dom Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 12 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said: Is it not possible to make the use of the Yacht station conditional on the wearing of life jackets for crew on deck. It is a charged for facility. That is in effect exactly what I'm suggesting. They manage to collect fees fine, despite staff only being there for limited hours. I suspect the rangers on site are probably keener than anyone to prevent any further incidents, so would probably happily explain the need to hirers. I suspect, in reality, if someone in uniform told them to do so, they'd generally be compliant. The only difference is the tone of voice and telling them they have to, rather than recommending they do so. In my experience, the majority are nervous of doing something wrong, so easily persuaded. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meantime Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 3 minutes ago, dom said: I suspect if you ran aground on Breydon, then refused to wear a jacket after being instructed to do so, a court would very likely levy a fine using S.68(1) of the byelaws. It's unreasonable to put rangers in a position where they have to choose between leaving people on the boat, or a high risk rescue without lifejackets. If the above isn't true, the byelaws probably need changing to address this. 99 times out of 100 it wouldn't be the rangers making the rescue. Spirit of Breydon is unsuitable for such tasks. The RNLI or inshore lifeboat do nor have the power to direct you to wear a lifejacket. Any reasonable person would if required to do so during a rescue but would be very unlikely to be prosecuted if they didn't. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 17 minutes ago, dom said: I suspect if you ran aground on Breydon, then refused to wear a jacket after being instructed to do so, a court would very likely levy a fine using S.68(1) of the byelaws. It's unreasonable to put rangers in a position where they have to choose between leaving people on the boat, or a high risk rescue without lifejackets. If the above isn't true, the byelaws probably need changing to address this. Ranger: Put a lifejacket on, or we won't rescue you. Private boat owner: Sorry, I don't have a life jacket on board. Ranger: Then we can't rescue you, and we'll prosecute you for refusing to obey an order that is physically impossible for you to comply with. Really? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meantime Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 13 minutes ago, dom said: That is in effect exactly what I'm suggesting. They manage to collect fees fine, despite staff only being there for limited hours. I suspect the rangers on site are probably keener than anyone to prevent any further incidents, so would probably happily explain the need to hirers. I suspect, in reality, if someone in uniform told them to do so, they'd generally be compliant. The only difference is the tone of voice and telling them they have to, rather than recommending they do so. In my experience, the majority are nervous of doing something wrong, so easily persuaded. I cannot remember if there is a public right of way through the yacht station but you see enough members of the public taking a stroll along there. How do you regulate for that? Put on a lifejacket before entering!!! Very unlikely, but what happens if you see a boat struggling to moor? The rangers cannot be everywhere. So you go to help and slip! Walking along an unguarded waters edge with trip hazards can be as dangerous. Most drownings in the river in Norwich do not involve a boat. Just being near the waters edge carries risks. We still don't know if the latest incident involved someone leaving or returning to their boat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dom Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 23 minutes ago, Paladin said: Ranger: Put a lifejacket on, or we won't rescue you. Private boat owner: Sorry, I don't have a life jacket on board. Ranger: Then we can't rescue you, and we'll prosecute you for refusing to obey an order that is physically impossible for you to comply with. Really? That's an entirely different context to the one being discussed. Stupidity and belligerence are two different things. Rangers have to deal with the first. They shouldn't have to deal with the latter. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dom Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 23 minutes ago, Meantime said: I cannot remember if there is a public right of way through the yacht station but you see enough members of the public taking a stroll along there. How do you regulate for that? There's a sign on the fence at the entry saying private, no right of way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grendel Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 further up the quay, there are steps over the bund wall, and the boundary fence has stopped before that point so acess is easy enough 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MargeandParge Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 We would find it very hard to shout at a kind brave person trying to help us that we had life jackets in the cupboard . I also struggle to see parents making their off spring wear jackets and not doing so themselves. One it should be lead by example and two if they do have to go in fully clothed to rescue their kids are they going to use the kids as floats. When anyone needs to act quickly they don't usually have time to prepare themselves so if you're wearing a jacket you are half way to being ready. Just the way we see it. Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 1 hour ago, dom said: That's an entirely different context to the one being discussed. Stupidity and belligerence are two different things. Rangers have to deal with the first. They shouldn't have to deal with the latter. I was simply responding to the context that you provided, should a boat run aground on Breydon Water. And I don't recall anyone here suggesting belligerence. While hire boats are equipped with sufficient lifejackets for the crew as part of the hire requirements, private boats have no such requirements. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dom Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 1 hour ago, Paladin said: I was simply responding to the context that you provided, should a boat run aground on Breydon Water. And I don't recall anyone here suggesting belligerence. The context was belligerence and someone refusing to follow an instruction to put on a jacket. Your response changed that to stupidity, ie. someone crossing Breydon without lifejackets on board, which is an entirely different thing. It's unavoidable that BA should have to deal with the latter. They shouldn't have to deal with the former and there should be legal frameworks in place to make sure they don't have to, or have legal recourse if forced to. 1 hour ago, Paladin said: While hire boats are equipped with sufficient lifejackets for the crew as part of the hire requirements, private boats have no such requirements. Pleasure boats over 45ft crossing Breydon are Class VII vessels operating in category C waters, so under MSN 1676, are required to have "a lifejacket appropriate for every person on board" which "must be fitted with a lifejacket light". Those below 45ft are not subject to any formal requirements, but common sense says you'd do so - not least because, if the worst happens and you're involved in a serious incident, a court might ask you to justify why you thought it was safe to adhere to a lower standard. That's assuming you can't accept the simpler premise not to do anything to put another person in any form of risk. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hylander Posted August 23 Share Posted August 23 13 hours ago, MargeandParge said: We would find it very hard to shout at a kind brave person trying to help us that we had life jackets in the cupboard . I also struggle to see parents making their off spring wear jackets and not doing so themselves. One it should be lead by example and two if they do have to go in fully clothed to rescue their kids are they going to use the kids as floats. When anyone needs to act quickly they don't usually have time to prepare themselves so if you're wearing a jacket you are half way to being ready. Just the way we see it. Kindest Regards Marge and Parge And an old saying but true - if you are prepared it never happens. I would rather the latter. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumPunch Posted August 23 Share Posted August 23 One thing missing from this discussion is the fact the authority struggle to get their current prosecution load through. Under manned / resourced at the legal side of NCC ( who do their prosecutions ) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted August 23 Share Posted August 23 3 hours ago, RumPunch said: One thing missing from this discussion is the fact the authority struggle to get their current prosecution load through. Under manned / resourced at the legal side of NCC ( who do their prosecutions ) Added to which they are not a Police force and have limited powers. Fred 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polly Posted August 23 Share Posted August 23 I always think the time to put on my life jacket isn’t when something is actually happening. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rightsaidfred Posted August 23 Share Posted August 23 While I would never ever discourage anyone from wearing a floatation device I know of two occasions when they almost caused the opposite problem where they held the individual concerned trapped underneath the hull of the boat potentialy causing them to drown, fortunately they both managed to free themselves but it shows we need to ne cautious of what we preach. Fred 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gracie Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 How very sad, another life lost and a family left heartbroken The thing is we all love the water, there are risks that come with that. The same as there are risks when boarding a plane, driving a car etc. You never know what's around the corner, just take care and have some common sense my dad always says I was raised wearing a life jacket as were my boys, they wouldn't be allowed outside the boat without wearing one much to their annoyance at times . But tough, rather a battle over wearing one than seeing my child in the water without one Grace x 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.