Rafting etiquette

[GrantD]

Surely the classic English social oil that helps us all rub along easily is paramount here?

"Good morning, may we cross" (required)
"Yes of course" (required)
"Would you mind ..........."
"Oh I'm afraid thats a bit tricky"
"Please, allow me to help, failing that would you mind using the scrap of old carpet I always put down as part of my rafting up anticipation routine"
"Certainly, would you like us to carry 'Peebles'?"
",No, she'll be fine"
"Laters ... ?" (sing song voice required)
"Byeeee ?"
Peebles: "Woof/Miaow/Moo/Baaaa"

 

[RJJ]

Yes, though perhaps if you have special needs you should go on the outside of the raft. So leave, let them raft up and rejoin.

If you are a bit picky you have to help people to help you..

No problem with that in principle, but you might not be aboard.

 

[TernVI]

It's perhaps the most glaring example of everything about brand new yachts. To the guy spending 250k, that teak option at 40k looks rather nice and spiffy. To the person who buys the boat for 1/3 the price fifteen years later, with the teak showing its age, depending if Mr Rich looked after it nicely, you are now looking at 1/2 the purchase price to replace the decks.

I believe the teak would last twice as long if properly maintained, hence my concern for it to be kept clear of dirt of any kind. If you keep it free of dirt, and if you appreciate the "weathered silver/grey" look is what it's meant to be (not chasing the new honey look, which lasts a matter of days), then it has its plus points.

I wouldn't have chosen teak on the decks ideally, but the boat has many other advantages.

It sounds like a classic case of second or third owner realising that his teak deck is 'waffer thin' and ablative. The wood sold as teak is not s good as it used to be. it's not very durable. The fibres are wearing of every time you wash it, walk on it or leave it out in the rain. It changes your boat from a 'consumer durable' to a 'consumer semi durable'. It has a designed lifetime, like a hatchback car or washing machine.

People have some odd belief that teak doesn't rot.
In Portsmouth, there is a saying 'The Foudroyant was teak and that was pretty rotten'.
That grey look is loose fibres waiting to be washed away.
If it's not an inch thick to start with, start saving for replacing it.

Teak decks are a silly anachronism from the days when forests were plentiful, yachting was for the rich and boats weren't expected to last ever so long. Yachts only came out for a short season and got covered up in Camper's for more than half the year.

Whether you have a teak deck or not, it you don't want all the drunks, dog owners and other people you'd prefer to avoid stamping across your deck, avoid rafting. Anchor off, pick up a mooring buoy, talk nicely to the marinas, decide on destinations with all these things in mind. I don't have a teak deck. But I still tend to prefer places where rafting is not called for.

 

[Rocksteadee]

I did once have a chap leap aboard my boat bare foot to fend off his mate as he came rather uncontrolled into Cowes Yacht Haven. Thing was he didn't look too closely at my foredeck and I had not yet gotten around to cleaning up after my pooch's nighttime necessiities. I am sure it all washed out from between his toes !

[/QUOTE]

and you realise that your toenails needing cutting the night before

 

[FlyingGoose]

What ever happened to just being nice and respectful, good gracious, a simply request done politely means no harm .
Yes they are entitled to cross. But they also have a duty to be respectful, if I was asked nicely I would do it out of courtesy , no issues to me it is only taking your shoes off your not asking them for a kidney
Also to op maybe a mat and just ask then the rub dirt off.
Also I am in the 40 age range and on a previous thread about mooring lines it has been the younger sailor trying to help were as the retired grumpy old sods have some god complex
Bring it on oldones

 

[john_morris_uk]

Seawater suffices - and is preferable to fresh. Salt, as we all know, helps things stay damp.

I completely agree about mistakenly chasing "honey" - inevitably that means you scrub it, strip out the wood, it still goes grey and now it's uneven so eventually you sand it....then a few weeks later it needs a scrub...and repeat.

The dirt does matter, because pressing dirt into the deck has much the same effect as sandpapering.

"Dirt contributes to the wear of a teak deck" as it says here The truth about teak decks - Practical Boat Owner

Which is why, per my original post, the RYA indicates it is appropriate to consider removing shoes, and I agree.

But you can't keep the decks clear of dirt. (Even the references say you have to wash them regularly) A great maxim in life is ‘choose your battles’ and part of that choosing is measuring the gains and losses.

If you’re that convinced the dirt does harm then it only does harm by being ground in by passing feet. My personal opinion is I think you’re completely over egging the effect of ‘dirt’ but you’re entitled to your opinions...

If you choose to raft up (and there are always alternatives - even if one of them is depart the port) then you then you can choose to piss a lot of people off by making demands over ‘shoes must be removed to cross my sacred deck’ or you take the option of putting some mats down or simply washing your decks down several times a day.

 

[johnalison]

But you can't keep the decks clear of dirt. (Even the references say you have to wash them regularly) A great maxim in life is ‘choose your battles’ and part of that choosing is measuring the gains and losses.

If you’re that convinced the dirt does harm then it only does harm by being ground in by passing feet. My personal opinion is I think you’re completely over egging the effect of ‘dirt’ but you’re entitled to your opinions...

If you choose to raft up (and there are always alternatives - even if one of them is depart the port) then you then you can choose to piss a lot of people off by making demands over ‘shoes must be removed to cross my sacred deck’ or you take the option of putting some mats down or simply washing your decks down several times a day.

I don't share your optimism that there are always alternatives to rafting, that is, without moving twenty miles to another harbour. Across much of the Baltic, first-comers get boxes and the late arrivals raft up, and I have come across similar procedures along the Channel. There are places where two-boat rafting is the maximum permitted, but even then you can be unlucky. I don't concern myself much about dirt on my teak, but chunky patterned rubber soles can leave marks, especially when wet.

I have only once encountered one very prescriptive boat-owner, who very reluctantly let us raft in Falmouth and gave us a narrow path to the shore. When he realised that we were not like the people who had given him trouble recently we became good friends for a couple of weeks.

 

[john_morris_uk]

I don't share your optimism that there are always alternatives to rafting, that is, without moving twenty miles to another harbour. Across much of the Baltic, first-comers get boxes and the late arrivals raft up, and I have come across similar procedures along the Channel. There are places where two-boat rafting is the maximum permitted, but even then you can be unlucky. I don't concern myself much about dirt on my teak, but chunky patterned rubber soles can leave marks, especially when wet.

I have only once encountered one very prescriptive boat-owner, who very reluctantly let us raft in Falmouth and gave us a narrow path to the shore. When he realised that we were not like the people who had given him trouble recently we became good friends for a couple of weeks.

I’m not optimistic about the choices about rafting up or not and my comments about always having a choice were a bit tongue in cheek... However, if someone is going to be mega precious about something designed and built to be walked on, then the choice of twenty miles to the next port is always there...

 

[johnalison]

I’m not optimistic about the choices about rafting up or not and my comments about always having a choice were a bit tongue in cheek... However, if someone is going to be mega precious about something designed and built to be walked on, then the choice of twenty miles to the next port is always there...

I think that some of the schemes proposed have been unrealistic, but I do expect civilised behaviour from neighbours. I am merely kilo-precious I suppose.

 

[RJJ]

I’m not optimistic about the choices about rafting up or not and my comments about always having a choice we’re a bit tongue in cheek... However, if someone is going to be mega precious about something designed and built to be walked on, then the choice of twenty miles to the next port is always there...

For the fifteenth time,I didn't "demand" I requested, said "please", and was roundly ignored by perfectly able-bodied people in dirty footwear, who heaved on my guardrails and didn't put shorelines and had poorly positioned inadequate fenders.

There's a boring thread, within this thread, of those of you who disagree with me (which is fair enough, that's why I asked) using insulting language and misquoting me (which is not). For every time you remind me that "decks are to be walked on" I would respond "yes, and teak decks are to be walked on with clean footwear only".

Removing footwear, after all, takes less time than it took any single one of you to disagree with me. It's not a big ask, as some other respondents have agreed.

 

[john_morris_uk]

For the fifteenth time,I didn't "demand" I requested, said "please", and was roundly ignored by perfectly able-bodied people in dirty footwear, who heaved on my guardrails and didn't put shorelines and had poorly positioned inadequate fenders.

There's a boring thread, within this thread, of those of you who disagree with me (which is fair enough, that's why I asked) using insulting language and misquoting me (which is not). For every time you remind me that "decks are to be walked on" I would respond "yes, and teak decks are to be walked on with clean footwear only".

Removing footwear, after all, takes less time than it took any single one of you to disagree with me. It's not a big ask, as some other respondents have agreed.

No insults intended from me. I appreciate that you don’t agree but there’s a consistent theme of people responding to your description of a ‘polite request for people to remove their shoes to cross your decks’ that it’s not a reasonable request. No matter how polite.

I know you’re not demanding.

Removing footwear is a PITA sometimes.

However it takes all sorts and no doubt I’d comply if asked. But I’d probably avoid rafting up to you again if I had the choice.

 

[chriss999]

No problem with that in principle, but you might not be aboard.

...in which case you'll not know who has walked across the deck, I would think.

Like taking lines, rafting is trickier than I thought. But in the grand scheme of things, I'm sure all will be well between people of goodwill.

 

[RichardS]

No insults intended from me. I appreciate that you don’t agree but there’s a consistent theme of people responding to your description of a ‘polite request for people to remove their shoes to cross your decks’ that it’s not a reasonable request. No matter how polite.

I know you’re not demanding.

Removing footwear is a PITA sometimes.

However it takes all sorts and no doubt I’d comply if asked. But I’d probably avoid rafting up to you again if I had the choice.

Although, I must say that I still believe it to be reasonable request. I get asked to do it a dozen times on every visit to SIBS and I always comply happily.

Their boat, their rules.

Richard

 

[john_morris_uk]

Bra

Although, I must say that I still believe it to be reasonable request. I get asked to do it a dozen times on every visit to SIBS and I always comply happily.

Their boat, their rules.

Richard

Brand new boats at boat shows walked on by people who are not wearing deck shoes.

Totally different circumstances.

 

[RichardS]

Bra
Brand new boats at boat shows walked on by people who are not wearing deck shoes.

Totally different circumstances.

Neither the skipper nor any the the crew on my boat are wearing deck shoes as none of us have ever owned a pair.

The OP's deck is brand new, just like the boats at SIBS, and that's the only bit that matters.

Totally identical circumstances.

Richard

 

[superheat6k]

Neither the skipper nor any the the crew on my boat are wearing deck shoes as none of us have ever owned a pair.

The OP's deck is brand new, just like the boats at SIBS, and that's the only bit that matters.

Totally identical circumstances.

Richard

" ... our yacht, new-to-us last year ... " suggests to me the boat is at the very least secondhand, and thus is not new. Therefore your argument here is simply incorrect - so not totally identical circumstances as you suggest..

The OP also opines he was not rude or oppressive, but also muses in one response that the responders were split 50:50 as to whether or not they would oblige him, when the polI I put up separately showed a massive majority against removing shoes, and generally this is with very good reason.

It is my opinion the OP's view of his view is that regardless of what others think, he is not interested in the majority view on this subject. I expect he would make a very good politician.

 

[RichardS]

" ... our yacht, new-to-us last year ... " suggests to me the boat is at the very least secondhand, and thus is not new. Therefore your argument here is simply incorrect - so not totally identical circumstances as you suggest..

The OP also opines he was not rude or oppressive, but also muses in one response that the responders were split 50:50 as to whether or not they would oblige him, when the polI I put up separately showed a massive majority against removing shoes, and generally this is with very good reason.

It is my opinion the OP's view of his view is that regardless of what others think, he is not interested in the majority view on this subject. I expect he would make a very good politician.

OK, not totally identical, but very similar ...... and that's all I was hoping for.

As for the "majority view" ..... the day that I accept that "the majority" automatically knows better than me is the day that I shoot myself.

Richard

 

[john_morris_uk]

Neither the skipper nor any the the crew on my boat are wearing deck shoes as none of us have ever owned a pair.

The OP's deck is brand new, just like the boats at SIBS, and that's the only bit that matters.

Totally identical circumstances.

Richard

The OP’s boat was ‘new to them’. In other words it was second hand and not brand new.
You might not have any ‘deck shoes’ but substitute‘ footwear suitable for boating’. Thousands of people at the boat show turn up in everyday walking shoes that are very much not suitable for walking across brand new decks - whatever they’re made of.

Very much not the same.

I’ll bet that even you in your ‘we don’t have any deck shoes’ boat draw the line at people who try to wear trainers that leave marks everywhere. If you don’t you’re a rare exception.

 

[superheat6k]

OK, not totally identical, but very similar ...... and that's all I was hoping for.

As for the "majority view" ..... the day that I accept that "the majority" automatically knows better than me is the day that I shoot myself.

Richard

Perhaps ( I have no view to share on that point - do you have a gun ? ) - but the OP came on here for opinion, and it seems to me he doesn't like what the considerable majority of responders have opined. Perhaps he should therefore at least understand his expectations of boating are not what others might more generally expect or agree with, when in a public mooring situation. Thus he has several choices - perhaps always be the outside boat or do not use public moorings, but do not be surprised when perfectly reasonable and sensible shoe wearing boaters refuse to remove their shoes to exercise their unwritten right to cross an inside boat on a publicly shared mooring.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Perhaps ( I have no view to share on that point - do you have a gun ? ) - but the OP came on here for opinion, and it seems to me he doesn't like what the considerable majority of responders have opined. Perhaps he should therefore at least understand his expectations of boating are not what others might more generally expect or agree with, when in a public mooring situation. Thus he has several choices - perhaps always be the outside boat or do not use public moorings, but do not be surprised when perfectly reasonable and sensible shoe wearing boaters refuse to remove their shoes to exercise their unwritten right to cross an inside boat on a publicly shared mooring.

Sums it up rather well.