drink boating

G

gjgm

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 Mar 2002
Messages
8,143
Location
London
Visit site
so there is to be a consultation paper.
Can anyone explain the logic behind:

The consultation seeks views on the draft regulations that would exempt non-professional mariners on boats which are less than 7m long and have a maximum design speed of seven knots or less

I think a drink boat limit is a good idea (the implementation suggests it would apply to those in charge of navigation). And I m not going to get dragged into a "what if my anchor drags in a force 7 in the middle of the night"... But the above exception seems to imply its OK to be drunk in a small,slow vessel.. which seems odd to me that is ok to be drunk in any vessel...
 
Well I'd rather be hit by a 7m boat at 7kts than by a Predator 108 at 40 odd kts, if nothing else...
 
It is just a sop. There is no credible evidence that it is a widespread problem. The legislation is in place, just not implemented. All this will do is give powers to breathalyse when an offence is suspected. There is no proposal for random tests. It is unlikely to have any real impact on either boaters or the "accident rate" because the latter is already so low as to be almost unmeasurable.
 
It depends on the boat you're cruising in I guess.
With mine, a collision with a 7m/7kts boat would hardly make much more than scratches, whilst I'm afraid I wouldn't stay afloat if banged by the boozed up helmsman on a 108' at 40kts.
Mind, he wouldn't stand a chance either, so maybe you're right at the end... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
...as long as he has a good insurance, that is!
 
Can't see the problem....how many accidents are there caused by it? Anyway to be over that limit takes about 7 pints.
 
Being really cynical /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif you have to remember the sailing biased RYA has been consulted on this and of course raggies would never drink and drive, except perhaps when they need their under 7m tender with puny outboard to get back to the mother ship after a session at the pub.
 
I was involved in the trials with the police breath testers and most of us were ok at random intervals for several hours after. I think it was Heinikan (spelling) which was about 4% abv? Still wouldn't drive or fly but would happily potter along at 6 kts.....round here it is rare to see another boat.
 
Anyway to be over that limit takes about 7 pints.
*******

That is absolute rubbish. Of course it depends on the drink and the individual, but 2-2.5 pints is about it.
 
Quite a fair ruling really.

The risks involved between a small vessel at walking speed is very different to a larger sportcruiser 'on the plane' isn't it?

Anybody who can't see the reasoning is very very thick indeed...
 
ah, thanks for the clarity and insight. If someone piss*d in his tender with an outboard hits a child swimming near the beach, its good to know you ll be sympatheic to his drinking.
 
One of the only recent fatalities I'm aware of on the Thames involved a small runabout returning from the Henley fireworks in the dark, young girl knocked overboard and drowned, youngster in charge like everybody else on board was drunk, why should this be exempt?
 
I don't think it is fair at all.

Why have we got the same alcohol limit for driving a juggernaut in black ice on a crowded motorway as we have for (say) a rib with 15hp o/b being driven at 2knts in Newtown Creek on a summer Sunday afternoon?

There's no test of proportionality in the justification for the legislation. We are only asked :"Do you agree that the combination of parameters for the exception are sufficient to minimise any health and safety risks linked specifically to alcohol consumption in this environment?", not whether the price paid for minimising the risks can be justified. Using the same type of justification it is easy to see boat licensing and skipper qualifications complete with a new tax necessary to pay for all the enforcement.

Finally there's a whole set of boundary conditions that I have to worry about in order to decide if I am breaking the law:
(1) Am I over the drink drive limit? Easy enough to know after a few pints at lunchtime, but what about on the morning after the night before? I don't mind the stress of dealing with this question when I am driving something as dangerous as a car, but when I am in a boat capable of 7.5 knots I can do without it.
(2) Who on board is "responsible for navigation"? I think the consultation says this includes the person steering and the one controlling the throttle, but there's a mention of someone called a "skipper", which I didn't realise was a defined person on a leisure boat. Does this reponsibility change from time to time?
(3) Is my vessel capable of more than 7 knots? (This is where the boat licensing will come in)

These are all questions I may find myself having to answer as I drag my anchor onto a lee shore for which no-one has made the case.
 
eh ?
You dont support the concept because there may be times that you dont know whether you are still piss*d or not? (1)
Bizarre logic .
 
But it is not really exempt. It is still an offence to use the boat while unfit. The only difference is that the new proposals sets limits and the use of breathalyzers. If the "runabout" was capable of more than 7 knots even if it was not doing it then it would be covered.

As I commented earlier, I don't think this will have any real impact on day to day boating, nor will it affect the "statistics". It is a sop and not worth arguing about. If they had proposed random checks that would be another matter - but don't think the police would have liked that nor would the Govt be keen on financing enforcement!
 
I don't know if the "runabout" was capable of more than 7knts, the point was that the boat was being navigated in the dark with no lights lots of hazards to hit, trees, jetties, weirs etc... the river has a 4.3kt limit anyway, but as far as i'm aware speed was not the cause of the fatality it was falling overboard banging her head and drowning, this is exactly the sort of thing this law is supposed to catch. So why have the 7knt limit, there must be a reason? its not because an under 7m, 7kt boat is safer surely.
In my lifetime of boating the only time I have come close to a really life threatening situation, was returning to an anchored yacht in a dinghy pissed with a few mates and being washed out to sea in force 7, fortunately a fishing boat saw us and rescued us. Its the sea or water that is dangerous, not speed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

T
Notices to Mariners - Week 51
Replies
4
Views
682
Shaz77
S
T
Notices to Mariners - Week 52
Replies
0
Views
337
tillergirl
T

Share this page

Top