Looking at a boat in Auckland

[CassidyNZ]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

I've not reviewed Cat 1 for some time now, but it used to include things like minimum stanchion heights and spacing. All very well for boats designed to t hat rule, but woe to the chap whose boats stanchions are shorter and further apart (as many production boats are). Such trivia should not be so rigorously defined or enforced IMO... yes, the closer and higher are better, but we've cruised for a long time with boats that would not have qualified under Cat 1.

And some folks chose to not have a dedicated life raft... etc.

When the infamous section 21 ruling was enforced in NZ, lots of cruisers stayed away, us included, because they would have had to make expensive, intrusive and unwanted mods to their proven cruising boats.

So I don't agree that it is inconsequential if enforced.

Jim

Section 21? Of which rule set? It appears that I may have missed something important about Cat 1. Section 21 of the Cat 1 rules is about crew/qualifications. Just wondering how that leads to expensive boat mods.

Also, if the Section 21 that you reference is part of Cat 1, why would foreign visiting boats be concerned? They’re not subjected to Cat 1.

The irony of Cat 1 is that it’s original intention AFAIK was to reduce the NZ govt exposure to the huge SAR costs associated with ill-found vessels having to be supported to when things go wrong. But a significant proportion of vessels in NZ’s SAR area (all foreign registered boats) are not required to comply with Cat 1 but receive identical support as those that do comply. An example: I have a close friend who immigrated to NZ 15 years ago, brought his boat with him, has lived here permanently since then and is an NZ citizen and, because his boat remains registered in his country of origin, he does not need to comply with Cat 1. Go figure.

[Dsanduril]

We are based in California but found the boat we wanted in NZ (Whangarei). The boat was foreign registered (Swiss) and had been brought into NZ under a temporary import/cruising permit. We ended up buying the boat. NZ Customs witnessed the sales transaction. They also transferred the original temporary import permit to us and we were able to keep the boat in NZ for an additional 16 months without any duties or taxes.

We re-registered the boat in the US (USCG documentation) while it was in NZ no problem. We spent the time in NZ cruising pretty much all of the north and south islands. The weather was generally pretty nice, and really pretty decent predictions so you knew when you wanted to hide. Truthfully the hardest part of the whole process was getting the extended stay tourist visas.

Never once has any questions about Cat.1. Since the boat was brought into the country as a foreign vessel and left as a foreign vessel they simply didn't apply and not one official thought they did/should. Can't speak to a NZ vessel sold under the same circumstances, but, my understanding - if the vessel is foreign flagged (which it could be after purchase if you are not a NZ citizen) then you don't have to deal with Cat. 1.

All in all we found it a very simple, straightforward process to purchase a boat in NZ and leave, and we fully enjoyed sailing in NZ. A lovely country, great people, fun sailing, and pretty anchorages. What more could you ask for?

[barnakiel]

Quite the contrary. It is O LOT OF PROTECTED water there. Good place to sail and learn sailing.



Easy sailing in the summer (but low on winds often) . And when a rough day comes, it can be real rough (which somehow does not stop the Kiwis from sailing).


Horrible wet and cold winters. A NO NO time to be there, live there or sail there. Tie the boat, rent a heated studio (or fly home and return next year). If you winter over, I would do so only in Auck. The other places are truly small towns.



There is no comparison for NZ and Caribbean as one place is sort of like Norway or England of the Southern Hemisphere while Caribbean is a sailor's paradise. (We lived in NZ for two years and I never swam there once ...) I swim in Martinique every day - first thing in the morning!



BTW The best fish&chips on the planet, fantastic sushi bars, very sour wines and very sweet nation. Recommended.



Cheers,
b.

[CassidyNZ]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Quite the contrary. It is O LOT OF PROTECTED water there. Good place to sail and learn sailing.

Easy sailing in the summer (but low on winds often) . And when a rough day comes, it can be real rough (which somehow does not stop the Kiwis from sailing).

Horrible wet and cold winters. A NO NO time to be there, live there or sail there. Tie the boat, rent a heated studio (or fly home and return next year). If you winter over, I would do so only in Auck. The other places are truly small towns.

There is no comparison for NZ and Caribbean as one place is sort of like Norway or England of the Southern Hemisphere while Caribbean is a sailor's paradise. (We lived in NZ for two years and I never swam there once ...) I swim in Martinique every day - first thing in the morning!

BTW The best fish&chips on the planet, fantastic sushi bars, very sour wines and very sweet nation. Recommended.

Cheers,

Most cruisers spend NZ winters up in the tropics and come back here for the summers. Summers generally a lot drier and hugely warmer and on North Island it’s very “swimmable”. Not tropical but not totally unpleasant. Summers in the tropics are generally considered the NO NO.

Those local NZ cruisers that can will also spend winters in the tropics because we can

[Heg]

New Zealand has some awesome cruising grounds. Stunning scenery and lots of fabulous places to anchor.
We have cruised two summer seasons there and loved it. Check out our YouTube channel. We’ve got quite a few videos up of our time there, including things like hauling out .....

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by CassidyNZ

Section 21? Of which rule set? It appears that I may have missed something important about Cat 1. Section 21 of the Cat 1 rules is about crew/qualifications. Just wondering how that leads to expensive boat mods.

Also, if the Section 21 that you reference is part of Cat 1, why would foreign visiting boats be concerned? They’re not subjected to Cat 1.

The irony of Cat 1 is that it’s original intention AFAIK was to reduce the NZ govt exposure to the huge SAR costs associated with ill-found vessels having to be supported to when things go wrong. But a significant proportion of vessels in NZ’s SAR area (all foreign registered boats) are not required to comply with Cat 1 but receive identical support as those that do comply. An example: I have a close friend who immigrated to NZ 15 years ago, brought his boat with him, has lived here permanently since then and is an NZ citizen and, because his boat remains registered in his country of origin, he does not need to comply with Cat 1. Go figure.

Section 21 was part of the legal nomenclature back in 1994/95 when Jenny Shiply, then minister of Transport, said that all vessels, regardless of flag state would need to pass a Cat 1 examination before being granted clearance to depart. After a long legal battle which ended in your Supreme Court, that rule was thrown out. The foreign cruising community stayed away in droves for those years, us included, and many never returned, us included. We quite enjoyed the three seasons we spent cruising in NZ, loved the people and were welcomed warmly w here ever we went. But we were unwilling to be forced to do some things required at that time (we choose not to carry a dedicated life raft, for instance). And apparently now the requirements include a slew of certifications for skipper and for crew... things I don't have and don't wish to go through the process of acquiring (expensive and time consuming). Apparently I'm not alone in this thinking. But by the time the rule was rescinded, we had moved on to basing our cruising in Australia, and that proved to be fairly permanent... we still do!

As to the the "huge SAR costs associated with ill-found vessels having to be supported to when things go wrong", conversations with professional members of the SAR community at the time revealed that the costs of actual rescue are not "huge" and would be replaced by costs of ongoing training flights and missions. And ironically (at least to me) many of the boats that required rescue in the infamous "Queen's Birthday" storm of June 1994, and including the only one lost with its crew, were indeed Kiwi boats that HAD passed the Cat 1 exam. The cost of SAR was a political red herring, at least back in the mid 90s. I don't know about now.

As an aside, the Kiwi's punch well above their weight in many things, and SAR policies are one such. The willingness of those folks to not just rescue people from foundering boats, but to actually help them keep their boats afloat and getting them back to shore is pretty outstanding, and a kinda different mind set to the otherwise outstanding USCG who mostly don't feel that their role is to save or succor boats... just people. We salute the Kiwi navy folks who do such a great job and who have helped many of our acquaintances over the years.

Jim