Boat registration

[Keith Hart]

Hi folks,

Badbaws says "I thnik anyone who drives a powerboat of more than 6/7 knots should do a planing craft compulsory training course. A 2.2m inflatable with a 2 hp outboard is less likely to damage property or persons than a 20ft hard chine or RIB

Yes, here is just another of the problems of COMPULSION. Which boats would come under the regulations? In many respects it would be far more dangerous to be out in the Moray Firth in a 2.2m sib with a 2.5hp engine than in a 9m rib. So what do we do here? Perhaps we should have a law against taking small boats out in the open sea?

Wavehumper: Would you be in favour of me popping into a bike shop and buying a Kwacker 1100 (green of course) and taking it out on the road with no trainig or ticket I can answer that easily - NO. However this takes the discussion on another tack (note how I keep introducing these nautical metaphors). I could ask, are you in favour of compulsory training for hill walkers? What tread pattern should they have on their shoes? How much Kendal Mint Cake should they carry for any specified journey? My point about compulsory motorcycle training was the extra expence and problems it caused. We already have compulsory motorcycle training, we DON'T have compulsory boat training - let's keep it that way.

The fact is that law has a ratchet effect. One little law gets added to another, then another, then another. Legislation creeps in and grows. Always MORE, never LESS. Just look at the difference in opinions on this forum, and WE are all enthusiastic ribers and sibers. Can you imagine what a cock-up the faceless men in whitehall would make of trying to regulate LEISURE boating.

Seen in 'New Scientist' last week: The government are looking at a system of national video facial identification. Cameras all over the UK would be scanning people's faces and software would be identifying individuals. Details would be passed to a central police computer. No this is not a joke. This all began with speed cameras. From the speed camaras came ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognotion). ANPR is in operation NOW. As you drive about major cities in the UK, your car number plate and owner details are recorded. You see. Just one little step at a time. And we damned well accept it. After all it's in our interests!!! So THEY say.

Do you feel it's ok to run a boat without it being insured - that is up to the individual. Bear in mind that if insurance was compulsory the premiums would rocket. This alone would scupper many would-be boaters (another nautical metaphor)

Do you see a difference in requirements between say a 4 metre boat and an 8 metre boat in terms of trainig, safety equipment and driver knowledge See first paragraph.

The small ripple of regulation all too easily becomes the tsunami of compulsion.

Keith (nautical metaphors) Hart

PS. I have not lost my sense of humor - honest

[thewavehumper]

This is good,

I've been waiting to get into a proper discussion for some time now, I am in work right now so I can't answer in detail.

However, presuming I've just bought my Kwacker, and I have forgone training do you think I should have a licence to drive this green thrill machine

Also should we change channels and keep this discussion going on your Mori poll thread

Cheers
Stuart

[Keith Hart]

Hi Wavehumper

Yes, good isn't it.

However, presuming I've just bought my Kwacker, and I have forgone training do you think I should have a licence to drive this green thrill machine

This is a distraction. My points about CBT (I was also involved in the 2 Part Motorcycle Test before it), were the complications, expense, and problems caused by COMPULSION. I am in favour of training, I am against extra regulation and COMPULSION.

You can either live in a society that allows people to be different, allows people the choice to live their lives as they please, allows people to do some dangerous things and as a result some people get killed or injured. Or you can live in a society where we are all monitored (closer than you think), completely regulated and there is zero tollerance. If you think the latter then life in Tehran under the Taleban was a good example of what that is like.

Under the former, Allan Priddy and persons of his ilk, are allowed to be adventurers. Under the latter they would not.

I want to live in the former society.

This week I have been at Crown Court in a murder case. An old lady was raped and murdered 7 years ago. The defendant is in court now because of DNA evidence I found at the scene all those years ago. I am very much in favour of the national criminal dna database. However I am not in favour of compulsory DNA testing for all UK citizens.

My arguments are on the principles of government interference in boating (and in anything for that matter).

I have over the past few years become more and more concerned about the lack of privacy we have as a society, and the amount of petty regulations (many stemming from the EU) that squash us down like a gigantic depression (first nautical mataphor this posting). So the thought of compulsory training, compulsory licencing, compulsory anything to upset my new found freedom in my little sib strikes a raw nerve.

I would never go out in my boat without a lifejacket. Some people do - their choice. I do not want lifejackets to be made compulsory. Who would enforce it anyway?

If the slipway you are about to use is slimy and very slippery you do not go down it because you know your 4x4 will slide all the way down into the water. (How's that for a nautical metaphor)

Compulsion is the top of an extremely slimy slope!

Keith (not an anarchist - honest) Hart

[GraemeCooper]

Couldn't resist getting involved in this one .....

I have read the various comments with interest, and would like to add my point of view

I have been involved in boating for around 35 years now - and have witnessed as many idiot things on water as I have witnessed on land - on motorways, and various other roads.

Just because the 'scooter driver' as Keith puts it wizzes past you like an idiot, and many more road users drive in the same way, doesnt mean we say let's forgt driver training because a mad few ignore it anyway.

I am FULLY in favour f having to have some form of basic traning and / or license before you can operate a boat.

As or who would police this - the various places for launching in this country often have a Harbourmaster or Beach Warden close by - they could quite easily do it in the majority of cases.

Jet Ski's have required to be registered before launch in many places, and this has worked well. Insurance companies coud play heir part - checking licenses before issuing certifcates - and most of us who invest copious amounts in a boat would not forego insurance. I know there will always be the odd ones - but there are those who dont even pay road tax - and that has to be on your car windscreen!

I say lets go for a COMPULSORY (for the protection of the majority of us) system - like the ICC - for once the French may have just got it right.

[narked]

I say don't bother putting regulations on safety stuff for INSIDE the boat, if the people in their don't want to wear lifejackets, let em drown. However, there is no reason to say NO to requiring licenses for being able to control a boat. Poor driving skill puts others at risk, and it's this that should be tackled. Chances are if someone nearly knocks you off the motorway and then speeds off, you'll take their registration and call the police. Currently with recreational boating you can't always do that. And it's all too easy for someone with no training to loose control of a powerboat.

As for the comments from Keith about such things bringing an end to epics like the SoC round the world attemp, I don't see how it would. Unless of course these regulations prevent boats from leaving UK waters, and that would be just downright stupid on the governments part.

So, to sum up, regulations should be brought in to make sure that people are capable of driving a powerboat before they can go out in one. As for enforcing these laws, yeah, not easy. But some ideas could be retailers could make sure that people have the required license before selling them a boat. Whoever collects the launching free at slips could check. Harbourmasters could check.

Matt (keeping the debate alive) Brown

[Charles]

Whether you like regulations/licensing or not, I think it is inevitable that it will be a reality before too long. Without deviating too much from the original thread, put some thoughts together on how you would forsee any impending regulatory procedures.

Some food for thought comes from Victoria, Australia:

"In Victoria alone over the last 12 months there have been more than 850 reported boating incidents, which resulted in 10 fatalities and 22 serious injuries. These accidents are usually the result of poor boat handling skills, inadequate knowledge of waterways and weather conditions, and a lack of understanding of vital safety practices and procedures"

Licensing of all craft (25000) will commence in January 2003.

[Mike Garside]

I live in deepest darkest Cornwall. Never see a policeman from week to week. Probabaly because there are not enough criminals around here to be bothering with.

But if something happened round these parts that needed law enforcement it seems unlikely that there would be any law enforcers to enforce the law. They just don't exist.

I also, from time to time, stay up in London - in E14. Police everywhere you look but still not enough to keep the law breakers under control. E14 has probabaly the worst crime figures in Britain.

So, pray tell me, all you who desire legislation and enforcement of new laws in British territorial waters, where are all the waterborne policemen in their squadboats going to be found to enforce your new laws?

We aint got enough to sort out those that flout the laws on land. We sure are not going to find a whole bunch of new ones to stop your boating yobs for dangerous driving off the Lizard on a wet Monday in January. Or, come to that, in the Solent on August Bank holiday Monday.

Get real. Only the police can enforce the law. Not harbour masters or retailers. It's not their job. Thank Gawd.

And there seems to be little money or recruits available for extra police patrols on the Roseland Peninsular in Cornwall - let alone on the beat in the Solent.

Unenforceable law is BAD law. If was possible to enforce it we would almost certainly have it. We don't. An in this respect we are fortunate.

You all behave responsibly on the water without law enforcement agencies breathing down your neck. Be grateful. Once the law enforcers are there it will only be wishful thinking to remember the good old days before you were regulated in yet another area of your lives of far less freedom than your parents enjoyed.

Me? I want freedom. Not more bloody rules.

[GraemeCooper]

Well, what a subject this is turning out to be.

As I said before, ths is not an easy law to enforce - but obviously neither is the Vehicle Tax law if you believe the Treasury figures.

Mike, you say:

You all behave responsibly on the water without law enforcement agencies breathing down your neck.

Unfortunately that is not always the case - but it is not just a case of upholding the law - it is the safety and security of other boat users.

If the rules were made that to get insurance you had to submit your ICC that would go a long way.

A few years ago they brought in new rules on the canals re safety of boats - and everyone said it was bound to fail, but it hasnt, and the inland waterways are a safer place.

This is similar - and with at least some form of basic training we can all enjoy our sport / recreation in a safer environment.

We are not looking for Big Brother here - just some common sense.

[Mike Garside]

Graeme. You say that if you had to produce your ICC to get insurance that would go a long way.

Why?

Presumably it would make some people get their ICC. Not me. In 25 years and 75,000 sea miles I have never, because it has not been mandatory, before bothered with insurance. Given that there is no law to enforce me taking out insurance, I prefer to underwrite my own risks.

So, you would have to make insurance mandatory to catch guys like me. Who is going to pull me over onto the hard shoulder and check Ive paid my dues? The Solent Panda car patrol?

[narked]

Well it seems a few of you are saying that if it's not possible to enforce laws, then they shouldnt be brought in. How many serious crimes go unsolved? Loads. They can't all be enforced, but that doesn't mean we should make em legal.

All I'm saying is that licenses should be checked whenever POSSIBLE. Hopefully this will be at the majority of popular boating areas, and so the majority of people there will be qualified, and so other water users should be safe. I'm not saying have police patrol boats driving around everywhere checking licenses.

Matt

[GraemeCooper]

Mike

I understood that cruising with BIBOA meant that you had to have Insurance - must have got that wrong!

Underwriting your own losses is fine - but have you considered that you could damage someone elses boat - accidents happen.

At the SOC weekend there were a lot of boats in a small area - if you had damaged another boat would you pay to have it repaired?

Personally I have also travelled many sea miles, in all forms of craft, and insurance is something I would never be without when in my own boat.

As for the ICC, the French seem to manage to check ours regularly, so some form of control would be possible.

2 examples:

Portmouth Harbour Slipway - has a man on duty representing QHM in the office from around 0730 to 1800 (ish) most days. He could easily check certificates.

North Wales - on all beaches / slipways you need to either see the Harbourmaster, or the local Marina owners. These ask for insurance - they could also ask for ICC or similar.

Even if checks were only a once in blue moon thing, it would make people think twice if the regulations were that you took a test to drive a boat.

It has been mentioned previously, you would not go and buy a powerful Motorcycle and drive it without a test / training - boats can be just as dangerous - and it is the messge we are sending out - buy a boat - no tests, no rules - how responsible is that!

[Richard B]

I wouldn't even like to take my little dinghy out on the water without insurance. I have a policy that provides up to £2m 3rd party indemnity cover. The worst that could happen is that the propellor hurts, or god forbid kills, a swimmer. So Mike, I assume that you keep £2million in the bank to to underwrite your own risks?

I think that enforcement and regulation are two different things like Matt says. Look at the French approach - ICC mandatory, (insurance mandatory?), but I've never seen anyone checking this. Look at Carteret Marina - no security fence, walk off the pontoon, onto the public car park, or into the yacht club facilities without a pass key or coded doors. It's a different attitude, Ok there's more rules, but a much more law abiding ethos.

I've enjoyed all the training I've done, I get more out of my pastime, and my insurance policy costs me peanuts in comparison to even the modest value of my little boat.

[wavelength]

Let go to the real world. I never see a harbourmaster or beach warden or whatever where I launch and long may that continue.
The unruly elemnt do not care about anyone but themselves so if you think they are going to bother insuring their boat they picked up in some wheeler dealer arrangement somewhere you are in a fluffy little world way away from the real one - so needing a cert to get cover won't worry them.
But more to the point unenforceable law is as I said on keith's poll thread bad law. It only observed by the people who would never be a problem -and ignored by the idiots. I have been involved in law enforcement for more years than anyone deserves to be - and if you think some beach warden is going to get an answer let alone a proper name and address from a crowd of yobs on a beach without the benefit of the power of arrest or the ability to body check details on the police computer you really are out of touch with the culture in which we live. - and risk assesments would have no officer put in that position on his own. If you do get a name etc someone had better train the beach warden in police and criminal evidence interview procedures and human rights act matters if you are going to stand a snowballs chance in hell at court - cos thats what we are talking about, if the person does not obey the rules society sees fit to impose the sanction is that he is prosecuted. Oh and you had better pay him a sight more than he's getting now to do it too. Been there-done that, it ain't nice and its not the job of a beach guard or the coastguard who is there to be the friendly life saver - not the enforcer.

[Keith Hart]

Hi, me again

How many serious crimes go unsolved? Loads.

Er, not quite right there.

The detection rate for major crime such as murder is actualy very high (about 97% for murder). It is the minor crime that goes unsolved. Why? Money. There is not the time or money or manpower to throw what it requires to solve the average burglary or theft. It is also said that the majority of petty crime never gets reported.

Major crime gets solved (well most of it) because as in the case of a murder there is a dedicated incident room with a team of detectives and socos working on it full time with a huge forensic budget.

I'm commiting an offence right now. I've got a vhf marine radio and I havent got a licence (my daughter Karen has though). Who the heck is going to stop me and check? I don't know of anyone with a boat up by my house in Scotland who has one (a licence for the radio that is).

The nearest harbourmaster is in Inverness. I can't see him poping out to to a bit of pandaboat patrol.

By the way as mentioned in a previous reply of mine, the B*****D who murdered the old lady got life in prisonment yesterday.

Keith (will this thread get as big as my soc one) Hart

[GraemeCooper]

Dave

If I may make so bold I think you are missing the main point.

Of course there will always be the unruly element who will ignore any law - as I have said previously just look at Car Tax - were you have to display a sticker for all to see and yet a huge number of people ignore this. If you have ever been involved in an accident with one o thee people you will know ho awkward that can be - as their insurance - if they have any - is also invalid.

The peoplewe shold be really looking after - by offerng them training to ensure they get the most out of their boats, are the average people who go ad buy their bayliner/Avon/Fletcher whatever, then hal an hour later are stuck in some bay tryng to tow a water skier or give the kids a good time at maximum revs.

By bringing in licensing you say to these people that this type of recreation is fun - but there are things you need to know first.

We all know RYA Level 1 and 2 courses dont necessarily make first rate boat handlers over night, but at least they cover the safety and basics - making people at least think about what they are doing.

As for who would check this - this could be done on an ad hoc basis - after all how many times does the average driver have their licesne checke by the Police - usually only when they have done something wrong - or the Annual Christmas Police Fund Raising events when mobile speed cameras seem to be everywhere!

Checking and enforcement are not the core issue here - safety and enjoyment for all are what counts.

[Mike Garside]

Interesting polarity developing here.

Seems to me that Keith, Dave and I, all with present or past involvement in law enforcment, are against the introduction of yet more laws to be enforced. I wonder why? I believe it may have something to do with realism versus idealism.

Three small points before I pipe down on this subject...

1 120,000 members of the public try to improve their boating skills by doing RYA courses each year. They do so without being made to by law.

2 All newcomers to a liesure pusuit are novices who are less safe than old hands. That is a fact of life. If their interest develops they will want to improve their skills and, sensibly many will do so. Most that don't but are otherwise more or less law-abiding citizens will get bored and move on to other interests.

3 As the pro-law making lobby agrees, the reckless and the yobs will snub their noses at the new laws. It will be no safer on the water after we are all covered in yet more red tape.

That's all from me on this subject. As they say, I'm outta here....

Oh, one final point. On the subject of insurance....

To make my point, I exagerated. But Keith is right about adventurers like Alan Priddy not setting off round the world if, like road users, they were made to have insurance.

On my first long voyage in 1980, even if I could have afforded it, no one would underwrite me. I had no qualifications or experience to speak of. On my last in 1997 I was quoted £33,000 a year. I chose to take the risk and go without it. It was either that or forget the whole thing.

Cheers....

[Richard B]

Originally posted by Mike Garside
I was quoted £33,000 a year

Mike, what did the quoted £33,000 premium cover you for? My point is that 3rd party liability insurance for EEC use (usual limitations of geographical areas, etc...) is cheap. I guess that you were looking for rather wider cover, and did that cover you for salvage/rescue?

Anyway, no-one's mentioned (yet!) about UK rescue services being free...

[Richard B]

Originally posted by Mike Garside
As the pro-law making lobby agrees, the reckless and the yobs will snub their noses at the new laws

I'm not convinced - the lack of law, no I mean the lack of compulsory registration, training and insurance for open waters just gives out the message that these issues don't matter and that there isn't any law. Government uses law to encourage a certain type of behaviour - as in the case of compulsory wearing of seat belts in cars. There ARE laws covering the sea, and even more covering sheltered waters (like Salcombe harbour where insurance and registration is compulsory for all resident and all visiting craft), it's just that you don't HAVE to have studied or understood them before using a public access point like a slipway.

So, why should a boat, which may cause damage to other property or people, be treated in a different manner from motor vehicles? If you use a boat on the non-tidal Thames, you're also faced with something a bit like an MOT...

[dbillyboy]

I'm with you Keith. For those who voted for compulsor registration I say this. Look at the motorcycle world. Heavy regulation on training and the costs have gone through the roof!! I know, I used to be an instructor for 14 years. Also a 125cc machine with a 17 year old rider will cost anything up to £2000 to insure. Don't believe me? Try asking for a quote. As you can see RIB insurance on the whole is "Cheap" at the moment. So I say "Think again" before deciding on comulsion.

[narked]

Keith, you're right about me being wrong, I of course exaggerated when I said "major crime". But as you have said, a lot of "minor" crime (which is anything buy minor to the people it happens to) does go unsolved. So that would suggest that for a large part, they are unenforcable laws. But that doesn't mean stuff like theft should be made legal. As others have said, a lot of people don't have tax for their cars, and get away with it. Doesn't mean road tax should be made optional. Personally, I believe that TRAINING is all that should be REQUIRED. Some form of licence that has to be shown when purchasing a boat, or launching from a manned slip. I say leave stuff like insurance as optional, although it would be a damn good idea to have it, but don't force it on people. And as I've said before, don't force personal safety equipment on to people, if they don't want to wear a lifejacket, it's their choice, and they won't be hating anybody but themselves when they drown.

And as most have said, there will still be a MINORITY of trouble causers who will manage to get past any measures put in place, but that's the case with pretty much everything.

Back to the SoC issue, the only thing in this discussion I could see preventing that would be the introduction of mandatory insurance. It would be an extra cost, and as we've seen, it was a challenge for them on the funds they had anyway. But if it was brought in, then basic insurance for whilst their in British waters won't be a huge cost, and does provide that bit of backup for if something goes terribly wrong as they set off or return.

Just my opinions on the matter, if you wish totally ignore em, I am only 17 so what do I bloody know?

Matt