Search and rescue

[bigmart]

I think you have just made my point about methods of raising funding.

Like I said, in a civilised society, the provision of rescue cover should be the responsibility of the whole society.

To take your argument to it's natural conclusion is the stifle the individual and foster the cotton wool society. Is George Orwell your hero.

Martin

 

[HMCG]

quote "Like I said, in a civilised society, the provision of rescue cover should be the responsibility of the whole society."

It should also be societies responsibility to behave in a safe manner. Unfortunately that doesn't happen yet.

I do not support regulation for the sake of regulation but if you knew the number of times I have heard yacht/angling boat owners say "I will now buy a lifejacket" or more to the point the number that found out that little gem a little too late. Remember, as coastguards we see a much bigger picture than you do. The it will never happen to me attitude unfornatley is all to prevelant in the maritime world.

My favourite quote of all that we hear all the time. - " I never wear a lifejacket.........but I make sure that my wife and children always do"

Safer lives, safer ships, cleaner seas.

 

[nicho]

......but at least on the road we have to take a driving test to ensure the basics to be safe enough to be let out on the roads. If anyone wants to go on to drive a bus or HGV, they are tested again. I'm not one for regulation for the sake of it, but I have never been able to understand why anyone can win the lottery, spend £500,000 on a 30 ton, 60' motorcruiser and then is allowed to be let loose with no training/test whatsoever, to do 25 knots in the Solent on a crowded Bank Holiday weekend. It does happen. I know of someone who bought a 40' Princess motor cruiser as his first boat (ever) and first time out went to Torquay - not understanding anything about tides/shoal ground etc (I know for example he cut very tight inside Calshot Light Vessel - by sheer luck it was near high water). He did not understand colregs or really know how to operate GPS/radar/chartplotter so didn't bother. On the way back he got caught at the wrong time "about half mile off Portland Bill" in huge seas, that ended up with his young family being injured. He was lucky to come out the other side. He was a menace to himself and to others. They eventually frightened themselves so much, the boat was sold, but right up to that point he still refused to go for training - preferred to be "self taught".

I cannot think anyone on this forum, would agree with someone, not having passed any sort of test, drive a high powered car at speed on the M1.

Sorry Guys, I just don't get why there is resistance to some kind of regulation eg having to pass Day Skipper theory and practical. Please explain it to me!

 

[bob_tyler]

"badly phrased on my part"

Not like you

Bob

 

[bigmart]

We may not have licensing for boating yet but the various Government agenciies do have the option of litigation against those who behave incompetently.

The ludicrous situation is that, as someone who has voluntarily obtained a Yachtmaster Offshore with Commercial Endorsment, I have more to lose than an unqualified sailor.

I sail on Sail Training Vessels where, if I were caught having had a drink, I would not only be fined by the authorities, I would lose my qualifications. What would happen to an unqualifies sailor?

My attitude, when going to sea, is that my safety is my responsibility. I find it laughable when you hear callouts in the Solent from sailing vessels that have lost their engines. What do they think sails are for? This kind of molly coddling attitude, of society, fosters this (Ive had enough now. Take me home.) ethos.

Are none of us allowed to stand on our own two feet?

Having said all this there appears to be no sense to the regulation demanded other than to obtain funding for official bodies.

I think I have said this in earlier postings. I feel that Central Government should properly fund the rescue agencies form central funds. This is the only way to ensure that there is no predudice in the supply of quality support.

Carry on with this over regulation & there will be no source of funds because there will be no boaters.

Martin

 

[HMCG]

I will close this with this small note.

If there were no boaters we wouldn't need to spend so much trying rescue you so we wouldn't need the funding.

I will not make any more comments in this thread.

Safer lives, safer ships, cleaner seas.

 

[Joe_Cole]

I understand what you are saying about the guy with the brand new boat and no experience. The trouble is that regulation doesn't solve the problem with the idiots. These are exactly the same kind of people who drink and drive, wear no seat belts etc etc.

Regulations are no good if people ignore them.

Joe

 

[bigmart]

You wouldn't need the funding because you wouldn't have a job.

Please don't take my last comment personally but I can't help think that, somewhere, there is a short sighted beaurocrat whose only intention is to raise funding by back door taxation.

There is no cosideration as to how these policies stifle the individual the effects on the very fabric of our society are imeasurable.

Martin

 

[nicho]

Joe, there will always be a problem with the odd rogue, as it is on our roads - there are still drink drivers and those who have no insurance cover, but they are in the minority thankfully. The chap I was talking about would have had some training if it was forced upon him by law - he just didn't see the need until it was too late.

Believe me, I don't want to be regulated off the seas, but neither do I want my boat/crew endangered by untrained "skippers" who charge around like loose cannons. The cost of a 5 day Day Skippers course is around 1% of the average family sailing boat - surely it's not a finance consideration? Of course, the vast majority will take it upon themselves to get some basic training, but I simply cannot see why it cannot be mandated.

 

[Ohdrat]

Re: Driving Test

mmm and how many times were you told that passing your driving test was a completely different kettle of fish to driving..

Looking at the standard of driving in this country I would hesitate to say that passing your driving test means you are fit to be incharge of a motor vehicle on the road..

and similarly I don't think a compulsory Sea Driving test would mean an improvement on the Leisure sailors / motor boater etc skills and ability to be incharge of a leisure vessle ..

As I have stated previously unless there is draconian policing of motorist / leisure boaters or even commercial shipping driving tests and regulation are utterly toothless and mean very little in terms of accident prevention.

 

[nicho]

Re: Driving Test

Agreed. They teach you to pass your test rather than to drive, but it's a head start over anyone who tries to drive without tuition - at least they have to study the highway code! In Northants, there is some pretty draconian methods applied to stop motorists from speeding (5 mobile speed camera vans that chase around the County hiding round bends etc to catch the unwary - I've been caught twice and have learned a lesson). Believe it or not, it actually works - it's rare to see anyone exceeding urban speed limits in these parts now. I certainly don't.

 

[kgi]

I rather think that if there were no recreational boaters that needed rescuing, half of you guys would probably be out of a job....

 

[LadyInBed]

I think the answer must be NO

Voluntary rescue services do a job well above and beyond the call. If it was put on a professional footing covered by insurance, there would be all sorts of exclusions in very small print.

Went for a walk along the beach, "Oh look, the tide has cut us off". "Oh well, that’s it, we haven't paid our rescue insurance"! /forums/images/icons/frown.gif
On the other hand, we had paid the insurance, but one of us fails to get rescued. Can NOK sue?

 

[wishbone]

Re: Cough up!

As a diver and a sailor I take great care in being responsible for my actions above and below the water line, I minimise risk and use experienced judgement, But while human beings roam the earth there will always be the plonkers that put other peoples lives at risk! I’ts comforting to know that land and sea rescuers are there to help, Regardless of who pays. The sailor or caver who takes a party out and put their lives at risk should have the collection tin rattled under His or Her nose! to help with the coffers. The rescuers are not only helping the plonker but are saving the innocent in His or Her charge and a fantastic job they are doing. If I cock up at 30 metres is goodbye Vienna. In business if I make a mistake I have to pay one way or another. “BUT” I don’t think paying should be compulsory just make them feel obliged to cough up and rattle that big tin!

Wishbone

 

[Ohdrat]

I would suggest that IMO / HM Coast Guard go after the big boys first... It wasn't so long ago that a Coast Guard Winchman was killed / lost at sea winching crew off a striken commercial ship that put out off harbour in deteriorating conditions around the Pentland Firth of all the damn stupid things to do.. and now the oil spill off Galicia which admittedly isn't a rescue situation now but is related to the regulation and policing off commercial shipping...

It is my firm belief that the moves to tax leisure users for rescue services is on the basis that it is easier to police us than big international shipping...

 

[Joe_Cole]

Nicho,

In many ways I agree with you about training courses, I think that it's crazy to go to sea without them.
On the same basis though we could legislate for just about anything, ban smoking, ban alcohol, make cars have regulators set at 70mph, traing for pedestrians to stop them walking out in front of cars, ban butter because of cholestorel etc.

Having said that I really don't feel that strongly about it, it's just that I rather like the present more or less unregulated regime that we have at the moment.

Joe

 

[kgi]

Martin you know as well as i do that certification isn't everything, Nicho is for it but we all know who the schools are who are more relaxed in there pass rates, and as for the coasties threatening us with withdrawing the Portland SAR, well it will probably happen anyway, once the naval air station at portland shut that was just the start of the rot, helo's are incredibly expensive to run, and it won't be long (5to10 years) before its withdrawn anyway, the cost can normally be absorbed in a military budget, but as that is being tightened, the bean counters look at options to save more money.............for my money the coastgaurd started to lose it when they shut the coast stations.......now they have gone from a "passive" reaction role to an active "policing" role..i thought your comment on George Orwell was, inthe circumstances quite apt....they are turning into big brother

 

[nicho]

Joe - I think we sort of, almost agree! I do take your point about overregulation and inability to police though.....

 

[HMCG]

I know I said that was all I was going to say but I have to reply to your comment.

HM Coastguard is still the passive organisation it always was. We are a small part of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and have no responsibility for prosecution or for creating or enforcing regulation. Yes we will pas on information following an incident to the MAIB and the MCA enforcement branch but that is something we have always done.

HM Coastguards primary responsibility is SEARCH AND RESCUE. We have some responsibility for pollution response due to the 24hr nature of the operations rooms.

Search and Rescue helicopter cover is under review at the moment. This involves ourselves, the MOD and other members of the UKSAR organisation. We are looking at better placement of aircraft to allow better overall response times as well as the possibility of one agency being in charge of all SAR aircraft in the UK. It is possible that in future the aircraft will all be civilian contracts. This may sound like a cost cutting exercise but beleive me the Bristows aircraft that we use at the moment are available at all times and replacements are made available if one fails. This has not been the case with MOD aircraft for some time. It is not unknown to have no MOD aircraft available in the whole of Scotland and Northern England for periods of up to a day.

No matter where a resource is based. If we find a better placement for it and would like to move it the local public will have an uproar about it. Yes it is nice to have a helicopter on your doorstep butif it is not able to fullfil its role for its whole area of responsibility then others are loosing out.

At the end of the day you pay taxes to allow us to operate. yes we could have a helicopter every 30 miles and a coastguard team in every harbour town but you would end up paying for it as would the rest of the land locked nation who have never been to sea in their lives. All of the other emergency services are used by people throughout the UK. This cannot be said for HM Coastguard. In the US in order to ensure value for money the coastguard has become heavily diluted with funds unavailable to do any job well. They are responsible for SAR, Customs, Drug Enforcement, Policing, safety, inspection, certification and many others. Do you want the UK coastguard to end up that way or would you rather a professional and highly trained coastguard service. HM Coastguard is seen by other coastguard services around the world as the world leaders in SAR. I personally would like to keep it that way.

Please don't get SAR and Survey and Inspection confused. I am not a surveyor and have no legal power to arrest vessels. I am a Search and Rescue Officer and my job is to save lives.

Safer lives, safer ships, cleaner seas.

 

[Cornishman]

Don't think anybody who is 'certified' would be allowed anywhere near the bridge of a ship!