Thread: Maritime Safety Queensland

I don't live in Brisbane so cannot get the paper?

Any chance of scanning a copy John? I missed the paper today too!

OR if you can give us some key words or phrases from the article so I can search the Sunday Mail site?

cheers,

P

Originally Posted by Pagie

cut by MIK ... not everyone lives in Brisbane so do not have paper?

Ah, but presumably anything Maritime Safety Queensland does is of interest only to those who DO live in Queensland!?

I'll see if I can find the stuff of the MSQ website and post the link.

Originally Posted by bitingmidge

Any chance of scanning a copy John? I missed the paper today too!

OR if you can give us some key words or phrases from the article so I can search the Sunday Mail site?

cheers,

P

Article attached

I ran out of time today to track down the reference on the MSQ web-site. Perhaps someone else might want to follow that up.

Thanks!

My kids have just been away camping at a fishing spot in central Qld, where they "bought" a canoe. Signed a contract to buy it for $300.00 and a $30.00 non refundable deposit.

They were then allowed to have a half day test voyage up the lake system, then of course returned it, then their purchase contract was torn up.

It seems that registration and insurance only needs a bit ingenuity to get round!

I'll try to get more info as well.

Cheers,

P

Like most things in government, they make a law with one intent but fail to understand the implications.

There are lots of things about marine safety that are tared with a brush that don't suit.

So you have to have the same licence to operate a seagoing 60 foot charter vessel as you would to hire a canoe or a padle boat on a small lake.
the penny drops as to why we dont see many small hire craft.

cheers

I understand that there have been a few fatalities lately in Qld related to boats used in a 'share boat' (their term not mine) manner.

The licence to operate a 60 ft charter boat would be a Master V, not a Coxswain. I understand that restricted coxswains can give safety briefings to hire boaters.

What we see in Qld is dramatic increase in the size of people's first boat. In the 'old days' (like I did), you learnt in smaller boats and slowly made your way up. Not any more.

Yes there will be unintended consequences, but I think it is fair that when you pay money for using a boat, you have a right to expect that your feet won't get wet, hence boat surveyed, etc.

Try dogding around it and see just how understanding your insurer is. Most States have some sort of definition about operating for commercial reward. Do that while not correctly (commercially) certified (registered/surveyed) and see how long it takes your insurere to say not operating lawfully, contract (of insurance) void.

I am honestly glad that the canoe kids stayed safe. I would think some sort of insurance limbo if there was an incident.

I agree that share boating gets people into boating and that is a good thing, I see too many boats that never leave the marina. All deserving to be loved and enjoyed.

(Yes I am cautious and yes I am insured)

For the purposes of discussion only!!!!

I want to riff around this idea ... occasional people dying does not necessarily mean that something is unsafe or shouldn't be done. There comes a point of course where you have to regulate against stupidity and ignorance ... but the question is

How far do you go?

While I believe that some regulation is necessary I am thinking of all the things that have made up my boating life that I would be unable to experience because of regulation that may be excessive.

• Sailing with a small family sailing club that operated out of a garage that was low cost because of a minimal infrastructure (and insurance requirement during the 70s). There used to be squillions of these little clubs. No more.
• Renting an bunch of old wooden rowing boats at the Royal National Park south of Sydney (boating in a narrow river or a wide creek with a pooled area. Boats were somewhat leaky - but we were given bailers. Some of us capsized (on purpose) and had to bail the boats out. Great day for a big bunch of teenagers.
• Going to a low cost sailing camp as a school kid in the '70s. The cost was just for food really with training and use of some almost geriatric boats - three f/g Vagabonds, an wooden OK, an old NS14, a cut down rig 12ft skiff.
• Hiring old putt putts on Wallis Lake at Forster on the NSW. No buoyancy tanks (level flotation a future dream). I am not sure we had life jackets. Wearing life jackets would have been no problem - and I think represents a good level of personal responsibility anyhow - but I think we were not given them on some of the occasions.
• Putt Putts again for Coal and Candle Creek and Berowra waters and the Shoalhaven river - with families or various youth groups
• University sailing - racing sharpies and 420s - those clubs were all run on a shoestring - insurance costs have become so high.
• Sailing and boating and making rafts with the Sea Scouts. Building fibreglass canoes too. Fixing up an old 16 foot skiff and an old Manly Junior that people had abandoned - sailing to work out where the leaks were then taking them back and doing more work.
• Buying my first boat - or my parents buying it for me. We knew nothing about tow ropes and tow rings and paddles (found out about them when I started racing with a club) - did know about lifejackets (it was about a quarter of the cost of the boat).
• When I started racing I used to go sailing most days of school holidays - occasionally I would head well offshore from Pittwater in a Nor Easter knowing I would blow back in the right direction really easily.
• Or reading about the experiences of all those little nuggetty ocean races that used to give boats a good hammering (Gabo, Montague) - that were held with the idea that everyone was responsible for themselves and crew. Some argue that the lack of those tough little races is why there is such attrition in the Hobart race now. Getting rid of all the rescue services would certainly mean that people would be more responsible with boat design and construction!!! (I am teasing a bit there - but can you see my drift)

The main question is that ... when is the person themselves responsible and when is someone else to be held responsible?

The supplementary question is ... were these things all dangerous and required regulation?

At one of my clubs a member died of a heart attack while sailing a Heron in a club race. Attitude of family was ... at least he died doing what he loved and they organised a memorial race to be held yearly under his name. On the other hand if he hadn't been in the bot he would probably have got help "and be alive today" as someone would say.

Maybe instead of expecting clubs and hire places to be insured if people are inclined to take risks then they should insure themselves rather than expect someone else to take care of them.

Or maybe people hurting or killing themselves is the price to be paid for an interesting and instructive society??? )

I guess my point is ... there is so much pressure to regulate and control and make things expensive and difficult ... that there needs to be some pressure in the opposite way too.

How many lives and injuries will a particular new regulation or new regulation save? If it is one or two a year, then it may not be worth it. If it can save 10 - maybe it is a good thing. Maybe the result needs to be achieved in the simplest possible way too - instead of level flotation for power boats have mandatory wearing of PFDs of some grade? Would it achieve the same ends with much less cost and regulation.

With a single regulation it would be possible to prevent shark attacks completely. In Taiwan, on many beaches you have to wear a lifejacket - but maybe that is a good idea because so many people cannot swim very well - shocking the first time you get told that you have to put one on to go in the water!!!! What is Mandarin for "Bodysurfing" - sob!?

I dunno - if this discussion continues from this post I hope it generates light rather than just heat.

So it would be good if this was kept broad rather than specific ... "I went down to the motor registry the other day and this is what they said to me .... blah" - we all know those types of stories and they are BORING!

Best wishes
Michael

Originally Posted by onthebeachalone

Article attached

I ran out of time today to track down the reference on the MSQ web-site. Perhaps someone else might want to follow that up.

It is a bit hard to comment without the detail. If it is for boats over 10m that makes some sense. Comment though about the Coxswain certificate. If the owner doesn't require one ... why should the hirer?

Or does this misrepresent the position?

Aquamarine - I know you are not responsible for any of this - and it is great to have someone here that can shed more light than most - please don't feel I am asking you justify any of it at all - and don't feel that you have to defend anything beyond what you think is a good thing personally! (just to pre-empt the situation where it might feel that it is a bunch of boat owners against the "industry guy" - I trust all the regulars, but you never know who will stroll in!)

Best wishes
Michael

Originally Posted by Boatmik

It is a bit hard to comment without the detail. If it is for boats over 10m that makes some sense. Comment though about the Coxswain certificate. If the owner doesn't require one ... why should the hirer?

I think it's reasonable that a hirer has some qualification, however being a Coxswain doesn't in itself mean that the person is either a responsible seaman, or capable of instructing a raw hiree!

I would have thought that the owner of the boat had enough at stake to ensure it came back in one piece without a need for a notional licence.

On the other hand, I'm caught in a bit of a bind at the moment. Having sailed for more than 40 years, I've never had a need for a power boat licence. I've actually delivered sub-maxi racing yachts, but needed a crew member to take me ashore in the powered tinny!

I've been asked to deliver a boat next year in Europe, on the inland waterway network. No problems.

But to gain a licence one needs to sit an exam in French or Dutch (neither of which I speak) or obtain an International Certificate of Competence. No problem again says I, until I find out that the AYF isn't interested. I could of course get one in Britain IF I was a resident of the UK AND a citizen!

I actually completed the written bits for the coxswain's ticket many years ago, but because all of my experience was on non-commercial sailing craft, didn't proceed.

Another friend in a similar position got his hours up on commercial sailing vessels, and was qualified to run sailing vessels up to 80 feet or thereabouts, but not power!

Basically, the licencing processes in this country seem to be a complete schamozzle, but so that we know we're not alone, if the craft I was delivering in Europe was a hire boat, I wouldn't require a licence!

Cheers,

P

Out of curiosity, here's the current Qld requirement for briefing hire boat skippers, note that the first 99 briefings have to be "overseen" by a person with qualifications, but that person doesn't have to be present!!

What???

P

Briefing requirements for providers have been expanded, and require:

• that the person conducting the briefing holds at least a recreational marine driver licence, and a personal watercraft licence in the case of personal watercraft
• the first 99 briefings be overseen by a coxswain or an experienced recreational marine driver licence holder
• the person overseeing briefings does not need to be present at each briefing.

I recently obtained a recreational power boat licence, let me tell you the process is a joke.

I agree that the whole licencing regime is a mess, at the bottom end it is very easy to get a licence at the top end you are faced with a chicken & egg process and parts of the process that go back a couple of centuries.

The hire boating thing also is inconsistent.
Even if you have a RMDL you sill need to sit exactly the same course to get a personal water craft licence........ however....... there are places you can hire one completely unlicenced.......

There was an incident with one of these legaly unlicenced PWC a couple of weeks ago.

This is like allowing someone to ride a high powered motorbike unlicenced simply because they are hiring it...........who thaught this was a good idea?

Similarly
under a particular power rating there is no licence required for small powerboats........ to a certain extent.... fair enough........ there is also no age restriction or requirement for supervision....... so legaly a 5 year old could drive a tinny with a 3HP outboard completly unsupervised.

I was down the "Nerang" with neil a few weeks ago and there in an open speed section there were a couple of sub teens playing arround in little tinnies......& I mean playing arround, dougnuts, fig 8's and stuff.....if it was a PWC it would be called freestyling.......these little twits were unsupervised and not paying attention...... this in an area where large boats come thru doind 15to 20 knots.........would these parents alow the same kids to play on their bikes on the main road?

There seems to be in the minds of many that because they are on the water there are no rules and there is a licence to be careless.

Who would expect to crack a beer the minute they get in the car to drive anywhere, but many have an alcohol consumption asumption associated with boating.

I can certainly see that there is a time and place for " messing arround in boats", but unfortunately there are many who do not have the faintest understanding of the consiquences of doing the wrong thing in the wrong place at the wrong time and there have been inocent people die because of it.

cheers



I can see that in the future recreational marine licencing will get more strict.

You can try and license people to do almost anything - we do it for cars, trucks, boats even marriages.
Fact is there is no license for common sense nor responsibility - get those 2 going and you do not need the others!!!!

Howdy Soundman,

I agree with the idea of consistent minimums, but some of the new legislation seems equally as misplaced as the old inconsistencies.

People will do stupid things whether or not there are licences - though a basic level of licence does have an educative effect as well.

To blame licenced or not licensed for particular incidents though, I don't think is fair in most cases. Plenty of people on the roads who do crazy things too - but that is accepted as part of the cost for the relative simplicity of the system.

And while there is an attempt to make cars safer, roads better I don't think anyone would put up with the excesses required to become qualified for anything above certain sizes that are required for the waterways.

The Coxswain example of Midge's really sniffs of protecting particular qualifications rather than attempting to achieve anything concrete - you HAVE to have a coxswain present 99 times. No choice.

I can get a licence to drive a heavy truck rig with much less effort than to get a coxswain's ticket, despite many years of sailing different sized sailboats and using different sized powerboats in many situations.

I know a bit about the sorts of things that Midge and others have done and they should be able to take that resume to the authorities, go through a sensible set of coursework to make sure that there are no holes in their knowledge and sit an exam for a coxswains ticket and receive one in the post the following week. Anything else is simply protecting the group that have already gone through the existing system.

A Coxswain is running one of the smaller ferries around Sydney Harbour - I can do that no worries (it would be too stressful I think - but that is not the point). But I need COMMERCIAL HOURS to get it.

In terms of commercial passenger carrying - it is smart to have a set of higher level qualifications, but it seems that there is a place for an alternative lower standard of competency that still qualifies one to use larger boats.

Like Midge says - with a few weeks (weekends?) study and a few hundred dollars you can get a ticket to allow you to drive a substantial vessel (60ft say) on European canals and rivers where there is also a large amount of commercial traffic. In England it hangs off the existing system of Powerboat competency run by the RYA (royal yachting association)

At the moment there are recreational boat licences and then Coxswains and Masters and, as far as I know, nothing in between.

Are any of the Australian Yachting Federation (or whatever they call themselves now) competency levels recognised by the various waterway authorities?

I am normally pretty disinclined to say something is stupid - not usually a word in my vocabulary - as there is usually something good about the same thing too. But midges example of 99 supervised briefings is just crazy. How about a guideline of defined objectives and a checklist with 5 supervised then some random checks later. But 99 beggars belief.

Or are you pulling our legs Midge? You made that up to get us going - dinch ya?

My sense is that the various maritime authorities are very disconnected from reality - otherwise the 99 wouldn't get a look-in - any sensibly based rational authority would see that it is ..... stupid.

there are many who do not have the faintest understanding of the consequences of doing the wrong thing in the wrong place at the wrong time and there have been innocent people die because of it.

I completely disagree that there are "many".

A point here is that while there are occasional fatalities (as there are with cars), most people get on with using their boats in a sensible way on a week by week basis with no safety problems or issues at all. This is because by-and-large most people are sensible and reasonably well educated about what they want to do.

Part of the problem for waterway authorities, as it is for police and ambulance people, is that they get to see the results of the idiotic few consistently and so start to think that most people are idiots or up to no good. It is a reasonable response to their particular environment, but that doesn't mean it is balanced or justifiable position.

Perhaps the motor car regulations, license levels and required insurances are a good model. There are lots of choices within that framework. If something goes wrong people don't off and sue the Dept of Motor Transport because it is largely a system of self responsibility.

Best wishes,

Michael Storer