am I the only one

[rtbates]

Am I the only one who is concerned that the proliferation of novices heading out to sea and the recent spate of rescues is going to adversely affect all sailors. IE, gov't intervention in the form of required training, required gear, required number of crew, where you can go, when you can go etc. The insurance industry already tells their clients when and where they can sail and what crew they must have. I can hear the future CG response to a mayday, "Will that be MC or VISA".. None of us want that. Am I being too paranoid?

[Alan Wheeler]

No your not paranoid. It will eventually go that way. To some extent it has in countries around the world now. England requires cruising plans before you head out. NZ requires you to have a boat to a certain standard for the sailing you do, being Harbour, coastal, or offshore, each having different requirements. Oz requires the skipper to have a licence. The more idiots we get out there, the more the inforcments we will get.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

England requires cruising plans before you head out.

News to me, I think it is "recomended" to notify someone onshore, although I think you can also notify the CG........but whether they react to anyone "missing" I don't know.

In Jersey we don't. And I can't say I have ever checked in and out of France either. Not to say the relevent authorities don't know that I am coming and going - but I never see them.

Having said all that, I suspect it is all a matter of time.............

[mike d.]

i don't think you are being paranoid at all, i believe the C.G. has every right to charge to go get a person/s calling in for rescue. the guard was never intended for use to go save people who of their own accord put them selves in harms way. they were set up to protect the coast from invaders. i know everyone knows this! people have become complacent and out of touch with their-own capabilities and capacities, and because the C.G. started to help those in times of peril. now we as a society think it is a free service and expect the Guard to be there at a moments notice because of our own short comings. when the C.G. goes out everyone in the country pays, for them to find and attemp to save those in dire straits. yes we are all taxpayers into the system to fund the Guard, but we as recreational boats/voyagers use the service dis-proportionlly to input of funds and intended designation of . i do not back any attempt by the gov. for manditory licensing, special equipment, ect although education would be a viable enterprize to follow, because of the lack of commonsense exhibited by many in our midst. when the gov. has to use it's resources to respond to people who willingly put themselves in harms way do to lack of planning and/or knowledge there should be reprecus-sions for that. hopefully i won't eat those words, and i hope what i wrote makes some sense.

[dana-tenacity]

I try not to be pessimistic, but I think cruising is a mere shadow of what it used to be, a big chunk of the reason increased bureaucratic interference in many forms ( the other biggie the number of incompetent people going cruising, but that's another thread). I'm just glad I did it it when I did, it wouldn't be as much fun if I were leaving now.

[Joli]

I'm not to worried about the less experienced heading out on managable boats, in general a smaller boat can be manhandled. The ones that worry me are those that head out on boats weighing over 24k lbs. A boat heavier than that requires more planning and knowledge to keep out of trouble. Tough to do when yo have limited time on a boat.

I am in no way discouraging people from buying larger boats, there are many benefits, but it's best if they have some knowledge and experience first.

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

. Oz requires the skipper to have a licence. The more idiots we get out there, the more the inforcments we will get.

The license we need is how to handle a 12 foot tinny, it in no way show's people how to control a sail boat, fast sailing cat or indeed a 50ft powercat.

Collecting names and revenue in my opinion.

Dave

[Pblais]

Am I the only one who is concerned that the proliferation of novices heading out to sea and the recent spate of rescues is going to adversely affect all sailors.

I don't see at as any worse than ever before. There is not enough regulation to control stupid people. Requiring people to have minimim skill levels just somehow seems to fall short.

All those that are sure they are minimally trained - raise your hand.

Regualtion can never be more than minimal qualifications and I doubt anyone with a lot of experience would want to sail off with only minimal qualifications.

the guard was never intended for use to go save people who of their own accord put them selves in harms way.

On average the USCG saves 15 people every single day. I'ld say it's in the mission. It was setup that way in the very beginning. It's not something you can decide before you go out to bring someone in either. Now who do you think with minimal qualifications is going to decide if the person they just dragged in wasn't minimally trained enough.

[Lynx]

Well, When I first started I did not think that was a problem. I have seen more small powerboats offshore in distress than sailboats.

Now that I have been doing it for a while, I can see your point. However, how does one learn if not going out an makeing a few mistakes?

There is free courses but few take them. Still there is people who crank up their boat after sitting for a year or more, go off shore and need help getting back.

Ocean crossings? I think that we are hearing more about the problems because of better communications and more boats out there. I do believe that the % of successes is better.

[coot]

Originally Posted by mike d.

the guard was never intended for use to go save people who of their own accord put them selves in harms way.

Which country are you thinking of? The United States Coast Guard was formed by a merger of two previously existing agencies. One was the United States Life-Saving Service, which was created specifically to rescue people from shipwrecks. (The other was the Revenue Cutter Service, which was created to enforce customs laws. USCG has since absorbed other government entities.)

It would seem to me that the vast majority of people who find themselves "in harm's way" at sea have done so "of their own accord". The only exceptions I can think of are draftees or prisoners, who would not be permitted to decline to go to sea.

Everybody else made a choice to be there, whether they are a recreational boater, a cruise ship passenger, a fisherman, an able seaman on a container ship, a tugboat captain, etc. All these people accepted the risk.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Pblais

... All those that are sure they are minimally trained - raise your hand ...

With decades of study, instruction, & experience sailing & cruising, I consider myself ‘trained”.
Having some appreciation of how much there is to know - I am certain that my training is “minimal”, at best.

PS
According to the Gov't of Canada: I'm not qualified - as I haven't accquired the "Operator Profficiency Card".

[ssullivan]

I'm with Gord on that one. It's a lifetime of learning... and then some.

Coot is correct too... the USCG was formed from the original Life-Saving Service which had manned stations all around the various coasts. They would use various pulley systems, small lifesaving boats, etc... from shore to rescue those on ships that had grounded close by. It was a volunteer and nearly volunteer group (as their pay was low) that was immensely respected for their tireless efforts to save people without much in the way of compensation.

There sure are a lot of people, even close to shore that need assistance. Living on the water, I helped no less than 11 or 12 people last summer. I towed a few in, righted capsized boats, lent a hand in getting them up and running again, etc... It is amazing how many people don't respect the water and its ability to kill you.

Anyway, it seems there are at least more and more going out to sea all the time, doing solo crossings, etc... so maybe they are not less well prepared, but just more in number?

[Amfivena]

When we bought our Westsail several years ago it had been about 4-5 years since I'd even been on the ocean (or a lake) in a private boat. My wife had no experience in boats other than a whale watch trip or two. I grew up on a large lake, owned just about every type of boat one would float on a lake and had a fair amount of ocean experience as well.

I had enough experience to know that I knew squat about owning and operating a larger sailboat. I was somewhat amazed that 'they' let me buy the boat without any checks other than a credit check. I did have some trouble finding a loan and insurance, but that was only because the boat was a 1974 - not because of my experience level.

So, I definitely find it disconcerting that people could easily buy boats bigger and faster than mine with no training. On a theoretical level I would support licensing and testing. However I have no faith that any government would do it 'right.' Boats are just too varied and complex to designate a standard operating test. About the only thing I could support would be a meaningful safety/rules of the road test. But again, anything a jurisdiction came up with would be a joke. If it was thorough enough to mean something, most people would fail it.

As for CG rescues I'd fully support them charging for their services in some manner. If I had to be rescued I'd fully expect to pay. Of course I'm one of those weird people that sends a check to the volunteer rescue after they take me or a family member to the hospital. I also believe in personal responsibility and accountability so take what I say with a grain of salt as I'm definitely not in sync with the times.

[Pblais]

[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']So, I definitely find it disconcerting that people could easily buy boats bigger and faster than mine with no training. On a theoretical level I would support licensing and testing. [/font]

Here is a good example of what is coming.

Boater Exam.com - Virginia Boating Safety course and exam

The state of Virginia has mandated passage of a safety course for everyone. There is a time schedule for old guys and no one gets grandfathered. This is a link to a "qualified course" you can take and pass totally on line. You can actually work through the sections for free then you take the exam and you pay only if you pass. They will accept some other courses to satisfy the requirement if you have a certificate. I'm not sure if my old ASA 101 course counts.

What is perhaps most interesting is what the course covers. Also what it does not cover. It's got a fair amount of stuff with emphasis on rules and regs. It's the memorization stuff you can pass with a multiple choice test.

It is worth a look see as I do think they are trying to get into the biggest problems there are on the water. The format of the online material is actually done pretty well.

There is nothing in it that applies to offshore boating and not too much specific to sail boats other than rules and regs. Most of the emphasis is small power boats and PWC's. It's about what most of the people do on the water and the worst of of the worst mistakes that generally are at the root of the deaths and serious injuries that do happen.

[Island Mike]

In CT my wife and I had to take 6 hours of class and pass a test, we recieved a Certificate of Personal Watercraft Operation. You can not operate a boat of any kind in CT waters without this certificate. While the class did not get into detail about how to actual drive the boat it did cover rules of the road, safety, regulations,laws, lighting etc. This material was covered in detail and many questions were asked in relation to handling a boat. There were a fair % who did not pass the test.