Select to expand quotecisco said..
Read between the lines of legislation and it essentially means the :- "law is against being poor".
I'd go even further and say it's against the law to be normal.
A normal man simply cannot live in compliance with the law, it's impossible.
The control freaks love that.
Select to expand quoteAshleyM said..cisco said..
Read between the lines of legislation and it essentially means the :- "law is against being poor".
I'd go even further and say it's against the law to be normal.
A normal man simply cannot live in compliance with the law, it's impossible.
The control freaks love that.
Thanks Ashley, That's reassuring
A few conspiracy theorists have taken over Seabreeze.
I know lots of people who are normal, They work, have families, contribute to the community and don't break the laws that are usually there for the amenity of the majority.
Let's stick to sailing!
Well, conspiracy theory or not, anyone with a modicum of nous could see the real reason behind the legistation.
We should not loose our ability to read between the lines.
Morningbird is the one with the clean spectacles and sadly, he is the one who is thinking about selling his yacht...?!
Select to expand quotefrant said..UncleBob said..
Yeah, and to add further maritime have deemed that all of Sydney Harbour, yes in it's entirety is one place as is all of broken bay, from the bridge at Brooklyn to the sea and all of the waterways is likewise one place so it appears that we only have the use of our boats for fourteen weekends per year.
With the description of all of Sydney harbour being one place how do they reconcile the differential mooring costs within that one area?
Interesting that the 90 day limit does not state consecutive days, just a total of 90 days so I guess that one has to assume they mean we may only use our boats for one quarter of the calendar year.
Should do wonders for the boating industry.
Where have you found this interpretation. It is not consistent with the interpretation of "place" as set out in the explanatory letter from Transport NSW published at start of thread. It would seem to me that separateLy defined anchorages or mooring fields are different places by that interpretation.
unfortunately there must be a few derelict vessels that have brought this regulation into being and everybody potentially pays for that.
BSO x 2, maritime office x1. Your results may vary, after all they are public servants.
Select to expand quoteMorningBird said..
A few conspiracy theorists have taken over Seabreeze.
I know lots of people who are normal, They work, have families, contribute to the community and don't break the laws that are usually there for the amenity of the majority.
Let's stick to sailing!
Are you saying that these people you know have never, say, gone a little over the speed limit, stayed just a tad long in a car space, had that one drink to many before getting in their car, put all the right things in the right curb side bin, never littered even a little by accident, if this is the case you should put them up for sainthood, personally I'd say they weren't people at all, far more likely to be sheeple following their public servant masters like a good little slaves, that's not living, that is existing.
Select to expand quoteTamble said..
What I'm finding difficult is determining what a "day" is for this purpose.
If I use my yacht both days of every weekend to go an anchor for a few hours at a nice picnic spot, does that count as a day, even though I return to the marina overnight? How much of a day is a day?
When I took my Masters ticket I had to prove the number of "days" at sea. A "day" was not a 24 hr period but any
time within a 24 hr period. Mind you that was some decades ago, but I doubt anythings changed.
Select to expand quoteBruski068 said..MorningBird said..
A few conspiracy theorists have taken over Seabreeze.
I know lots of people who are normal, They work, have families, contribute to the community and don't break the laws that are usually there for the amenity of the majority.
Let's stick to sailing!
Are you saying that these people you know have never, say, gone a little over the speed limit, stayed just a tad long in a car space, had that one drink to many before getting in their car, put all the right things in the right curb side bin, never littered even a little by accident, if this is the case you should put them up for sainthood, personally I'd say they weren't people at all, far more likely to be sheeple following their public servant masters like a good little slaves, that's not living, that is existing.
Stick to sailing, there are other forums for this stuff.
Select to expand quoteMorningBird said..Bruski068 said..MorningBird said..
A few conspiracy theorists have taken over Seabreeze.
I know lots of people who are normal, They work, have families, contribute to the community and don't break the laws that are usually there for the amenity of the majority.
Let's stick to sailing!
Are you saying that these people you know have never, say, gone a little over the speed limit, stayed just a tad long in a car space, had that one drink to many before getting in their car, put all the right things in the right curb side bin, never littered even a little by accident, if this is the case you should put them up for sainthood, personally I'd say they weren't people at all, far more likely to be sheeple following their public servant masters like a good little slaves, that's not living, that is existing.
Stick to sailing, there are other forums for this stuff.
Sorry sport, I have to disagree, this is so related to sailing, even if it wanders occasionally.
The bottom line is that the 2016 regulation imposes a limit that may be arbitrarily applied to limit the use of your boat to 90 days, or 28 days depending on the location, per calendar year. All it takes is a BSO that feels it's his duty to enforce this absurd rule and your f#*%$d, before an uninformed magistrate that knows little about boating and follows the advice provided by maritime.
Cheers and good luck if it should happen to be you.
Select to expand quoteUncleBob said..MorningBird said..Bruski068 said..MorningBird said..
A few conspiracy theorists have taken over Seabreeze.
I know lots of people who are normal, They work, have families, contribute to the community and don't break the laws that are usually there for the amenity of the majority.
Let's stick to sailing!
Are you saying that these people you know have never, say, gone a little over the speed limit, stayed just a tad long in a car space, had that one drink to many before getting in their car, put all the right things in the right curb side bin, never littered even a little by accident, if this is the case you should put them up for sainthood, personally I'd say they weren't people at all, far more likely to be sheeple following their public servant masters like a good little slaves, that's not living, that is existing.
Stick to sailing, there are other forums for this stuff.
Sorry sport, I have to disagree, this is so related to sailing, even if it wanders occasionally.
The bottom line is that the 2016 regulation imposes a limit that may be arbitrarily applied to limit the use of your boat to 90 days, or 28 days depending on the location, per calendar year. All it takes is a BSO that feels it's his duty to enforce this absurd rule and your f#*%$d, before an uninformed magistrate that knows little about boating and follows the advice provided by maritime.
Cheers and good luck if it should happen to be you.
Agree, keep to the sailing issues not personal social or political opinions. Wandering, as you put it, is what leads to people getting emotional and making angry or abusive posts.
How will this law affect the normal sailor?
This law couldn't be policed in the past and can't be policed now. How will they know you have reached 90 days in total, or even 28 days for that matter. Do you really think the BSO takes a daily note of each vessel at anchor and then passes that on to all the other BSOs in case the boat moves. The data management would be a nightmare.
It will have zero effect on all but the really stupid boat owner who stays at anchor in one spot long enough to annoy the neighbours or those who anchor long term to save on mooring fees. The latter clog up waterways, impede approach channels to mooring areas and if unlit are a danger to others.
Overall, this particular law should only have a positive affect on the majority. For the minority it might affect it can't be policed unless they are very stupid or inconsiderate.
Select to expand quoteThis law couldn't be policed in the past and can't be policed now. How will they know you have reached 90 days in total, or even 28 days for that matter. Do you really think the BSO takes a daily note of each vessel at anchor and then passes that on to all the other BSOs in case the boat moves. The data management would be a nightmare.
Well they can and have been doing so.
Back in October an American visitor was told to move on in Sydney "as they had used up their days".
Regardless of the fact that they had a three year Australian cruising permit.
Select to expand quotenswsailor said..This law couldn't be policed in the past and can't be policed now. How will they know you have reached 90 days in total, or even 28 days for that matter. Do you really think the BSO takes a daily note of each vessel at anchor and then passes that on to all the other BSOs in case the boat moves. The data management would be a nightmare.
Well they can and have been doing so.
Back in October an American visitor was told to move on in Sydney "as they had used up their days".
Regardless of the fact that they had a three year Australian cruising permit.
One of the stupid ones. They are among us.
The passive technology is already in use by the police.
They don't issue car rego stickers now, because they don't need them to pick up unregistered vehicles. There are cameras in police cars that scan the cars around them analyze the number plates, it then sends info back to the databank, and alerts the police if the rego is out of date, or the owner has outstanding warrants. This is all automatic - the police in the car do nothing, they just receive the alert.
An anchorage of course is more difficult...but a run around the bay once or twice a week by the BSO with the camera pointed at the rego numbers would potentially keep track of all the pleasure craft at anchor in NSW.
I have no idea if they do this...but it would not take much effort for them to do so.
Ok. I am retired, decided to go cruising.
I leave my home mooring, notified rms, go there for a few days than here for a week, all anchoring. Few days more further up and so on. I get to Tweed Heads, l anchored 89 days all up so far, all over the state!
Go north for a few months more cruising, then l come back to Nsw. Well, l got one day left of my official 90 days, right?
What is happening then?
I agree that we shouldn't get too tin hat conspiracy theory. However, pollies shouldn't get away with poorly worded legislation that catches the wrong people as well as the right ones, even if prosecutions are unlikely. Legislation should also be clear - the definition of "place " should be in the legislation, not just made up by the enforcing authorities.
The English canals have the same problem where the "continuous cruiser" licence requires regular moving but doesn't say how far!
Back to more boaty problems now for me.
Cheers
Bristle
I think you have all missed the point. I for one embrace this new rule and will lobby the government to uphold it . Somebody is finally thinking about me for a change. So now after 28 starts for all of the classes of racing per year the start boat can no longer anchor. So four trips out each week for the start / finish boat is approximately now a Seven week racing season the harbour is now free of those pesky weekend/ twilight racing boats so I no longer have to dodge them while I'm having a pleasant sail
mmm so I'm sure if I change my boats name to "finish line " I will be left alone . Yep I think this rule is a way to get rid of the " undesirable liveaboards " but who knows until some one on this board has a first hand experience . Just another rule for the nanny state to pull out as a last resort.
Select to expand quoteAshleyM said..
I haven't seen one conspiracy theory in this thread. Did I miss something?
Yes, we have a conspiracy to hide the conspiracy theories from you!
Conspiracy theory has nothing to do with it ! It is illegal to anchor in NSW waters for more than 90 days in a calendar year, as the law stands. At the risk of a $5500 fine plus court cost and representation.
If your happy with that, well good for you.
Select to expand quoteAgent nods said..
The passive technology is already in use by the police.
They don't issue car rego stickers now, because they don't need them to pick up unregistered vehicles. There are cameras in police cars that scan the cars around them analyze the number plates, it then sends info back to the databank, and alerts the police if the rego is out of date, or the owner has outstanding warrants. This is all automatic - the police in the car do nothing, they just receive the alert.
An anchorage of course is more difficult...but a run around the bay once or twice a week by the BSO with the camera pointed at the rego numbers would potentially keep track of all the pleasure craft at anchor in NSW.
I have no idea if they do this...but it would not take much effort for them to do so.
G'day AN,
I don't believe that rego scanning by camera , like the license plate recognition stuff in vehicles would ever work.
Too much boat motion, too many variables in size /font/colour of the lettering. We're testing various video analytics at the moment. neither these or the system that Qld police use in the vehicles are good enough for use in this environment.
Cheers,
SB
Select to expand quoteshaggybaxter said..
G'day AN,
I don't believe that rego scanning by camera , like the license plate recognition stuff in vehicles would ever work.
Too much boat motion, too many variables in size /font/colour of the lettering. We're testing various video analytics at the moment. neither these or the system that Qld police use in the vehicles are good enough for use in this environment.
Cheers,
SB
But that is sort of the point:
As I said the anchorage is more difficult to use this technology. But there are people like you and others that are working on it. So sometime in the future....?
I wonder how this law will apply to the super yachts.
I am presently on the harbour and every time I come here you see the same large motor boats anchor aroun the harbour. Usually between rose bay and Taylor's bay. Their tenders running about picking up and dropping off people.
There 30 days in one spot would run out quick.
I wonder how this law will apply to the super yachts.
I am presently on the harbour and every time I come here you see the same large motor boats anchor aroun the harbour. Usually between rose bay and Taylor's bay. Their tenders running about picking up and dropping off people.
There 30 days in one spot would run out quick.
I must say this strikes me simply as "bad" law/regulation with potential for unintended collateral impacts.
It seems that we have a law created to address a particular problem, but that:
1) Can be circumvented by "street smart" citizens
2) The government would not want to enforce in a number of scenarios, because common sense tells you that the actions of citizens are reasonable
Why clothe it as a "Safety Regulation"?
Isn't the integrity of the marine regulations system enhanced if Safety Regulations are reserved for marine safety?
It is the law maker's job to make good law, considered law, enduring law, not haphazard law.
There is really no excuse. Very disappointing.
In an imperfect world, it's hard to get around having laws that look silly but are enforced with some sense. Lots of us lived on board at anchor for years but did it with consideration and therefore had a blind eye turned to us.
So if they take this law off the books, what will people say when a rusty old piece of junk gets anchored on a 2lb Danforth just upwind of their own pride and joy and the owner takes off, never to be seen again? In a vaguely similar thread a while ago, about the guy who was taken off his boat by police in Lake Mac, many people here cried out against the abuse of power - and then information from people who were there, who knew the boat and knew what happened, told us that it was a very different story and that essentially the guy had been threatening to damage or destroy other people's boats.
None of this means that the law is perfect. Oh, and before anyone starts implying that some of us are tame sheeple, I bet I'm the only person here who (as a volunteer) has single-handedly written a submission to Maritime which caused them to overturn a proposed law that other Seabreezers were just complaining about. It's just that we often damn the authorities when they do something and then complain when they don't do something.
Select to expand quoteKarsten said..
I must say this strikes me simply as "bad" law/regulation with potential for unintended collateral impacts.
It seems that we have a law created to address a particular problem, but that:
1) Can be circumvented by "street smart" citizens
2) The government would not want to enforce in a number of scenarios, because common sense tells you that the actions of citizens are reasonable
Why clothe it as a "Safety Regulation"?
Isn't the integrity of the marine regulations system enhanced if Safety Regulations are reserved for marine safety?
It is the law maker's job to make good law, considered law, enduring law, not haphazard law.
There is really no excuse. Very disappointing.
Ran into a Maritime guy at the boat ramp yesterday, he didn't seem to think much of the reg as well. He had a chuckle at some of the points I raised.
As I said before I get the 28 day thing, it can be used to keep the riff raff moving along, The 90 day caper in new is out of shape ! Non logic, ! &$@!?!!!
Anyone whom isn't an armchair sailor would have put that time in by now ! F****** stupid !
PS still waiting for a reply from my local MP. I only wish to explain to the local honorary that if the mooring licence was more flexible . So as to make the use of mooring minders less opportune and thus making moorings more avalable, we would see a growth in cared for vessels and a reduction of the despised loiterer.
How long do you recon it will take before osmosis starts to sink boats ?? Picture the average mooring field on that day
Select to expand quotewoko said..
As I said before I get the 28 day thing, it can be used to keep the riff raff moving along, The 90 day caper in new is out of shape ! Non logic, ! &$@!?!!!
Anyone whom isn't an armchair sailor would have put that time in by now ! F****** stupid !
PS still waiting for a reply from my local MP. I only wish to explain to the local honorary that if the mooring licence was more flexible . So as to make the use of mooring minders less opportune and thus making moorings more avalable, we would see a growth in cared for vessels and a reduction of the despised loiterer.
How long do you recon it will take before osmosis starts to sink boats ?? Picture the average mooring field on that day Select to expand quote
Fibreglass yachts have been about since 1950. Never lost one to osmosis yet! I predict 250 years till osmosis starts to sink boats. Mooring minders are not the problem. It's the boats people buy then leave on moorings till they decide to sail back to their home port. Couple of weeks turn into a couple of months and then we forget how long they have been there and who actually own them!
Select to expand quoteRamona said..
Mooring minders are not the problem. It's the boats people buy then leave on moorings till they decide to sail back to their home port.
Yeah. Like this one, moored near me, took a wander about a year or so ago, someone put it back on the mooring (no thanks from the owner) then the mooring failed again a week ago, boat ended up on the beach again. Never seen anyone near it, solid growth and shell etc on the hull. Hoping it didn't hit anyone on the way through the moorings. Back on a mooring now, until next time...
Select to expand quotesydchris said..Ramona said..
Mooring minders are not the problem. It's the boats people buy then leave on moorings till they decide to sail back to their home port.
Yeah. Like this one, moored near me, took a wander about a year or so ago, someone put it back on the mooring (no thanks from the owner) then the mooring failed again a week ago, boat ended up on the beach again. Never seen anyone near it, solid growth and shell etc on the hull. Hoping it didn't hit anyone on the way through the moorings. Back on a mooring now, until next time...
A Bluebird that escaped being blown up by that Australian TV show "Water Rats"!
