In-water Hull Cleaning Banned In Vanuatu

[a64pilot]

I did not take a crack at you, or your industry, merely a guess is all.
However I’m beginning to wonder if thou doth protest too much.

It’s late here and I’m going to bed. Again I did not mean to disparage you or anyone in Vanuatu, don’t think that I did.

[NoTies]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

No, I do understand, and in particular I thought it interesting that you pointed out two things.
1. We can’t do a good job of cleaning ourselves, and you were a little offended about people who try apparently
2. A hull has to have been cleaned within 30 days prior to arriving in New Zealand, and then you made the point that often Vanuatu is a jumping off point for New Zealand

I pointed out no such thing, you obviously have an agenda here that includes twisting whatever you read.
Show me where I said you couldn't clean your own boat (just not in the water).
Show me where I said boats must arrive in Vanuatu with a clean hull.
I don't understand why you have such a problem with caring for the environment in another country. But then again, maybe your unwarranted attack about mariner service providers here gives a general idea of your respect for "foreigners" and their laws.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by NoTies

I have grown rather tired of your snide insults.

Maybe you can back off a bit on all the offense taken and help foreign cruisers entering your waters become more aware of the problem, how to comply with the new regulations, and thus enjoy their time in your country without causing environmental harm. Although there are always exceptions, it seems to me that most cruising sailors are pretty responsible people and wouldn't want to wear out their welcome.

As for your marine industry, the reality is that if someone developed the infrastructure to make compliance easier and more effective, then it would be a win-win all the way around. Provided of course, and as a64 said, it does not take advantage of the new reg by overcharging for the service. I didn't take that as any slight towards your profession's practices in your country, but rather as a comment on one of the occasional, unintended pitfalls of such regulations generally.

[NoTies]

Originally Posted by Exile

Maybe you can back off a bit on all the offense taken and help foreign cruisers entering your waters become more aware of the problem, how to comply with the new regulations, and thus enjoy their time in your country without causing environmental harm. Although there are always exceptions, it seems to me that most cruising sailors are pretty responsible people and wouldn't want to wear out their welcome.

As for your marine industry, the reality is that if someone developed the infrastructure to make compliance easier and more effective, then it would be a win-win all the way around. Provided of course, and as a64 said, it does not take advantage of the new reg by overcharging for the service. I didn't take that as any slight towards your profession's practices in your country, but rather as a comment on one of the occasional, unintended pitfalls of such regulations generally.

It was his first comment on the subject that raised my hackles and I wasn't brought up to take insults.
I have often discovered that what some people think as taking advantage of them is in actual fact businesses just struggling to survive. If all cruisers realised what slim margins there are in a seasonal industry with a high infrastructure investment requirement they might look a little more kindly at the people who bleed for them. I have to tolerate seeing visiting yachts employing people illegally whilst the people with legitimate investment in the industry like ourselves often get slammed for charging for our services. We don't do it as a social service even if we do enjoy the work and meeting others.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by NoTies

It was his first comment on the subject that raised my hackles and I wasn't brought up to take insults.
I have often discovered that what some people think as taking advantage of them is in actual fact businesses just struggling to survive. If all cruisers realised what slim margins there are in a seasonal industry with a high infrastructure investment requirement they might look a little more kindly at the people who bleed for them. I have to tolerate seeing visiting yachts employing people illegally whilst the people with legitimate investment in the industry like ourselves often get slammed for charging for our services. We don't do it as a social service even if we do enjoy the work and meeting others.

All quite understandable. I have become good friends with several people in the marine trades with whom I am eternally grateful for helping me so much when I first bought my boat and was pretty clueless. Since then I have been able to take on more & more of the work myself and so appreciate first-hand how difficult & time consuming it often is. The caveat is that it can also be a two-way street, and there are some who unfortunately take advantage of cruisers in need. Like any profession I suppose there's good & bad stories, but it's human nature to make more of a stink about the bad ones I suppose.

Fwiw, there are some areas here in the US that have imposed regs similar perhaps to what was recently adopted in Vanuatu. In Maryland (last time I was there anyway), for example, boatyards over a certain size have to capture & treat the water after pressure washing boats, regardless of their origin. It involves the installation of very expensive equipment that most smaller yards would likely not be able to afford. This is all in an effort to help restore the Chesapeake Bay, although I don't think it's been adopted as of yet in Virginia waters which surround the southern Bay. There are also requirements that marinas have free pump-out services, along with various no-discharge regs. Restrictions on bottom paint are also becoming fashionable, although commercial, military & LE vessels enjoy exemptions.

Some of these regs make some sense, whereas others perceive them merely as "feel good" measures that are only applied to recreational boaters because they can be. I therefore suspect that a64's comment may have been more about what's going closer to his home waters than the invasive species threat that the authorities are trying to deal with in yours.

[Pelagic]

Getting back to clarifying the issue.....

They do imply larger ships (not being tossed around), so perhaps they could confirm ALL... or set a tonnage limit (eg above 50 tons)

The danger with regular haul outs is compression damages to hull from slings, bad railways, bad slings etc...
Heavy cruise boats don't like to haul out just for a simple cleaning....

Cleaning in water within an enclosed pen is far more low tech, less intrusive and hauling up the mesh net to collect for incineration and study, is far more practical.

[NoTies]

Basically Kembro doesn't know what he's talking about. This should not be the role for the maritime regulator but instead should fall under bio-security. I don't buy the story of haulouts being bad for a boat, I've hauled boats with various methods for decades and never damaged one. That being said, some of the dodgy trailer/cradle combos around the joint do have a habit of popping bulkheads and beltings etc. but you need to make sure that the haulout service is professional. This is more about cruisers wanting to spend as little money as possible in the countries they are visiting. Why should Vanuatu bio-security be put at risk because someone is too tight to maintain their boat properly?

[Jim Cate]

An somewhat informed but far from expert thought:

Most marine species (the fouling sort) propagate by releasing germ cells of some sort or another. These free float about whilst they mature, and the sessile critters eventually alight somewhere and begin to grow into their mature forms.

Thus, it is hard to see how this hull cleaning ban will stop the foreign species from infecting new waters. If they are there at all stuck to a hull or scraped off, they can propagate and spread.

Insisting that hulls be clean upon arrival is more to the point, and Australia has at least had that rule in effect for some years now... but it is irregularly enforced. Sometimes we have been "inspected" (a look at the water line and as far down the hull as is easily seen) but more often not. One inspector confided that if the rest of the boat was shipshape and clean, they reckoned the bottom would likely be as well.

Ships too have fouling organisms attached to their hulls at times, and thus can add to the spread of invasive species... at least the ones that reproduce while attached to their host. They spend less time in port as a rule, but this does not exempt them from the possibility of adding to the problem.

Considering the above, this rule seems kinda arbitrary and not very well thought out. If there is a real marine biologist following, I'd be interested in their opinions.

Jim

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Insisting that hulls be clean upon arrival is more to the point,
Jim

That of course is the most practical enforcement every country could agree to.....
..but that means, boat owners that visit for a while, are allowed to clean off the local critters, before departure.

Let's see if common sense and intelligence can prevail and allow quarantine to include that in their inspection.

[NoTies]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Insisting that hulls be clean upon arrival is more to the point, and Australia has at least had that rule in effect for some years now... but it is irregularly enforced.

Jim

According to AQIS they have no such rule. They simply offer guidleines.

[NoTies]

This is what happens when you believe social media and boatyards who don't have the best interests of their clients at heart.

"Thank you for contacting the department for advice on managing the anti-foul and biofouling on your vessel.

The department does not have specific requirements for a vessel to have an anti-foul system or have been recently cleaned. The Biosecurity Act 2015 that has taken the place of the Quarantine Act 1908 states that a vessel cannot be an unacceptable biosecurity risk but does not give specific actions that an operator needs to undertake to manage their biofouling. The department recommends the use of the Australian Government National Biofouling Management Guidelines as a voluntary measure to encourage best practice for biofouling management of vessels and submersible structures operating in Australia. Development of biofouling regulations consistent with the direction set by the International Maritime Organization is currently underway by the department. Please follow the link below if you would like to be added to the stakeholder consultation list.

If your vessel has recently had an anti-foul system applied or has recently been cleaned documentation such as receipts from the purchase of the paint or from the marina for the application, or receipts from the diver service are good records to have available should a Biosecurity Officer ask about your biofouling management. The use of a biofouling management plan and record book as outlined by the IMO are considered best practice and strongly encouraged by the department.

If you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact us directly."

Kind regards,

Jason

Marine Pest Unit
Animal Biosecurity Branch
Australian Government Department of Agriculture and Water Resources
7 London Circuit, CANBERRA ACT 2601 Australia
PO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Australia
www.marinepests.gov.au"

[Exile]

Originally Posted by NoTies

This is more about cruisers wanting to spend as little money as possible in the countries they are visiting. Why should Vanuatu bio-security be put at risk because someone is too tight to maintain their boat properly?

I'm not understanding this. If Vanuatu does not have the facilities to recapture and therefore screen/filter the offending critters, aren't they all just getting washed back into their waters? How is this different from boaters cleaning their own hulls? And if Jim Cate is correct on the science, then not cleaning hulls may pose just as much of a threat to the local ecology.

I would think most cruisers would want to be in compliance with a visiting countries specific rules & regs, but if it turns out to be irrational or unworkable and entails significant added expense, they may opt to go elsewhere. And that's not good for your profession either.

[svlamorocha]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

I think ships are supposed to run any ballast water through their engine cooling systems to kill marine life before they dump it. I wonder how many of them actually bother to do so?

The "treatment" involves running ballast water through a UV device before discharge. AFAIK the coolung system does not have anything to do with it.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by NoTies

You DID take a crack by inferring this legislation was a result of industry lobbying. We jail corrupt people here.

Well there's the misunderstanding, in the US we put 'em in the highest public offices in the land...

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by newhaul

It appears that it only applies to commercial vessels. If I read this article correctly
International vessels prohibited from underwater hull cleaning in Vanuatu waters | News | dailypost.vu

I thought I would click on your link to see what all the fuss is about and met with this notice rather than the web page. Think they need to think twice if they want to get the message out to folk in other countries.