If you read the pdf document It bans kitesurfing AND windsurfing in the exlusion zones from October to April.

This will ban us from windsurfing where we currently windsurf at Scarborough... North of the drain on brighton beach...

This will force us into the Kiting area.

The goal is to reduce conflict among water users... I cant see how this will reduce conflict.

There has been no talk of banning windsurfing anywhere in WA for the last 25 years.

Until kiting came along and some of them caused fkn havoc..... and now we are dragged down too. Thanks very much fellas [}:)][}:)][}:)]

Now from reading that stuff above, it appears it has been voted in by council already, so if we have a sook will it be any good? I doubt it.

WWA are you onto it as a body, or should we send individual complaints or what?

For whinges (I'm sending one) the council admin plus all those voting is as below:


stirling@stirling.wa.gov.au; ceo@stirling.wa.gov.au; leonie.getty@stirling.wa.gov.au; jason.robbins@stirling.wa.gov.au; bill.stewart@stirling.wa.gov.au; elizabeth.re@stirling.wa.gov.au; stephanie.proud@stirling.wa.gov.au; sharon.cooke@stirling.wa.gov.au; terry.tyzack@stirling.wa.gov.au; robin.furlong@stirling.wa.gov.au; rod.willox@stirling.wa.gov.au; paul.collins@stirling.wa.gov.au; david.michael@stirling.wa.gov.au; Giovanni.Italiano@stirling.wa.gov.au

WWA submitted it's position a year ago on the draft plan for redevelopment of Scarborough. Stating our reasons for retaining the existing windsurfing area.
I contacted the relevant person at C of S yesterday but didn't get to speak and will try again today. I will post when I have more details.

here is the thread from over a year ago.


www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Western-Australia/Scarbrough-Beach-Mgnt-Plans/?page=1

If scarbs area does get shut down, where do you see the like of yourself Matt and the other scarbs locals sailing ?? Up nearer Trigg, or would you then be sailing dutchies more?

Reflex Films said...

This is disappointing

AS a scarbs wave sailor of 20 years i will miss this spot. The bank seemed to set up just right to catch any generated wind swell on a mid to high tide in the arvo. Meaning that we were wave sailing on no swell days.

I Have had many a classic head high session there when others reported no swell or had to head to lanno.

Unfortunately the kite chaos has just gotten worse over the years - i was getting multiple kite strikes / board impacts every summer -and in increasing numbers.Last years getting wrapped in lines incident was a beauty.

Of course dropped kites and lines through the entire break ended up happening on an hourly basis.

It was only a matter of time until we lost the access (which we fought hard to gain many years ago - with the council) - frankly i am amazed it lasted as long as it did.

The tide of kite madness cannot be stopped - even the WAKSA crew cant control them. But good for them they managed to cover a rather large insurance payout over an incident at Brighton recently.

Scarbs on the windy days last summer was starting to attract some pretty solid numbers of windsurfers on the water - maybe the newer boards were making it more fun and easier for everyone to sail.

RIP scarbs - i will miss you.

Lao Shi I will talk to you about this tonight at the AGM, but I think it is time for a well structure email campaign to the coastal councils to show that the windsurfing community is behind improving beach safety and that we have been using the beaches without issue for 20yrs etc etc.

Maybe we should represent our suggestions regarding exclusion zones and explain that if swimmer are up wind there is limit risk etc.

Councillors needs votes and they hate bad publicity. Might be time to call the West Australian and get a campaign going about iconic aussie sports being banded from the beach all that sort of emotional rubbish that the media love.

Dog exercise in the high risk category? Are these people for real...
I think this has allot to do with ass covering. Ive never sailed scarbs but I hope they dont ban it for you guys!

not surprizingly it coincides with the boundaries of the redevelopment

As the policy has been voted on then need to get the windsurfers changed from high risk to low risk, Loby the council, email each counceller from Marks email addresses.
We can't change the whole policy but we can tell them why our sport is low risk and how it is so different to the other high risk ones and get them to change this.
Email and write letters now asking who decided it was high risk and why.

FINMEISTER said...

As the policy has been voted on then need to get the windsurfers changed from high risk to low risk, Loby the council, email each counceller from Marks email addresses.
We can't change the whole policy but we can tell them why our sport is low risk and how it is so different to the other high risk ones and get them to change this.
Email and write letters now asking who decided it was high risk and why.

I think it should be the same risk as surfing. Medium risk. Clearly its less dangerous to others than kiting as the rig is contained.

Yes we need to be recognized as low risk!
We don't want to be associated with kiters who managed to stuff it up for us.
My draft email clearly states the difference between us and kitesurfers in how much room they take up, the length of time it takes for an out of control kite to come to a stop compared to a sail hitting the water and how much more hazardous they are.
I mention grouping us together will create conflict and be hazardous to both parties.
I have also mentioned that as the COS wants to take control of our self regulated safety that if any incidents happen to a windsurfer from a kitesurfer while we are in the same designated area, I would strongly urge the windsurfer to take legal action against the council for compensation.
We won't stop this policy but we may be able to deflect it by changing our staus to low risk, spend just 30 minutes put together an email and send each councilor one now! it's just a click of a button.

Ok guys I spoke to the Beach Services Co-ordinator yesterday and here is his e-mail to me.

"As discussed, please find attached a copy of the City's Beach Recreational Activity Plan and appendixes. The plan itself is not wholly about restricting or limiting windsurfing at City of Stirling beaches. It also deals with, in part, banning jetskis from all beaches within the City of Stirling and establishing an area of beach at Mettams Pool where fishing is not permitted. The City has strived to find a balance between all beach activities and of course recognises that there may be areas where adjustments may be made.

As mentioned, with regard to windsurfing, the idea is basically to formalise what is already an informal situation at the southern end of Scarborough Beach. There is no intent on the City's part to stop or ban activities from occurring. The plan is only for a 12 month trial and the City will welcome input, particularly with regard to shifting the northern boundary of the permissible area closer to the Scarboro Surf Life Saving Club. The grassed area immediately adjacent to the Surf Club pathway and the track are still available to use."

Those present at the WWA AGM discussed the situation and we will be sending a submission to the council. WWA would also like to organise a meeting between council, WAKSA and the Scarborough SLSC to try and reach an acceptable solution. I understand the strength of feeling but please hold off on "demonstrations" and the like until we have tried negotiations.

By all means, please contact the council directly to make your feelings known.
It would be good if you could either copy WWA in using the e-mail info at windsurfingwa.org.au or post your message on this thread.

The fine will be $125 but will be a last resort after warnings issued by beach inspectors or lifeguards. We need to try and reach a solution and educate everybody about it so that nobody feels the need to elevate the exclusion to a ban.

Thanks knigit for bringing it to our attention. The council recognised that it had not contacted us for input citing a lack of contact details. As I stated earlier, WWA made a submission on the draft redevelopment plan this time last year.

Sorry this is a long one, but I hope it raises some valid points to bring normality to this contentious issue.

When I first read the announcement about the Beach Recreational Policy its full ramifications didn't quite sink in initially, but it has now. Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and surfers alike along this stretch of coast may now be exposed to even more conflict than the intent of the policy. Collectively, we will now have to readjust the common agreed areas into an even narrower area along the coast. Potentially leading to an untenable level of frustration due to overcrowding and ultimately exposing users and bystanders to serious and litigious injuries.

The area that the City of Stirling (CoS) has legislated as an exclusion zone has been a place that has given myself and hundreds of others sailors many years of amazing enjoyment. To now have it removed in a brushstroke makes me feel extremely morose. Even worse, during the period between Oct and Nov the conditions at Scabs contains some of the best sailing conditions of the season. At the same time conditions are highly undesirable for swimming as the water is still cold and the wind chill factor keeps the beach virtually deserted. Having this exclusion zone empty of sailing during this period is senseless.

Like Mike, I'm in the process of drafting an email and letter to the CoS. I want to ensure that I state the facts and articulate the incorrigible way CoS neglected the interests one the main group who effected by this decision, the Scarborough Wavesailing community. Therefore, I would like WWA to confirm that they were not privy to any discussion relating to exclusion zones at Scarborough Beach. Also that WWA did not receive a draft policy indicating the proposed layout of the exclusion zones until post approval of the legislation.

This is an important issue to debate that CoS were negligent in accordance with the Local Government Act which requires community review of all draft policies, in this case the exclusion of input from WWA.

Other issues I believe need raising to CoS are and I'm guessing there would be more;

1) How were the Activity Risks assessed.? CoS did not provide a thorough reasoning of the risk assessment, which is required by any agency when implementing new legislation. For example, according to this policy there is nothing prohibiting someone fishing in the middle of an area that is designated as swimming along Scabs.

2) As Matt pointed out, security of the Manning St carpark is pretty bad in comparison to the currently location where the carpark is in full view while on the water and regular patrols by the police and CoS security. Has this issue been addressed by CoS such that they will provide additional patrol to ensure the same level of security as the existing. After reviewing the policy this issue has not been addressed.

Addressing these issues raised may enhance the opportunity of reinstating windsurfing back to its original location after the 1 year trial period.

I believe this legislation has emerged due to a group that has more influence over CoS than Windsurfers, Kitesurfers and Surfers. One of the main causes of conflict, which is the catalyst for the policy, was over the past few seasons at Scabs the flippancy and blatant disregard to the logical behaviour by Scarboro SLCC by swimming, paddling etc directly in the traditional windsurfing area.

This caused a great deal of conflict between the two parties. I can remember one instance where the kayaking coach telling a windsurfer, concerned about the safety of people in the water, to “F Off this is our training area”.

To quote George Orwell's Animal Farm “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” After reading the Kitesurfing forum, to fully educate myself regarding this topical issue, WAKSA quoted that;

“Kite exclusion zones around swimming areas established by Scarboro SLSC will be endorsed by WAKSA and local kiters;

Does this mean that Scarboro SLCC have the exclusive rights to dictate who, where and when people can use the beach.?

Therefore, the complete negative sentiment towards the kitesurfing community as the sole reason for banning windsurfing is a little unjust.

Mutual collaboration from all parties is required here to allow all sports to coexist together at Scabs. It can work if you remove simple minded bigotry.

Good stuff Sheeny, very well put.

I'd also ask them to confirm that they actually have jurisdiction below the high tide mark, my understanding was that councils had absolutely no authority in this area. I know that Wellington Point is like this -- the council tried to ban kiting there but kiters rig up below the high tide mark and they can't do anything about it. Rangers come around every now and again and if you have one tiny bit of kit above the high tide line you'll get fined, if you're on the sand then you're fine...

Might be a good loophole to consider?

I have sailed at Mullaloo a few times last season after the council placed the exclusion zones and there still seems to be ongoing issues. North Mullaloo zone is similar to the one identified by the CoS, kite zone to the south, then exclusion zone. We usually sail just to the north of the exclusion zone - a bit like the Brighton set up....minus the decent banks and quality sailors of course. What tends to happen is the competent guys kite upwind, and the ones that wipe out or are learning are to the north & get swept into the exclusion zone which then leads to issues with swimmers & beach goers. Out of control kites heading off northward is par for the course up there, I have had a couple of near misses, I've also dragged in 3 boards in 1 session - no probs as everybody's gotta have their fun. Looking at the proposed plan at Scarborough it would seem logical to have the kiters DOWNWIND at the north carpark end, this would avoid the likely hood of incidents described above befouling the surf club exclusion zone. Should they wipe out etc then they will not run foul of an exclusion zone until Trigg, plenty of space imo.
Never had a problem with a kiter, especially one downwind of me. Never met a kiter who was happy to be downwind of me though...!
The whole premise of these demarcation zones are flawed as they do not take into account wind directions, currents, launch points & human error etc. If they are to be in place then buffer zones would be required - that's more real estate lost.
Exclusions are just a council cop out for not making the public aware that the water is a shared resource (like the old "windsurfers frequent these areas" signs). They seem to work at Methams, Watermans and Dutchies...!

AB...

AB...

AB....