Rescue: what would you do?

[finga]

I've been thinking a fair bit about this whilst I've been plastering walls and cleaning shower screens.
When I did my license all those blue moons ago it was written everywhere in the book that the skipper is responsible for his (or her) vessel and all aboard her at all times and skipper is akin to God....and no questions asked.
That seems to have been drummed into me ever since.
Now here is a question. If the boat is not in a registered mooring, tied to a swing birth or dock or attached to any other recognised mooring that's been mentioned previously in this thread and the skipper who took the boat there then got on the turps.
Is he neglecting his duty if there is no competent person to take over the skipper's duty just so the vessel may be moved at any time it may be need to be moved or any other 'duties' a skipper is responsible for (ie anchor let go, storm, noisy neighbours, boat next door going up in flames, vessel taking on water, batteries blowing up....the list can be endless).
The vessel is theoretically still 'at sea' isn't it until it's moored or on it's trailer and seeing the vessel is 'at sea' there has to be a responsible skipper?

There are heaps of registered mooring areas around if you look on the charts.

What does ColRegs say?

[Rodpal]

I think common sense and logic should prevail in all circumstances

Being able to see the V sheet tells me they couldnt have been to far away. Assisting by responding to the stricken vessel then towing them back to the shoreline would have been an act of instinctive human nature under abnormal circumstances, (which i think is the definition of a hero) going beyond that i think is crossing the line.

I have seen boatman pull up at a bottleO and load up with a couple of cartons for an over night trip .. scary shit man .. would i be pleased to see them if my vessle was under duress .. without a doubt

[Mister]

Under the circumstances the skipper has absolutely no excuse or no recourse for being over the limit while in control of a vessel. If this "skipper" wanted to be the drinker then there should have been another responsible person onboard capable of operating the vessel.

Skippers need to realize that while at "anchor" they still have responsibility, some should obviously remember this!

[WalrusLike]

I remember years ago waking up to a thump at Tangalooma. I knew immediately what had happened. The boat full of loud mouthed drunks ahead of us had drifted down on us.

I had a line on their cleat and was fending off for about five minutes trying to rouse them. They staggered out and then argued with me that my boat had somehow drifted uptide on them!

When they realised they had dragged they sheepishly said sorry and proceeded to lift anchor and motor off to re-anchor. To my delight they were downstream of me by the time they were organised. I went back to my bunk but heard a lot of carrying on and muffled thumps for a while.

They were drunken bloody nuisances. Tied up to a mooring is one thing, but at anchor you need to have some wits about you.

[ShaneC]

There is a difference between having a few cans on anchor and being a drunken pest though. I know many very capable skippers that would be better with six cans on board than a lot of people you see around would be sober.

Pissed idiots are pissed idiots, but the dragging anchor problem in the first instance was caused by inexperience and not knowing what was needed and how to do it. Shoot me down for it, but an experienced skipper with a few cans on (not blind but enjoying life!) in my opinion is much better in the dark in a bit of weather, than someone who has done a day long course and been let loose on the world in his new boat. Not arguing the legalities, just expressing a view......

[trueblue]

hic,.......... what! hic!

I'm not going anywhere

[WalrusLike]

....,Shoot me down for it, but an experienced skipper with a few cans on (not blind but enjoying life!) in my opinion is much better in the dark in a bit of weather, than someone who has done a day long course and been let loose..,,,

Yep. I agree and said the same thing earlier.

Boats and cars need different skill sets and mild alcohol impairment is less of a danger factor on the water than stupidity and thoughtlessness.

Some folk are just as dangerous sober as drunk, and others are just as safe in either condition. So I advocate a higher reading for boats. .08 or even 1.0.

Prosecute folk for their actions not their blood readings. Having said that... You still need your wits about you so I don't advocate skippers getting sozzled.

[SunnyCoastMark]

Yep. I agree and said the same thing earlier.

Boats and cars need different skill sets and mild alcohol impairment is less of a danger factor on the water than stupidity and thoughtlessness.

Some folk are just as dangerous sober as drunk, and others are just as safe in either condition. So I advocate a higher reading for boats. .08 or even 1.0.

Prosecute folk for their actions not their blood readings. Having said that... You still need your wits about you so I don't advocate skippers getting sozzled.

No Way and I am surpised at the above comments. People who reckon they function better drunk are delusional to say the least. It is just an excuse - and a poor one at that.

Where do you drawthe line? - How do you tell - on a boat - bit hard to make them do a sobriety test on the water. I can see it now...."Sir, can you place one hand in front of the other and swim in a straight line....."

A higher reading for boats? - 0.10 - you are asking for trouble and to even think that you are safer in the boat with a drunk driver than in a car is ridiculous in the extreme.

If you can't control & discipline yourself enough to be responsible when you are in control of a boat - then you should not be out there.

I might sound a bit preachy - but it is not rocket science.

Might be time for me to bring out the snapper.............



Mark

[ShaneC]

I dont believe he is saying people perform better when drunk than sober... thats just plain stupid. But if I was sinking and given the choice of 1) An experienced skipper thats had a six pack and is capable of handling a boat in ordinary conditions or 2) A dude who got his licence last week after paying to pass a course because he bought a new boat... I know who I would rather. Old mate did what he thought was right at the time, and I take my hat off to him. People with good intentions are getting rarer and rarer, its a pity his good act is going to cost him.

I am not for a second advocating everyone getting maggot and jumping in their boats.... just saying.

[timeout]

does DUI apply to a row boat/tender?
If they where close and I was over the limit that's what I'd do,row the tender over.If I thought someone was in real danger/life threatening position I would go help regardless of my predicament.

[EdBerg]

As I don't know all the fact of this situation it is hard to make the correct decision, however if I was in the same situation and there was an emergency I also would respond and then take the matter to court and the media.

For starters if someone puts up the V sheet, it only tells us that someone need assistance and not what assistance is required, for example; the situation might be that the skipper had an electrical problem and whilst attemping to fix it may have had a heart attack or stroke, his kids or wife on board may have tried to radio for help but because of electrical problems could not, so whilst the wife is trying to give mouth to mouth the young kids may have been told to hold up the V sheet. I certainly would not trust flares with young kids.

Now, from a distance, nobody will know what the situation is untill they get there and investigate, and personaly I would want anybody in any condition to come over and help if they could.

So whilst being sloshed and driving a boat is dangerous, not recommended and may cause an accident, refusing to come to the aid of a stricken boat that has signalled that help is wanted or needs it, would cause death in the above scenario. I know I would have a hard time of it, knowing I may have been able to save someones life and didn't.

It's a bit like if you go 4W Driving with your mate, wife or whoever and you are sitting, settled around a campsite for the night, an hour from the nearest highway and out of radio reception range because of distance and valleys, your are all having a good time relaxing and drinking, you are well sloshed, when suddenly the other person gets bit by a Inland Taipan, so after putting on a compression bandage, what would you do next? would you take them and drive them to get help whilst under the influence during which you might have an accident, and I stress "might have" an accident, or would you take the risk and drive the other person to seek medical help or the alternative would be they will die.

So whilst it is different sitting in front of a computer screen and judging it, I would like to think that if we were all in that situation we would all do the right thing (not neccessarily the "legal thing") and worry about the consequences in court.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[Crunchy]

does DUI apply to a row boat/tender?
If they where close and I was over the limit that's what I'd do,row the tender over.If I thought someone was in real danger/life threatening position I would go help regardless of my predicament.

Well you can't ride a horse or a pushy over the limit so I guess a tender or row boat is going to be out too. Another few years and you will only be allowed to drink "In an approved drinking chair (Must be licensed and approved for drinking by the Ministry of Fun Police), a full safety harness must be worn at all times, correct Australian Standard padding must be used.....oh and for good measure lets chuck in an approved drinking helmet.

[Richo1]

Crunchy, you forgot the "certificate of competancy"stating you have attended an alcohol safe handling course, compete with marine operations endorsement! LOL

[WalrusLike]

A year or two ago I drove my family around the South Isl NZ. It was great going back in time to when everything wasn't nanny state. Their roads don't have guard rails everywhere. Their dams and spillways aren't fenced off.

Yes if you drive too fast you will go over the edge. Don't speed. Yes if you jumped into the spillway you might drown. Dont do it. Watch you own kids, don't rely on the state to do it for you.

They are more rugged than we are here I am afraid.

Here is a picture of a very happy Walrus.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1334880121.940939.jpg

[Rodpal]

I dont think we do have enough info to make an informed decision in this senario

As Finga and many others have pointed out the responabilities of a skipper is quite demanding as the person in charge and something that shouldn't be taken lightly

Personally i think the limit on the water should be zero but its set at 0.05 so i guess there's the guideline, tolerance, window of discretion .. whatever you want to call it

If you look at the likelyhood and consequence of a scenario of drinking while at sea .. whatever the outcome you can be assured it will directly affect someone you know