and sunrise (heightened risk circumstances)."
Maritime says "By definition, underway means not at anchor, not made fast to the shore and not aground. When a vessel is drifting, it is underway."
The third part of the proposal says "at all times when boating alone". It doesn't say "when boating alone and underway". It doesn't mention "underway" and doesn't state that if you are not underway, you don't need a PFD.
The fact that there's a comma between "boating alone, on Alpine waters....." seems to be significant. It's not saying "when boating alone on Alpine waters." It's saying "when boating alone" and also "when boating on Alpine waters".
Vampire Weekend are aware of the importance of commas, but I'm not so sure about Maritime NSW.
I take your point that it is open for interpretation and in extreme could be applied to vessels in a marina. Did you apply for the link to the information seminar ? I hope there will be a Q&A section
Select to expand quoteMichaelR said..
Further, there are a lot of Police and BSOs out there who would more than likely caution you, rather than fine you for being sensible and not wearing a lifejacket when the conditions dictated it wasn't safe to wear one.
There are still the good old eggs but unfortunately the days of a good attitude and being friendly towards maritime & water police resulting in the same back appear to be over which is extremely sad in my view. I'm not sure if anyone has had an encounter with the next generation of water police but many appear to be up there with the worst of the highway patrol, not interested in a chat, arrogant and itching to issue a fine.
That's sad to hear, the next gen BSO here is open for a yarn as is the last gen, but we are still a bit rural and most folks give ya a wave or Gday but it won't last forever I guess
Select to expand quoteSydney88 said..MichaelR said..
Further, there are a lot of Police and BSOs out there who would more than likely caution you, rather than fine you for being sensible and not wearing a lifejacket when the conditions dictated it wasn't safe to wear one.
There are still the good old eggs but unfortunately the days of a good attitude and being friendly towards maritime & water police resulting in the same back appear to be over which is extremely sad in my view. I'm not sure if anyone has had an encounter with the next generation of water police but many appear to be up there with the worst of the highway patrol, not interested in a chat, arrogant and itching to issue a fine.
Haven't had any dealings with Pittwater area Water Police, apart from a wave as they pass by, but I have with the local BSOs and they seem pretty good. Guess it depends on what you're doing.
Did anyone attended the online info livestream ? I thought it was tonight but alas it was last night
Select to expand quoteCabron said..
Brilliant expose of the stupidity we live with.
