Boarded by the Coast Guard..Terminated Voyage

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Robin, there really are no hydrostatic release type PFDs. The ones that claim to be, are just using spring-loaded flapper valves over a conventional "aspirin tablet" release. Water pressure opens the flapper valve, and then the conventional release works, or fails, in the conventional manner. I'd call that a "hydrostatic protected" release, at best.

I chose a Crewfit vest, which uses a paper-mache wrapped springloaded needle instead. They are not prone to coming apart in a damp environment like the aspirin models, so no flapper complication is needed. On the other hand, they never applied for USCG approval so whether it is worn or not, it doesn't count for USCG inventory. (It just outperforms most that do.)

I'd say the original boarding crew was within the letter of the law, in that at least one USCG official document http://www.uscg.mil/d1/prevention/Na...nforcement.PDF online says that failure to meet the extinguisher spec alone may be grounds for termination. Not that it IS grounds for termination, but it is discretionary grounds for it. (May be, not shall be.)
But that team should still be reported to their base CO, CC'ed to the District command, and the Commandant's Office. Technically the USCG extinguisher approval is based on the weight, not performance, of the extinguishing agent, which is an obsolete and arbitrary way of measuring things. And on the corrosion resistance of the extinguisher. So if the law requires one, or two, and your vessel has FOUR that appear to be in clean working order with a sufficient amount of extinguishing agent...that's no reason to terminate a voyage based on an obsolete technicality.
Batch a gung-ho yoyo nonsense, that is.

And ditto on the vests, it sounds like everyone was confused by the PFDs. If an approved auto-inflate PFD is not being worn, it doesn't count. But that's nothing that can be held against it, as long as there are sufficient other PFDs at hand on board, as there apparently were.

And heaven help the idiot who asks me to blow a whistle, because I think I tried them all while SCUBA diving, where whistles aren't mandatory but have always been recommended as a safety item. There's no whistle in this creation that can be heard even a hundred yards upwind of the blower. Might as well use Maggie Simpson's pacifier for all the difference an approval stamp on a whistle would make.

Gung-ho yoyos. Need to be reprimanded and told to grow up.

Ours are CRewsaver Crewfit ones with Hammer operation http://http://www.crewsaver.co.uk/In...ing/index.html

[goboatingnow]

Despite all this, I dont use Hammar activators , as i don't like the fact that rearming is difficult and is recommended to be done by a service agent.

I use a 270 N 60g bottle , jacket for offshore use with a very secure integral harness and Blakley activators ( salt pill ). It withstands allots thrown at it sea wise

I have a good led water activated light added to it as well
Dave

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I'm sorry , all that happened was Nz courts overruled a local law.

I can guarantee you the French apply their safety rules to foreign vessels and I can guarantee Ireland officials require visiting cruisers to obey the national lifejacket law.

Why cause I've direct experience of both

For example the French require you to carry registration documents , whereas British law does not. British boats have been fined in France for failure to produce documents


IMO treaties have nothing to do with it.

Dave

THe French require all foreign boats to carry registration docs because some French got round their own silly rules by registering their boats overseas or at least claiming they had and flying a non French flag.

The lifejacket laws in Ireland (as in the Republic of, not applicable in Northern Ireland which is British) are a separate matter from what has to be carried by all vessels, as the laws say you must wear a LJ in certain circumstances and yes that applies to all whatever nationality but it has nothing to do with any arbitrary safety shopping list of must haves as I thought we were discussing here. After my stroke I cannot multi-task multiple different discussions so like I said I'm outa here

[hellosailor]

Robin, that URL must be hosted by the US government, it doesn't load for me but I found their pages through their home page. My vest is old enough that the arming kit doesn't even have the fancy red/green nonsense, although the new spare does. It would be nice of Crewfit to mention whether that Hammar kit can be fitted to the older vests, or "is an option" meaning they have to be built for it.

There's something about "older, simpler, cheaper" that still appeals to me.

[Robin3]

There's something about "older, simpler, cheaper" that still appeals to me.

well it applies to me as well as appeals....

TRy this URl http://www.crewsaver.co.uk/Inflatabl...ing/index.html

[Rakuflames]

Just wanted to report that I bought a new airhorn at West Marine a couple of days ago. Having read much of this thread, I was prepared to cut out the part on the packaging that said the horn was CG approved -- but it is printed right on the canister.

None of the whistles on my PFD's have that "Good Housekeeping" seal of approval, though.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by pbiJim

Now that you mention it, I do seem to recall seeing a NJ driver's license with a boat endorsement on it. I wonder though, is NJ able to enforce that sort of thing on the open ocean? Or does that just apply to lakes & rivers within the state?

Thanks,
Jim

Boat on an NJ license is just for non-tidal waters...it's really just a tax as you still need to take their safety course if you live there.

They can only enforce to 3NM out and coastal/inland waters....just NJ waters which extend to 3NM offshore.

Feel safe cruising down the beach though...I don't think I have ever seen the NJ State Police cruising in the ocean...they do come out for incidents...but open water boarding...nope haven't ever seen one unless they are escorting something.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Ocean Girl

Oh and therapy, I was referring to the seat cushion like throwable. They are good back ups with throw rings. In a MOB we throw the life ring,MOB pole ( when we had one) and any throw cushions nearby, the more the merry in that situation.

When I don the type 1 foam life jacket, my harness is still useable.

OH! I have those too. I don't count them at all. Unless counting butts.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I'm sorry , all that happened was Nz courts overruled a local law.

I can guarantee you the French apply their safety rules to foreign vessels and I can guarantee Ireland officials require visiting cruisers to obey the national lifejacket law.

Why cause I've direct experience of both

For example the French require you to carry registration documents , whereas British law does not. British boats have been fined in France for failure to produce documents


IMO treaties have nothing to do with it.

Dave

Dave there is a strong distinction between enforcing SAFETY requirements on foreign flag vessels and all other requirements (like environmental and paperwork).

You are simply wrong with regards to safety regulations, which is what this thread was about. The French cannot (legally) and do not insist a foreign vessel has French or EU approved life jackets or air horns, or other various requirements to go offshore (As they do their own flag vessels). The Kiwi cannot (and after the court case) do not insist that foreign sailboats leaving for offshore meet Cat 1 requirements (as they do for their own vessels). And Chile cannot legally (and and most but not all of their officials are aware they should not) insist you have SOLAS life rafts. If you read the court decisions, the NZ and Chile the courts rule that way because of the international IMO treaty. The safety regulations of the flag state take precedence. Most local officials I have talked to understand this all perfectly clearly, but a few do not.

However, you are right about other sorts of regulations. They can insist you comply with local insurance requirements, local environmental law, and local paperwork (like deratting certificates), 'red fuel' requirements, etc etc . . . because the IMO treaty only addresses/protects the flag state safety equipment and not anything else. So there are all sorts of other 'non safety' local laws that can be and are enforced on foreign vessels.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Dave there is a strong distinction between enforcing SAFETY requirements on foreign flag vessels and all other requirements (like environmental and paperwork).

You are simply wrong with regards to safety regulations, which is what this thread was about. The French cannot (legally) and do not insist a foreign vessel has French or EU approved life jackets or air horns, or other various requirements to go offshore (As they do their own flag vessels). The Kiwi cannot (and after the court case) do not insist that foreign sailboats leaving for offshore meet Cat 1 requirements (as they do for their own vessels). And Chile cannot legally (and and most but not all of their officials are aware they should not) insist you have SOLAS life rafts. If you read the court decisions, the NZ and Chile the courts rule that way because of the international IMO treaty. The safety regulations of the flag state take precedence. Most local officials I have talked to understand this all perfectly clearly, but a few do not.

However, you are right about other sorts of regulations. They can insist you comply with local insurance requirements, local environmental law, and local paperwork (like deratting certificates), 'red fuel' requirements, etc etc . . . because the IMO treaty only addresses/protects the flag state safety equipment and not anything else. So there are all sorts of other 'non safety' local laws that can be and are enforced on foreign vessels.

I'm sorry Evans, the IMO treaties are not the issue. You are extending the NZ court judgement to others.

Please tell me how Croatia enforces competency laws

Ireland enforces life jackets rules, children on deck , under 16 MUST wear lifejackets.

France will and DOES apply its safety rules I know this for a fact. France enforces documentation rules etc Ive seen a UK boat fined for out of date flares.

IMO treaties as far as I see do not apply to leisure vessels. The safety rules certainly don't

Explain why a semi automatic ar15 was confiscated at sea in German territorial waters

National rules apply unless comity is applied

There was a huge thread on ybw on this.


IMO demands all vessels be registered for example , the UK exempts this for example.

Stop saying I'm wrong PROVE IT

For e ample an IMO vessel captains license cannot be challenged in a third state. Croatia can and does enforce such case.

Look up comity


Dave

[pbiJim]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

There was a huge thread on ybw on this.

Care to post a link?

Thanks,
Jim

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Despite all this, I dont use Hammar activators , as i don't like the fact that rearming is difficult and is recommended to be done by a service agent.

I use a 270 N 60g bottle , jacket for offshore use with a very secure integral harness and Blakley activators ( salt pill ). It withstands allots thrown at it sea wise

I have a good led water activated light added to it as well
Dave

Exactly what I have. The 270 Newton inflatables are not all that common; 165 is the norm (I believe). But 165 is probably not enough if you are in cold water and lose the ability to swim (which you will after maybe 10 minutes).

This is a totally superior solution, IMHO. A non-inflatable lifejacket is a passive measure intended to help you in case your boat is already sinking and you have time to roust it out and put it on -- a la Titanic. It's not effective in the situations where we actually need them on a yacht -- in rough weather, say, when there's a risk of going overboard, but you need to be able to function and move about on deck.

They are not inferior to non-inflatable jackets in terms of pulling over your head if they have proper crotch straps -- and I wish they would ban the sale of any jackets without these.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I'm sorry Evans, the IMO treaties are not the issue. You are extending the NZ court judgement to others.

Please tell me how Croatia enforces competency laws

Ireland enforces life jackets rules, children on deck , under 16 MUST wear lifejackets.

France will and DOES apply its safety rules I know this for a fact. France enforces documentation rules etc Ive seen a UK boat fined for out of date flares.

IMO treaties as far as I see do not apply to leisure vessels. The safety rules certainly don't

Explain why a semi automatic ar15 was confiscated at sea in German territorial waters

National rules apply unless comity is applied

There was a huge thread on ybw on this.


IMO demands all vessels be registered for example , the UK exempts this for example.

Stop saying I'm wrong PROVE IT

For e ample an IMO vessel captains license cannot be challenged in a third state. Croatia can and does enforce such case.

Look up comity


Dave

Peace, my brothers. You are all partially right.

Evans is rightest of all -- there is a distinction between equipment required to be carried on non-SOLAS vessels, and rules about how you have to behave. One of the conventions obligates states to respect each other's non-SOLAS equipment requirements -- which is why the US does not require UK vessels to carry USCG approved fire extinguishers, to name one of many examples. This is not comity, but a treaty obligation -- to respect certain rules of other states. If I have time I'll dig it up.

But Dave is also right insofar as many rules -- particularly those concerning behavior -- like when you have to wear those life jackets, and what kind of documents you need to be prepared to present -- are a matter of local law, period, and apply to all vessels of whatever flag in the territorial waters of that country. He is certainly right that a boat is in no way like an embassy.

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Peace, my brothers. You are all partially right.

Evans is rightest of all -- there is a distinction between equipment required to be carried on non-SOLAS vessels, and rules about how you have to behave. One of the conventions obligates states to respect each other's non-SOLAS equipment requirements -- which is why the US does not require UK vessels to carry USCG approved fire extinguishers, to name one of many examples. This is not comity, but a treaty obligation -- to respect certain rules of other states. If I have time I'll dig it up.

But Dave is also right insofar as many rules -- particularly those concerning behavior -- like when you have to wear those life jackets, and what kind of documents you need to be prepared to present -- are a matter of local law, period, and apply to all vessels of whatever flag in the territorial waters of that country. He is certainly right that a boat is in no way like an embassy.

that is how I believeit is and I'm glad I'm no longer alone.

BTW the many threads on this on YBW.com in the UK are long and just as tiresomely argumentative because it seems some folk want to be armchair lawyers.

The French requirement for Brit boats to carry registration is not done under French Law but by using British law which says any vessel going outside of the UK has to be registered as a British Vessel . The French merely insist on enforcing the Brit requirement to be registered IF you go foreign (but there is no need to register in the UK if you do not) so the French merely enforce a Brit requirement to suit their own ends as in stopping their own French nationals from avoiding silly regulations and taxes simply by claiming to be from the UK or Belgium or Holland. The UK introduced THE SSR (small Ships Registry) in order to provide a simple and inexpensive means for British people to register versus the full deal Registration which is complex and expensive, requiring measurement by a qualified surveyor and a complete paper trace from build through all previous owners to present day. On the full (called Part 1, or ) registry. If you install a new engine on a fully Part 1 registered boat the boat has to be re-surveyed by an acceptable to them qualified surveyor and the registry amended with the new data, I know because I had to do that process when I re-engined my then sailboat and it costs loads to pay for the survey and document updates. Fully registered vessels BTW have unique names and there cannot be two with the same name (think how much fun USCG would have sorting that one out!)

But does any of this actually make things safer???

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Robin3

that is how I believeit is and I'm glad I'm no longer alone.

BTW the many threads on this on YBW.com in the UK are long and just as tiresomely argumentative because it seems some folk want to be armchair lawyers.

The French requirement for Brit boats to carry registration is not done under French Law but by using British law which says any vessel going outside of the UK has to be registered as a British Vessel . The French merely insist on enforcing the Brit requirement to be registered IF you go foreign (but there is no need to register in the UK if you do not) so the French merely enforce a Brit requirement to suit their own ends as in stopping their own French nationals from avoiding silly regulations and taxes simply by claiming to be from the UK or Belgium or Holland. The UK introduced THE SSR (small Ships Registry) in order to provide a simple and inexpensive means for British people to register versus the full deal Registration which is complex and expensive, requiring measurement by a qualified surveyor and a complete paper trace from build through all previous owners to present day. On the full (called Part 1, or ) registry. If you install a new engine on a fully Part 1 registered boat the boat has to be re-surveyed by an acceptable to them qualified surveyor and the registry amended with the new data, I know because I had to do that process when I re-engined my then sailboat and it costs loads to pay for the survey and document updates. Fully registered vessels BTW have unique names and there cannot be two with the same name (think how much fun USCG would have sorting that one out!)

But does any of this actually make things safer???

Yes, and from a Yankee point of view, the British bristling at French requirements is absolutely hilarious - from our point of view, the French are extremely lax and the Brits are abject anarchists. Oh, how I love sailing in this part of the world . I believe the Brits require nothing from me, as being a non-chartered vessel under 20 meters, besides a radar reflector and proper nav lights. Fire extinguishers? Life vests? Entirely in the skipper's discretion, including what type, and whether and when they should be worn. The French require in-date flares, and some kind of registration, at least the Mickey-Mouse SSR scrap of paper, invented purely to enable anarchist British yachtsmen to satisfy oppressive French bureaucrats. Quel horreur! Registration!!!??? How dare they?? I'm suing in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg!!! Dealing with a scenario like the OP's, you guys - French, or Brit - must think you've landed by mistake in a post-apocalyptic fascist horror movie!!

I was boarded by the French douane in wind-swept, desolate Ushant (Oessant), in July. The douanniers had such panache - they came roaring in on Darth Vader's own blacked-out 1000 horsepower RIB, carrying automatic weapons, politely (and in perfect English) asking permission to come aboard, and this being granted, took up positions around the deck with light hands on the Heckler & Koch mini submachine guns. Papers were scrupulously examined, faults were found, faults were discreetly overlooked, with advice on how to fix them before the next foray. Whereupon the squad departed with roaring outboards and a cheery wave.

You folks have no idea how good you have it.