This is obviously a one rule for them and one for us situation? But I ask this, how can someone less qualified or with no qualifications at all, act as the policeman in matters associated with the sea? And as we all know, it can come to down to life and death situations out there.
It would be nice to know that the person in charge of an official government vessel who has come to assist you in a critical situation, has at least the minimum qualification to be out where you are. Perhaps Government vessels and their crews aren't allowed to go to the assistance of stricken vessels in case they stuff up and cop the flack that is so often associated with sea rescues? Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why Government vessels don't come under the same stringent rules, both in boat survey and personal qualifications, as everyone else in the industry? I think there's something fishy going on here!
Bill Hohepa, Auckland
MARITIME NZ RESPONDS Dear Sir
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the concerns Bill Hohepa has raised regarding the Ministry of Primary Industries (formerly the Ministry of Fisheries).
I can confirm that all maritime rules apply equally to all water users, regardless of whether they are part of a government department or not. The expectation is that anyone operating a vessel complies with the appropriate safety management system, for example Safe Ship Management (SSM), and that they are manned appropriately according to either the 31 series of rules, or Part 35 (which allows organisations to operate approved training programmes for their own staff). MPI are aware of these requirements and I can confirm that their vessels are duly certificated and required to operate with appropriate manning. The only exception to this is where Navy vessels are involved – the maritime rules do not apply to naval vessels as the Navy operates under its own parallel system of regulations. If I am provided with specific details of potential breaches, I will pass these to MPI, who have confirmed that they will investigate in order that I can be assured their vessels and crew remain compliant.
Sharyn Forsyth, General Manager Maritime Services Maritime New Zealand, Wellington
AMAZON AND TEMPEST Dear Sir
Bill Hansen here, skipper and owner of FV Amazon. Just to let you know the Tempest was what we originally designed the Amazon from. I have never owned the Tempest but had always admired her. I had previously owned and operated the FV Sovereign for 38 years having purchased her from my father. Re your magazine, it is a great one and keep up the good work. Bill Hansen, Te Anau
ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE? Dear Sir
In her article on FCVs (Issue 88, p38), Sandra Gorter quotes me correctly on mandatory electronic surveillance in the Dungeness crab fishery, but I seem to have erred in calling the advocate an American. I had deleted my notes and writings, so I went on the Internet to check. It operates in British Columbia: same species, same coast, but north of the 49th Parallel. To recap: interlinked GPS, mast-mounted videocam, onboard sensor and electronically tagged pots, with recorded catch checkable by viewing videotapes. One absolute rule: if the system does not work, the boat cannot fish. Will it work on FCVs? It would certainly go a long way
September/October 2012 Professional Skipper 5
VIP.S88
