This is in a kayak newsletter but still..
New Rules for PFD's
Currently we are required to wear Australian Standards approved PFD's when outside of 400m from the shore (inland waterways) or when paddling at sea. There is now discussion that this will be changed to just 100m from shore, meaning that most paddlers will need to get themselves a PFD.

Check this out for more info: www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/index.html

does it apply to narrabeen swamp?

i went yesterday evening and got spat right back out. Conditions felt horrible or i hadnt rigged properly. Glad to be wearing pdf and helmet, fortunately didnt end hooked in underneath but thought thats where i was heading and can see it might have made things worse, but actually stoppped me getting nailed as somehow went over the top landing on the board backwards (i think...too fast to recall really)

And just as i was starting to get cocky....

Mobydisc said...

Why doesn't the NSW government just get it all over with and charge everyone an annual $1000 waterway licence?

No bullsh!tting behind safety and crap like that. Just get it out in the open the government needs our money more than we do. Gotta pay for Ophra and the soccer world cup bid and all that crap coz rich people don't like reaching into their own pocket. Thats how they got rich.

While they are at it they can start charging for the rain, the sunshine and the air we breath.

Good hatin

sboardcrazy said...

JayBee said...

Moby - How does the State Govt possibly benefit financially from introducing stricter PFD laws?

Fines..

No fines if you obey the law!!!!!! Possibly too obvious for many I suppose.

I also think you will find that the discussion papers above are from last year where the 100m restriction was proposed, but as per the other PDF thread the laws for windsurfers remain the same as they were (400m).

JB

Here's an excerpt -
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This paper proposes a range of changes about when and where it will be a legal requirement for a lifejacket to be worn. The justification for the proposed changes is the concept of times of heightened risk, where experience tells us there is a greater risk of a boating accident, and if an accident does occur there is an identifiable high risk of drowning if you are not wearing a lifejacket.
In brief, if these proposals were to be adopted, the following new rules for wearing lifejackets would apply.
The minimum requirement would be for a type 3 lifejacket (which is an approved buoyancy vest that is comfortable and non-restrictive) to be worn:
• by children less than 10 years old in a vessel less than 4.8 metres, and when underway in the open area of a boat less than 8 metres
• when being towed, such as when waterskiing or wakeboarding
• when in a vessel less than 4.8 metres in heightened risk situations such as at night, when alone and on ocean waters
• when operating an off-the-beach sail craft in ocean waters
• on small recreational craft such as kayaks and sailboards, at all times in ocean waters and when more than 100 metres from shore in sheltered waters.The minimum requirement would be for a type 1 or type 2 lifejacket to be worn:
• when operating in a vessel less than 4.8 metres on alpine lakes.
Please read the whole paper for the detail, and for an explanation why we think these changes are necessary.
As well, a new approach called “Skipper Judgement and Direction” is proposed. This approach would give a skipper the right to require passengers to wear a lifejacket if for example the weather changed and a routine boating trip became heightened risk.
There are some other proposed minor changes so please read the document and let us know what you think...
The paper has been finished & submissions taken ..

Its all about the fines. How do you measure 100 or 400 meters out in the water? Not as though there are any buoys out there telling you how far to shore. High or low tide marks? What about jetties and piers? A crappy law that will be interpreted in the way to maximise revenue while not doing anything to improve boating safety.

Personally when I'm out windsurfing I don't count the meters I've sailed from the shore. Even with a GPS on I'm not keeping track as I'm concentrating on sailing.

It won't matter if you are a competent swimmer or not. It doesn't matter. The argument is you may get banged on the head and then you can't swim anyway.

Life is about risk and risk management. I can be an idiot and go rock fishing in a roaring gale and then wonder why when I turned my back to the wave I got washed into the sea and drown. However I choose not to do that. But if I want to do that then it should be my choice.

Why should the government tell me what to do? Oh hang on they won't tell me what to do. They will just extract revenue out of me and then tell me to be on my merry way. Of course they could try and educate but that costs money.

So what I'm hoping for is some buoys out in all NSW waterways to tell when we are 400, 100, 10 or 1 meter offshore. Of course I'll be waiting for a long time coz that will never happen as that costs money.



Of course when the Lib/Nats get in they will tell us

"Oh sh!t those Labor idiots spent all the cash on crap like that motor car race around the Olympic Park and Ophrah coming out here last year. So yeah we are bumping up that $100 fine for not wearing your lifejacket in your bathtub up to $500"

"We also have to increase your power charges by 100% coz those idiots you just chucked out didn't spend anything on the power grid for the last 15 years. Sorry."

Hi Chris,

I checked out the NSW Windsurfing association site. It seems like all the clubs are into racing & wave sailing competitions. I'm not into either. So what can NSW Windsurfing offer me or how can I contribute to it? Perhaps a more social/recreational association of windsurfers could be started.

I think there is a sort of social windsurfing club in SE Queensland called the Wind Wanderers. Perhaps that could be used as a model for a NSW equivalent.

I'll start a thread on the NSW forum to see if there is any interest in such a club.

Do you get the feeling that Kato doesn't like PFD's

Old Salty said...

Do you get the feeling that Kato doesn't like PFD's

Na, just stupid rules and litigation lawyers

The topic title had me really confused and I was worrying about Adobe not working in the water

Sure, the initial decision to propose new rules without talking to those involved was not brilliant (IMHO). But on the positive side, Maritime NSW actually listened to those involved when they opposed the proposals.

Maybe we don't have to get so narked with them for flying a kite, when they did in fact retract the proposals. It actually took some guts for them to retract their proposal and therefore admit that they were wrong.

It's also a lot easier to criticise someone for putting in extra safety rules when you're not one of those who have the responsibility to save lives. I've spent years in accident investigations and while I dislike the "nanny state" as much as anyone, sometimes when you get to deal with the consequences of accidents you feel that if you felt you could save lives by changing rules, you may do it. While I was against Maritime's proposal, I also know that a PFD may just have saved my father's life - sometimes safety rules ARE worth it.

I'm not a fan of Maritime (I was actually trying to get my brother to lodge an official complaint against them for another matter) but if we reckon Maritime should see the situation from our side, surely we should also see the situation from their side. It doesn't mean that they are right, but it does mean that they were not unreasonable - they actually behaved well in this matter.

Yachting NSW, supposedly the governing body of sailing in this state, is a bit annoying. They supported the proposals, without asking the windsurfing associations what they thought of them. For "our" body to support something that could have lead to its members trying to duck under mast-high waves while wearing PFDs is not good, IMHO.

A 'shore' is also defined as a strut or prop placed against or beneath a structure to restrain movement, thus a boom placed against a mast restrains movement of the sail and mast in relation to one another, therefore when windsurfing you can never be more than 100 m from the 'shore'

im getting sick & tried of the nanny state that is always telln me what i can & cant do realisticly if you look at the statsics most people who drown in the surf are tourists so why not make all tourist were life jackets in this country it makes more sense as they are the ones drowning .