Driving Licence for a boat - What's wrong with that ?

[goboatingnow]

I think this debate is about absolutles and the issue can be solved differently. How about compulsory training ( a license is irrevelevant). must be given to all first time buyers of boats with say greater then 6HP ( or perhaps designed speeds over 17knots). Hence the sellers of boats would have to ensure some basic training

ALso I think it is a fallacy to assume that basic training ( whether compulsory or not) makes people "think" they no it all. Theres no statistics to show either viewpoint. The sea tends to very rapidly show people how little they know.

There is a need for compulsory training for certain users, not compusory licensing

The other spurious reasons such as " I saw a german licensed xxxx bump yyyy) do not point against compulsory training,what we are trying to do is to ensure that the basics are understood, rules colregs , nav markers etc and to point out to people the obvious dangers, not to turn them into expert drivers.

Very few people, will say that getting a car license, makes them into "good" drivers, it merely ensures they have a grasp of the basics.

As to how compulsory training restricts your freedom...!!! what are afraid you wont pass a simple enough test!.

 

[Ubergeekian]

We have Driving licence for cars, separate for Trucks, planes etc. In fact nearly all forms of transport except pleasure boats !

You don't need a licence in the UK to ride a horse or bicycle, or to fly a glider (fixed, hang- or para-).

 

[Ubergeekian]

I lean towards the need for some sort of qualification. It's interesting how vehement some are about it.

What qualification would you think necessary for a kid with an Optimist?

 

[Ubergeekian]

As to how compulsory training restricts your freedom...!!! what are afraid you wont pass a simple enough test!.

That's basically the same "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" nonsense which home secretaries trot out every time they observe us a bit more carefully.

All of the following could easily cause death or injury to yourself of someone else: for how many would you oppose passing a simple test and holding a licence?

Sailing
Cycling
Cooking
Hill walking
Swimming
Gardening
Having sex
Painting a ceiling
Changing a tyre
Playing tennis
Playing golf
Lighting a primus stove

 

[Tranona]

Just catching up with the latest posts. Getting near to the "crux" with the OP seeming to confirm that his concern is about poor boat handling in confined spaces. Clearly training on handling boats in these situations may reduce collisions - however, there is no evidence presented that it is "new users" causing the problem - indeed another post clearly laid the blame at OAPs in MABs - hardly new users!

Where there are compulsory licences, they are usually in categories eg over xhp. However, when you look at the stats there are just as many accidents in low hp craft such as falling out of a dinghy. Or there can be limits of operation - I understand in Australia there are more "stringent" requirements if you go more than 1 mile offshore - even though most of the accidents occur within 1 mile!

So we go back to basics - which is that there is no credible evidence that incompetence is widespread and that it causes accidents. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that there are people who have difficulties with certain aspects of boating, particularly close quarters handling and possibly poor handling of powerful power boats, but not enough to justify any compulsion - even if one could figure out an acceptable standard and mechanism for enforcing.

Actually, the ICC requirements do provide a basic standard, but based on coastal and offshore sailing. However, acording to a poll on Scuttlebutt a few months ago, it seems the majority of holders get it because they have the RYA certificate.

So, the training required is freely available on a voluntary basis, take up is good and it seems there is no case for making it compulsory.

 

[fisherman]

What qualification would you think necessary for a kid with an Optimist?

Same as for a kid on a bike: parental control and advice. This is exactly what the opponents of seat belts said, "It can't work because of milkmen/delivery drivers". There would have to be sensible limits to it, which seems unlikely with the authorities we have now. This is why it might be better to take the initiative before you have it thrust up(on) you.

 

[Refueler]

AFAIK there are no requirements for operators of boats on British inland waterways to have any form of documentation as far as their competence is concerned. There are of course some quite strict rules about the boats, designed to prevent damage to the waterways and other users.

Now some questions for those who go boating in countries with compulsory competency certificates - how are things like kids mucking about in dinghies handled? I presume there is some threshold for exemption? On the scale from a beach inflatable up to a power boat with 200hp on the back or a 40 foot sailing boat, at what point does certification become necessary.

Second question - how is certification policed at sea? and are there still some who just ignore the authorities and jump in a boat without the paperwork?

Latvia : Min age for any boat 2.4m and above incl. Jetskis is 14yrs power, 16yrs sail. They do have classes such as canoes / kayaks that are exempted.

One of the reasons Police are refusing to accept another driver for my boat is that my nephew is under those ages ... even though boat is UK flag and therefore exempt from that rule.

 

[Refueler]

You don't need a licence in the UK to ride a horse or bicycle, or to fly a glider (fixed, hang- or para-).

I did say nearly .... implying immediate thought of comparitors.

 

[jenku]

Having sex

If that would entail training lessons with a highly trained instructor and a practical exam I might actually be in favor of that!

 

[Observer]

There is a marked absence of intellectual rigour in the "there ought to be a law against it" (aka "let's have compulsory licensing") camp. Proponents of a scheme of licensing for users of pleasure craft should explain (this is just scratching the surface) how any proposed scheme would be designed, implemented and enforced; how much it would cost; who would pay for it; and (perhaps most important) how (in detail and with reasoned argument) the scheme would materially reduce the mischief sought to be addressed (and, indeed, should define exactly what that mischief is).

Until that is done (I don't say it can't be done but I haven't seen it yet), calls for compulsory licensing is mere day-dreaming. Wishing for a desirable end (improved safety, better educated/trained water users) without addressing the means by which the end can be practically and practicably achieved is, to be blunt, pre-school fantasising.

 

[Tranona]

This government claims only to bring in legislation where there is clear evidence of need (see the documentation attached to the consultation on the drink regulations). However, there is still the "political" element which attached pleasure boaters to legislation related to railways and commercial marine operators on the simple basis of why should leisure boaters be exempt - surely if commercial operators need legislation, why should others be exempt. However, so far the consultation process has failed to find evidence of need or effective operational procedures.

At the moment, I don't see any need for political legislation (such as a major disaster or "worsening statistics") or any external pressure for legislation.

Might different if the reward for introducing it was unlimited supplies of gas to plug our energy gap because of failure of government policy. Shall I have words with my friend the Colonel?

 

[nct1]

You are correct, the cost of implementation is the only real bar to this, along with the current relatively low fatality rate and low criminality level.

However the cynic in me thinks it would be a good way of testing the government's charge by the mile transponders, where the boat owner pays for the cost, then they know where the boat is at any time and "incidents" can be traced, and boats not transponding are easily pulled in.

It does not prove whether a trained person is at the helm, but like speeding tickets the owner would have to prove their innocence.

So no, it is not beyond the wit of government to implement.

 

[Ubergeekian]

Same as for a kid on a bike: parental control and advice. This is exactly what the opponents of seat belts said, "It can't work because of milkmen/delivery drivers". There would have to be sensible limits to it, which seems unlikely with the authorities we have now.

And indeed delivery drivers are exempt from wearing seatbelths.

However ... the continuum is far broader in sailing. If the kid in the Optimist doesn't need a license, does the adult in a Wayfarer?

Sorry. It's a stupid, stupid, stupid idea and having the sailing community propose it would be even more stupid. As I said in my first response, it's not the licensing that's the problem, it's the enforcement. The coastline of Great Britain (the mainland) is just a shade over eleven thousand miles. Adding the main islands gives another eight thousand. What sort of enforcement exercise do you think it would be to make sure that every boat being sailed along nineteen thousand miles of coast has an appropriately qualified person in charge?

 

[Searush]

[snip]

"I'm sorry to sit on the fence but there you are . . ." Where do you do your boating where there are fences then Searush?
S.

Silly sod, they're everywhere. Shows how much sailing you do!

 

[fisherman]

As I said in my first response, it's not the licensing that's the problem, it's the enforcement.

And as I've said, the insurance companies will do it for them. There is no enforcement of the MCA cert for fishing vessels, or none that I've experienced, except that it is a condition of insurance cover. When there is an incident it's the first thing the MCA and the insurance company will ask for.

I was asked for proof of insurance before entering the local boatyard, and before mooring in the local fishing port. If the insurance is dependent on any other paperwork (cert of competence or whatever) they will want to see that also.

We asked the fire brigade for advice on safety for a firework display. Thay said do a risk assessment. We said who checks it? They said no-one, until there's an incident, then you have to show the adequacy and implementation of your risk assessment.

If certification comes in the insurance companies will insist on it as a condition of cover, it will be up to you if you take the risk of being uninsured. You won't be asked for it until there is an incident.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

A Case For Vessel Licence and Skipper Licence

Why licence? To raise revenue.
The Insurance Companies wont give a toss because they want your premium to raise revenue as well.

 

[fisherman]

Why licence? To raise revenue.
The Insurance Companies wont give a toss because they want your premium to raise revenue as well.

Exactly. They will have the premium, and the excuse not to pay out.

 

[Sybarite]

In France, if sail is the principle motive power, no license is required. Mobos over 6hp require a license which revolves around colregs, safety equipment, basic boat handling and MOB drills. Sensible idea.

It is officially assumed that sailors will have acquired the basic skills. You can therefore have the anomaly of an experienced boater going out fishing in a dinghy with an 8hp outboard requiring a license whereas a relatively recent recruit to sailing can motor freely with his 80hp auxiliary. However the sailer will have to comply with a complete inventory of safety equipment which at least will point him in the right direction.

Most of the "coq oups" that I have seen over here relate to mobos docking without taking into account the basic parameters of windage and tide. Incidentally in my marina, one such was docking a few weeks ago with a crew member perched on the pulpit and a helmsman obviously approaching far too quickly. On realising the situation he jammed it (at full revs) in reverse and the bowman did a most inelegant dive...!!

You don't have annual boat licenses in the UK. We do in France. It would be a mammouth task to set up the data base to start taxing. A boat licensing data base would solve that problem.

Boating is now immeasurably safer than it used to be because of : more soundly built boats, reliable diesel engines, more information available (eg this forum), democratisation of electronics: depth sounders, VHF, GPS, radars, EPIRBS, better equipped life saving services etc etc.

To address another point about inland waterways licenses: this requires another set of skills as for example when you meet a 500 ton barge swinging wide on a river bend. I think that a license here is justified.

Sailing is one of the great freedoms we have. The overwhelming majority of sailors I have encountered have been responsible and competent individuals; I, for one, would therefore be prepared to risk a few mavericks than to have yet another freedom curtailed.

John

 

[Tranona]

To address another point about inland waterways licenses: this requires another set of skills as for example when you meet a 500 ton barge swinging wide on a river bend. I think that a license here is justified.

John

However, as you probably know, if I want to use my own boat on the inland waterways in France I need to have an ICC. If, however, I hire a boat I don't!

Pragmatism rules OK. If a certificate of competence was required for hirers the industry would collapse. And this in the country that started the whole thing about certificates of competence, getting the UN involved to enforce it - but only when it suits them! And, by the way holding a gun at the head of the British government to force it to have a registration system for boats or they would refuse comity to UK yachtsmen! Lucky they accepted the SSR (equivalent of a bus pass!)

 

[goboatingnow]

France didnt specifically start the ICC, it arose from the requirements to navigate the Rhine and Danube.