Nanny state hey.

There have always been rules and regulations up and down the coast. Warning signs at dangerous locations ect....

Closer you get to the big smoke the more crowded it is the more rules there are. Just the way it is. Surf, sail, kite, sup with a bit of common sense and your normally fine. A little bit of respect is all the guy is asking for I believe.

beastsurf said..
Nanny state hey.

There have always been rules and regulations up and down the coast. Warning signs at dangerous locations ect....

Closer you get to the big smoke the more crowded it is the more rules there are. Just the way it is. Surf, sail, kite, sup with a bit of common sense and your normally fine. A little bit of respect is all the guy is asking for I believe.

These aren't warning signs being discussed, it is exclusion zones. Saying where you may or may not do something, regardless of whether there are other people there or not. And the nannystate always adds rules and regulations and absolutely never reduces them.

Anycase, the Trigg exclusion zone is well positioned, not very intrusive and there are often surfers out there charging the windslop, so it makes sense. The Cottesloe one is completely dumb though, haven't seen anyone other than kiters / windsurfers / wingers / downwind foilers out there on a windy afternoon in ages. And it wouldn't even be possible to stay in the green strip for anyone except foiling with 45 degree upwind angles.

Worth mentioning that on the 10 km stretch of beach from swannies - trigg, there might be zero or one or two surfers on that entire stretch on a windy afternoon. And being dressed in black, chest deep in the water, with 25 knot wind spray and chop means that visibility from 50 m away is not great to say the least. Imagine if the nannystate made a few new rules regarding visibility for all water users (I'm thinking sand whip flag, maybe a blue and white dive flag, reflective helmet), but it's not a nannystate right, so wouldn't worry...

Maybe if we took a bit more responsibility for our actions we wouldn't need so many rules telling us what not to do

Cetus said..
Maybe if we took a bit more responsibility for our actions we wouldn't need so many rules telling us what not to do

+1

PrfctChaos said..

beastsurf said..
Nanny state hey.

There have always been rules and regulations up and down the coast. Warning signs at dangerous locations ect....

Closer you get to the big smoke the more crowded it is the more rules there are. Just the way it is. Surf, sail, kite, sup with a bit of common sense and your normally fine. A little bit of respect is all the guy is asking for I believe.

These aren't warning signs being discussed, it is exclusion zones. Saying where you may or may not do something, regardless of whether there are other people there or not. And the nannystate always adds rules and regulations and absolutely never reduces them.

Anycase, the Trigg exclusion zone is well positioned, not very intrusive and there are often surfers out there charging the windslop, so it makes sense. The Cottesloe one is completely dumb though, haven't seen anyone other than kiters / windsurfers / wingers / downwind foilers out there on a windy afternoon in ages. And it wouldn't even be possible to stay in the green strip for anyone except foiling with 45 degree upwind angles.

Worth mentioning that on the 10 km stretch of beach from swannies - trigg, there might be zero or one or two surfers on that entire stretch on a windy afternoon. And being dressed in black, chest deep in the water, with 25 knot wind spray and chop means that visibility from 50 m away is not great to say the least. Imagine if the nannystate made a few new rules regarding visibility for all water users (I'm thinking sand whip flag, maybe a blue and white dive flag, reflective helmet), but it's not a nannystate right, so wouldn't worry...

Gees talk about getting your knickers in a knot. There's a few rules around get use to it. Might be time to get of your Xbox and start in the real world mate.

I like red.

PrfctChaos said..

JESUSGUS said..

PrfctChaos said..

beastsurf said..
Nanny state hey.

There have always been rules and regulations up and down the coast. Warning signs at dangerous locations ect....

Closer you get to the big smoke the more crowded it is the more rules there are. Just the way it is. Surf, sail, kite, sup with a bit of common sense and your normally fine. A little bit of respect is all the guy is asking for I believe.

These aren't warning signs being discussed, it is exclusion zones. Saying where you may or may not do something, regardless of whether there are other people there or not. And the nannystate always adds rules and regulations and absolutely never reduces them.

Anycase, the Trigg exclusion zone is well positioned, not very intrusive and there are often surfers out there charging the windslop, so it makes sense. The Cottesloe one is completely dumb though, haven't seen anyone other than kiters / windsurfers / wingers / downwind foilers out there on a windy afternoon in ages. And it wouldn't even be possible to stay in the green strip for anyone except foiling with 45 degree upwind angles.

Worth mentioning that on the 10 km stretch of beach from swannies - trigg, there might be zero or one or two surfers on that entire stretch on a windy afternoon. And being dressed in black, chest deep in the water, with 25 knot wind spray and chop means that visibility from 50 m away is not great to say the least. Imagine if the nannystate made a few new rules regarding visibility for all water users (I'm thinking sand whip flag, maybe a blue and white dive flag, reflective helmet), but it's not a nannystate right, so wouldn't worry...

Gees talk about getting your knickers in a knot. There's a few rules around get use to it. Might be time to get of your Xbox and start in the real world mate.

Another windy afternoon, another zero surfers out in this massive red zone you somehow need... (because of the scary scary kiters). I need to get off my xbox... looking at the numbers it looks more like you need to get off the couch and use that big slice of red ocean you somehow got the council to dedicate to yourselves.

My point is slicing up the whole coast into specific areas, for activities that do not often occur at the same time, just reduces the available space at no additional advantage to either activity.

But you guys preaching respect, feel free to continue namecalling instead of coherent discussion. No irony there.

Merry Christmas mate Hope you asked Santa for a new dummy