RE: [Paddlewise] Outlaw Paddling, was Kayaks and Visibility Study

I don't pretend to be any sort of expert on this - but having listened to a
lot of NZ bureaucrats expend a lot of words on this over the past 6 months -
I conclude that we live in a world of laws layered one atop the other - just
to amaze us.

In NZ, as elsewhere, lying over everything are the International ColRegs -
and no local laws should run against them. However, as far as I know, when a
country 'signs-up' to such an international collections of rules, they are
only 'in force' in that country's territory once that country's legislature
has enacted them into local law.

Then we have NZ's National laws which can add to or clarify the ColRegs.
Note that the Int.ColRegs start out (Rule 1) by saying that this is allowed.

Luckily, NZ hasn't any State level of regulation to worry about, but some of
our Regional Councils have added a level of control - using bylaws. In my
city, the Auckland Regional Council has imposed local controls on Jetskis,
water-ski boats and now on the visibility of kayakers (when more than 200m
from shore).

I would not be astonished to hear that, in a similar sort of way, US
Federal, State & City/Town laws exercise local control on boating within the
US territorial waters. 

I haven't heard of any maritime-law frontal collisions between any 'lower'
jurisdiction and a 'higher' one - I expect that this leads to political
pie-on-the-face and is avoided as a career-threatening activity by
bureaucrats.

I can give an example of a substantive NZ national-level 'clarification' to
the Int. ColRegs - perhaps on a par with the US changing the standard rules
of 'keep to the starboard side of a channel' in some of its Territorial
waters. (Which, of course, it is completely entitled to do.)

NZ has chosen to add a distinction covering the rights of a 'vessel under
oars' to the section regarding 'Conduct of Vessels in Sight of One Other'.
Such rights are not addressed in the International ColRegs. Such a vessel is
neither mentioned in the General Definitions - nor in the 'Responsibilities
between vessels' (Rule 18). It is, however, mentioned under the lighting
regs (Rule 25) and so, at least in Rule 25, is seen as neither a sailing nor
a power-driven vessel. Sloppy - very sloppy.

Perhaps such craft are intended 'by default' to be included as a
'power-driven vessel', which is formally defined as 'means any vessel
propelled by machinery'. As a Mech.Eng. (and not a lawyer), my definition of
a machine is very clear and certainly includes oars, double-ended paddles
and certainly ropes, pulleys, masts and sails - but what the hell do I know
?

Let's leave aside my contention that only bad life-rafts and 'people up
creeks without paddles' lack mechanical propulsion and guess that what was
meant by 'machinery' was (in my words) the action of engines powered from
stored mechanical, electrical, chemical (from gaseous, liquid or solid fuel)
or nuclear energy. Phew! Please don't ask about solar or wind...

Anyway, a 'vessel under oars should either fit in with 'machinery' or with
'sails' - or just be given its own category. Since it is unlikely to sink a
tanker - it seems it was simply ignored in the ColRegs as being unworthy of
consideration.

So NZ did a (somewhat sloppy) clarification to our 'Rule 18' and, in the
list of vessels to which a power-driven vessel must give way, added the
words 'or a vessel under oars' to make it 'a sailing vessel or a vessel
under oars'. I say sloppy, because we didn't define a 'vessel under oars'
anywhere (does it really include kayaks?), nor did we specify the pecking
order between 'oars' and sailboats.

I haven't attempted to dig into the US interpretation of the Int.ColRegs
(which, let us not forget, avoids the issue entirely), but it seems to take
the view that a 'human-powered vessel' is just another power-driven vessel
and should act like one.
(Again, I am quite open to correction on this - it is just what I've been
told.)

I'm sure glad I don't write software the way most laws seem to get
formulated ;-)
       
Best Regards
Paul

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Paul Hayward_____________________ (64)-(9)-479-2888
microMATION CONSULTANTS LTD________mob: 021-585-521
POB 101-257 NSMC, Auckland______________New Zealand
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************