Professional Skipper Magazine from VIP Publications

#91 Jan/Feb 2013 with NZ Aquaculture

The only specialised marine publication in Oceania that focuses on the maritime industry, from super yachts to small craft to large commercial ships, including coastal shipping, tugs, tow boats, barges, ferries, tourist, sport-fishing craft

Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaleditions.com/i/101615

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 6 of 100

L E T TERS CONTINUED��� CLARITY REQUIRED Dear Sir The refusal of Maritime NZ to take no action in the Antaeus/ Gypsy sinking puts a whole new light on the International Collision Regulations. By exempting pleasure craft from any prosecution Maritime NZ has more or less rewritten the rules. What other countries think of this change in the rules and whether they apply overseas I would not know. I would think though that overseas pleasure craft in New Zealand waters would also be exempt. A container ship would be required to give way to a superyacht even in a restricted waterway. Also, in theory, a drunken owner of a gin palace doing 30 knots is quite entitled to plow through a bunch of kids in P Class yachts if he so chooses without fear of retribution. I would assume that commercial craft would be required to give way to all pleasure craft whatever the situation. Maybe the lack of prosecution of the owner of the Antaeus is a one off occurrence? Or could it be that he has enough clout with the powers that be that by greasing the appropriate palms he buys himself out of any possible prosecution? Yes, its possible. Otherwise, Maritime NZ should clarify as to whether or not these are the facts of the case, and clarify these matters soon, as the safety of all mariners, pleasure or commercial, is at stake. So we may all know where we stand. Brian Cuthbert, FV Typee PHOTOSHOPPED? Dear Sir, I spend much time with each issue of Skipper since much of its news is just long enough for a ���sittie session��� in the head. But one thing kept me coming back for a second look. I refer to the photo on page six of the Aquaculture insert magazine in the November/December issue. Its caption states that the scallops are reflected in the water���s surface above, But how can a reflection show the underside of what���s below? I suspect you have been Photoshopped. Hugh Ware, Peabody, MA, USA Hugh you may be right the caption was to go with the photo used on the cover and photos used vicky verka but sadly got mixed, Well spotted. Ed��� PRUDENT TAX SPEND? Dear Sir The good, the bad and the ugly. Never a truer word stated. Keith, you never cease to amaze us with your pointed, but factual editorials, which for all the people I know is a must read as soon as the magazine arrives. I would like to add to your comments on boat and ship-building support. While I do not wish to decry the film industry, once you have made the film and people have seen it, its over. Whereas a ship or boat will continue to give good service and provide an important income for its owners and crews for 30 or more years. This is local income and wages which we then pay taxes on to the Government. In other words, the Government continues to get a return on its investment for many years to come. Not so the film industry where the profits remain offshore. The recent demise of ShipCo is a case in point where they were building excellent tugs and barges and a bit of Government support at the front end would have saved that yard and kept staff and sub trades jobs secure. Now the yard is under some 4 Professional Skipper January/February 2013 dodgy foreign ownership to complete a tug and barge destined for French Polynesia, with little future beyond this. We now hear a number of other tugs and four barges that were in the pipeline are going to Asia of which this Government is trying to woo. This sucks. Fortunately one New Zealand company is starting to build its new 45m barge down the road. For us in Whangarei we need more and the Government would be better placed to assist at this level rather than the dole queue. Name withheld by request. Fitter-engineer, Whangarei The new ship in question is a 44m motorised vehicular ferry for the wholly New Zealand owned ferry company Sealink NZ Limited who made the conscious decision to buy New Zealand made. Ed��� DEATHSHIP, ���HYSTERIA��� Dear Sir I read the article on the Kiwi-owned ���Death Ship��� with mixed feelings. Firstly, I have to set aside my adverse reaction at the mention of the owners��� names, I have yet to read anything about the Simunovich empire that generates favourable feelings. Secondly, I have to set aside my similar reaction to the mention of Greenpeace - or any green organisation. Look at it dispassionately. Margiris needs to take ���over 16,000 tonnes of fish to cover costs���. We need to know what species and over what timeframe. Even so, two or more smaller, less economic trawlers, fishing the same resource, would need to catch even more than that to cover their costs (economies of scale). They would also need more observers than would one large vessel. If these observers cannot prevent ���environmental damage��� from occurring with Margiris, they cannot prevent it from occurring with smaller vessels. They would also ���vacuum up entire shoals of fish���, but on a smaller scale. Collectively, the result would be the same. If Margiris is subsidised by the EU, that would benefit New Zealand fishing companies. If she replaces a number of Korean vessels, that can only be beneficial to all. She could only do harm if she damages the resource or the environment, and the system of clearing the net, as described, means ���fish are not damaged���. Everything she catches will therefore be marketable product, covered by quota. From what has been revealed in the article, Margiris, operating within the constraints of the QMS and under MPI regulations, can only be an improvement on what is happening in the New Zealand fishing industry now. The hysterical opposition seems to stem from her sheer size and the usual green propensity to attack industries which actually produce something useful. R Lea Clough, Napier OPEN LETTER TO: Maritime New Zealand, To whom it may concern Re: Invoice (details provided) I have received your account for $161.72 charging for Nav Aids, Safety at Sea and Oil Spillage. In my view Maritime NZ do not do anything relevant on our lake to justify a charge. I own and operate a 750 Senator boat on Lake Taupo, Tunza Salvage. This boat is in SSM for the purpose of salvage work. It was specifically built for this. As Lake Taupo is managed by Internal Affairs the Nav Aids are supplied by them. The only involvement Maritime NZ would have with these was if they had to be notified of any new buoys or beacons I order to update charts. All safety issues are dealt with by the Lake Taupo Coastguard and Harbour Master, which includes new literature and

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Professional Skipper Magazine from VIP Publications - #91 Jan/Feb 2013 with NZ Aquaculture