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

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Paul Hayward <pdh_at_mmcl.co.nz> wrote:

>
> 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.


Interestingly enough, Rule 1 states that local Rules can be written for
areas within harbors and rivers navigable by international vessels. No
mention of near-shore waters where, we might assume, the International
ColRegs are again in force. One might assume, then, that outside of a harbor
or a navigable river the international ColRegs would prevail. Then we have
this....

>
> 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).


Do they specify within harbors or navigable rivers? Seems that more than
200m from shore would actually be more likely to fall under the ColRegs.

>
> 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.


In non-navigable waters it's up for grabs. If a lake is within a city then
that city feels perfectly free to enact some sort of hodge-podge of "rules".
Otherwise a county or a state. Fortunately the Federal Government in the USA
restricts itself to the ColRegs.

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?


As an electronics engineer (origanally, at least) I agree. But then again I
believe in imaginary numbers.

>
> 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.


It does seem strange doesn't it? I figured that if it's not a sailboat then
it must be a powerboat. Apparently in 1972 no one had any inkling of the
pending popularity of kayaks.


> 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.


Several states in the USA have done this. Oregon is one. But only upon
waters not under control of the USCG.  But Oregon says that sailboats give
way to vessels under oars which is nonsense; it's much harder to stop in a
sailboat than it is in a rowboat or kayak or canoe.

>
> 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.


This has been my interpretation as well. Kayaks are clearly not sailboats,
tugboats, fishing vessels (under the Rules) or any of the others. Therefore
we have to pretend we are powerboats and behave appropriately.

Changing the International ColRegs is not a simple matter and that's
probably why we have such an apparently nonsensical set of Rules. Why
address "vessels under oars" in one section and nowhere else?

This is why I prefer to follow the strong flashlight rule and keep to waters
other boats would fear to follow.

So that leaves another question: Do these local rules (in OZ and in NZ) only
apply to harbors or are they being enforced outside harbors as well.

I'd also be curious as to whether following these local rules has completely
eliminated collisions between kayaks and other vessels. It has been my
experience that the average amateur boater is as likely to aim for a single
white light as aim away from it. This is most especially true on waters with
very dark shorelines. Maybe they think it's a harbor in a storm or
something. But if they are aiming for you they will hit you much sooner than
they (or you) expect; meaning at a higher speed than an approach speed. This
is because a kayak is so much lower (and therefore nearer) than the lights
they normal are accustomed to.

I'm going kayaking. Back Monday evening.


Craig Jungers
Moses Lake, WA
www.nwkayaking.net
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************