ARC Navigation Safety Bylaw Review

ARC Navigation Safety Bylaw Review Rule 2.17
This affects all kayakers, fishermen in kayaks, sit-upons, dragon boats, Maori waka, surf kayaks, surf ski racers, kayak racers, dive yaks, fishing yaks and in fact every craft that uses a paddle to propel it in the Auckland Region.

This affects all kayakers, fishermen in kayaks, sit-upons, dragon boats, Maori waka, surf kayaks, surf ski racers, kayak racers, dive yaks, fishing yaks and in fact every craft that uses a paddle to propel it in the Auckland Region.

ARC ignores 94% submitters * 545 * submissions in 4 folders (about two reams of paper) were considered by the ARC subcommittee and Harbourmaster's office along with verbal submissions on 29 May. What is the issue? In 2008 the Auckland Regional Authority updated it's Navigation Safety Bylaw. After submissions had closed, but before the bylaw was approved, the ARC subcommittee slipped a draconian rule 2.17 'Paddle Craft Visibility', into the bylaw. The rule says paddlers MUST ENSURE their visability. The rule effectively shifts blame from power boat skippers not looking ahead and running down a paddler to the paddler. Because the propper consultation process was not followed, ARC was forced to have new submissions but cleverly worded the statement of proposal so that evidence for a need or otherwise for the rule, as required under the Local Government Act, could be ignored. Evidence shows the rule not to be required, it could not be observed and it would not be effective in reducing the already very low rate of collisions. Worse still, blind aherance would reduce safety for paddlers. The hearing concluded with 94% of subbitters calling for the removal of the rule. The same subcommitte heard the new evidence, and you guessed it, it is ignoring the bulk of submitters and attempting to justify its original mistake. Paddle organisations united in oposition send letter to ARC Paddle organisations and clubs united in oposition and on 21st July 200909 sent this letter to the Auckland Regional Authority. Chairman, Auckland Regional Council Re: ARC Maritime Safety Bylaw “Paddle craft visibility” We, the undersigned Auckland paddle clubs and associations, call on the ARC to: Remove the current paddle visibility rule 2.17 from the Auckland Maritime Safety Bylaw, and Insert a “recommendation for visibility of kayaks and other paddle craft” as an appendix to the bylaw similar to the approach taken by Environment Waikato. Environment Waikato has addressed the paddle visibility issue by implementing a recommendation “Appendix 5” in the 1 July 09 Safety Bylaw update. We believe this is the preferred approach for ARC to take. We believe this is necessary for the safety of paddlers in Auckland. In particular: There has not been sufficient consultation. The use of a recommendation for paddle craft visibility, rather than a rule, would allow each type of paddle sport to use their own comprehensive safety codes of conduct, which includes paddle visibility and collision avoidance, as part of an overall safety strategy for their sport. Such safety codes of conduct could be included in ARC Maritime Safety Bylaw reviews as recommendations in the future. An overwhelming number of submitters, 94%, called on the ARC not to use a rule to address paddle craft visibility, but to use education instead. A “recommendation” will be far more effective, safer, and supported by each sport, than a widely unpopular “rule” for educating current and new paddlers in paddle craft safety, including the need to be visible. Any recommendation developed should include wording that encourages the different sectors of the paddle sport community to operate within their own developed codes of practice to encourage safety. Signed Auckland paddle clubs and associations Tuesday 14 th July 2009 Auckland Regional Outrigger Canoe Association Associated clubs Akarana - Sulphur Beach Aratika Water Sports Club - Hinemoa Reserve, Birkenhead Cook Islands Outriggers Association - Mt Wellington Counties Eastern Outrigger Canoe Club - Mt Wellington Hauraki Sports Club - Tamaki Auckland Hoe Tonu Outrigger Canoe Club - Avondale Manukau Outrigger Canoe Club - Otahuhu NZ Taniwha Dragonboat & Outrigger Canoe Club Inc - Lake Pupuke Orakei Water Sports - Orakei Pakuranga Outrigger Canoe Club - Mangere Bridge Tamaki Outrigger Canoe Club - Panmure Auckland Te Paerangi Waka Ama Inc - Otahuhu Te Pou Herenga Waka Ama Club Inc. - Manukau City Waitakere Outrigger Canoe Club - Te Atatu South Canoe Racing New Zealand Canoe Racing New Zealand is the National Sports Organisation responsible for the administration, development and competition of Canoe Racing in New Zealand including Olympic racing. Associated clubs North Shore Canoe Club Takapuna Boating Club Waitemata Canoe and Multisport Club Independent paddle clubs and associations Coastbusters Sea Kayak Association Inc Eastside Ocean racing Club Hauraki Canoe Club Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers (KASK) Offshore Ski Racing Association Takapuna Boating Club Taniwha Outrigger and Dragon Boat Club Canoe & kayak Associated clubs Yakity Yak kayak Club - Auckland & Auckland Canoe & Kayak Yakity Yak kayak Club – Manukau & Manukau Canoe & Kayak Yakity Yak kayak Club - North Shore & North Shore Canoe & Kayak Manukau Canoe Club Surf Life Saving Northern Region Associated clubs Bethells Beach Far North Karekare Kariaotahi Mairangi Bay Mangawhai Heads Muriwai Omaha Orewa Piha Raglan Red Beach Ruakaka Sunset Beach United North Piha Waipu Cove Whangarei Heads A single club did not sign Auckland Canoe Club Why should you care about this? There are increasing controls being put on all forms of individual pursuits in New Zealand and throughout the western world, often in the name of safety. Kayakers and paddle craft are no exception. ARC wants to control what we do, where we do it and how we do it. Auckland is called "City of Sails" because generations of sea going individuals got out there and enjoyed the sea. Kayakers and kayaking organisations believe we are the best people to determine what is safe for ourselves. The ARC has proven it knows nothing about kayaks or kayaking from its current safety bylaw which is absolutely unenforceable rubbish. Do we want to end up like Europe? If we operated under European kayaking regulations, we would not be allowed to kayak to Great Barrier, to Coromandel or even kayak from Sullivan's Bay in Mahurangi to Motuora Island or any of the other Islands more than 5km offshore. Is this what we want in New Zealand? If you were a kayak fisherman in France in a plastic yak under 4 meters, you could not venture more than 300 meters offshore because these craft are considered to be "beach gear". In Europe kayaking has ended up with extreme over-regulation. Do we want to end up like Europe? ARC believes kayakers need to be regulated for our own safety. They say we are not visible. They say if they don't regulate us, we risk collision. Is this true? In the last 10 years there have been only 5 investigated collisions involving paddle craft in all New Zealand including lakes. ARC says there must have been more collisions, but they have no evidence. Maritime NZ has not considered kayak collision to be a problem so has not kept records until just recently. However the Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers (KASK) has kept statistics for 10 years of all kayaking incidents including collisions. Statistics show collision is NOT a problem at all. ARC says that with the big increase in kayaks over the last 10 years there must be a corresponding increase in collisions. But are there? The number of kayaks has increased from around 2000 fifteen years ago to around 200,000 today, a 10,000% increase. The total number and rate of collisions involving kayaks has not increased at all. ARC is completely ignoring all known statistics and is pursuing regulation as a means of controlling kayakers. This is only the first step. Maritime New Zealand, in its submission to ARC on rule 2.17, said it wants to bring in regulations on all craft up to 4 meters in length. Up till now no one has mentioned 4m so this is obviously a reference to what is happening in Europe. Let's see what Europe says about kayak regulation. Here are the regulations for kayakers in France. This is where New Zealand is headed unless we stem undue regulation of paddle craft now. Regulation of Sea kayaks in France LA RÉGLEMENTATION DU KAYAK DE MER EN FRANCE - Translated into English by Paul Hayward The rules governing the practice of sea kayaking in France have been rapidly developing in recent years. First seen as 'beach gear', despite its marine qualities, the sea kayak has only been allowed to point its bow up to a mile from shelter (1,852 m) and up to 5 miles (about 9 Km ) under certain conditions in Bretagne. The regulation of recreational boating is moving toward the European standard. In this context, new texts are being prepared. Categories would be replaced by 'areas of navigation'. In the case of sea kayaking, it is moving (so far) towards two zones of navigation: up to 300m from shore for 'beach gear' up to 5 miles (9.2 Km) from shelter for approved kayaks The approval of a kayak will be similar to today, with additional requirements for, a skirt, a spare paddle, a paddle float, flares, a whistle or horn, signal mirror, a deck or hand compass, a waterproof lamp, a map of the area, 20g Fluorescein (marine dye), and a VHF. Navigation must be undertaken, at a minimum, by two kayaks. Check regularly for updates, with Maritime Affairs, the French Federation of Canoe-Kayak or coastal clubs. In the meantime, the current French (June 2004) status is: Sea kayaks Sea kayaks, after approval, are allowed to operate in the 6th category, ie up to 2 miles from shelter. Definition Are considered to be boats driven solely by human power, approved for 6th category navigation in accordance with the provisions of Division 224, with characteristics as follows: a length greater than 4 m, a width greater than 0.50 m, and with a L / W ratio less than 10 (where L is the length & W the width). For boats over 10 m, this ratio no longer applies, but a minimum width of 1 meter is required. In the case of a multihull boat, the total width is equal to the sum of the widths of the main hull & float(s), provided they have a length equal to or greater than 2 m. Reminder : inflatable craft powered solely by human power are 'beach gear' and their area of navigation is limited to the coastal strip of 300 m. Transitional period During a transitional period of 3 years from August 3 2000 , boats already benefiting from an exemption from the navigation area of 300 m may continue to navigate in the area a mile from shelter. At the end of this period, those boats concerned that have not been the subject of an approval procedure (to continue to navigate beyond the 300 m), will be considered as 'beach gear' and their use will be limited to the coastal strip of 300 m. The decisions on approving these boats are made by the technical director of the national sports federation concerned - according to the type of boat: the French Federation of Canoe-Kayak or the French Federation of Rowing, after notice from a commission for specific approvals. Is this what you want for New Zealand? ARC Rule 2.17 history In July 2008 the Auckland Regional Authority Navigation Safety Bylaw came into effect. Rule 2.17 affects all paddle craft including kayaks that operate in ARC controlled waters from Thames-Kawau. ARC accepted submissions last year but at the time rule 2.17 was not in the proposed Bylaw (it was slipped into the Bylaw after submissions closed). The Bylaw Rule 2.17 has now been reviewed and this time there have been many submissions from the kayaking community. See submissions to ARC -> New Wellington Safety Bylaw -> Waikato goes for education-> Maritime NZ wants to go national -> Current Bylaw Rule 2.17 “Every kayak and paddle craft that is navigating in waters beyond 200 metres from shore shall ensure they are highly visible to other vessels. This shall include: (a) wearing a high visibility vest or high visibility PFD; and (b) use of reflecting tape on oars or paddles and also on clothing; and (c) at night showing a continuous white light visible in all directions from a of distance two nautical miles.” Link to full ARC Safety Bylaw Look for Definitions of paddle craft and Rule 2.17. Also kayaks must have identification. The current Bylaw (above) shows ARC knew nothing about kayaks when it passed this bylaw (not supprising since there was no consultation ). ARC Proposed Rule 2.17 wording Note: The ARC has not yet released changes to wording after consultation yet. They have refused to tell us until it has been passed. “Every kayak and paddle craft that is navigating in waters beyond 200 metres from shore shall ensure they are highly visible to other vessels. This shall include: By Day Wearing highly visible clothing or a highly visible PFD suitable for contrasting with the visibility conditions at the time; At Night (a) use of reflective tape on clothing; and (b) showing a continuous white light visible in all directions and of suitable intensity to avoid collision; and (c) having ready an electric torch showing a white light which must be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent collision.” What's wrong with proposed rule? Kayakers believe the current rule is not needed. Kayakers prefer education over regulation. Kayakers believe the current and proposed rule is not practical, and can not be observed. Kayakers do not want to break the law but when the law is an ass it will be treated as such. Kayakers do believe in safety. We practise it all the time we are on the sea. We learn risk management techniques and weigh the risks of one action verses another depending on conditions. Kayakers know that if there is a collision with a power boat they will come off worse. The statistics show that although collisions are extreemly infreqent they often result in severy injury for the kayaker. Therefore kayakers learn that they need to take action regardless of rules to avoid consequences. Kayakers know more about what they need than a few ARC Councilers. Proof of this is the curent need for a Bylaw review, where propper procedure was not followed. Submissions overwhelmingly reject the need of regulations and support kayaker education. What other regions are doing Greater Wellington Regional Council has just updated their Wellington Navigation and Safety Bylaw. They have taken a sensible approach for both yachts and paddled craft less than 6 meters in length. An all round lightis only required within the harbour. Elsewhere only a torch. This conforms with the International Collision Regulations. Wellington has shown what a Regional Authority can do when they consult. Congratulations Wellington. Environment Waikato has opted at the moment for education over regulation. They have just introduced a new Navigation Safety Bylaw on 1 July 2009. Auckland Regional Authority. This leaves just one authority, the ARC, who did not consult with kayakers before introducing rule 2.17 and are pursuing regulation. Why is the ARC concerned? There were 3 kayakers hit in 2008 in Auckland. The Harbourmaster originally looked at the problem and recommended to the ARC Committee considering the Safety Bylaw that education was the best way to address the problem. ARC Councilors overrode his advice and, after the consultation period had ended , inserted Rule 2.17. With the proliferation of new kayaks, especially fishing yaks, sit-upon kayaks and to a lesser extent sit-in kayaks the ARC fears that new kayakers will have about the same degree of water-safety knowledge as the average fizz-boat owner (who the ARC is somewhat afraid to tackle). Kayakers are an easier target than fizz-boats (at the moment). The Harbourmaster conducted some kayak visibility tests in the inner harbour with some members of the Auckland Canoe Club last year. At one time it was claimed that this was "consultation with kayakers" However, these 3 collisions are the only ones recorded in ARC waters for 13 years! In the only one investigated the Judge said "the kayaker did nothing wrong" when prosecuting the power boat skipper. The second was suspected sunstrike and in the third it is suspected the fishing boat skipper was not keeping a watch. All occurred in the inner harbour during the day. The ARC now wants to visibility regulations for paddle craft, not only in the inner harbour, but everywhere from Auckland to Kawau. Maritime NZ submision to ARC Marritime New Zealand (MNZ) has reviewed the proposed bylaw amendment and makes the following comments and observations. Clause 1.17.1 MNZ proposes the following wording in place of the that currrently proposed by te ARC (changes in bold) Every paddle craft, rowing craft and small craft under 4 metres in length that is navigating in waters beyond 200 metres from shore shall take all reasonable practical steps to ensure they are highly visible to other vessels. This may include: By Day wearing highly visible clothing or a highly visible PFD or other suitable thing for contrasting with visibility conditions at the time By Night a) use off reflective tape b) showing a continuous white light visible in all directions and of suitable intensity to avoid collision; and c) having ready an electrict tourch showing a white light which must be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent a colision. Single list of all ARC Councillors' emails (copy whole section) "Michael Lee" <mike.lee@arc.govt.nz>; "Judith Bassett" <judith.bassett@xtra.co.nz>; "Clive Varter" <ccarter@calaw.co.nz>; "Joel Cayford" <joel.cayford@arc.govt.nz>; "Sandra Coney" <coney@xtra.co.nz>; "Brent Morrissey" <brent.morrissey@arc.govt.nz>; "Christine Rankin" <christine@rankingroup.co.nz>; "Christine Rose" <christine.rose@arc.govt.nz>; "Paul Walbran" <mgparts.nz@clear.net.nz>; "Bill Burrill" <bill.burrill@arc.govt.nz>; "Jan Sinclair" <jancolin@ihug.co.nz>; "Dianne Glenn" <dianne.glenn@arc.govt.nz)	Updated 24 July 2009 Your submissions on ARC safety bylaw 2.17 Summary * Leave bylaw as is (9 submissions) - 1.65% * Rescind bylaw (first option) (514) - 94.31% * Change bylaw (not rescinding) (20) - 3.67% An overwhelming number of submissions called on ARC to rescind the Safety Bylaw Rule 2.17. Over 94% of all submissions said: "Education not bylaw". Latest News - 24 July 2009 24/7/09 - Followup ARC meeting with Auckland paddle organisation expected in two weeks. 21/7/09 - ARC Chairman Mike Lee chairs meeting with with paddle organisation and Navigation Safety Bylaw subcommittee to hear issues. 14/7/09 - Forty nine Auckland paddle associations unite and send letter to ARC calling on rule 2.17 to be removed . ARC subcommittee retracts offer to release proposed by;aw wording ARC subcommittee offers to release proposed bylaw wording to paddlers Kayakers email ARC representitives complianing about subcommittee ignoring 94% submitters call to remove rule ARC hearing of verbal submissions ARC ignores 94% of submitters "Tell us what you want" the ARC subcommittee (of the Environmental committee) said to kayakers. We'll listen. Here are the 3 points 94% of al summissions asked for: "I do not support regulation via a bylaw " "Public education through a voluntary code of good practice developed by kayaking organizations" And "through recommendations by maritime safety authorities". We said a rule can not cope with all the different types of kayaking /racing / paddle craft. We told them it is power boat skippers not looking ahead that causes collisions with kayakers. We told them we wanted education, not a bylaw. We told them and they listened. Are they recommending "education not bylaw"? NO Are they recommending public education through a voluntary code of good practice developed by kayaking organizations? NO Have they taken notice of recommendations by Maritime New Zealand (maritime safety authorities)? NO ARC is ignoring 94% of submitters. If you want to do something - email your local ARC counciller and tell them 94% of submitters don't want to be ignored. Link to your local ARC Councillor who will be pleased to hear your views Here is the email to send to your councillor This is how ARC democracy works The subcommittee decided it knew more (after 1 day of submissions) than kayakers with a lifetime of experience. The subcommittee believed, without a rule kayakers will not be safe. It believes kayakers are not responsible enough to make their own codes of practice, as in other sports, we need to be regulated for our own good. The subcomittee acknowledged collisions are caused by power boat skippers not watching where they were going. "Yes" they said " but what can we do about them?" The ARC is powerless against the powerful power boat lobby. But they can make rules for kayakers, so they will. How can any attempt to modify kayaker behaviour alter the outcome of a collision that is caused by a power boat skipper not looking ahead? They know this. But the rule is not designed to prevent collisions, it is designed to give the ARC Harbourmaster control over kayakers who are misbehaving on the water. The harbourmaster said this at a meeting before the submission process. During the submissions however this was denied. So this is where we are at: ARC councillors heard submitters and are recommending to the ARC a rule that 94% of submitters do not want. ARC knows better than the kayaking experts in New Zealand. They know better than Paul Caffyn (KASK) and widely considered to be one of the most experienced kayakers in the world. Better than Pete Townend of Canoe & Kayak and Yakity Yak, better than Ian Ferguson (Fergs kayaks), better than Maritime New Zealand and better than Stuart Chrisp (the kayaker who was run down by Ross Masters of the Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron). Stuart Crisp was wearing everything the ARC recommends. Bright kayak, bright clothing, a bright paddle and he still got run down. The subcommittee believes 94% of submitters are wrong - that it has become expert enough to bring in kayak safety rules for all forms of paddle craft - sports and recreational paddlers. The ARC thinks "any solution" is better that one individual kayakers may select depending on the conditions at the time, a "one fix for all" solution to collisions. The problem is that many paddlers will believe them and will stop thinking about safety. If you want to do something - email your local ARC councilors and tell them 94% of submitters don't want to be ignored. We don't want what the subcommittee is recommending to the ARC. Link to your local ARC Councillor who will be pleased to hear your views Here is the email to send to your councillor It is interesting to see who started all this and who is backing it now. The 1.65%) of submitters who wanted the bylaw left as it was are : Denise Jamieson - Director Planet Seadoo (sells jet skis) Ports of Auckland - Nigel Meek Fullers Ferries Basil Orr - Private submission (but represents Crusing and Navigation Association of NZ & Westhaven Marina and Users Association at Recreational Harbour Users meetings). (Note: he claims 2.17 was added to the draft ARC bylaw as a result from his submission 28 Feb 07 and his verbal submission 23 April 08). Jeremy Singleton - (wants 2nm light provision left, did not comment on other requirements) Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron - Ross Masters, Ex Vice Commodore (recently prosecuted for running down a kayaker in Auckland Harbour that really started all this off) Scott Colbrook - private submission - Vice Commodore Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron Outdoor Boating Club of Auckland - Frazer Elder John Burrett - Rear Commodore Royal New Zealand Yacht Squadron, Past Commodore Outboard Boating Club of NZ. What 94% of submitters said... The 514 submitters who wanted it rescinded stated: “I believe that visibility of kayaks and paddle craft should be improved through public education, through a voluntary code of good practice developed by kayaking organizations, and through recommendations by maritime safety authorities. I do not support regulation via a bylaw.” ARC intends to ignore your calls and pursue regulation. Paddlers are not as powerful a lobby as the power boat organisations. You don't pay $3000 a year to join your kayaking organisation (like the RNZYS). You don't control America's Cup in Auckland. You don't add anything to the ARC waterfront property portfolio. (Don't forgetmembers of this subcommittee are also on the ARC Finance Committee which controls millions of dollars of harbour front estate). Want to do something? - Email your local ARC counciller NOW and tell them 94% of submitters don't want to be ignored. Link to your local ARC Councillor who will be pleased to hear your views Here is an email to send to them Moving On. What happens now? This is the same ARC subcommittee that formulated the original Rule 2.17 (without a lawful submission process). It was forced to open the process again to receive submissions. It has now heard your submissions and will make a recommendation to the ARC about the new wording. ARC will vote on this or make any changes they see fit, then pass it into the Safety Bylaw. It has not told other ARC councillers that what it is proposing is not backed by 94% of submitters. After the submission process we have no further say except to tell individual ARC Councillors what we actrually said to the subcommittee. The subcomittee will not do this so, if you care, you must. You now need to let your locally elected ARC Counciller know what submitters called for. Point out 94% of all submitters called for the ARC to rescind rule 2.17 and concentrate on "education rather than a bylaw". The full ARC was not happy about the lack of consultation last time. The subcommittee has yet to put their recommendations to the ARC. Are you going to let the subcommittee put words into your mouth? Speak for yourself. Email your local ARC councillor. This is a political process - and it is fundamental to democracy. It is subject to the usual political influences... so tell your councillor what you want! Link to your local ARC Councillor who will be pleased to hear your views Here is the email to send to your councillor The ARC Councillors who are ignoring 94% of submitter's wishes: No point sending your email to these councillors - pick one of the others later Cr Paul Walbran - Waitakere Chair - Regional Strategy and Planning Committee Phone: 09 817 8163 Mobile: 021 886 723 mgparts.nz@clear.net.nz Cr Bill Burrill - Manukau Chair - Finance Committee Phone: 09 366 2066 Mobile: 021 978 139 Email: bill.burrill@arc.govt.nz Cr Jan Sinclair - Manukau Deputy Chair - Environmental Management CommitteePhone: 09 292 2421 Mobile: 0274 773 317 Email: jancolin@ihug.co.nz Cr Dianne Glenn - Franklin/Papakura Chair - Environmental Management Committee Phone: 09 366 2000 ext 8555 Mobile: 0274 284 779 Email: dianne.glenn@arc.govt.nz The other ARC Councillors that need to know about what what you actually asked the subcommittee to do are: Here is an email to send to them Cr Michael Lee - Auckland Chair - Auckland Regional Council Phone: 09 366 2111 Mobile: 0274 943 198 Email: mike.lee@arc.govt.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Michael Barnett - Auckland Deputy Chair - Auckland Regional Council Chair - CEO Review Committee Deputy Chair - Regional Land Transport Committee Phone: 09 366 2066 (Seems he does not like to be emailed!) Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Judith Bassett - Auckland Chair - Auckland Regional Holdings (ARH) 17 Stilwell Road, Mt Albert, Auckland 1025 Phone: 09 849 2267 Email: judith.bassett@xtra.co.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Clive Carter - Auckland Deputy Chair - Finance Committee PO Box 91776, Auckland 1142 Phone: 09 303 1615, 09 366 2000 extn 7121 Mobile: 0275 778 921 Email: ccarter@calaw.co.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Joel Cayford - North Shore Phone: 09 366 2000 ext 8177 Mobile: 0274 978 123 Email: joel.cayford@arc.govt.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Sandra Coney - Waitakere Chair - Parks and Heritage Committee Phone: 09 366 2000 ext 8208 Email: s_coney@xtra.co.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Brent Morrissey - Manukau Deputy Chair - Transport and Urban Development Committee PO Box 17346, Greenlane Mobile: 0274 853 521 Email: brent.morrissey@arc.govt.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor Cr Christine Rankin - North Shore Deputy Chair - Regional Strategy and Planning Committee Mobile: 0275 824 804 Email: christine@rankingroup.co.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor (Note: has not answered emails on this issue from others - probably not worth trying) Cr Christine Rose - Rodney Chair - Transport and Urban Development Committee Chair - Regional Land Transport Committee Deputy Chair - Parks and Heritage Committee Phone: 366 2000 ext 8715, or 09 412 5668 Mobile: 027 428 4778 Email: christine.rose@arc.govt.nz Here is the email to send to your councillor
Links ARC web site - search on Safety bylaw revision ARC Safety Bylaw 2008 Previous consultations on the 2008 proposed Bylaw ARC Safety Bylaw 2008 Review Public Notice ARC Safety Bylaw Review Statement of Proposal KASK - Kiwi Association Of Sea Kayakers Surf Ski New Zealand Canoe and Kayak Auckland Canoe Club Fergs Kayaks Yakity Yak kayak Club Paddling organisations common submission form (pdf) Paddling organisations common submission form (.doc) Night vision works and how to see in the dark More on night vision - rods and cones in the eye International Collision Regulations (COLREGs) (PDF) Local Government Act 2002 No 84 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 Maritime New Zealad Recreational Boating Accidents This web page was made to get the common submission form to kayakers and to make kayakers aware of the issues. Many kayaking groups and individuals have contributed to the contents but paddling is so varied not all groups may agree on all view points expressed. However we have all agreed on the common submission form. History Previous page (before 17/5/09 ) Page before submissions closed (before 17/3/09).	Is there really a kayak visability problem? As part of my submission, I went through all known kayak collision incidents and and the results were interesting. The average is only 1 collision involving a kayak or paddle craft and other type of vessel each 2 years for all NZ (sea, rivers and lakes). In Auckland, it is even less - 1 in each 5 years. In the last 13 years there have only been 2 fatalities in NZ from kayak and paddle craft collisions. In total there were only 7 recorded collisions in NZ over the whole 13 years! Just under half of the collisions were due to sunstrike. In all the rest, the power boat skipper was talking to someone else or not looking ahead. They did not see the kayak until after the collision - even when at close quarters and the paddler was waving a paddle over their head. In one instance it was a 6 person waka - all waving paddles over their heads, i.e. the power boat skipper was simply not looking ahead and keeping a watch. In these cases, kayak visibility does not even enter the situation. Half the collisions occurred within 200m of the shore in a 5k speed limit area - but the power boat (or jet ski in one instance) was either speeding or driving dangerously. In all cases the ARC's current or proposed rule would most likely not have altered the outcome. This is because (a) it only applies outside 200m and (b) it would not alter the behaviour of the dangerous or speeding drivers who in all cases were not looking ahead and (c) it would arguably only make a marginal difference, if at all, in the cases of sunstrike. There has been no recorded increase in the rate of collisions, in spite of the steep increase in new kayaks and kayakers over the last few years. This implies the number of kayaks and their visbility is not the issue in collisions. The issue seems to be a few power boat skippers not keeping a look ahead. "Skipper vacant, not at home" syndrome. See the evidence - NZ paddle craft collision statistics for the last 13 years.
Read the Submissions to ARC We wanted to bring you all 545 submissions - but the scale of the objections to the ARC bylaw surprised us - as well as the ARC. There are in 4 photocopied manuals measuring 3 inches thick (that is about 175mm for non-oldies). Here are just a few. If you want to see them all, ask and we'll see what can be achieved. Natasha Romoff - I belong to the Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers, Auckland Canoe Club, North Shore Canoe Club and the Yakkity Yak club; I have been involved in leadership programs to improve kayaker safety over the last 10 years; I have served on the Coastbusters (www.coastbusters.org.nz) committee several times over the years; I have participated in Coastguard training exercises; I have done extensive paddles in New Zealand waters on the sea, lakes and rivers. I also have many years of keelboat sailing experience. So my submission is coming from the perspective of experience of conditions we paddle in as well as a wish to keep myself and others in my group safe on the water. I strongly believe in paddler education and believe the paddling community have come a long way in achieving this. We work to coordinate initiatives between the kayaking fraternity, Coastguard, Maritime NZ, Water Safety NZ, and DOC. So the lack of consultation on this by-law and the change in stance from some government representatives is more than disappointing. Mike Scanlan - Snell’s Beach Dear Councillor Rose, Regarding ARC Rule 2.17, I have already made a submission but would like to offer the following additional observations to bring some balance into the issue. I spend a lot of time on the water in the vicinity of Kawau Bay, which is a very busy waterway for small boats. My experience as a powerboat user is that:_ “Kayaks are not the vessels with a visibility problem”. I use both a kayak and a powerboat, and the vessels that I find difficult to see while I am moving at speed in the powerboat are not kayaks, they are weathered aluminium dinghy’s, especially when these are at anchor fishing. These are a matt grey color that offers very little visual contrast to the ocean (particularly on overcast days) and the occupants are generally dressed in dull colored clothing and often not wearing life jackets -let alone high visibility ones. These vessels are very difficult to see, especially smaller dinghy’s without a canopy. Sea kayaks however I find to be highly visible. I believe this issue has lost its way and that while night time kayak paddling, especially around Auckland Harbour requires special care so as to be seen, the avoidance of collisions between daylight kayakers and powerboats has almost nothing to do with kayak visibility and everything to do with keeping a proper lookout as per existing marine regulations. My primary concern with Rule 2.17 is that it is likely to increase risk to kayakers through a perceived lessening of obligation to powerboat users to keep a proper lookout and that the net result will be the opposite one to its intention. Best Regards Mike Scanlan Snell’s Beach .	...More Submissions to ARC Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers (KASK) Submission ( Paul Caffyn, Safety Officer) - Here is Paul's list of firsts: First solo kayak circumnavigation of: South Island NZ, North Island NZ, Stewart Island NZ, Australia, Japan, tidewater circumnavigation of Alaska. First circumnavigation of Britain with Nigel Foster, New Caledonia with Conrad Edwards and first kayak crossing of Foveaux Strait NZ., Two attempts to kayak across the Tasman Sea. Kayked Prince William Sound, Alaska with Conrad Edwards, south-west coast and west coast of Greenland, Angmagssalik region of East Greenland, Kuala Lumpur, Malaya, to and around the island of Phuket, in Thailand with Conrad Edwards, and from Isortoq down the SE coast of Grønland, to Prins Christian Sund, then westwards to Narsaq. with Conrad Edwards. Note: for "brief summary" of Paul's adventures see extra page) Ken Livingston (Arawa Canoe Club) - I’ve done a lot of coastal sailing around NZ, some bluewater trips to the Islands, race kayaks and yachts in the Lyttelton Harbour and have a Coastal Skipper qualification. I did the first Arawa risk management plans for our river races back in 2002, and worked with the rowing club, ECan and the Canterbury harbourmaster to develop some common-sense river safety rules for the Avon River that were eventually sealed into by-laws. I’ve been on the Arawa Canoe Club committee in various capacities, including president, for over 10 years. Kevin Dunsford (KASK) + Incident Stats + Fatality Stats - Kayaked 25 years, solo & group coastal kayaking East Coast of North Island. Have been involved in Auckland Canoe Club, North Shore Canoe Club, Auckland Sea Kayak Network, Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers, Coastbusters & various kayak leadership courses. Also sails keeler in Gulf with Milford Cruising Club.

ARC ignores 94% submitters

* 545 * submissions in 4 folders (about two reams of paper) were considered by the ARC subcommittee and Harbourmaster's office along with verbal submissions on 29 May.

What is the issue?

In 2008 the Auckland Regional Authority updated it's Navigation Safety Bylaw. After submissions had closed, but before the bylaw was approved, the ARC subcommittee slipped a draconian rule 2.17 'Paddle Craft Visibility', into the bylaw. The rule says paddlers MUST ENSURE their visability. The rule effectively shifts blame from power boat skippers not looking ahead and running down a paddler to the paddler. Because the propper consultation process was not followed, ARC was forced to have new submissions but cleverly worded the statement of proposal so that evidence for a need or otherwise for the rule, as required under the Local Government Act, could be ignored. Evidence shows the rule not to be required, it could not be observed and it would not be effective in reducing the already very low rate of collisions. Worse still, blind aherance would reduce safety for paddlers. The hearing concluded with 94% of subbitters calling for the removal of the rule.

The same subcommitte heard the new evidence, and you guessed it, it is ignoring the bulk of submitters and attempting to justify its original mistake.

Paddle organisations united in oposition send letter to ARC

Paddle organisations and clubs united in oposition and on 21st July 200909 sent this letter to the Auckland Regional Authority.

Chairman, Auckland Regional Council
Re: ARC Maritime Safety Bylaw “Paddle craft visibility”

We, the undersigned Auckland paddle clubs and associations, call on the ARC to:

Remove the current paddle visibility rule 2.17 from the Auckland Maritime Safety Bylaw, and
Insert a “recommendation for visibility of kayaks and other paddle craft” as an appendix to the bylaw similar to the approach taken by Environment Waikato.

Environment Waikato has addressed the paddle visibility issue by implementing a recommendation “Appendix 5” in the 1 July 09 Safety Bylaw update. We believe this is the preferred approach for ARC to take.

We believe this is necessary for the safety of paddlers in Auckland. In particular:

There has not been sufficient consultation. The use of a recommendation for paddle craft visibility, rather than a rule, would allow each type of paddle sport to use their own comprehensive safety codes of conduct, which includes paddle visibility and collision avoidance, as part of an overall safety strategy for their sport. Such safety codes of conduct could be included in ARC Maritime Safety Bylaw reviews as recommendations in the future.
An overwhelming number of submitters, 94%, called on the ARC not to use a rule to address paddle craft visibility, but to use education instead. A “recommendation” will be far more effective, safer, and supported by each sport, than a widely unpopular “rule” for educating current and new paddlers in paddle craft safety, including the need to be visible.
Any recommendation developed should include wording that encourages the different sectors of the paddle sport community to operate within their own developed codes of practice to encourage safety.

Signed
Auckland paddle clubs and associations
Tuesday 14 th July 2009

Auckland Regional Outrigger Canoe Association
Associated clubs

Akarana - Sulphur Beach
Aratika Water Sports Club - Hinemoa Reserve, Birkenhead
Cook Islands Outriggers Association - Mt Wellington
Counties Eastern Outrigger Canoe Club - Mt Wellington
Hauraki Sports Club - Tamaki Auckland
Hoe Tonu Outrigger Canoe Club - Avondale
Manukau Outrigger Canoe Club - Otahuhu
NZ Taniwha Dragonboat & Outrigger Canoe Club Inc - Lake Pupuke
Orakei Water Sports - Orakei
Pakuranga Outrigger Canoe Club - Mangere Bridge
Tamaki Outrigger Canoe Club - Panmure Auckland
Te Paerangi Waka Ama Inc - Otahuhu
Te Pou Herenga Waka Ama Club Inc. - Manukau City
Waitakere Outrigger Canoe Club - Te Atatu South

Canoe Racing New Zealand
Canoe Racing New Zealand is the National Sports Organisation responsible for the administration, development and competition of Canoe Racing in New Zealand including Olympic racing.
Associated clubs

North Shore Canoe Club
Takapuna Boating Club
Waitemata Canoe and Multisport Club

Independent paddle clubs and associations

Coastbusters Sea Kayak Association Inc
Eastside Ocean racing Club
Hauraki Canoe Club
Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers (KASK)
Offshore Ski Racing Association
Takapuna Boating Club
Taniwha Outrigger and Dragon Boat Club

Canoe & kayak
Associated clubs

Yakity Yak kayak Club - Auckland & Auckland Canoe & Kayak
Yakity Yak kayak Club – Manukau & Manukau Canoe & Kayak
Yakity Yak kayak Club - North Shore & North Shore Canoe & Kayak
Manukau Canoe Club

Surf Life Saving Northern Region
Associated clubs

Bethells Beach
Far North
Karekare
Kariaotahi
Mairangi Bay
Mangawhai Heads
Muriwai
Omaha
Orewa
Piha
Raglan
Red Beach
Ruakaka
Sunset Beach
United North Piha
Waipu Cove
Whangarei Heads

A single club did not sign

Auckland Canoe Club

Why should you care about this?

There are increasing controls being put on all forms of individual pursuits in New Zealand and throughout the western world, often in the name of safety. Kayakers and paddle craft are no exception. ARC wants to control what we do, where we do it and how we do it. Auckland is called "City of Sails" because generations of sea going individuals got out there and enjoyed the sea. Kayakers and kayaking organisations believe we are the best people to determine what is safe for ourselves. The ARC has proven it knows nothing about kayaks or kayaking from its current safety bylaw which is absolutely unenforceable rubbish.

Do we want to end up like Europe?

If we operated under European kayaking regulations, we would not be allowed to kayak to Great Barrier, to Coromandel or even kayak from Sullivan's Bay in Mahurangi to Motuora Island or any of the other Islands more than 5km offshore. Is this what we want in New Zealand? If you were a kayak fisherman in France in a plastic yak under 4 meters, you could not venture more than 300 meters offshore because these craft are considered to be "beach gear".

In Europe kayaking has ended up with extreme over-regulation. Do we want to end up like Europe?

ARC believes kayakers need to be regulated for our own safety. They say we are not visible. They say if they don't regulate us, we risk collision. Is this true?

In the last 10 years there have been only 5 investigated collisions involving paddle craft in all New Zealand including lakes. ARC says there must have been more collisions, but they have no evidence. Maritime NZ has not considered kayak collision to be a problem so has not kept records until just recently. However the Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers (KASK) has kept statistics for 10 years of all kayaking incidents including collisions. Statistics show collision is NOT a problem at all. ARC says that with the big increase in kayaks over the last 10 years there must be a corresponding increase in collisions. But are there?

The number of kayaks has increased from around 2000 fifteen years ago to around 200,000 today, a 10,000% increase. The total number and rate of collisions involving kayaks has not increased at all. ARC is completely ignoring all known statistics and is pursuing regulation as a means of controlling kayakers. This is only the first step.

Maritime New Zealand, in its submission to ARC on rule 2.17, said it wants to bring in regulations on all craft up to 4 meters in length. Up till now no one has mentioned 4m so this is obviously a reference to what is happening in Europe. Let's see what Europe says about kayak regulation.

Here are the regulations for kayakers in France. This is where New Zealand is headed unless we stem undue regulation of paddle craft now.

Regulation of Sea kayaks in France

LA RÉGLEMENTATION DU KAYAK DE MER EN FRANCE - Translated into English by Paul Hayward

The rules governing the practice of sea kayaking in France have been rapidly developing in recent years. First seen as 'beach gear', despite its marine qualities, the sea kayak has only been allowed to point its bow up to a mile from shelter (1,852 m) and up to 5 miles (about 9 Km ) under certain conditions in Bretagne.

The regulation of recreational boating is moving toward the European standard. In this context, new texts are being prepared. Categories would be replaced by 'areas of navigation'. In the case of sea kayaking, it is moving (so far) towards two zones of navigation:

up to 300m from shore for 'beach gear'
up to 5 miles (9.2 Km) from shelter for approved kayaks

The approval of a kayak will be similar to today, with additional requirements for, a skirt, a spare paddle, a paddle float, flares, a whistle or horn, signal mirror, a deck or hand compass, a waterproof lamp, a map of the area, 20g Fluorescein (marine dye), and a VHF.

Navigation must be undertaken, at a minimum, by two kayaks. Check regularly for updates, with Maritime Affairs, the French Federation of Canoe-Kayak or coastal clubs.

In the meantime, the current French (June 2004) status is: Sea kayaks

Sea kayaks, after approval, are allowed to operate in the 6th category, ie up to 2 miles from shelter.

Are considered to be boats driven solely by human power, approved for 6th category navigation in accordance with the provisions of Division 224, with characteristics as follows: a length greater than 4 m, a width greater than 0.50 m, and with a L / W ratio less than 10 (where L is the length & W the width).

For boats over 10 m, this ratio no longer applies, but a minimum width of 1 meter is required. In the case of a multihull boat, the total width is equal to the sum of the widths of the main hull & float(s), provided they have a length equal to or greater than 2 m.

Reminder : inflatable craft powered solely by human power are 'beach gear' and their area of navigation is limited to the coastal strip of 300 m.

During a transitional period of 3 years from August 3 2000 , boats already benefiting from an exemption from the navigation area of 300 m may continue to navigate in the area a mile from shelter.

At the end of this period, those boats concerned that have not been the subject of an approval procedure (to continue to navigate beyond the 300 m), will be considered as 'beach gear' and their use will be limited to the coastal strip of 300 m.

The decisions on approving these boats are made by the technical director of the national sports federation concerned - according to the type of boat: the French Federation of Canoe-Kayak or the French Federation of Rowing, after notice from a commission for specific approvals.

Is this what you want for New Zealand?

ARC Rule 2.17 history

In July 2008 the Auckland Regional Authority Navigation Safety Bylaw came into effect. Rule 2.17 affects all paddle craft including kayaks that operate in ARC controlled waters from Thames-Kawau.

ARC accepted submissions last year but at the time rule 2.17 was not in the proposed Bylaw (it was slipped into the Bylaw after submissions closed). The Bylaw Rule 2.17 has now been reviewed and this time there have been many submissions from the kayaking community.

See submissions to ARC ->
New Wellington Safety Bylaw ->
Waikato goes for education->
Maritime NZ wants to go national ->

Current Bylaw Rule 2.17

“Every kayak and paddle craft that is navigating in waters beyond 200 metres from shore shall ensure they are highly visible to other vessels. This shall include: (a) wearing a high visibility vest or high visibility PFD; and
(b) use of reflecting tape on oars or paddles and also on clothing; and
(c) at night showing a continuous white light visible in all directions from a of
distance two nautical miles.”
Link to full ARC Safety Bylaw

Look for Definitions of paddle craft and Rule 2.17. Also kayaks must have identification.

The current Bylaw (above) shows ARC knew nothing about kayaks when it passed this bylaw (not supprising since there was no consultation ).

ARC Proposed Rule 2.17 wording

Note: The ARC has not yet released changes to wording after consultation yet. They have refused to tell us until it has been passed.

“Every kayak and paddle craft that is navigating in waters beyond 200 metres
from shore shall ensure they are highly visible to other vessels. This shall include:
By Day
Wearing highly visible clothing or a highly visible PFD suitable for contrasting with
the visibility conditions at the time;
At Night
(a) use of reflective tape on clothing; and
(b) showing a continuous white light visible in all directions and of suitable
intensity to avoid collision; and
(c) having ready an electric torch showing a white light which must be
exhibited in sufficient time to prevent collision.”

What's wrong with proposed rule?

Kayakers believe the current rule is not needed.
Kayakers prefer education over regulation.
Kayakers believe the current and proposed rule is not practical, and can not be observed.
Kayakers do not want to break the law but when the law is an ass it will be treated as such.
Kayakers do believe in safety. We practise it all the time we are on the sea. We learn risk management techniques and weigh the risks of one action verses another depending on conditions.
Kayakers know that if there is a collision with a power boat they will come off worse. The statistics show that although collisions are extreemly infreqent they often result in severy injury for the kayaker. Therefore kayakers learn that they need to take action regardless of rules to avoid consequences.
Kayakers know more about what they need than a few ARC Councilers. Proof of this is the curent need for a Bylaw review, where propper procedure was not followed. Submissions overwhelmingly reject the need of regulations and support kayaker education.

What other regions are doing

Greater Wellington Regional Council has just updated their Wellington Navigation and Safety Bylaw. They have taken a sensible approach for both yachts and paddled craft less than 6 meters in length. An all round lightis only required within the harbour. Elsewhere only a torch. This conforms with the International Collision Regulations. Wellington has shown what a Regional Authority can do when they consult. Congratulations Wellington.

Environment Waikato has opted at the moment for education over regulation. They have just introduced a new Navigation Safety Bylaw on 1 July 2009.

Auckland Regional Authority. This leaves just one authority, the ARC, who did not consult with kayakers before introducing rule 2.17 and are pursuing regulation.

Why is the ARC concerned?

There were 3 kayakers hit in 2008 in Auckland. The Harbourmaster originally looked at the problem and recommended to the ARC Committee considering the Safety Bylaw that education was the best way to address the problem. ARC Councilors overrode his advice and, after the consultation period had ended , inserted Rule 2.17. With the proliferation of new kayaks, especially fishing yaks, sit-upon kayaks and to a lesser extent sit-in kayaks the ARC fears that new kayakers will have about the same degree of water-safety knowledge as the average fizz-boat owner (who the ARC is somewhat afraid to tackle). Kayakers are an easier target than fizz-boats (at the moment). The Harbourmaster conducted some kayak visibility tests in the inner harbour with some members of the Auckland Canoe Club last year. At one time it was claimed that this was "consultation with kayakers"

However, these 3 collisions are the only ones recorded in ARC waters for 13 years! In the only one investigated the Judge said "the kayaker did nothing wrong" when prosecuting the power boat skipper. The second was suspected sunstrike and in the third it is suspected the fishing boat skipper was not keeping a watch. All occurred in the inner harbour during the day.

The ARC now wants to visibility regulations for paddle craft, not only in the inner harbour, but everywhere from Auckland to Kawau.

Maritime NZ submision to ARC

Marritime New Zealand (MNZ) has reviewed the proposed bylaw amendment and makes the following comments and observations.
Clause 1.17.1
MNZ proposes the following wording in place of the that currrently proposed by te ARC (changes in bold)

Every paddle craft, rowing craft and small craft under 4 metres in length that is navigating in waters beyond 200 metres from shore shall take all reasonable practical steps to ensure they are highly visible to other vessels. This may include:

By Day
wearing highly visible clothing or a highly visible PFD or other suitable thing for contrasting with visibility conditions at the time

By Night
a) use off reflective tape
b) showing a continuous white light visible in all directions and of suitable intensity to avoid collision; and
c) having ready an electrict tourch showing a white light which must be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent a colision.

Single list of all ARC Councillors' emails (copy whole section)

"Michael Lee" <mike.lee@arc.govt.nz>;
"Judith Bassett" <judith.bassett@xtra.co.nz>;
"Clive Varter" <ccarter@calaw.co.nz>;
"Joel Cayford" <joel.cayford@arc.govt.nz>;
"Sandra Coney" <coney@xtra.co.nz>;
"Brent Morrissey" <brent.morrissey@arc.govt.nz>;
"Christine Rankin" <christine@rankingroup.co.nz>;
"Christine Rose" <christine.rose@arc.govt.nz>;
"Paul Walbran" <mgparts.nz@clear.net.nz>;
"Bill Burrill" <bill.burrill@arc.govt.nz>;
"Jan Sinclair" <jancolin@ihug.co.nz>;
"Dianne Glenn" <dianne.glenn@arc.govt.nz)

Updated 24 July 2009

Your submissions on ARC safety bylaw 2.17 Summary
* Leave bylaw as is (9 submissions) - 1.65%
* Rescind bylaw (first option) (514) - 94.31%
* Change bylaw (not rescinding) (20) - 3.67%

An overwhelming number of submissions called on ARC to rescind the Safety Bylaw Rule 2.17. Over 94% of all submissions said: "Education not bylaw".

Moving On. What happens now?

This is the same ARC subcommittee that formulated the original Rule 2.17 (without a lawful submission process). It was forced to open the process again to receive submissions. It has now heard your submissions and will make a recommendation to the ARC about the new wording. ARC will vote on this or make any changes they see fit, then pass it into the Safety Bylaw. It has not told other ARC councillers that what it is proposing is not backed by 94% of submitters. After the submission process we have no further say except to tell individual ARC Councillors what we actrually said to the subcommittee. The subcomittee will not do this so, if you care, you must.

You now need to let your locally elected ARC Counciller know what submitters called for.

Point out 94% of all submitters called for the ARC to rescind rule 2.17 and concentrate on "education rather than a bylaw". The full ARC was not happy about the lack of consultation last time. The subcommittee has yet to put their recommendations to the ARC. Are you going to let the subcommittee put words into your mouth? Speak for yourself. Email your local ARC councillor.

This is a political process - and it is fundamental to democracy. It is subject to the usual political influences... so tell your councillor what you want!

Link to your local ARC Councillor
who will be pleased to hear your views

Here is the email to send to your councillor

The ARC Councillors who are ignoring 94% of submitter's wishes:

No point sending your email to these councillors - pick one of the others later

Cr Paul Walbran - Waitakere

Chair - Regional Strategy and Planning Committee
Phone: 09 817 8163
Mobile: 021 886 723
mgparts.nz@clear.net.nz

Cr Bill Burrill - Manukau

Chair - Finance Committee
Phone: 09 366 2066
Mobile: 021 978 139
Email: bill.burrill@arc.govt.nz

Cr Jan Sinclair - Manukau

Deputy Chair - Environmental Management CommitteePhone: 09 292 2421
Mobile: 0274 773 317
Email: jancolin@ihug.co.nz

Cr Dianne Glenn - Franklin/Papakura

Chair - Environmental Management Committee
Phone: 09 366 2000 ext 8555
Mobile: 0274 284 779
Email: dianne.glenn@arc.govt.nz

The other ARC Councillors that need to know about what what you actually asked the subcommittee to do are:

Here is an email to send to them

Cr Michael Lee - Auckland

Chair - Auckland Regional Council
Phone: 09 366 2111
Mobile: 0274 943 198
Email: mike.lee@arc.govt.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Michael Barnett - Auckland

Deputy Chair - Auckland Regional Council
Chair - CEO Review Committee
Deputy Chair - Regional Land Transport Committee
Phone: 09 366 2066
(Seems he does not like to be emailed!)
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Judith Bassett - Auckland

Chair - Auckland Regional Holdings (ARH)
17 Stilwell Road, Mt Albert, Auckland 1025
Phone: 09 849 2267
Email: judith.bassett@xtra.co.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Clive Carter - Auckland

Deputy Chair - Finance Committee
PO Box 91776, Auckland 1142
Phone: 09 303 1615, 09 366 2000 extn 7121
Mobile: 0275 778 921
Email: ccarter@calaw.co.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Joel Cayford - North Shore

Phone: 09 366 2000 ext 8177
Mobile: 0274 978 123
Email: joel.cayford@arc.govt.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Sandra Coney - Waitakere

Chair - Parks and Heritage Committee
Phone: 09 366 2000 ext 8208
Email: s_coney@xtra.co.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Brent Morrissey - Manukau

Deputy Chair - Transport and Urban Development Committee
PO Box 17346, Greenlane
Mobile: 0274 853 521
Email: brent.morrissey@arc.govt.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Cr Christine Rankin - North Shore

Deputy Chair - Regional Strategy and Planning Committee
Mobile: 0275 824 804
Email: christine@rankingroup.co.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor
(Note: has not answered emails on this issue from others - probably not worth trying)

Cr Christine Rose - Rodney

Chair - Transport and Urban Development Committee
Chair - Regional Land Transport Committee
Deputy Chair - Parks and Heritage Committee
Phone: 366 2000 ext 8715, or 09 412 5668
Mobile: 027 428 4778
Email: christine.rose@arc.govt.nz
Here is the email to send to your councillor

Links

ARC web site - search on Safety bylaw revision

ARC Safety Bylaw 2008

Previous consultations on the 2008 proposed Bylaw

ARC Safety Bylaw 2008 Review Public Notice

ARC Safety Bylaw Review Statement of Proposal

KASK - Kiwi Association Of Sea Kayakers

Yakity Yak kayak Club

Paddling organisations common submission form (pdf)

Paddling organisations common submission form (.doc)

Night vision works and how to see in the dark

More on night vision - rods and cones in the eye

International Collision Regulations (COLREGs) (PDF)

Local Government Act 2002 No 84

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

Maritime New Zealad Recreational Boating Accidents

This web page was made to get the common submission form to kayakers and to make kayakers aware of the issues. Many kayaking groups and individuals have contributed to the contents but paddling is so varied not all groups may agree on all view points expressed. However we have all agreed on the common submission form.

History

Previous page (before 17/5/09 )
Page before submissions closed (before 17/3/09).

Is there really a kayak visability problem?

As part of my submission, I went through all known kayak collision incidents and and the results were interesting.

The average is only 1 collision involving a kayak or paddle craft and other type of vessel each 2 years for all NZ (sea, rivers and lakes).
In Auckland, it is even less - 1 in each 5 years.
In the last 13 years there have only been 2 fatalities in NZ from kayak and paddle craft collisions.
In total there were only 7 recorded collisions in NZ over the whole 13 years!
Just under half of the collisions were due to sunstrike.
In all the rest, the power boat skipper was talking to someone else or not looking ahead. They did not see the kayak until after the collision - even when at close quarters and the paddler was waving a paddle over their head. In one instance it was a 6 person waka - all waving paddles over their heads, i.e. the power boat skipper was simply not looking ahead and keeping a watch. In these cases, kayak visibility does not even enter the situation.
Half the collisions occurred within 200m of the shore in a 5k speed limit area - but the power boat (or jet ski in one instance) was either speeding or driving dangerously.
In all cases the ARC's current or proposed rule would most likely not have altered the outcome. This is because (a) it only applies outside 200m and (b) it would not alter the behaviour of the dangerous or speeding drivers who in all cases were not looking ahead and (c) it would arguably only make a marginal difference, if at all, in the cases of sunstrike.
There has been no recorded increase in the rate of collisions, in spite of the steep increase in new kayaks and kayakers over the last few years. This implies the number of kayaks and their visbility is not the issue in collisions. The issue seems to be a few power boat skippers not keeping a look ahead. "Skipper vacant, not at home" syndrome.

See the evidence - NZ paddle craft collision statistics for the last 13 years.

Read the Submissions to ARC

Natasha Romoff - I belong to the Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers, Auckland Canoe Club, North Shore Canoe Club and the Yakkity Yak club; I have been involved in leadership programs to improve kayaker safety over the last 10 years; I have served on the Coastbusters (www.coastbusters.org.nz) committee several times over the years; I have participated in Coastguard training exercises; I have done extensive paddles in New Zealand waters on the sea, lakes and rivers. I also have many years of keelboat sailing experience. So my submission is coming from the perspective of experience of conditions we paddle in as well as a wish to keep myself and others in my group safe on the water. I strongly believe in paddler education and believe the paddling community have come a long way in achieving this. We work to coordinate initiatives between the kayaking fraternity, Coastguard, Maritime NZ, Water Safety NZ, and DOC. So the lack of consultation on this by-law and the change in stance from some government representatives is more than disappointing.

Mike Scanlan - Snell’s Beach
Dear Councillor Rose,
Regarding ARC Rule 2.17, I have already made a submission but would like to offer the following additional observations to bring some balance into the issue.
I spend a lot of time on the water in the vicinity of Kawau Bay, which is a very busy waterway for small boats.
My experience as a powerboat user is that:_
“Kayaks are not the vessels with a visibility problem”.
I use both a kayak and a powerboat, and the vessels that I find difficult to see while I am moving at speed in the powerboat are not kayaks, they are weathered aluminium dinghy’s, especially when these are at anchor fishing.
These are a matt grey color that offers very little visual contrast to the ocean (particularly on overcast days) and the occupants are generally dressed in dull colored clothing and often not wearing life jackets
-let alone high visibility ones. These vessels are very difficult to see, especially smaller dinghy’s without a canopy. Sea kayaks however I find to be highly visible.
I believe this issue has lost its way and that while night time kayak paddling, especially around Auckland Harbour requires special care so as to be seen, the avoidance of collisions between daylight kayakers and powerboats has almost nothing to do with kayak visibility and everything to do with keeping a proper lookout as per existing marine regulations.
My primary concern with Rule 2.17 is that it is likely to increase risk to kayakers through a perceived lessening of obligation to powerboat users to keep a proper lookout and that the net result will be the opposite one to its intention.
Best Regards
Mike Scanlan
Snell’s Beach .

...More Submissions to ARC

Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers (KASK) Submission
( Paul Caffyn, Safety Officer) - Here is Paul's list of firsts: First solo kayak circumnavigation of: South Island NZ, North Island NZ, Stewart Island NZ, Australia, Japan, tidewater circumnavigation of Alaska. First circumnavigation of Britain with Nigel Foster, New Caledonia with Conrad Edwards and first kayak crossing of Foveaux Strait NZ., Two attempts to kayak across the Tasman Sea. Kayked Prince William Sound, Alaska with Conrad Edwards, south-west coast and west coast of Greenland, Angmagssalik region of East Greenland, Kuala Lumpur, Malaya, to and around the island of Phuket, in Thailand with Conrad Edwards, and from Isortoq down the SE coast of Grønland, to Prins Christian Sund, then westwards to Narsaq. with Conrad Edwards.
Note: for "brief summary" of Paul's adventures see extra page)

Ken Livingston (Arawa Canoe Club) - I’ve done a lot of coastal sailing around NZ, some bluewater trips to the Islands, race kayaks and yachts in the Lyttelton Harbour and have a Coastal Skipper qualification. I did the first Arawa risk management plans for our river races back in 2002, and worked with the rowing club, ECan and the Canterbury harbourmaster to develop some common-sense river safety rules for the Avon River that were eventually sealed into by-laws. I’ve been on the Arawa Canoe Club committee in various capacities, including president, for over 10 years.

Kevin Dunsford (KASK) + Incident Stats + Fatality Stats - Kayaked 25 years, solo & group coastal kayaking East Coast of North Island. Have been involved in Auckland Canoe Club, North Shore Canoe Club, Auckland Sea Kayak Network, Kiwi Association of Sea Kayakers, Coastbusters & various kayak leadership courses. Also sails keeler in Gulf with Milford Cruising Club.

ARC Navigation Safety Bylaw Review Rule 2.17

Why is the ARC concerned?

Moving On. What happens now?