kimhollamby
Administrator
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 3847
Loc: London (at work)
|
|
Thanks to the many of you who have contributed here. Some 187 posts later, many of them actual incident reports, the problem is clearly not going away.
However, concern is one thing but getting that to translate across to any means of action is another. That is especially so when incidents caused by collision with flotsam and jetsam or fouling by rubbish and fishing gear are so rarely getting thrown up in MCA and RNLI figures. It tends to suggest that most occurences are getting dealt with by owners themselves and via the assistance of non-lifeboat tows, commercial yards and private divers. Statistically, the problem doesn't exist, so it is hardly likely to get looked at by government. That is the problem the RYA faces when being asked to challenge the status quo.
For that reason the RYA is now encouraging boatowners to start filing incident reports on the confidential system run by the charitable UK Confidential Human Factors Incident Reporting Programme, or CHIRP for short. This organisation was founded in the early 1980s to serve the aviation industry, but launched a maritime programme in July of last year with the assistance of government funding. Although weighted heavily towards commercial interests, the advisory board includes Steve Johnson, the RYA's Cruising Manager and Nick Parker of the British Marine Federation.
You can read more about CHIRP by visiting its website, which is a little quirky but contains some useful background if you want to understand who you might be offering your reports to. We are now also hosting the relevant reporting form on ybw.com. This form looks a little daunting at first but only if you pay too much attention to the questions asking whether you are a captain or chief engineer and whether you serve on a tanker or cargo ship. You can access it at http://www.ybw.com/pdf/CHIRP_report.pdf
At the moment CHIRP has received barely more than a handful of reports covering fouling and collision incidents, so any new feedback will raise this matter further up the agenda, or perhaps at least put it on the table.
|
birdseye
regular
Reged: 09/03/2003
Posts: 3557
|
|
The thing that has always puzzled me about pot buoys is why, when so many of them are put in well trafficked places and either marked badly or with sinking marks, no one has ever sued the fisherman for the damage caused. Surely they must have some"duty of care" to mark them effecively if they are placed where boats might go.
|
alpha
regular
Reged: 18/11/2001
Posts: 192
Loc: UK
|
|
Hi all,
CHIRP has been part of the aviation safety scene for years, and has achieved some notable successes. I am sure that under Peter Tait's direction, the marine CHIRP will grow to be a worthwhile mechanism.
On the subject of unmarked pots, I honestly don't know why we don't all simply cut the lines of those we find. This would be the simplest and most effective way of solving this problem. Two wrongs don't make a right, but as Kim so ably explains, the problem is not going to go away without some action, somewhere.
So, I echo Kim's recommendation. Give CHIRP your support, and use it - it is only one tool in the safety kit, but it's a sharp one.
|
DavidP
regular
Reged: 01/11/2001
Posts: 226
Loc: Southampton ,England
|
|
Hi
" I honestly don't know why we don't all simply cut the lines of those we find. This would be the simplest and most effective way of solving this problem."
I said to myself if ever i picked up a pot bouy this is what i would do in the future, but another fourm member made a very good case for not doing this in as much as they will be probably be marked with a GPS position ,so not to much trouble to retreive and secondly if the pot is not found and left on the botton, crab goes in eats the bait then starves to death then the next crab goes in eats first crab then starves to death and so on and so on.
Dave.
|
WayneS
regular
Reged: 21/01/2002
Posts: 850
Loc: Berkshire
|
|
I would rather 100 000 crabs starve to death than a yottie die as a reult of fouling the pot marker.
|
mike_bryon
regular
Reged: 07/01/2004
Posts: 194
Loc: venice
|
|
I respectfully suggest caution if you intend to cut the lines of fisherman's gear which are not fouling your vessel. Some fisherman are likely to react inappropriately if they find you doing this. Things could get violent. It would be totally wrong but a real possibility.
|
maxi
regular
Reged: 08/11/2002
Posts: 580
Loc: Hampshire
|
|
Not an incident so, presumably, of no interest to CHIRP, until someone is injured or dies.
The entire inshore area between Lepe and Calshot is now totally peppered with dozens & dozens of wholly inadequately marked pot bobbers - directly on the lay-line for small boats heading to, or returning from, the West.
With ABP's insistence that the main channel is a no-go area for small craft, these craft are largely forced to the North of the channel and therefore into direct conflict with this maze of bobbers with their inherent dangers.
Even the most inept barrister would surely have no problem whatsoever, in proving the relevant authority, whom I assume to be ABP, to be negligent in their duty to ensure safe navigation.
Is this just another instance of the bloody mindedness of fishermen carrying the day, because no one has the guts to take them on - legally or on their own terms?
|
Sunnyseeker
regular
Reged: 15/04/2004
Posts: 292
Loc: Devon
|
|
Rope round your prop is like getting a puncture it might never happen but you still carry a spare? if you have an engine you need a rope cutter...weve picked up stuff...bits of nets line etc just floating around off spain more than once, its not always going to be attached to a pot...fishing line (if long enough) with hooks and floats can cause as much damage. There is a new cutter (in Y World this month quickutter? ) that has even cut ss wire so in most situations now you will not get trapped or have your drive system disabled. Its something Ive always planned for and have mask and knife always ready, just in case.
|
alpha
regular
Reged: 18/11/2001
Posts: 192
Loc: UK
|
|
Andrew Weir, in his excellent book 'The Tombstone Imperative', explains why it is that people generally DO have to die before change is actioned.
It would be extremely straightforward to enact legislation requiring all pot markers to be marked to a standard (flag, radar reflector, minimum pole height, automatic flashing light active at night, with identification marks indicating who the owner is).
My experience outside boating suggests that this legislation might rapidly follow a fatality, but will not come about without one. Really, we (reasonable people) should be able to do better.
So, how do we tackle this serious problem?
Is education (of the offenders) a possible answer? The CAA's general aviation safety department have made a huge success of 'roadshows' around the country preaching aviation safety messages - do we need something for boaters and fishermen? I think this could be a real winner - with RNLI involvement, it could be a strong tactic.
Should we (the motor boat community) get together to design and manufacture a 'standard' pot marker in sufficient numbers to equate to very low cost, and then actively market them - or offer them for free - to the fishermen?
Should we be more aggressive in tackling 'offenders' - when your sterngear is fouled, how could you track down the offending fisherman and prosecute, given present rules?
The present debate over light dues is a parallel. Most bouyage is handy, but not essential, for most of us. It doesn't provide genuine improvement in our ability to avoid hazard or reduce risk. Proper pot marking would, so do we need to join the two issues together somehow?
Go on, let's have some lateral thinking...
|
Planty
regular
Reged: 02/05/2003
Posts: 743
Loc: West Midlands
|
|
Surely, most of our concern is to do with cost and inconvenience. Personally I have no problem with a visible well marked pot that can be avoided quite easily, my concern and I presume that of others, is the dark, ex oil bottle, barely apparent above the surface. Almost invariably situated in a wholly inappropriate spot.
Thus perhaps the only course open to us as a "group" is to loudly publicise our intentions as a "group" to dispense with any inappropriately positioned, unmarked, invisible pot markers. I am talking "en masse", we should declare without fear or favour that these things are a menace and will not be tolerated after a certain predetermined date. Simply, stop, lassoo incorrect pot marker and cut it off. if we joined forces publicly and stated that was our intention in the relevant periodicals, we would probably never have to cut one at all. They would either be removed or marked correctly post haste. Its only because we accept non compliance it occurs.
I don't want to see some one deceased to affect change as mentioned earlier, wait for legislation? Give me a break.
When enough "cost and inconvenience" has been caused or even just threatened to these people, I will not honour them with the title Fishermen, we will see change. If it were an action taken by many, there simply isn't enough "violence" to go around us all. Paul
|
CaptainCava
regular
Reged: 06/07/2002
Posts: 97
Loc: Chertsey, Surrey
|
|
I agree - just cut them off.
Don't wait for the 'threat' to get round by word of mouth....it wont.
Just cut them off.
By the way, does anyone know, is it illegal?
|
maxi
regular
Reged: 08/11/2002
Posts: 580
Loc: Hampshire
|
|
Kim, CHIRP 'appears' to be wholly directed to reactive reporting, their forms do not seem to allow for proactive prevention of problems that may arise in the future. The impression is that CHIRP is pretty much an exclusively big-ship thing.
The seemingly unregulated proliferation of fishing gear, particularly the poorly constructed gear that is begging for an incident, does urgently need to be addressed but if CHIRP is the direction to go, than it must be made accessible to small boat reports.
In the humble opinion of this ex Big Ship man, who is now a small boat sailor and who has already been deterred by the CHIRP forms.
|
LordNelson
regular
Reged: 06/09/2002
Posts: 734
Loc: West Sussex, England
|
|
The Dutch fishermen seem, in general, to mark their nets etc., very well and to an understandable code; could we not find out how they have managed to arrange this?
|
kimhollamby
Administrator
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 3847
Loc: London (at work)
|
|
...your reaction mirrors mine. When I first saw the form in an RYA committee I more or less said "do you expect someone to fill in one of these"
Sad to relate the form hasn't changed. But I was also made aware that its very big-ship-ness was obviously deterring all leisure boaters and therefore they weren't filling it in and therefore the prop fouling issue didn't exist! For that reason I thought it best to encourage people to use what appears to be the only way of getting on the map, even if flawed.
Fascinatingly I've since heard of some fairly spectacular incidents with lobster pots and fast ferries (which can struggle if ingesting one up a water jet or catching one across a stabiliser) so one would hope CHIRP is picking that up.
All still reactive of course, but it's obvious too that no-one is running around checking these things on the water. On a cross-Channel recently we got buzzed by a MAFF plane but quite obviously it was on the hunt for illegal fishing, not small craft dropping polyprop and 5-litre washing up bottles.
|
BobA
regular
Reged: 16/09/2003
Posts: 151
Loc: Hull
|
|
Hi Alpha
A couple of weeks ago I was pottering along off Clacton with somewhere in the region of 25 other vessels of varying size. headingwest on an incoming tide which does run a bit quick at times, I saw the yacht infront of me (about 50yards) suddenly vear to starboard towards the shore which was about a quarter of a mile, he could not go to port because on closer inspection there was a drift net set up in a semi circle about 10 yds to his port side with no flag marks or anything all you could see was the occasional float on the top line.
I was motoring at the time - so hard astern and tea all over the cabin sole.
I agree they should be well marked and not in a "normal channel" for vessels from the Colne
|
moodycruiser
regular
Reged: 14/05/2004
Posts: 654
Loc: Solent
|
|
There's a lovely little dark blue one just outside the outer line of moorings at Yarmouth - great fun at night if you don't know it's there !
Tony
|
Zeewulf
new user
Reged: 05/09/2004
Posts: 2
Loc: Solent
|
|
Hi Kimhollamby
Part of the problem with HM Coastguard figures is that on an incident such as fouled prop, we can log it as a "Vessel - Fouled prop" in the incident log, but the incident is not Search and Rescue (SAR) unless the vessel is in danger and the RNLI are not obliged to launch unless the vessel is in danger... all we in the Rescue Coordination Centres can do is ask them if they will launch to a tow job, some lifeboats will and others will definitely not. Beyond that we can request nearby vessels to assist and this is almost invariably the quickest and safest solution if the casualty is not in immediate danger.
Please remember HM Coastguard are SAR specialists and not policemen. We will do all we can to help anyone who is in trouble, but it is nigh on impossible for HM Coastguard alone to force legislation which is why we ar part of the MCA. If a mariner reports that their Prop is fouled by fishing gear it will be recorded and with our new Information Management System these incidents will be flagged up if they are reported at the time, then maybe statistics will speak for themselves and perhaps the MCA may be able to act. Unfortunately near misses arent recorded.
There is legislation for marking of pots in the UK, the pot must be marked with a floating buoy showing the Fishing Vessels name and FV number. the business is an intensely competitive one and fisherman will not want flags because of the real danger of divers and other fishermen lifting their pots... it is a very lucrative business - I have known fishermen not give their position even in a distress, for fear of giving it away to the competition! Long line fishermen are required to buoy and flag the ends of the longline... why the difference noone can tell me.
Speaking for myself, I have encountered these problems and been fouled myself... in time honoured British maritime spirit I went over the side and cut the prop free then helped myself to a lobster on the way.
|
Lifeboat
regular
Reged: 11/03/2005
Posts: 107
|
|
Now speaking here on MY account & NOT that of the RNLI. I find it very worring that so many of you also have such a disregard for another mans living & the law, why all this he is an "offender"? Why is he the offender when it's you who is there for pleasure not your livelyhood.
Now dont get me wrong i'm in support of anything that will make it safer at sea, so if its a good thing it gets my vote. I'm just pointing out the other side to the coin. And before you ask, no im not a fisherman.
All i would say is that they are not all bad, & we need to focus on sorting the job at hand, not just giving fishing & fisherman a good slagging! It's a tough one, but one that will get sorted out!
|
Lifeboat
regular
Reged: 11/03/2005
Posts: 107
|
|
Out of interest, what sort of input would be wanted from the RNLI? And explain more of how it could/would help. I know that sounds daft, but it would paint the whole picture.
|
BrendanS
regular
Reged: 11/06/2002
Posts: 37066
Loc: Me: Wilts. Boat: Lymington
|
|
no one has anything particular against potters, but you've jumped in without having followed a lot of the debate. There are many amateurs who put pots in main channels and in other dangerous places, often with little or inadequate marking, connected by floating line etc etc
--------------------
See http://www.frappr.com/ybw to add yourself to the forum map
and as everyone else is doing it
www.plaintalkconsulting.co.uk
|
BrendanS
regular
Reged: 11/06/2002
Posts: 37066
Loc: Me: Wilts. Boat: Lymington
|
|
what is your position in the RNLI?
--------------------
See http://www.frappr.com/ybw to add yourself to the forum map
and as everyone else is doing it
www.plaintalkconsulting.co.uk
|
Lifeboat
regular
Reged: 11/03/2005
Posts: 107
|
|
Yeah, i realise i have read it a bit wrong, but you must understand that where i am from is a fishing town & you hear of lot of stories like this against the fisherman & i=t causes a lot of problems.
But my question is what can the RNLI do to help? I'm not really sure i follow, is just that you would like to see the issue in the stats or do you want a campaign etc?
Regards
|
MikeEchoPapa
regular
Reged: 28/02/2004
Posts: 1063
Loc: Winterbourne Abbas, Dorset
|
|
With regard to legality should not the local Harbour Byelaws be checked to see if pots etc. can actually be laid in or around fairways ?
--------------------
Brian
|
PilotWolf
regular
Reged: 19/04/2005
Posts: 541
Loc: East Yorkshire
|
|
Local RNLI crew here have spent 2 or 3 recent training evenings plotting the unlit temporary racing bouys onto the charts so if there's a shout at night or in low vis hopefully they won't hit them at 18 knots. They re around the size of a 50 gallon drum but 1/2 submerged and some are predominantly black... should they be reported/removed?
I know which will do most damage.
PW
|
S28
regular
Reged: 19/09/2002
Posts: 4107
Loc: South Coast
|
|
I wasn't aware this zone was "no go", just that there was a "moving prohibited zone" around big ships in the precautionary area...
dv.
|
jollyjacktartheoceanpig
regular
Reged: 12/05/2005
Posts: 103
|
|
Sorry Kim, confidential reporting seems to me to a bit of a distraction. Ref my previous post. Why not use the might of your publication or the higher power of the RYA to mount a test case using Health & Safety at Work legislation e.g. "putting a person at risk by your actions" to pursue the cowboys who call themselves seafarers? Or are is an old moaning point just good for easy copy? I'm not aware that the H&S at Work act differs from land to sea.
jjtop
|
BrendanS
regular
Reged: 11/06/2002
Posts: 37066
Loc: Me: Wilts. Boat: Lymington
|
|
which bit of the legislation do you propose using?
I can't see ipc's lawyers willing get involved in expensive legal battles trying to set precedents. It's not a boating magazines role to set legal precedent. More of an RYA thing I would have thought, and even then they tend to work more by behind the scenes discussion than litigation
--------------------
See http://www.frappr.com/ybw to add yourself to the forum map
and as everyone else is doing it
www.plaintalkconsulting.co.uk
|
jollyjacktartheoceanpig
regular
Reged: 12/05/2005
Posts: 103
|
|
Sorry for not responding earlier but we've had problems with BB installation (BT) we are now hopefully replying at warp factor 8.
legislation:
The bit that says you must not, by your actions, put people at risk within your workplace.
IPC & RYA:
Both are money making operations with interests in selling copy or service. From my point of view I think they are a long way behind the scene.
JJTOP
|
BrendanS
regular
Reged: 11/06/2002
Posts: 37066
Loc: Me: Wilts. Boat: Lymington
|
|
Your reply makes no sense. Most people here are leisure boaters. How would this legislation apply to them. or where else do you propose to try to use this legislation.
--------------------
See http://www.frappr.com/ybw to add yourself to the forum map
and as everyone else is doing it
www.plaintalkconsulting.co.uk
|
jollyjacktartheoceanpig
regular
Reged: 12/05/2005
Posts: 103
|
|
Dear Vulcan I spend most of my life responding to B/S and recognise your reply. As a mere boaty person or a fully paid up member of the general public you are entitled to the protection of current H &S legislation: air, land, sea or deep space.
Beam me up if I'm incorrect.
jjtop
|
BrendanS
regular
Reged: 11/06/2002
Posts: 37066
Loc: Me: Wilts. Boat: Lymington
|
|
Why go to all the hassle of trying to make general Health and Safety regulations fit a maritime environment, and the cost of trying to make legal precedence, when there is already legislation in force which has already been shown to be applicable, such as the 1995 Merchant Shipping Act.
It's not bullshit, it's commensense. Why are you so keen for someone to foot the bill, to try and create legal precedence, when it's not necessary?
Have a look here for an example of what has already been achieved under the Merchant Shipping Act
http://www.thisisdorset.net/dorset/weymouth/news/WEYMOUTH_NEWS_NEWS0.html
You don't provide any explanation of how or why you want to use Health and Safety legistlation - people slipping on deck, collions with other vessels, hitting the pontoon when berthing, trapping a finger in the anchor chain?
and as I stated in an earlier post, most people here are leisure boaters, so how would health and safety at work be of any relevance. I've already asked you how you intend to use the legislation - you didn't respond, so you'll have to excuse me being a bit Vulcan and asking some pertinent questions that you don't appear to be answering
--------------------
See http://www.frappr.com/ybw to add yourself to the forum map
and as everyone else is doing it
www.plaintalkconsulting.co.uk
Post Extras:
| |
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
