Jet skis - solution

[DavidBolger]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

Totally disagree.

Must have a licence for any boat with engine over 5 hp and 5 meter LOA.

How many more wreckless teenagers would we have on motorbikes, cars or drunken driving. I'm not saying that licencing will eliminate the problem, just that it will help to control the problem.

And of course, it is the duty of the state to attempt to legislate common sense into people who have none. I was born an axe murderer so leave me alone to do my thing!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Roberto]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

<<I firmly believe that it is not the duty of the state to attempt to legislate common sense into people who have none>>

I thought so, then a new traffic law recently came into effect in Italy, stiff fines, driving licences with points, etc. After the first few were fined 50-60 points one shot (of 20 available), the most chaotic, irreponsible, dangerous way of driving in Europe became one of the safest, statistics on hand. It may just be the initial effect, but then if it lasts why not consider it efficient ?
I reckon the average Briton is far more responsible and sensible than the average Italian, especially with watersports, maybe the pwc are italianizing part of the uk youth ?



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

I dont know that I'm bothered one way or the other about the piece of paper - what I am bothered about is the perception that people with the certificate are safe - gaining the qualification is only the beginning of a process which never ends.

As for the reckless ones - no amount of training will make them think differently, as evidenced by the youngster I saw leaving the motorbike CBT , and pulling a wheely as he cleared the gates....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

I suspect that is an entirely sensible reason to gain the certificate. It just wont ever apply to the testosterone loaded oiks that I suspect we may be talking about here.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Jools_of_Top_Cat]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

Quote>>My proposal is that anyone on the water must have a licence for which you pay a fee of say €20 per year and must pass a test similar to the Day skipper/coastal skipper before getting a licence.<<

You can't be serious, can you? You want to pay euro 20 per year to use free water, what right does any government have to tax for the use of something that does not belong to them, I pay harbour dues, because every safe anchorage has been stolen by the crown to lay down moorings. This is theft.

There are already laws in place to control the types of behaviour being talked about, why not enforce what’s already there in order to kerb the problem, without adding more bureautic taxes, get real!

>This would fund the coastguard/rescue services to regulate the waters. Anyone on the water without a valid licence would have their craft confiscated and only returned to them upon production a valid licence.<

I gave 7 years of my free time to crew on the Lifeboat, I think I have paid my dues, if I was around and crew was required I would not hesitate to jump aboard, how much more do you think I should pay? Craft confiscated, is this not piracy? are you just trolling or do you really believe that this is the answer? So, liveaboards who never leave their moorings on boats which have not moved in years would be turfed onto the street because they are not qualified to sail, and have no intentions to ever set sail would have their vessel confiscated.

>I hope I am not detecting a Europhobe trend in this forum. The benefits of standardisation, regulation and harmonisation are too numerous to list but it seems certain sections of the UK are intent on ignoring them. I can only assume that these are not the people involved in the steel, boat building or car industries (to name a few) which have been effectively eliminated dues to the UK's uncompetitiveness, currency and effective withdrawal from the EU.<

There you go again with regulation, this is stunning, do you look down at everyone who does anything different to the norm, how about we all wear the same clothes, live in allotted accommodation according to our working skills, all earn the same money.

I shall say this again.....

The police and harbour masters have legislation in place to deal with all the complaints that have been arising on this subject, they for whatever reason do not / will not enforce them, so your answer is to bring in more regulation which will cost us the victims of these louts while they carry on as before without fear of retribution. Do you really feel that these 'louts' knowing they will not be pulled up by any form of enforcement officers will go and licence themselves, yet I will be forced to pay up a yearly tax which will have no other reason but revenue building.

UNBELEIVABLE!!!!!






<hr width=100% size=1>Julian

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.topcatsail.co.uk/Honda_00.html>Honda Formula 4-Stroke racing</A>

 

[qsiv]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

But that wouldnt achieve what you are after - I dont believe any PWC are longer than 5m, so they wouldnt need a licence.

Apart from my perception that compulsory licensing wouldnt make the irresponsible into safe users, I fail to see that this could be enforced in any meaningful way -you would need 10's of thousands of extra policemen to even begin to enforce this - and if it isnt enforceable, it isnt worth doing as those who really need to be caught will just ignore the law. As most of these offences take place in or close to harbours I suspect that there are plenty of local byelaws that would suffice to bring the miscreants to heel - if there were the resources and the will.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

I'm pleased to hear it's worked! It sounds similar to the UK system - but it does depend on there being a will to police it and enforce it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

Re: List the benefits, please (long rant).

I hope I am not detecting a Europhile tendency on this forum. There are few benefits to harmonisation, and almost no sign of it happening. Other EU countries are far less deferential towards EU directives, flagrantly breaking EU law. Every french restaurant has a form of words to say "we don't use british beef" and watersports are policed police according to local laws, broken again (eg, in Cannes bay, where waterskiing is somehow OK in a 10knot restricted zone). The car industry was not at all broken by withdrawl from the EU, but by poor management and restrictive leftish-backed unions, and most succesful car companies aren't based wholly in Europe.

After 15 years of EMU/Euro all promises of the European super-economy "powering ahead" have been proven totally unfounded, with Germany's once-proud record floundering to a degree thought unbelievable 20 years ago. Britain's withdrawal from the EMU triggered a period of recovery, now threatened with a tax and spend policy already scolded by the IMF. At the centre of Europe is Switzerland, doing fabulously well thank you very much, and all rich as heck. In the former USSR and balkans, artificially-grouped nation states have exploded in animosity after a few decades, and emerging asian nations see no benfit nor need to group together in the way that many insist is the only possible way forward in Europe.

A protectionist european club/superstate is irrelevant on a world stage, and certainly not anything attractive. If you drive a boat, fly a plane, do business internationally, use a computer, you speak English, the language of the world. If you run an army, or a school, or a government or a bank, you use anglo-saxon models. It is quite arguable that the moderate performance of mediterranean countries is largely supported by northern Europeans spending tourist and property billions every year.

The EU is a government, whioch are (for the most part) not secret things, doing largely unseen Good Things That You Would Not Understand. That would be like being married to a spouse who never stayed at home, never cam on hioliday, was never around the house, but used your bank account. Or an employee who never turned up or did anything tangible, except um, work hard to harmomnise things in the industry. Yet an individual, a company and a country is in fact a competitor, not a harmoniser.

The EU came about as the busted and guilty hand of post ww2 Germany and the frightened French sought to win pride, security, international loans andinternational acceptability. It succeeds today as all involved have almost limitless and unaccountable budgets and power, a good side-option for national governments to rid themselves of awkward and self-important yet irrelevant politicians, or to retire to in due course when the hurly-burly of the democratic chuick-out can be nimbly sidestepped. It serves no other purpose, and has not succeeded in achieveing anything at all - other than in these miserable and self-serving ways in which it has exceeded its wildest dreams. The historical propensity of the French to tinker ineffectively and expensively with their style of government continues unabated.

And yet, after spending billions on the EU, we still have a powerful government who mocks any naysayer. "I suppose you'd like to pull out altogether" they sneer. Well, I'd like to hear a benefit. One just one. Put on the same spot ten years ago by a schoolchild, Douglas Hurd squirmed and said that, primarily er, um well, war in Europe was impossible as a result of the EU. Someone ought to tell the northern irish, the catalans, and anyone in the balkans it was all guaranteed not to happen. Because in UK and indeed all over Europe, people don't think in big blocks. We look after our own families and kids, massively, bnot see that they are alright and donate the rest to a big pot. We cheer our own countries - not even yet managing to agree a UK footbal team - can anyone imagine an EU fotball team. Ah, but the EU it's not like that, see, it's nation states, say the pro-EU people. Oh yes it is matey - i pay for those politicians, i'm European, and yet it's supposed to be okay that like everyone else I am ambivalent even when election time comes around. We actually follow the American elections in europe - not our own.

There is no future, no belief in this EU project. Many insist that it will be best long term. Really? If we joined, we *might* be more prosperous, one day, to be in than out, but for the last 15 years the reverse has been demonstrably true. Are we going to pick a week or a month when, ooh, if we were in right now, we'd all be better off by five quid, let's join. I hope not. There are lots of things we can all do individually or as a country to make ourselves a bit richer that are sure bets. Joning the EU isn't one of them - it's a long shot, and becoming longer by the minute. Indeed, if someone in the mid 80's had said, we're out, thanks, we're on our own, heads down, let's go to it - we'd almost certainly be economically miles ahead of where we are now.

This last bit is easy. For yonks the europhiles have been bleating about the "obvious advantages" of working with "european partners" when the reverse has been true. Now, if Douglas Hurd can't spellem out, lets let that one go. Quation is, how rubbish does the EU have to be before we say, right that's it, we've had enough, we're out of here. They busted the UK meat industry, before that the fishing industry. Recent events have shown that there's no hope of a valid European army or foreign policy. Events over the past 15 years has shown that currency union is ineffective or even downright counterproductive. Red diesel has gone, as has duty free. There's the question - how bad does the eurpean govenment have to become before we all say erm, that's enough?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tom52]

More regulation and licencing will not help without enforcement.
The harbour master at Poole does not use the powers he already has to prevent the dangerous behaviour and breaking of speed limits in the harbour enterance by jetskis and some power boats.
Another example....., in theory both the boat and the operator require a licence for VHF but you have all heard what goes on on Channel 16.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[IanBry]

Re: 16yr old Jet Skier killed in Cork

Hi David

I realise you have strong views on the subject that you hold with conviction. I am however glad that you seem to be among the minority. I don't know if you were attempting to be patronising by saying that having a day skipper qualification teaches someone how to have consideration for others? For me this was taught by my parents. If your argument held any water (pardon the pun) then all people with driving liceneces would be fine upstanding considerate folk (you're not suggesting that - are you?)

The fact remains that there are laws in place to deal with people who behave dangerously. If they are not being upheld than creating more won't work either, nor will it save the lives of those who choose to flaunt them.

If you believe that common sense can be taught then you are more misguided that I thought.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Deal with the problem

Problem is that there is easy cheap access to high speed PWC which is killing people.

Solution is to ensure that those gaining that access are competent. Ergo ... introduce a licencing scheme for PWC and police it. Address the problem and stop these deaths.

Introducing a waterwide licencing scheme is irrelevant in dealing with this problem.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Deal with the problem

We have a much much smaller concentration of boats here and my comments must be seen in perspective against that.

However, after some deaths from PWC's (including in a chaperoned school group!)and some other recreational troubles, a comprehensive review was recently done here involving recreational groups (including PWC's) and the regulators. The outcome was that there was a great deal of solidarity as to it being undesirable to bring in registration and licencing. That view was also held by the regulators, and from my own other contacts with them, I know they were taking a very honest stance in that. The emphasis was to be on education and a minimal increase in Maritime Rules where regarded essential.

With respect to education and PWC's it was decided to produce a publication specifically targetted at them (it is available here <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.msa.govt.nz/Publications/publicationlist.htm>http://www.msa.govt.nz/Publications/publicationlist.htm</A> - look for Personal Water Craft.pdf I think it is). The intention was that this would be given to hirers of PWC's to issue to their customers and would be handed out on beaches to users - it was produced in card form so it could live in the "glovebox" of ones PWC.

In the Navigation Rule that was produced, as I posted before the main thing affecting the PWC issue was to do with speed:

"Without reasonable excuse, no vessel may exceed 5 knots through the water:

Within 50 metres of another vessel or person in the water
Within 200 metres of the shore, any structure, or any vessel displaying a dive flag.
While anyone has any part of their body over the bow or sides of a power boat. "

So, for example a PWC (or any other vessel) cannot exceed 5 knots within 50m of another PWC (or any other vessel) nor within 200 m of the shore.
There are exemptions for races, events, vessels over 500T that cannot navigate at those speeds, etc. Harbour bylaws come second to the navigation rule. Someone mentioned skiers, etc - a skier is not allowed to allow themself to be towed under the above circumstances.

This came in earlier this year and how well it will be policed is yet to be seen. But whatever, if one is involved in a serious accident exceeding the speeds and seperations then culpability has been moved out of the realms of subjectiveness (otherwise, what is to fast, or too close?) and one can expect to spend time eating porridge, and for ordinary law flouting situations a clear mechanism and measure of compliance exists for prosecution and I am sure it will be applied.

It all gained a great deal of ownership, and the no registration, no licencing approach was generally regarded as without merit.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[alan43]

Re: Deal with the problem

Licencing PWC drivers didn't work here (Sydney Harbour). All PWC divers in NSW must have a photo-ID licence, issued after a written test of knowledge of all the rules & regulations. Despite some enthusiastic policing, it had so little effect on the hoons that PWC's are now totally banned from the Harbour. (So the responsible users have suffered as a result.)
Seems to me that we can do one of three things:
1 - Ban the activity altogether;
2 - Tolerate the actions of the minority in order to maintain the freedoms of the majority;
3 - Vigorously pursue & prosecute individual ratbags (including confiscation of craft) until the message sinks in. You don't really need a licence for this, but it would need a compulsory photoID card for the driver and compulsory prominent registration number marked on the craft.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Deal with the problem

Last sentence should have read "It all gained a great deal of ownership, and the registration, licencing approach was generally regarded as without merit." {sigh}

John


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[SlowlyButSurely]

Re: Deal with the problem

I don't believe training and licensing will make any difference whatsoever. The jetskis that I have seen being a nuisance have been driven with great skill by their riders. The problem is not ability of the riders but the fact that they have no consideration for others.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Deal with the problem

Not sure if you are agreeing with me or not - the message was not that they are training and licencing them, it was that they are giving them pamphlets and if they choose not to take any notice they will end up in gaol if they hit anyone and fined if they break the speed and seperation rules.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kingfisher]

1 benefit

TCM,

How would you like it if you had to request a visa every time you went to visit your boat in France ?

<hr width=100% size=1>Group of people on the pontoon: skipper is the one with the toolbox.
http://sirocco31.tripod.com

 

[kingfisher]

1 benefit

TCM,

How would you like it if you had to request a visa every time you went to visit your boat in France ?

I love those anit-globalist demonstrations. People from all over the world (!) coming together to voice their opinions.

So: free movement of goods báááád, free movement of people góóóód.

Oh, the euro.

EU governement non-democratic? Maybe, but some governements take their nation to war , clearly against the will of the majority of their people.

<hr width=100% size=1>Group of people on the pontoon: skipper is the one with the toolbox.
http://sirocco31.tripod.com

 

[ccscott49]

Re: 1 benefit

Bullshit, we didn't need a visa before the EU! I !totally agree with TCM on this, which is unusual! Do the europeans need the UK? We certainly don't need to be part of the european union as it satnds now or the way it's going. Basicallyt it's a very expensive club/beaurocracy gone totally bananas!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[DavidBolger]

Re: 1 benefit

Wow, I missed all the latest post as I went sailing last night (yes, with my licence in my boat papers and myself and all my crew wore lifejackets as soon as we left the dock). As an aside, I would be interested to know how many peple here say "I have enough experience here, I don't need a piece of paper" actually wear their life jackets all the time whilest sailing. It absolutely amazes me how many, so called "olde sea dogs" can be seen out sailing without any life jackets on. They are so small small and unobtrusive, it is ridiculous for people not to wear them. I suppose they are the same people who don't wear seat belts in their cars.

Anyway, the good thing about forums and discussions is that we hear all views which helps to formulate the best solution. Maybe licencing all vessels is not the answer but the focussed attention on PWC and powerboat users. I'm sorry to lump all power boat users into the one category but I have not met any of these "good" powerboat users yet. It seems the majority opinion is that the laws are there but the enforcement isn't. Therefore, we need to beef up on enforcement. This costs money. I for one, would be willing to contribute an annual fee to ensure that this enforcement takes place. I wouldn't think that the contribution would need to be much as the fines and confiscations collected would go some way to defray this cost. Now, before some nutter starts warbling on that this is just another tax on boating. Yes it is. It is a tax to rid us of this unsocialable behavior we are complaining about. Either pay the tax or put up with the current state of play. You can't have your cake and eat it.

I got on my bandwagon because a) I have nothing to do in work at the moment and b) someone asked the sensible question, what are we going to do about this problem. It seems to me that it is pointless for us all to spend hours bitching about this. Lets make a commitment to take some proposals to our local politicans/MEPS/councillors and get something done about this. As we're using a Yachting Monthly forum, I would encourage them to take the lead in the UK.

With regard to some of the comments regarding the EUphobia, I am disappointed to see some of the comments held. I have come accross these views before and from experience they are nirmmally help by people who have pretty closed minded people who listen to people not to hear their views but to thinks of a reply to contradict those views. These people usually see listenening to others people's view and being open to changing your mind as a weakness. Changing your views following discussion is a strength which enables society to move forward in the best possible manner but thankfully these closeminded people are never leaders.

Anyway, glad to see we got the discussion going.

<hr width=100% size=1>