Plymouth and jet skis

[sarabande]

An email just received says that all Personal Water Craft must hold suitable insurance, and (preferably) have them data tagged.

A registration sticker must be shown on all PWCs.

And the QHM has reminded PWC users of speed limits, Colregs, and other Rules and Regulations, and that they must remain a safe distance from other craft and people in the water at all times.



That was a bit unexpected but is very welcome !

 

[ashtead]

Excellent news-at Portsmouth QHM has a volunteer force who would be usefully deployed in doing checks on this all around the Solent not just patrolling the harbour entrance.

 

[Gary Fox]

Good stuff. I wonder how they get in touch with unknown, unregistered 'PWC users'?

 

[sarabande]

MoDPlod have ways of making them talk ?

 

[Gary Fox]

Just out of curiosity I started an insurance application for a PWC, l had to self-declare that all users were over 16, and 'experienced'. Or over 14 and 'accompanied' by a 16-yr old!

I can see the attraction: the hypothetical vessel I selected was the new Yamaha VXR, a standard off-the-shelf model, which Yamaha claim is capable of speeds 'over 67 mph depending on conditions' which would be fun when you are 16

 

[Moonbeam]

PLNTM 036 PERSONAL WATERCRAFT REGISTRATION SCHEME - INFORMATION | Royal Navy
This is an interesting development.... but if I were a user of one of these PWCs in Plymouth, my head would be scoping around while out on the water asking myself the question "why are we the only ones out here who have to be registered?" Be interesting to see if it leads to less PWCs and/or a change in their behaviour.
And will it eventually lead to every water craft having to be registered (even tenders) just like Chichester Harbour. I imagine if it does, registration will no longer be free. I've always thought Plymouth is too large with Tamar and Lynher and estuaries etc to be easily managed (with respect to leisure users) by a Harbour Master who together with the marine police have much more important work to do around Devonport and commercial shipping etc. It's one of the reasons I like it.

 

[Giblets]

QHM Portsmouth have had a PWC Registration Scheme for over 10 years. TBH I'm surprised that QHM Plymouth have taken so long to implement one of their own. Perhaps there is not the same proliferation of PWCs down there than up here.

 

[Never Grumble]

I've always thought Plymouth is too large with Tamar and Lynher and estuaries etc to be easily managed (with respect to leisure users) by a Harbour Master who together with the marine police have much more important work to do around Devonport and commercial shipping etc. It's one of the reasons I like it.

QHM Portsmouths area of jurisdiction is the whole of the Eastern Solent, that's a pretty large area too, however I think they have limited their licensing as follows.
The Dockyard Port of Portsmouth Order 2005 no PWC use is permitted within the harbour or within 0.5 of a nautical mile from shore outside the harbour without a licence from QHM.
And keeping your boat in Portsmouth harbour you get a little QHM sticker as well with a unique number on it, thats free too.

 

[Giblets]

QHM Portsmouths area of jurisdiction is the whole of the Eastern Solent, that's a pretty large area too, however I think they have limited their licensing as follows.
The Dockyard Port of Portsmouth Order 2005 no PWC use is permitted within the harbour or within 0.5 of a nautical mile from shore outside the harbour without a licence from QHM.
And keeping your boat in Portsmouth harbour you get a little QHM sticker as well with a unique number on it, thats free too.

I have a feeling that last bit is voluntary though whereas the PWC licence is compulsory.

 

[ashtead]

Good stuff. I wonder how they get in touch with unknown, unregistered 'PWC users'?

Just put the red jet out there and they will all come following him in surely ? 9providing they don’t hit him of course)

 

[andygc]

And the QHM has reminded PWC users of .... Colregs

But, sadly, COLREGS do not apply to PWCs because they are not "ships".

Goodwin, R v [2005] EWCA Crim 3184 (07 December 2005)

The suggestion that the Waverunner was a sea-going ship is worthy of A.P.Herbert. By no stretch of the imagination could that craft be so described. While jet-skis are used on the sea in proximity to land, they do not go to sea on voyages nor, we suspect would they be seaworthy in heavy weather. This is a further reason for allowing this appeal.

 

[humbug716]

QHM Plymouth has been under pressure to introduce a scheme like Portsmouth for some time. Managing it will be difficult due to the large area involved, and what happens if a PWC operator doesn't have a permit. I don't think its a hanging offence.

 

[[70521]]

PLNTM 036 PERSONAL WATERCRAFT REGISTRATION SCHEME - INFORMATION | Royal Navy
This is an interesting development.... but if I were a user of one of these PWCs in Plymouth, my head would be scoping around while out on the water asking myself the question "why are we the only ones out here who have to be registered?" Be interesting to see if it leads to less PWCs and/or a change in their behaviour.
And will it eventually lead to every water craft having to be registered (even tenders) just like Chichester Harbour. I imagine if it does, registration will no longer be free. I've always thought Plymouth is too large with Tamar and Lynher and estuaries etc to be easily managed (with respect to leisure users) by a Harbour Master who together with the marine police have much more important work to do around Devonport and commercial shipping etc. It's one of the reasons I like it.

It might make an interesting change to moving logs that are a danger to shipping.

You will/will not be surprised how closely Longroom and Flag monitor the waters they are responsible for.

Personally, I am all for every watercraft being registered, do you not voluntarily register your craft with MOD Police.

 

[penfold]

But, sadly, COLREGS do not apply to PWCs because they are not "ships".

Goodwin, R v [2005] EWCA Crim 3184 (07 December 2005)

The suggestion that the Waverunner was a sea-going ship is worthy of A.P.Herbert. By no stretch of the imagination could that craft be so described. While jet-skis are used on the sea in proximity to land, they do not go to sea on voyages nor, we suspect would they be seaworthy in heavy weather. This is a further reason for allowing this appeal.

Rather obtuse argument and not one that bears much scrutiny; they are very seaworthy and quite difficult to sink, amateurs have crossed the channel with little preparation or support and loonies have crossed the atlantic, it rather torpedos his case.

 

[[70521]]

But, sadly, COLREGS do not apply to PWCs because they are not "ships".

Goodwin, R v [2005] EWCA Crim 3184 (07 December 2005)

Try having that conversation with the MODPlod they are polite but firm. Its a military port what they says goes.

 

[Oily Rag]

But, sadly, COLREGS do not apply to PWCs because they are not "ships".

Goodwin, R v [2005] EWCA Crim 3184 (07 December 2005)

My copy of the COLREGS mentions "vessels" rather more than it does "ships".

 

[andygc]

The case was considered in an appeal heard by the Lord Chief Justice and two other judges as a test case on the application of Section 58 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 to jet skis. Section 58 is the section that provides the basis for prosecutions for breaches of the Collision Regulations leading to damage, injury or death. They found that it did not apply. You can read the judgement for yourself - click Goodwin, R v [2005] EWCA Crim 3184 (07 December 2005)

That the COLREGS say "vessel" is beside the point - the only enforcement of COLREGS is after the event, so it is the wording of legislation that matters.

A statutory harbour authority may have bye laws which define a vessel differently from the meaning in the Merchant Shipping Act. Barrow Port, for example has

"vessel" includes any ship, boat, raft or craft of every class or description howsoever navigated or propelled and a hovercraft and a hydrofoil vessel.

Their bye laws go on to state

The Collision Regulations shall apply to vessels within the jurisdiction of the Harbour Authority but subject to the other provisions of these byelaws.

So if a jet ski rams a stationary vessel in the Port of Barrow there is maritime legislation that allows for the prosecution of the master of the jet ski, but if he does the same outside the harbour limit, there is not.