• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lydia

Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania

176 posts in this topic

There is a lot of ill informed statements being made on this page regarding the interactions of the RYCT with clubs and the Salmon industry. Happy to meet any of you at the bar at the club to have a chat about the history of the clubs dealings re the salmon farms at a mutualy agreed time or better still you can talk to the club your self by giving them a call http://www.ryct.org.au/contact/ or if you want to keep upto date here is a link to subscribe to the RYCT news letter http://ryct.us11.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=b56e583773c90481c0e9523c2&id=090c612cae.

 

Here is link to a photo from this years RYCT Nav trial cruise. Great night.

 

https://www.facebook.com/RoyalYachtClubTasmania/photos/a.1090022744387249.1073741845.155848071138059/1090023091053881/?type=3&theater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just to give some perspective here, because it is obviously a navigational challenge to so many boats, but if I have this right:

 

RYCT Maria Island Race 8 boats

 

And that the only race RYCT run across northern Storm Bay outside the Hobart Race which CYCA run.

 

Derwent Sailing Squadron does not appear to brought into the argument gets 28 boat for the Launceston Hobart Race.

 

So all of this is about the effect on a 8 boat race as that is the only direct effect on a RYCT event.

 

The VDL Cruise has not been mentioned yet but that is a cruise in company.

 

So I am not buying the greater good of the Tasmanian boating community argument about now!

 

WTF? You really are a Dick , and miss the point entirely.

 

Keep on posting and building tour DICK profile, not that any one is really interested in your hole digging prowess.

 

What is a 'Tour DICK profile'? can you get a carbon one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

WTF? You really are a Dick , and miss the point entirely.

 

Keep on posting and building tour DICK profile, not that any one is really interested in your hole digging prowess.

 

What is a 'Tour DICK profile'? can you get a carbon one?

 

 

You suprise me Mr LB15 I thought you would have had the smarts to recognise a type-o. The "T" and the "Y"being next to each other on the keyboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of ill informed statements being made on this page regarding the interactions of the RYCT with clubs and the Salmon industry.

Hardly ill-informed Snoop. Some of us know a lot about the salmon industry. But if people are ill-informed about the RYCT's interactions with the salmon industry that might be because the only information provided has been what the club has said in the media which implies that the club feels that the Wedge Island lease expansion might threaten the S2H, and that the club has some sort of partnership with Environment Tasmania whose spokeswoman was interviewed at the RYCT. Anyone who cares to look at the ET website you will see that one of its two campaigns is anti-fish-farming, and navigation issues are not one of the things it is complaining about.

 

I think the original poster's point was that why has the RYCT chosen to use media sensationalism and perceived alliances with environment groups which has the potential to make the club look at least foolish, if not exploited, followed by a survey of its members which asks questions beyond the remit of a yacht club (Is the salmon industry sufficientlly regulated? etc), when other clubs have chosen a more apolitical behind the scenes business approach?

 

I'm not a member of the RYCT. If I was, I'd be pretty angry. As it is I'm proud to be a member of two other clubs which have chosen to take a more rational approach to the issue, including my home club which has had a happy and harmonious working relationship with both Tassal and Huon Aquaculture for over 20 years.

 

Perhaps if you had been in the country at the time before the first ABC media story went to air your more level headed approach might have been able to stop this shit fight. It still amazes me how someone who is not a Board Member of the club was allowed to go to the media and appear to be an endorsed spokesman of the club and present what seems to be a personal opinion as the official club stance, and to permit a representative from an environment group which has a far wider oppositional stance to salmon farming, to be filmed and interviewed in the club's grounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I agree with everything he said and he summed up the compliant perfectly.

And have no conflict of interest unless Huon aquaculture sponsoring a club event at which I am a member is a conflict of interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snoopy, it is really simple, either the RYCT spokesman exceeded his authority in which case there should be a public reprimand.

If the board endorsed the action then the board should be making a public explanation to members as to why.

Nothing has changed.

A survey after the fact to gather support misses the point.

Just looks like the directors are simply seeking to cover their arses after the fact.

 

And as usual with these types of fights while the egos are jousting, the institutional mandate of the RYCT with the wider Tasmanian community has already been lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chance you should declare a conflict of interest?

I have no conflict of interest. I'm a sailor, member of two yacht clubs (neither of which is the RYCT) and not employed or sponsored by an aquaculture company. I'm not even on the committee of my primary yacht club, the major sponsor of which is an aquaculture company (and a major competitor of Tassal the "offending" company in question). My area of expertise is aquaculture but hey, if commenting on your area of expertise is a conflict of interest then the whole "expert commentator" concept goes out the window. Might as well just let everyone's emotion and, "ill-informed" opinion have more weight. There you go Snoopy, someone arguing that contrary to your point, ill-informed opinion might be actually more important.

 

And as the whole point of this thread is the impact of fish farms on navigation how could any conflict of interest even come into play? You can either navigate around them or you can't. I haven't run into one yet. Not in a Sabre dinghy, Adams 10, J24, Mumm 30, Mirror Dinghy, NS14, 12' Skiff, Adams 40 or Thompson 7, let alone numerous power operated vessels. In daylight, at night, in 10/10th's fog, 0 knots to 50 knots, rain or hail. I've been rescued by handily on-the-spot fish farm boats twice. Once in a power boat with engine failure, once in an NS14 in 35 knots where my young crew member was close to hypothermic. Oh, you've got me there, a fish farm worker saved my crew. There's my conflict of interest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not going to inflame this topic as I feel there is too much emotion bouncing around on this page. Read the newsletters and communicate with the club directly for more information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda feel that emotion is irrelevant here, as are personal opinions about the merits (or otherwise) of fish farming.

Either the RYCT position is that fish farms proposed in Storm Bay pose a serious hazard to S2H competitors, or it isn't.

If it is RYCT's position, then perhaps you's care to explain why?

If it isn't RYCT's position then perhaps you'd care to explain why did RYCT appear to say that is was?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am bound by certain requirements which means that I can't and won't be commenting on this page. I can encourage anybody to seek information to aid in forming an opinion and position on the actions of any entity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much emotion is what you say when you don't want to answer the question.

I though the paramount rule in your game was never to ask a question to which you didn't already know the answer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snoopy, your boy put this in the public domain the moment he went to the ABC news while holding hands with Environment Tasmania.

 

Secondly, what are the requirements you refer to, maybe the requirement that the Board have told you not to post here.

 

Sounds like the Board endorses the actions of the spokesman but will not publically say it to all the members.

 

Also very interesting language, what exactly is the position of the entity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Also very interesting language, what exactly is the position of the entity?

Missionary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Any chance you should declare a conflict of interest?

 

I've been rescued by handily on-the-spot fish farm boats twice.

 

 

 

 

Mmm, enough said. You certainly gave the impression you knew little about seamanship and now you've confirmed it .

Either you always boat around fish farms (unhealthy fascination maybe?) or you aren't coming clean on how many times in total you have actually been rescued.

Probably best to step away from the water now, and leave watery matters like fish farm/boat interactions to people that understand.

Namely RYCT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the ABC article about that was on the internets.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-17/salmon-farm-expansion-river-derwent-could-interrupt-yacht-race/7635948

Here is the Mercury article

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/yachties-meet-over-proposal-for-storm-bay-salmon-farms/news-story/28b8d4f5ee9ebbb031b7ed2e1e188b03

 

I know that there is another meeting planned in the next month or so.

 

I can't see what your problem is Lydia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snoopy, Good to see Yacht/boat clubs taking a stand against fish farms. I am very familiar with the impact Aquaculture farms through WAs' Kimberly region, Northern Territory and FNQ have had on the cruising yachtsman. Some of our best anchorages have been taken over by this scourge.

 

Even though contrary to lease agreements the farms are generally poorly lit, with the boundary markers being last in line for attention after a storm event. A rather regular event I would have thought in STORM BAY.

 

Fish farmers using our waterways as a cheap sewage disposal system is bullshit and not conducive to recreation in our waterways.

 

A club would be negligent to its members not to oppose these A### holes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snoopy, the problem is simple and is perfectly summered up in Weyalan's post #110.

Seemingly, you are not able to grasp the issue.

If RYCT opposes fish farms come out and say that and we can bring an end to this thread.

Not hard.

 

This thread is about using bullshit justifications to justify a stance you don't want to acknowledge you have taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-5958-0-82755000-1476261344_thumb.jpg

 

 

Any chance you should declare a conflict of interest?

 

I've been rescued by handily on-the-spot fish farm boats twice.

 

 

 

Either you always boat around fish farms (unhealthy fascination maybe?) or you aren't coming clean on how many times in total you have actually been rescued.

Probably best to step away from the water now, and leave watery matters like fish farm/boat interactions to people that understand.

Namely RYCT.

 

This is where I sail and work. Each one of those red rectangles is a marine farm. Never run into one yet. The RYCT is 35 nautical miles away from my home club PESC, but of course the RYCT and you would know best wouldn't you? You know nothing mate. Leave the debate to locals who actually know these waters. No one gives a rat's about your WA, NT, FNQ experiences. Not relevant. OYF.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see the mature and reasoned response from the Abalone industry in today's Mercury.

This advances sensible debate.

Problem is I don't believe that the Tasmanian community is mature enough to have the debate unfortunately.

Bit like saying you can't have a fish farm b ecause some rich white guys who sail past it one day a year might hit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you reading the same article I am Lydia?

If this article is the basis of this topic, I can't see where some of the accusations have come from and the one statement in the ABC document has been cleared up/edited in the Mercury document.

You've jumped to some crazy conclusion based on something not based in reality.

 

Overlay I have not put my personal opinion on this page. The RYCT stance/process can be found by looking at their newsletters. (you may need to subscribe). I think there an all clubs meeting with company reps being organised once an agreed date is reached. I expect there will be more info after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

attachicon.gifHuon Port Esperance Marine Farms.jpg

 

 

Any chance you should declare a conflict of interest?

 

I've been rescued by handily on-the-spot fish farm boats twice.

 

 

 

Either you always boat around fish farms (unhealthy fascination maybe?) or you aren't coming clean on how many times in total you have actually been rescued.

Probably best to step away from the water now, and leave watery matters like fish farm/boat interactions to people that understand.

Namely RYCT.

 

This is where I sail and work. Each one of those red rectangles is a marine farm. Never run into one yet. The RYCT is 35 nautical miles away from my home club PESC, but of course the RYCT and you would know best wouldn't you? You know nothing mate. Leave the debate to locals who actually know these waters. No one gives a rat's about your WA, NT, FNQ experiences. Not relevant. OYF.

 

 

missed the others on the Bruny shore .

 

What is your evidence of RYCT meddling in the area?

I have seen none. Except the usual using the area for events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

attachicon.gifHuon Port Esperance Marine Farms.jpg

 

 

Any chance you should declare a conflict of interest?

 

I've been rescued by handily on-the-spot fish farm boats twice.

 

 

 

Either you always boat around fish farms (unhealthy fascination maybe?) or you aren't coming clean on how many times in total you have actually been rescued.

Probably best to step away from the water now, and leave watery matters like fish farm/boat interactions to people that understand.

Namely RYCT.

 

This is where I sail and work.

 

 

So (P)Irate are you saying now your work is associated with the fish farm industry , QUOTE "This is where I sail and work" UNQUOTE ie CONFLICT OF INTEREST or are you just dopey and confused as per normal and about to require rescue again ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

attachicon.gifHuon Port Esperance Marine Farms.jpg

 

 

Any chance you should declare a conflict of interest?

 

I've been rescued by handily on-the-spot fish farm boats twice.

 

 

 

Either you always boat around fish farms (unhealthy fascination maybe?) or you aren't coming clean on how many times in total you have actually been rescued.

Probably best to step away from the water now, and leave watery matters like fish farm/boat interactions to people that understand.

Namely RYCT.

 

This is where I sail and work.

 

 

So (P)Irate are you saying now your work is associated with the fish farm industry , QUOTE "This is where I sail and work" UNQUOTE ie CONFLICT OF INTEREST or are you just dopey and confused as per normal and about to require rescue again ?

 

Reading comprehension is not your strong point, is it? Neither, apparently is map reading. The map that (P)irate posted shows a small amount of water and a larger amount of land (the green bits)... is it, perhaps, possible that he sails on the watery bits and works on the landy bits? And, contrary to what you might believe, there is some employment in SE Tasmania not directly in the employ of the fish farm companies. I can vouch for the fact that Mr. (P)irate is not employed by a aquaculture company... Snoopy knows this too.... Snoopy's family has property a stones throw away from (P)irate's place, but Snoopy is also not in the employ of fish farmers... remarkable eh?

 

I re-iterate:

It is ok to hate fish farms. Go nuts, hate away. Wear a badge, even. But if your agenda is hating fish farms, be honest about that. Suggesting that a valid reason for not allowing fish farms in the proposed location (in Storm Bay) is that Sydney Hobart yacht navigators couldn't navigate around them is disingenuous to say the least. In the spirit of honesty, I'll own up to a strong preference for no fish farms in Storm Bay, but that fact isn't because I'm worried about them as a navigation hazard for S2H yachts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Suggesting that a valid reason for not allowing fish farms in the proposed location (in Storm Bay) is that Sydney Hobart yacht navigators couldn't navigate around them is disingenuous to say the least

 

Reading comprehension is not your strong point, is it?

 

Ok try reading the ABC article AGAIN. Where does it say that S2H navigators couldn't navigate around a fish farm?

 

WTF.

 

The proposal was open for comment and RYCT commented. Their preference was for no fish farm in what had historically been part of a favoured course.

 

 

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-17/salmon-farm-expansion-river-derwent-could-interrupt-yacht-race/7635948

 

 

 

From the article.

 

Mr Badenach said the location could be particularly problematic at night for yachts which have come around Cape Raoul in the state's south, 40 miles from the finish.

"During the evening they tack in close to the shore to get the land breeze and that is the difficulty," he said.

"They tack up the shore and they clear wedge island but now they'd have to tack right out to go around the fish farm."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Suggesting that a valid reason for not allowing fish farms in the proposed location (in Storm Bay) is that Sydney Hobart yacht navigators couldn't navigate around them is disingenuous to say the least

 

Reading comprehension is not your strong point, is it?

 

Ok try reading the ABC article AGAIN. Where does it say that S2H navigators couldn't navigate around a fish farm?

 

WTF.

 

The proposal was open for comment and RYCT commented. Their preference was for no fish farm in what had historically been part of a favoured course.

 

 

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-17/salmon-farm-expansion-river-derwent-could-interrupt-yacht-race/7635948

 

 

 

From the article.

 

Mr Badenach said the location could be particularly problematic at night for yachts which have come around Cape Raoul in the state's south, 40 miles from the finish.

"During the evening they tack in close to the shore to get the land breeze and that is the difficulty," he said.

"They tack up the shore and they clear wedge island but now they'd have to tack right out to go around the fish farm."

 

 

right - so now its not 'can't navigate', but 'too lazy to navigate' ?

 

That's a bother -- can you please move your industry somewhere else so 6 hours of my recreation time per year is not slightly complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

right - so now its not 'can't navigate', but 'too lazy to navigate' ?

 

That's a bother -- can you please move your XXXXXXXX EFFLUENT GENERATOR somewhere else so 6 hours of my recreation time per year is not slightly complicated.

 

^^There fixed it for ya.

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

 

 

Do you think that's funny, you fucking cunt? Go pedal that line around the CYCA, or past pretty much anyone who'd ever met Shorty. I think there'd a queue of people waiting to knock your fucking head off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

 

 

Do you think that's funny, you fucking cunt? Go pedal that line around the CYCA, or past pretty much anyone who'd ever met Shorty. I think there'd a queue of people waiting to knock your fucking head off.

 

 

Settle down. Accidents happen.

 

Fatigue is always a concern. Given the farms proposed location, a move may be a good thing . Every little bit helps.

A quote from the same ABC article.

 

 

 

 

 

"You've got yachtsmen who have been racing hard since Boxing Day and they hit Storm Bay and suddenly find that they are confronted with the hazard of a fish farm," he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

right - so now its not 'can't navigate', but 'too lazy to navigate' ?

 

That's a bother -- can you please move your XXXXXXXX EFFLUENT GENERATOR somewhere else so 6 hours of my recreation time per year is not slightly complicated.

^^There fixed it for ya.

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

Wow. What a low life thing to say. I don't have any words at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^There fixed it for ya.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

 

You are seriously out of order you low life fuckwit scum. Show some respect areshole. This is the Ocean Racing thread. Sal and Hicko have many friends here. Fuck off to whatever gutter you crawled out of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of this thread is what both Weyalan and Duncan have just said.

 

As for Pirate, he does not work for the fish farms, he is however perhaps one of the top five people in the state taking it forward into a brighter future.

 

A few other important people think that as well.

 

Enough man love!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^^There fixed it for ya.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

 

You are seriously out of order you low life fuckwit scum. Show some respect areshole. This is the Ocean Racing thread. Sal and Hicko have many friends here. Fuck off to whatever gutter you crawled out of.

 

I didn't think Hicko (RIP) was on Shockwave that fateful night. RIP Sal & Shorty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think Hicko (RIP) was on Shockwave that fateful night. RIP Sal & Shorty

 

 

 

 

 

He wasn't. I didn't know Shorty but I'd met both Sal and Hicko and I worked with Hicko's sister. I have the honour to have my name on the William Jackson Memorial Cup along with that of Hicko's father Jim who won it with Bronzewing back in the 1950's. Roger reckoned he was on board at the time, at about 2 years of age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Geeze show some compassion :D ,the offshore racer boys don't have a good record with navigating around obstructions , it wasn't that long ago that Shockwave had strife navigating around a F@@@@@ Islet.

 

 

Do you think that's funny, you fucking cunt? Go pedal that line around the CYCA, or past pretty much anyone who'd ever met Shorty. I think there'd a queue of people waiting to knock your fucking head off.

 

 

 

Yep...... agree.... some of us here still have open sores..... RIP Sal , Hicko, Shorty and all other legends gone to soon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are spoilt in Hobart. We have it too good as a venue for sailing with so little shipping traffic that we make the mistake of assuming that it is our playground and ours alone. Sail for a while in Port Phillip in Melbourne or Corio Bay in Geelong, let alone Sydney Harbour and you get a rude shock. At Geelong race week sailors are advised (by VHF or briefings on land) when ships will be entering the channel and port, and races are scheduled and located accordingly to avoid contact.

 

If the ship wasn't engaged in a previously announced and arranged pilotage exemption exercise then sure, it could have altered course at its discretion. As it is, it seems that TasPorts (which was in control of the exercise) advised sailing clubs well in advance, and the SBSC could have used its discretion to locate its course out of the proposed exercise.

 

Even so, as quoted in the Mercury article: "A spokesman for TasPorts said one of its pilots boarded the Ronja Huon and “adhered to maritime procedure and protocol during the transit of the Derwent River including display of the pilot flag at all times that he was on board’’.

He said recreational and commercial craft were made aware of the Ronja Huon’s movements on the public VHF channel."

 

And it is a bit disappointing that Mr Tiedemann, paid manager of the DSS (ie an employee, not a board member), after previously saying that discussions of concern with salmon companies should be behind closed doors and not played out in the media, has done exactly that. And with the authority of the board? And anyway, shouldn't it be officials of the SBSC making the complaint?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Media Release:

 

Monday 31 October 2016 – Media Comment Ronja Huon

The Tasmanian Ports Corporations (Tasports) initial internal review into the actions and communications of the Ronja Huon while under pilotage on the 29th of October indicates that the relevant Tasport
s, MAST and international maritime regulations and protocols were followed.

The harbour limits for the port of Hobart extend from the northern extremity of Bruny Island across to the southern tip of Betsy Island (including all waters in the D’Entrecasteaux Channel) through to just north of the Bowen Bridge.

This zone includes the area where numerous Derwent River yacht clubs run races throughout their respective seasons. Tasports and MAST have worked hard to create awareness and understanding in the sailing community regarding the rules, regulations and best practice procedures for planning race courses and managing recreational craft in commercial shipping areas.

The number one objective of these rules is to ensure the safety of personnel and assets.

The Ronja Huon has a length overall of 75.8m vessel with a gross tonnage of 3566, the ability to quickly manoeuvrer such a vessel is a key reason why it is essential for recreational craft to strictly adhere to maritime safety regulations.

A vessel under pilotage, such as the Ronja Huon was, has right of way over all other craft in the vicinity.

Marine safety is everyone’s business, on a busy day such as the Derwent River experienced on Saturday, it is up to all parties to ensure that clear and proactive communication is delivered, risks are appropriately managed and informed and objective decision making is in place.

It is clear that there is still work to be done to ensure that awareness of relevant procedures and protocols are in place so that commercial shipping can be consistently and safely accommodated on the Derwent River.

Alex McKeand | Manager Communications

Tasmanian Ports Corporation
T 6222 6023 | M 0437 030 330

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He said recreational and commercial craft were made aware of the Ronja Huon’s movements on the public VHF channel."

 

 

I'm with you pirate, if they don't keep their ear pressed to the VHF its fine to run the little kiddies down and KILL THE BASTARDS. ^_^

 

Now on a lighter note will you be watching to see if your 14 cents a day are being well spent by the ABC on tonights very topical Four Corners program. I take it you do pay tax :o

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salmon Wars, its on! Good to see industry corruption on a grand scale isn't just restricted to the mainland.

 

Nice to know they artificially colour it across a range of pretty orange shades so we won't guess that its chemically altered and we don't have to eat ugly white fish.

 

Thanks (again!) 4 Corners for the revelations tonight. Crossing that shit off my diet and no doubt many others will too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is working really well in the Salmon farming business in Tassie....... not....http://ab.co/2fucAIa - via @abcnews

A complete beat up article with little substance. They even managed a sideways slur of CEO of Tassal.

 

Why would a salmon producer want to kill their own stocks ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Everything is working really well in the Salmon farming business in Tassie....... not....http://ab.co/2fucAIa - via @abcnews

A complete beat up article with little substance. They even managed a sideways slur of CEO of Tassal.

 

Why would a salmon producer want to kill their own stocks ?

 

I'm not sure weather that is written in sarcasm font. If not.

No, the CEO of TASSAL was too busy shooting himself in the foot for any slur to be noticed.

 

They didn't even scratch the surface on what those pricks have done to Macquarie Harbour.

 

I did feel sorry for Frances Bender.

 

I hope she can tidy the industry up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We spent some time in the PNW this year, ate a lot of wild salmon.

 

The farmed stuff is crap, we dont eat it any more.

 

Lots of interesting stuff in the ABC story, unusual for them to actually have facts.

 

What I don't get is how a mussel farming lease can be sublet for fish farms, surely the terms of the lease would specify its sort of use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was out there on Saturday on my way back to the pen. There was no flag on the boat that a pilot was on board, (the pilot boat was seen racing out to the Huon boat after its 2nd run). I have photos that support this.

 

Irrespective of who had rights by the rules and col regs the over riding rule is good seamanship and safety. To drive a ship of that size through a fleet of small dinghies required a decision to be made at that point of time. That decision was a reckless and dangerous one. The Shipping channel is a large one and if the ship was 20 to 50 meters to the west he would have of missed the fleet completely.

 

This has nothing to do with fish farms and everything to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huon Ronda is 78 m and has pilot exempt masters.

Deemed restricted in ability to manoeuvre so goes to top of the tree.

 

Sounds like another case of sailboat racers and officials not understanding the world has changed.

Too many dickhead recreational sailors interfering with commercial vessels so the response has been harsh for recreational sailors.

 

Isn't the real question what was the dinghy race doing in the shipping lane anyway.

 

That's right sailors own the Derwent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lydia you are truely a fucktard.

But thanks for explaining your expansive knowledge of ColReg & Pilotage requirements in Australian Ports.

So good of you to start this trail of dribble, can't wait for your next instalment.

Suggestion : just stick to mouth breathing......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That used to be compliments around here once.

Anyway, looks like Tasports have a different view to you.

But if you want some pointers about entering other Australian ports you can ask me!

Brisbane has some of the best local rules, deemed hovercraft, deemed explosive carriers, LNG transfer areas.

All good Col Regs stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This has nothing to do with fish farms and everything to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

That's correct mate. It's nothing to do with fish farms. But not necessarily to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

 

A board member of the DSS has asked on social media as to why the SBSC didn't contact Hobart Port Control in the morning to ascertain shipping movements as, he stated the DSS and RYCT do?

 

TasPorts have released the media release as detailed above.

 

Huon Aquaculture (lessees of the ship but not operators of it) have said it was a pilotage exemption exercise whereby the ship had to stick to an approved passage plan.

 

Solvtrans, the Norwegian owners/operators of the ship have made no comment.

 

So, with the information we have here:

 

Now just maybe, for a ship visiting a port, on a pilotage exercise, with a pilot on board flying Code Flag H (as stated by TasPorts), or not on board (as alleged by observers) and restricted in manoeuverability, the skipper is unexpectedly faced with a fleet of sailing dinghies (Who was he to know they were kids? I know that many of them were adults). What does he do? Unexpectedly alter course and change his passage plan? Or assert his rights and responsibilities under the Colregs and authority of the pilotage flag, contact all stations on VHF, sound 5 short blasts and maintain course and speed (stand on)?

 

What would you answer on your coxswain's exam? I have 9 students being examined by AMSA for Cowswains Grade 1 next week. They could be asked the same question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading the TASport press release why does this sound like the commercial vessel made all the right noises but the PRO was either not listening or did not understand the obligations of the other vessels.

Could have abandoned the race and had restart.

The Huon Ronja is hardly a stealth ship

 

 

Internally TASPORTs have a different view by the looks. I wonder what the marine authority will determine (a little more independent)

 

On the Vessels 1st pass through the kids fleet the RO did delay the start - have the safety boats corral the kids away - communicate with the ship - discuss the space being used for the race - and formed an understanding with the skipper of the course - for which the marks were laid (it was the second race of the day). The skipper acknowledged understanding of the communication. The vessel returned 35 minutes later and steamed through the start finish line with the dinghies on the final leg of the race. Seems odd don't you think.........

 

There is a navigation channel under the Tasman bridge for up and down the river marked with leading lights/shapes and associated designated bailout routes. Aside from that the estuary is a shared resource for the enjoyment of the plebs and for the use of commercial vessels to ingress/egress the Port of Hobart. The Collision Regulations keep everyone separated.

 

The vessel did not display a H flag or an all white flag. It did display a H flag on its 3rd entry to Port so wtf.

 

Most Commercial stuff enters and leaves Port with an Easterly bias - this one was heading straight at John Garrow Shoal - a very westerly biased course. The Port due list showed the Vessel due to arrive at 19:00 hrs - this all happened mid afternoon.

 

Your a learned chap Lydia. Do you think the above action by the vessel are consistent with CollReg rules 7 or 8 which really are the common sense rules in open waterways. The dinghies certainly got out of the way - just - the committee boats couldn't pull their 70 metres of chain in time to get out of the way (anchoring is not prohibited where they were). Do you think the actions of the skipper of the vessel were reasonable under the circumstances?

 

Apparently all clubs got a communication re whatever they were up to - SBSC didn't apparently - and it would be interesting if any other club on the river got it.

 

Sandy Bay Sailing Club have conducted races here for 60 years - very rare for something like this to occur - mainly due to all parties acting in a sensible way. Something went wrong on the weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

This has nothing to do with fish farms and everything to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

That's correct mate. It's nothing to do with fish farms. But not necessarily to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

 

A board member of the DSS has asked on social media as to why the SBSC didn't contact Hobart Port Control in the morning to ascertain shipping movements as, he stated the DSS and RYCT do?

 

TasPorts have released the media release as detailed above.

 

Huon Aquaculture (lessees of the ship but not operators of it) have said it was a pilotage exemption exercise whereby the ship had to stick to an approved passage plan.

 

Solvtrans, the Norwegian owners/operators of the ship have made no comment.

 

So, with the information we have here:

 

Now just maybe, for a ship visiting a port, on a pilotage exercise, with a pilot on board flying Code Flag H (as stated by TasPorts), or not on board (as alleged by observers) and restricted in manoeuverability, the skipper is unexpectedly faced with a fleet of sailing dinghies (Who was he to know they were kids? I know that many of them were adults). What does he do? Unexpectedly alter course and change his passage plan? Or assert his rights and responsibilities under the Colregs and authority of the pilotage flag, contact all stations on VHF, sound 5 short blasts and maintain course and speed (stand on)?

 

What would you answer on your coxswain's exam? I have 9 students being examined by AMSA for Cowswains Grade 1 next week. They could be asked the same question.

 

 

Pirate - I would exercise my responsibility to avoid a collision by making a timely judgement - you sound like you would assert you "right of way" and go for it. I know which position I would rather defend with a coroner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

This has nothing to do with fish farms and everything to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

That's correct mate. It's nothing to do with fish farms. But not necessarily to do with bad decisions being made on the water at the time.

 

A board member of the DSS has asked on social media as to why the SBSC didn't contact Hobart Port Control in the morning to ascertain shipping movements as, he stated the DSS and RYCT do?

 

TasPorts have released the media release as detailed above.

 

Huon Aquaculture (lessees of the ship but not operators of it) have said it was a pilotage exemption exercise whereby the ship had to stick to an approved passage plan.

 

Solvtrans, the Norwegian owners/operators of the ship have made no comment.

 

So, with the information we have here:

 

Now just maybe, for a ship visiting a port, on a pilotage exercise, with a pilot on board flying Code Flag H (as stated by TasPorts), or not on board (as alleged by observers) and restricted in manoeuverability, the skipper is unexpectedly faced with a fleet of sailing dinghies (Who was he to know they were kids? I know that many of them were adults). What does he do? Unexpectedly alter course and change his passage plan? Or assert his rights and responsibilities under the Colregs and authority of the pilotage flag, contact all stations on VHF, sound 5 short blasts and maintain course and speed (stand on)?

 

What would you answer on your coxswain's exam? I have 9 students being examined by AMSA for Cowswains Grade 1 next week. They could be asked the same question.

 

 

Pirate - I would exercise my responsibility to avoid a collision by making a timely judgement - you sound like you would assert you "right of way" and go for it. I know which position I would rather defend with a coroner.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huon Ronda is 78 m and has pilot exempt masters.

Deemed restricted in ability to manoeuvre so goes to top of the tree.

 

Sounds like another case of sailboat racers and officials not understanding the world has changed.

Too many dickhead recreational sailors interfering with commercial vessels so the response has been harsh for recreational sailors.

 

Isn't the real question what was the dinghy race doing in the shipping lane anyway.

 

That's right sailors own the Derwent.

 

Huon Ronda is 78 m is not pilot exempt masters yet.

 

This is ironic that the comments on this page are that yachties from "town" should keep their noses out of what happens in rural areas. But when a ship from the rural area comes up to town and blasts around the river on an exercise that could be done any time of the week at any time of the year on any part of the river we are all " dickhead recreational sailors interfering with commercial vessels". That skipper lined up that fleet 3/4 of a mile if not more up the river and went straight through the fleet. There was no need for it. There has never been an issue like this before on the river.

 

Lydia your logic and arguments are suspect based on bitter\bial emotion and not common sense making your position weak reducing you to a ranting fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Huon Ronda is 78 m and has pilot exempt masters.

Deemed restricted in ability to manoeuvre so goes to top of the tree.

 

Sounds like another case of sailboat racers and officials not understanding the world has changed.

Too many dickhead recreational sailors interfering with commercial vessels so the response has been harsh for recreational sailors.

 

Isn't the real question what was the dinghy race doing in the shipping lane anyway.

 

That's right sailors own the Derwent.

 

Huon Ronda is 78 m is not pilot exempt masters yet.

 

This is ironic that the comments on this page are that yachties from "town" should keep their noses out of what happens in rural areas. But when a ship from the rural area comes up to town and blasts around the river on an exercise that could be done any time of the week at any time of the year on any part of the river we are all " dickhead recreational sailors interfering with commercial vessels". That skipper lined up that fleet 3/4 of a mile if not more up the river and went straight through the fleet. There was no need for it. There has never been an issue like this before on the river.

 

Lydia your logic and arguments are suspect based on bitter\bial emotion and not common sense making your position weak reducing you to a ranting fool.

 

 

 

 

He'll blame Yachting Australia next... Or is it Australian Sailing? Either way, Lydia will protest the IRC rating given to the Ronja Huon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i heard the Ronja shaved 500kg off it's bulbous prow - and it's IRC rating did not change !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Pirate - I would exercise my responsibility to avoid a collision by making a timely judgement - you sound like you would assert you "right of way" and go for it. I know which position I would rather defend with a coroner.

 

 

Exactly.

 

(p)irate please stay away from the water. Its getting clearer as to why you require constant rescue. Go entertain your white anting mate Lydia ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tasmanian Aquaculture Industry Information Night

On Monday November 7, representatives from the Tasmanian Salmon Farming Industry will be meeting with a number of officials from Tasmanian yacht clubs to discuss proposed developments within Storm Bay.

As the gateway to the Derwent and the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, Storm Bay regularly sees large numbers of sailors passing through, whether they be racing, cruising or delivering yachts to and from Hobart and the Huon and Channel regions. With this in mind, Australian Sailing in conjunction with the Tasmanian Salmonid Growers Association have called a stakeholders meeting as part of the community consultation process for proposed salmon farm developments within Storm Bay. At this meeting officials and staff from southern Tasmanian yacht clubs will discuss the impact that the proposed developments may have on sailing activities in the area.

It is hoped that the meeting between clubs and the salmon farming industry may lead to a better understanding of each others activities and enhance the on-water relationship between sailors and fish farm staff. Possible outcomes for sailors may include increased rescue capacity of fish-farm staff to help sailors in distress and improved navigation aids, including AIS transponders associated with the farms to mark their locations and easier to understand lighting systems to identify farms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bugger, will not be there.

Be good to see Pirate and Snoopy go a few rounds!

Yeah it was epic, he ate salmon I had some cheese. There were some crackers involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bugger, will not be there.

Be good to see Pirate and Snoopy go a few rounds!

Yeah it was epic, he ate salmon I had some cheese. There were some crackers involved.

 

Brilliant!! It shows what could have been done if loose cannons from a number of clubs hadn't gone running to the media and started all this shit.

 

It was a great night. Two salmon companies were present. One chose not to attend. A lot of information was shared. Most questions from yacht clubs related to radio frequencies and cage towing operations. ROV video footage was shown of the sea floor under salmon farming operations. And the biggest issue was that farm leases were not accurately marked on paper or electronic charts. The companies were surprised by this and agreed to take this up with MAST, AMSA etc who's responsibility is to get these things right.

 

And the quote of the night. From the Commodore of one of the clubs present (words to this effect, not an actual quote) "As long as they're marked on the charts correctly then that's all good. We can all navigate around fish farms."

 

And I ate Snoopy's share of the salmon. With the honey dill mustard sauce. It was fucking delicious. Even considering that I'd had three types of hot smoked salmon, salmon dip, ocean trout dip, standard cold-smoked, whisky-cured cold smoked, and honey-cured salmon for lunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all this talk of salmon means i'll be forced to cook cedar-planked salmon tomorrow - mmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 8:20 PM, Spar-Lash said:

Lydia you are truely a fucktard.

But thanks for explaining your expansive knowledge of ColReg & Pilotage requirements in Australian Ports.

So good of you to start this trail of dribble, can't wait for your next instalment.

Suggestion : just stick to mouth breathing......

Pity the official report got released this week.

Harsh reading for spar-lash and his mates.

Looks like SBSC has a bit of work to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 11:25 AM, snoopy said:

 

Huon Ronda is 78 m is not pilot exempt masters yet.

 

This is ironic that the comments on this page are that yachties from "town" should keep their noses out of what happens in rural areas. But when a ship from the rural area comes up to town and blasts around the river on an exercise that could be done any time of the week at any time of the year on any part of the river we are all " dickhead recreational sailors interfering with commercial vessels". That skipper lined up that fleet 3/4 of a mile if not more up the river and went straight through the fleet. There was no need for it. There has never been an issue like this before on the river.

 

Lydia your logic and arguments are suspect based on bitter\bial emotion and not common sense making your position weak reducing you to a ranting fool.

Snoops, you might want to read the report and bit about the salmon farm vessels interacting with the Huon river fleets safely but not so much when they come up town.

That is funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2016 at 10:45 PM, Waterfront said:

 

Pirate - I would exercise my responsibility to avoid a collision by making a timely judgement - you sound like you would assert you "right of way" and go for it. I know which position I would rather defend with a coroner.

So here is the official answer. Marine And Safety Tasmania investigation into close quarters situation between Ronja Huon and SBSC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, lydia said:

Snoops, you might want to read the report and bit about the salmon farm vessels interacting with the Huon river fleets safely but not so much when they come up town.

That is funny.

 

I'll bite. Whats your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck I love this place.

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0