Are Spurs worth it?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by moctrams

Any boater that installs spurs is a total jerk When you cut a crap pot line, the pot sinks to the bottom and the crabs die.

And what do you think happens when a crab pot line gets wrapped around a prop shaft which is NOT equipped with spurs?


Well, the same thing, of course. The crabs die and the pot is lost just the same, whether or not you have spurs. Except besides all that, without spurs, add a serious hazard to navigation, risk to the boater as he struggles to cut the mess free, damage to the vessel.


So sorry -- everyone should have spurs (AKA rope cutter). I would never sail without one.

[slug]

When you catch a trap , you learn not to catch another

With spurs you remain dumb for the rest of your life

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by slug

No guess work is needed

Scientists document ghost trap mortality by region

This is Florida , the mortality numbers are very high

https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/art..._1/i185/616418


Simply google your region

No need to guess

Ghost traps are certainly a real problem, but deleting spurs from boats does ZERO to alleviate that problem. If you get a pot line wrapped around your shaft it's going to get cut away anyway.


The solution to ghost traps is to require traps to have cutaway doors which open after a specified time in the water. I believe that is already required in some places like Chesapeake Bay.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by slug

When you catch a trap , you learn not to catch another

With spurs you remain dumb for the rest of your life

Nonsense.


Even with spurs running into a pot line is not a picnic. On my boat with partial skeg rudder part of the line always ends up in the joint between skeg and rudder What you are saying is just like saying seatbelts are bad because you will no longer try to avoid accidents.


But the main thing is that there is no "learning not to catch another". It is impossible to 100% avoid them, in places with a large density of pots, and especially when they are laid in channels. And at night? Or in the fog? What if the sea is up? Sail enough, and no matter how good you are, no matter how attentive you are, you will catch one sooner or later.


Now one place I've never run down a pot float is in the Northern Baltic -- in Scandinavia, the pot floats have long stalks with radar reflectors So with a good radar set and guard zone set, you will be able to avoid them even in bad weather


Of course we should do our best and avoid them -- keep a sharp watch and be attentive, whether or not we have spurs. But we have all the incentive to do that anyway, with or without spurs. But the problem of ghost pots cannot be solved by us -- the fishermen need to (a) use pots with cutouts which open if a pot is lost; (b) mark them well so they can be seen when the sea is up, and best of all with radar reflectors; (c) not set them in channels or fairways.

[Jamme]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The solution to ghost traps is to require traps to have cutaway doors which open after a specified time in the water.

+1 on this.

[Jamme]

Originally Posted by slug

Scientists document ghost trap mortality by region



This is Florida , the mortality numbers are very high



https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/art..._1/i185/616418

Thank you. This is very informative. I will definitely look more into it.

[Jamme]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

But the main thing is that there is no "learning not to catch another". It is impossible to 100% avoid them, in places with a large density of pots, and especially when they are laid in channels. And at night? Or in the fog? What if the sea is up? Sail enough, and no matter how good you are, no matter how attentive you are, you will catch one sooner or later.

I agree 100%.

[slug]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Ghost traps are certainly a real problem, but deleting spurs from boats does ZERO to alleviate that problem. If you get a pot line wrapped around your shaft it's going to get cut away anyway.


The solution to ghost traps is to require traps to have cutaway doors which open after a specified time in the water. I believe that is already required in some places like Chesapeake Bay.

WhAt will you do about gill nets ?

Long lines

In the end it s your responsibility as a seaman to do what ever is required to
avoid damaging fisherman’s equipment and the marine environment

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by slug

WhAt will you do about gill nets ?

Long lines

In the end it s your responsibility as a seaman to do what ever is required to
avoid damaging fisherman’s equipment and the marine environment

Sure, I totally agree, but the only way to avoid damaging fisherman's equipment is to not run into it in the first place. I'm pretty sure all of us do our best at that. I sure do. In areas where I suspect lots of pots, I normally put an extra watch on the bow and slow right down. A video camera up the mast might be a good addition to this; I've thought about it.



The point though is that once you do run into a pot line, a long line, or God forbid, a gill net, then it's game over for the equipment in any case. Whether or not you have spurs. Not having spurs does ZERO to protect either the equipment or the marine environment. Only not running into it can do that.

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by sailingmonika

Our broker suggested that we have Spurs installed.

WRT to the OP's question of whether spurs are worth it, I suggest having a look at https://www.yachtingmonthly.com/gear...ter-test-30012

Almost anyway you look at it, if anything gets fouled in your prop you will most likely have to dive to remove it or it's remnants.

Below is a 4 meter piece of 4mm poly netting lurking just below the surface that fouled my prop mid-Pacific. (I'm only smiling because I was able to remove it and it did no damage.)

[jmh2002]

Another for retractable propulsion and a low drag / low snag underwater hull.

A side benefit is speed through the water, easier maintenance, and simplified drying out.

Unfortunately most boats are not even designed like that in the first place, regardless of whether they are a monohull or a catamaran.

There are a few though

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

Another for retractable propulsion and a low drag / low snag underwater hull.

A side benefit is speed through the water, easier maintenance, and simplified drying out.

Unfortunately most boats are not even designed like that in the first place, regardless of whether they are a monohull or a catamaran.

There are a few though

Which ones? I've only ever seen this on hardcore racing boats.


There are significant drawbacks to retractable propulsion:


1. Severe limitation on prop size, which impacts efficiency.


2. Cost.


3. Complexity.


4. It will only help you with pot lines when you're not motoring.

[jmh2002]

You already know that I am a Wharram fan too (amongst other boats) but there are also some other catamarans like this as well.

And I'm not just referring to the propulsion, but the general under water shape, including any skeg or rudder.

2 outboards in retractable pods can be extremely simple.

Of course I'll get flamed for this but if buying or building a new boat it could be an option to consider. Not only for lines, but other marine debris too, of which there is more and more.

Check out this low snag hull shape.
Not much to get a pot line caught on there, at most the rear skeg, and the line could be easily pushed off with a boat hook.

If motoring, retract the propulsion and untangle or cut the line. Almost no need to go in the water, and very little chance of propulsion structural damage so severe that you now have water coming in.



And here is something interesting to throw into the mix. Yes I know a generator is still required for extended motoring range, so let's not start that again.

You can pick apart individual aspects of this entire concept, but I believe that the sum of the parts is greater than the whole.

https://www.elcomotoryachts.com/prod...ric-outboards/

[psaltydogs]

One dark night, I anchored with my Cheoy Lee Offshore 27. All was going well, until I maladroitly went ahead too far and wrapped the anchor rode around the shaft. It stopped the engine in a hurry.



In this predicament, I decided to up the anchor in the morning and sail across to a spot with a gravel beach, where I could careen the boat. The problems here were manifold: Light and fickle winds, the gravel which would abrade the paint, and the shore was right under a popular pub, where I would have an audience I didn't need.


So I lifted the compression release levers (which should be on every diesel) and rotated the engine with the gear in reverse. I turned and turned for a long time, until presto: the rode came free. There was a small defect in one strand of the rode, but it was still quite serviceable.



Never again!

[Nicholson58]

Originally Posted by moctrams

Any boater that installs spurs is a total jerk When you cut a crap pot line, the pot sinks to the bottom and the crabs die.

AND if the rope wraps around the shaft, pulls the strut from the hull, sinks the boat, you may die.

Fish trap floats in the Caribbean are a few clear pop bottles. Invisible in the sun glare and may be submerged.