Jump to content

Poll On New Lifejacket Rules


LIFEJACKET RULES  

273 members have voted

  1. 1. Children less than 12 years should wear a lifejacket at all times in a vessel less than 4.8m in length?

    • Agree
      250
    • Disagree
      23
  2. 2. Persons should wear a lifejacket when in a vessel less than 4.8m in length and AT NIGHT

    • Agree
      159
    • Disagree
      114
  3. 3. Persons should wear a lifejacket when in a vessel less than 4.8m in length and ON OPEN (OCEAN) WATERS

    • Agree
      175
    • Disagree
      98
  4. 4. Persons should wear a lifejacket when in a vessel less than 4.8m in length and ON ALPINE WATERS

    • Agree
      152
    • Disagree
      121
  5. 5. Persons should wear a lifejacket when in a vessel less than 4.8m in length and WHEN BOATING ALONE

    • Agree
      172
    • Disagree
      101
  6. 6. Persons should wear a lifejacket when in a vessel less than 4.8m in length and WHEN BEING USED AS A TENDER 400 M FROM SHORE

    • Agree
      114
    • Disagree
      159
  7. 7. Skipper responsibility, judgement and direction

    • Yes
      259
    • No
      14
  8. 8. Persons should wear a lifejacket WHEN BEING TOWED eg: wakeboarding or waterskiing

    • Agree
      257
    • Disagree
      16
  9. 9. Persons should wear a lifejacket WHEN OPERATING A KAYAK 100 M FROM AN ACCESSIBLE SHORELINE

    • Agree
      208
    • Disagree
      65
  10. 10. Persons should wear a lifejacket WHEN OPERATING A KAYAK IN OPEN (OCEAN) WATERS

    • Agree
      260
    • Disagree
      13


Recommended Posts

Please read the whitepaper found at the link below before voting in this poll.

Background

The primary purpose of any lifejacket is to increase safety. They assist the wearer to float – and ultimately can prevent them from drowning. For this to be achieved the lifejacket must be:

the correct type for the situation

the right size

correctly maintained

accessible, and

worn.

Simply carrying lifejackets on board vessels does not save lives because capsize, man-overboard, or other unexpected situations occur suddenly and without warning. Locating and donning lifejackets once in the water can be difficult or impossible, depending on the experience of those involved and other factors such as current, wave action and/or water temperature.

Wearing a lifejacket does not always prevent a fatality, but even when it doesn't it can help with the recovery operation and reduce risk for emergency services. An early recovery also reduces distress for the family and friends of a missing person.

There are many factors that contribute to a boating fatality and it is impossible to conclude absolutely that wearing a lifejacket would save a person's life in the event of a boating incident. However, there is an international consensus amongst boating safety organisations that a person's chance of survival can be dramatically increased.

Please add any constructive comments as the results of this poll will be sent to Maritime and relevant bodies. I will also be requesting that fishraider members be involved in any future public consultation.

mrsswordfisherman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I do all the things where it is suggested to wear a life jacket.

My boat is only 4.2m I always fish alone, I fish outside and I fish at night.

So with the new rules in mind I went to the local boat shop and checked out the life jackets.

They had a PFD Type 1 which is inflatable light and comfortable.It was on special

reduced from $139 down to $69 so I bought one. I have worn it now on my last three trips and now I am quite used to it.

It does not get in the way and I do feel a lot safer now that I wear it.

So I answered yes to all the questions in the poll and encourage others to try one and see for themselves.

Good and safe fishing to all.

Grandad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do all the things where it is suggested to wear a life jacket.

My boat is only 4.2m I always fish alone, I fish outside and I fish at night.

So with the new rules in mind I went to the local boat shop and checked out the life jackets.

They had a PFD Type 1 which is inflatable light and comfortable.It was on special

reduced from $139 down to $69 so I bought one. I have worn it now on my last three trips and now I am quite used to it.

It does not get in the way and I do feel a lot safer now that I wear it.

So I answered yes to all the questions in the poll and encourage others to try one and see for themselves.

Good and safe fishing to all.

Grandad

Good Work !!!

I am also interested in this. I have an inflateable one, and want to get another, so whoever else is with me can wear it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm sick of the "Nanny" society we live in, I can go "base jumping" or sky diving, but I have to wear a life jacket all the time in MY boat.Freedom is supposed to be valued, the Maritime authorities don't realy care if I live or die, but the revenue from fines & the extra tax generated by the forced sale of all the extra jackets will look good to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the poll should read 'Persons should be forced to wear lj's...' not 'Persons should wear lj's...'. They are 2 very different questions. And i think this is just another example of Australia becoming a massive nanny state and taking away basic liberties away for absolutely no reason. There is no doubt that these new laws are taking it too far and I dont think that boaters were adequately consulted.

Edited by dicko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The voters on the 2 questions regards boating alone and using a boat as a tender give different answers? What's the difference in going out to your boat or going boating? If you fall overboard, you fall overboard! I think the circumstances on the day dictate weather or not you should be wearing a life jacket. Another government policy dictating the way you live and play. Just another blanket rule telling you what you have to do or else. Don't we have any say of our own anymore?

Regards Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been boating since I was old enough to drive a car and have never had a need for a life jacket -ever! however in my time spent on the water I have witnessed some complete stupidity. I have been almost cut in half on 2 occassions by boats not watching where they are going, once in broad daylight when the driver of a very large miami vice type power boat was too busy chatting up the girl beside him and turned at the very last second missing us by about 2 feet and the wake almost threw us out of the boat anyway! the jerk didnt even slow down to see if we were ok or not or even apologise, also another time I saved a very large man from drowning when he was thrown from his boat under the brooklyn road bridge on a dark and stormy night we were the only other boat on the water and he was dead set lucky that it happened in the light of the bridge where we could see it, after pulling him from the water absolutely exhausted we discovered that he was drunk as a lord and was sitting on a milk crate for a seat in a flat bottomed boat, the milk crate apparently slipped sideways and with his weight suddenly shifting to the side, the boat turned full lock at speed and ditched him into the drink! very lucky to still be alive. unfortunately it is the action a few idiots like this that force the authorities to make these laws - personally I still think it sucks!

pete.

Edited by tide'n'knots
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I'm sick of the "Nanny" society we live in, I can go "base jumping" or sky diving, but I have to wear a life jacket all the time in MY boat.Freedom is supposed to be valued, the Maritime authorities don't realy care if I live or die, but the revenue from fines & the extra tax generated by the forced sale of all the extra jackets will look good to them.

Not to be offensive or anything, but that 'nanny society' you refer to will also be the people looking for you if you were lost at sea. They are merely protecting and preserving life. Also in terms of revenue raising raising. One person lost at sea would cost over 400 times the amount of one fine of not wearing a life jacket. So how would they be gaining any money out of it? 400 people pay for the one that got caught out is the way I see it.

Personally I think most of those rules are pretty much on the money. Although the fishing at night is abit over done. As the water is mostly calm inside the bays.

Carl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to be the same smart arse (I used to race triathlons and can swim 2kms+ no problem),,, "I wasnt wearing a life jacket or spending money on government money raising ideas",,,...... but I went out and bought 4 of them for my boat and kayak ( u can always find them for about $70ish) I wear one every time i go out, you dont even know your wearing it,,, im sure if you were to go arse up 2-5kms offshore you would be glad to be wearing one and maybe wished you had 2 on,,,, nothing is ever a problem until you have a problem.........just my 2 bits worth on the subject

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all have to follow some fundimental rules which could save our lives...like wearing seat belts whilst driving. What's better, finding your dead body or returning you safe and sound to those who cherish your existence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with wearing life jackets in certain situations not just a blanket rule of under 4.8 and on your own.I have been driving boats for 31 years,everything from starting in a 12ft tinny with a 6hp to driving game boats.I don't see the need to wear a life jacket while drifting or not under way and was recently pulled up by waterways while drifting in gymea bay,middle of the day with no wind and could not see the logic being that if I fell in the drink I could get myself in the boat,If I was unconscious and fell in the drink I couldn't activate the jacket anyway.

In saying that 18 months ago while heading out for a early morning kingfish in the hacking with a mate I hit a channel marker right on the point of my tinnie throwing us both in the water and knocking both of us out.Luckily I came too first and flipped my mate over and holding him up(not easy with a 120kg bloke) until we were rescued.The first thing I bought us both when we got out of hospital was an inflatable vest and I always wear it now when under way.I consider myself fairly competent and not a cowboy or some body who takes stupid risks but things can and do go wrong so a jacket is a good investment.Also there was no alcohol involved in the accident just a high tide,alot of glare,and a big bloke sitting at the front of the boat when I was driving a tiller steer.This was a place I had fished and surfed for 20 plus years.

So I think jackets are essential but not at all times,maybe they need to look at when and where you have to wear one.

Cheers,Brad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sick of the "Nanny" society we live in, I can go "base jumping" or sky diving, but I have to wear a life jacket all the time in MY boat.Freedom is supposed to be valued, the Maritime authorities don't realy care if I live or die, but the revenue from fines & the extra tax generated by the forced sale of all the extra jackets will look good to them.

No offense mate, I don't think that the government is banking on raising revenue from people buying extra life jackets as its the law to already have them on the boat. However, in real life, having them on board and not wearing them is as useless as base jumping without your parachute. From observation, most fishos don't appear to be great swimmers. Therefore, when an "unexpected accident" happens, and your find yourself in the drink 20m away from your boat and 100m from shore, you will be happy that it will keep you afloat for a while instead of a slow drowning.

Besides, with the advent of modern vests, any fishing technique, or your overall experience would not be affected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mate of mine and his experienced ex pro fisho at hathead, nearly drowned because they had lifejackets on. They were coming into the shallow launch creek at hat head in an open tinny, which during school holidays gets packed with kids in the creek. Whilst riding the back of wave into the narrow opening they had to stop due to oblivious kids swimming into their path.The following wave upturned the boat trapping them under the boat. The flotation vests pushed them up againsts the underside of the boat whilst they were still in the surge zone, preventing them from scrambling under the upturned sides.With no vests on they would have been able to squeeze under the side. They were lucky that adults then raised one side of the boat allowing them to escape. So its horses for courses. Blanket rules can also cause death and people should be able to be allowed to judge the severity of the the situation for themselves.

I also tend to agree that it can be a good revenue raising ploy.We went out several years ago for the first time out of Batemans Bay in a 6.3m walkaround custom plate. We didn't recognise it as a bar crossing as it is as "wide as Sydney heads". It was dead flat yet the local waterways bloke was parked round the corner and issued us with fines.Seriously!!! If it had of been a real bar crossing such as Narooma or Sth west Rocks I could understand. He was still parked outside,4 hrs later, still issuing fines. Obviously no time to circulate for intercepting real safety issues.

I agree , it's all about more fines coming from our communist Government.

I have worked on and under the water for most of my life and have wittnessed the death of two gentlemen whom were trapped in their sunken boat by their life jackets.

I have also been fined for no life jacket whilst wearing a full wetsuit,which needs 10 kg of lead belt to be worn to be able to dive below the surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This rule is ridiculous, and is just another example of how society is becoming over safety concious. I think that lifejackets should be compulsory for children under 12 under all circumstances and recommended for others, but this 4.8m boat stuff is just garbage!!!

1) If your boat capsizes and you fall into the water, lifejacket or not search and rescue are still going to need to spend time and money searching for you to rescue you

2) If you are knocked unconcious a lifejacket is useless unles it is activated (refering to manually activated vests)

3) Anyone who says that jackets do not get in the way while fishing - well try jigging, it is an absolute pain in the you know what!!!

What bugs me the most is the 4.8m boat garbage. You would be better off in a new 4.5m boat than some 20 year old 5m rust bucket!!! Makes no sense to me? It could be argued this rule is discriminatory towards those who cannot afford a bigger boat! These rules should be applied to all boats or none!

Society is becoming an overprotective joke. By raming it down everyone's throat that you are safer with lifejackets on and you must wear them - could this encourage greater risks to be taken from those in small boats because they have been reassured by society that they are now safer? Maybe - maybe not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What bugs me the most is the 4.8m boat garbage. You would be better off in a new 4.5m boat than some 20 year old 5m rust bucket!!! Makes no sense to me? It could be argued this rule is discriminatory towards those who cannot afford a bigger boat! These rules should be applied to all boats or none!

Perhaps the rule should be based on the boats flotation rating? i.e. BASIC vs LEVEL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

should seat belts be optional too seeing as they could cause whiplash?

is any fish worth a life?

i cant see the bad side in wearing a PFD, these days they are so unintrusive that you dont even know you are wearing it......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fish alone 90% of the time, I fish in Lake Macquarie or one of the Hunter Dams 90% of the time, I am within 50 metres of the shoreline trolling 90% of the time, I have always worn a life jacket when I deem it necessary or appropriate and I resent being told I have to wear one by anyone.

Other than that I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do see the negative side, but maybe an investment in the inflatable lifejackets? I have got one for myself. And I can say its like wearing a normal vest.

Edit: I also agree with fishmaniac, maybe age should be taken into consideration when deciding where rules apply, the only problem is where would the information for a guide be found unless people purposely capsize their boats to test it appropriately.

PDF's in the end are a lifesaving device, its best to become accustom to how it works so that in extreme circumstances it can be removed such as explained before.

P.S. I can also recognise that removing a lifejacket underwater would be difficult, but this is where you weigh up what would be more appropriate in a situation of being in the water. I think lifejackets save more lifes then kill.

Edited by Rafinx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

should seat belts be optional too seeing as they could cause whiplash?

is any fish worth a life?

i cant see the bad side in wearing a PFD, these days they are so unintrusive that you dont even know you are wearing it......

Mate, you could die everytime you hop in your car or in a boat. Understandably people have different opinions with regard to what level or risk warrants action.

The risk of something going wrong when boating alone or offshore is pretty much the same if you are in a 4.7m boat or a 4.9m boat. My main objection is with regard to the blanket rule that has been put in place over boats less than 4.8m.

The basis for this figure is based on the number of boating accidents that have occurred and how many were in boats less than 4.8m. It is fact that more smaller boats are owned than larger boats and it is also fact that most new boaties start off in a smaller vessel. That is why there are more incidents in smaller vessels! Perhaps if these figures were analysed by comparing the number of incidents to the age of those onboard, or the number of average boating trips made by boats of different size categories we may well have different laws in place?

And like i said, they are not intrusive for most styles of fishing but for some styles of fishing such as jigging they are annoying. Again, just because one person finds an item of clothing unobtrusive does not mean everyone else feels the same way.

If lifejackets are going to save heaps more lives (which I'm sure they will) then why aren't they made compulsory for boats of all sizes? Aside from what I percieve as being unjust to owners of smaller boats, is it not irresposible that society isn't ensuring that everyone wears lifejackets all the time so we are all safer????

Edited by fishmaniac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This rule is ridiculous, and is just another example of how society is becoming over safety concious. I think that lifejackets should be compulsory for children under 12 under all circumstances and recommended for others, but this 4.8m boat stuff is just garbage!!!

1) If your boat capsizes and you fall into the water, lifejacket or not search and rescue are still going to need to spend time and money searching for you to rescue you

2) If you are knocked unconcious a lifejacket is useless unles it is activated (refering to manually activated vests)

3) Anyone who says that jackets do not get in the way while fishing - well try jigging, it is an absolute pain in the you know what!!!

What bugs me the most is the 4.8m boat garbage. You would be better off in a new 4.5m boat than some 20 year old 5m rust bucket!!! Makes no sense to me? It could be argued this rule is discriminatory towards those who cannot afford a bigger boat! These rules should be applied to all boats or none!

Society is becoming an overprotective joke. By raming it down everyone's throat that you are safer with lifejackets on and you must wear them - could this encourage greater risks to be taken from those in small boats because they have been reassured by society that they are now safer? Maybe - maybe not?

my thoughts as well..make it all boats!!!under 4,8 m what a load of garbage!!!to bad if your in a 5m + boat and cant swim!!leave it alone..all there setting it up for is a fine fest!!!me personally i make. my deckys wear them but if your jigging etc they come off.spend the money on theses clowns keeping under sized fish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate, you could die everytime you hop in your car or in a boat. Understandably people have different opinions with regard to what level or risk warrants action.

The risk of something going wrong when boating alone or offshore is pretty much the same if you are in a 4.7m boat or a 4.9m boat. My main objection is with regard to the blanket rule that has been put in place over boats less than 4.8m.

The basis for this figure is based on the number of boating accidents that have occurred and how many were in boats less than 4.8m. It is fact that more smaller boats are owned than larger boats and it is also fact that most new boaties start off in a smaller vessel. That is why there are more incidents in smaller vessels! Perhaps if these figures were analysed by comparing the number of incidents to the age of those onboard, or the number of average boating trips made by boats of different size categories we may well have different laws in place?

And like i said, they are not intrusive for most styles of fishing but for some styles of fishing such as jigging they are annoying. Again, just because one person finds an item of clothing unobtrusive does not mean everyone else feels the same way.

If lifejackets are going to save heaps more lives (which I'm sure they will) then why aren't they made compulsory for boats of all sizes? Aside from what I percieve as being unjust to owners of smaller boats, is it not irresposible that society isn't ensuring that everyone wears lifejackets all the time so we are all safer????

i used to compete in ocen swims alot, i am a strong swimmer yet i still wear a pfd..... laws are laws....... your less likely to be thrown overboard on a bigger boat......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i used to compete in ocen swims alot, i am a strong swimmer yet i still wear a pfd..... laws are laws....... your less likely to be thrown overboard on a bigger boat......

:Funny-Post:

Yea, you are more likely to be thrown overboard from a 13ft tinnie as opposed to a 40ft riv. Explain to me how this is the case when you are in a 5m boat that's very old with poor hull design as opposed to a new boat just under 4.8m which would be more stable? So in replying to my previous comment and offering a counter argument you have failed to address the ONE issue i have with this law - that is the 4.8m figure!!!!!!

Yea laws are laws.... I would hate to see what the world would be like if everyone took that viewpoint....

It would be good to actually put some thought into the facts being presented - because if in fact laws should be changed for the better and enough people support change, it will likely occur.

I'm not arguing this law should be totally abolished, I believe that it currently stands to be improved for the reasons I have described previously.

Some areas for thought include:

- Reconsider the circumstances under which lifejackets are compulsory with reference to boat length (another member had a good idea referring to the flotation class of the boat)

- Reconsider whether its necessary to wear the jacket when not underway

- Make it compulsory to have auto-inflatable jackets for the case of being unconcious (for someone who is a strong swimmer, this would probably be the only time a lifejacket is of benefit)

- Government to subsidise auto inflatable vests to a more affordable price

Edited by fishmaniac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:Funny-Post:

Yea, you are more likely to be thrown overboard from a 13ft tinnie as opposed to a 40ft riv. Explain to me how this is the case when you are in a 5m boat that's very old with poor hull design as opposed to a new boat just under 4.8m which would be more stable? So in replying to my previous comment and offering a counter argument you have failed to address the ONE issue i have with this law - that is the 4.8m figure!!!!!!

Yea laws are laws.... I would hate to see what the world would be like if everyone took that viewpoint....

It would be good to actually put some thought into the facts being presented - because if in fact laws should be changed for the better and enough people support change, it will likely occur.

I'm not arguing this law should be totally abolished, I believe that it currently stands to be improved for the reasons I have described previously.

Some areas for thought include:

- Reconsider the circumstances under which lifejackets are compulsory with reference to boat length (another member had a good idea referring to the flotation class of the boat)

- Reconsider whether its necessary to wear the jacket when not underway

- Make it compulsory to have auto-inflatable jackets for the case of being unconcious (for someone who is a strong swimmer, this would probably be the only time a lifejacket is of benefit)

- Government to subsidise auto inflatable vests to a more affordable price

yeah you are probably right in regards to the flotation class of the boat........

i think that when not under way, below a certain floatation class PFD should be word..... all it takes is one jack ass to swamp your boat....

your last 2 points probably can be summed up into 1...... if compulsory auto inflate PFD's are to be worn, then goverment needs to subsidise it, as you said, then make the yearly service on them part of your rego cost...... (cant re rego without having this done)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

The mandatory waring of PFD’s is not about saving lives or revenue raising, just another little form of control, another small law so the noose tightens’ the power that be want a compliant population’ just do as your told. Children at school are trained to do as the authorities tell them like no hat no play! How long before every one will have to wear a hat when outside? For our own good of course

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...