Conference of Yacht Cruising Clubs
Annual Meeting - Thursday 15 January 2004
Technical content of the minutes of the meeting
Index of technical items dealt with at the meeting
11. Sailing directions editors’ meeting on 14 January
12. Trinity House plans and consultations
14. Automatic Identification Systems (AIS)
15. Obstructions to seaways caused by fishing gear
17. SJ’s report on other matters dealt with by the RYA Cruising Committee
19. Crown Estates ground rent known as Fundus
20. UKHO plans and its consultations with users
21. The dangers of single handed long distance races
22. The Future of Navtex & Weatherfax available to cruising yachtsmen
23. Current issues confronting the Maritime & Coastguard Agency
11. Sailing directions editors’ meeting on 14 January
The following matters were discussed and dealt with in the separate minutes of this meeting, circulated to all CYCC members and therefore not repeated here:
1. Purpose of the meeting
2. Potential liabilities of clubs and their publishing companies
a. The need to minimise risks of litigation
b. The risk for publishers and their authors
c. The advice received
d. Putting mariners on notice
b. Reducing possible sources of error
e. Adopting proper editorial practices
f. Buying professional indemnity insurance
g. Using a legal entity to screen liability
3. Royalties charged by the United Kingdom Hydrographic Office
4. Electronic publishing and website access
5. Practicalities of small print runs
6. Effectiveness of distribution arrangements
7. Arrangements with the Royal Yachting Association marketing department
8. Interface of clubs’ publications and other pilotage information
9. DEFRA’s initiative to publicise environmental restrictions with pilot guide publishers’ help
10. Problems arising from rolling implementation by UKHO of WGS84
In following up the action points, the Hon. Secretary has held an initial discussion and shared the text of minutes of the agenda item about RYA's marketing and publicising the clubs' pilot guides with Trevor Jones, the Chairman of RYA's Cruising Committee, who also serves on the Marketing Committee.
Action: Hon Secretary to arrange 13 January 2005 meeting and invite Imray
12. Trinity House plans and consultations
Consideration was given to Dr Ray Glaister’s report (attached at appendix 2) on 2003 Trinity House user group consultations about changes in aids to navigation, major navigational issues and plans being developed by Trinity House for its own future.
The value of CYCC’s membership of the group was felt to be especially important in the light of the opportunity given to CYCC to comment on the Trinity House 2020 The Vision strategy paper, which appears to advocate increased regulation of cruising yachtsmen and imply support for charging light dues to yachtsmen.
Action: Clubs to comment on CYCC’s draft letter to Trinity House. The final version of the letter after receiving comments from the clubs and giving the RYA the opportunity to review the letter with the aim of avoiding the two organisations offering conflicting arguments was sent on 29 January 2004 and is included in the consolidated circulars to members January 2003 to January 2004.
Mr Stephen Johnson, representing the RYA Cruising Committee, joined the meeting at this point and the minutes on technical matters below reflect both the CYCC discussion and matters raised by Stephen in the course of explaining the Cruising Committee’s activities. Mr Kim Fisher, head of the Maritime & Coastguard Agency’s Navigation & Communication Division joined the meeting later during the course of the technical discussion.
13. Light Dues
AM reported that, following his work on behalf of CYCC during the first round of efforts by the Department of Transport to shift the burden of light dues more to the private sector, including leisure yachtsmen, he has been following the second round. In particular, he has been suggesting ideas to the RYA to assist in preparing RYA’s submissions. The background to the present round was sent to CYCC members in the circular of 12 May 2003. Part of AM’s arguments were also circulated to CYCC members on 21 December 2003. SJ then described the progress of the study by MDS Transmodal under contract from the Department of Transport on the economic impact of potential changes in light dues and his own experience at the two consultative meetings held by the contractors. Other interested parties had argued that leisure yachtsmen should be made to pay, essentially with the aim of shifting the burden from themselves, and the contractors had suggested that owners of vessels on the Small Ships Register might be made to pay an annual fee.
AM noted that it is difficult to deflect the DfT’s argument that the user should pay and reminded the meeting that, given the structure of the General Lighthouse Authorities, any decision to charge by the United Kingdom would be likely to be taken up by Ireland. He pointed out that it is difficult to discriminate between users and non-users and charge in accordance with the extent of use. The SSR would be a very blunt and inequitable instrument and left out of account all foreign visiting yachtsmen. The costs of any fair system would be likely to outweigh the proportion of total light dues that could be raised from leisure yachtsmen. SJ said that the RYA’s argument was based on cost, not complexity. The RYA had surveyed yachtsmen through its Regional Liaison Officers (RLOs) to identify aids-to-navigation that are important to leisure yachtsmen or merely used because they are there, with the aim of demonstrating that most aids are for the benefit of commercial traffic. The RLOs had given limited response, but the feedback received tended to support the RYA’s arguments.
SJ said that the contractors’ study did not seem to give clear conclusions and recommendations. The next steps would be up to the Minister and the RYA would follow up as soon as any clear direction emerges.
BS expressed concern that light dues could be the thin end of the wedge towards general taxation of leisure yachtsmen, particularly in the light of the suggestion of charging based on SSR registration. Given that the law had been changed to make registration voluntary when the SSR was introduced, one might hope that the DfT would be reticent about making it the foundation of tax charges.
Following the meeting, the hon. secretary circulated a statement made in the House of Lords on 14 January by Lord Triesman on behalf of the Government, saying about light dues and the contractor’s study: "I do not wish to pre-empt any part of that study, but changes must be cost-effective to operate. It is for that reason we feel that, although it is not an impossibility, the idea of making a significant change in relation to leisure and pleasure craft is extremely unlikely. As my noble friend Lord Berkeley pointed out, it is more than likely that the overall costs of trying to implement such charges would far exceed any of the benefits. Collecting the money would be a hugely complex exercise." This suggests that the immediate risk is being lifted. However, a watching brief remains necessary.
The Chairman thanked AM for the quality and extent of his continuing efforts.
Action: AM will continue to follow the issue of light dues and will give input to the RYA or organise separate submissions by CYCC in most effective way.
14. Automatic Identification Systems (AIS)
The background to the obligatory fitting of AIS was given in the circular to CYCC members on 4 February 2003. Not much has changed in respect of the issues raised at that time with regard to its use by leisure craft. These include the lack of clarity about the likely effectiveness of AIS in collision avoidance together with practical and cost aspects such as the uncertain availability of type B equipment suitable for leisure craft. However, compulsory fit by the end of 2004 for all vessels over 300 GRT is becoming a reality and US pressure continued toward compulsory fit by smaller vessels. From the cruising yachtsman’s viewpoint, the view seems to be that AIS has the potential to be useful in due course but needs a settling in period in the merchant fleets and that its fit by leisure yachts should not be compulsory. CYCC had given input to the RYA along these lines.
SJ said that the RYA’s current position in its discussions with the authorities and in support of the position taken by ISAF, is that there should be no compulsory fit of AIS in leisure craft, by which the RYA means craft under 24 metres and under 80 gross tonnes. He said the RYA is concerned by the linkage that had been made to suggest using AIS as part of anti-terrorism security as opposed to its intended purpose of assisting safety of navigation and ship-to-shore communication. KF said that the MCA had no intentions of proposing mandatory carriage by small craft in the foreseeable future.
Action: The hon. secretary will watch progress of RYA Cruising Committee’s AIS working group to identify any action needed by CYCC.
15. Obstructions to seaways caused by fishing gear
The dangers of unmarked fishing gear had been discussed at the 2003 Annual Meeting and the Chairman and AM had written to the RYA on 3 February 2003 to encourage a focus on this topic, and the letter had been circulated within CYCC. The risks posed by fishing gear are considered to be on the increase, not least because of marks being dragged below the surface of the water and due to an increase in the use of wire traces. SJ noted that wildcat fishing gear by amateur fisherman created a special additional problem. In this connection, the RYA is studying some specific locations; for example, the planting of lobster pots in the Needles Channel.
AM and SJ said that one of the major problems in encouraging official action is the lack of effective incident reporting. The RYA and CYCC were encouraging clubs to promote reporting, but most evidence so far is anecdotal. AM’s opinion is that the actual number of incidents is much higher than the reported incidents. Discussion with any group of yachtsmen reveals that most have recent experience of fishing gear difficulties. BG said that the Search & Rescue authorities had been studying the issue over a 15 year period. The RNLI had also built up a record of relevant incidents attended by its boat, which had suggested that these were in the region of 40 relevant incidents a year; however, the RNLI has had problems with its database and it has been temporarily withdrawn, so this information cannot be relied upon.
KF said he had the impression that the reality of the problem was relatively small in terms of the number of incidents. If a serious problem could be demonstrated, action would be taken. This is important in the light of his view that primary legislation would be needed to achieve what is asked. PS was concerned that this impression was reflected in the MCA’s leaflet, which he felt understated the problem.
SJ reminded the meeting that the Government had extended CHIRP (the UK Confidential Hazardous Incident Reporting Programme) to the marine industry in July 2003 and that he represented the RYA on the 25 person Maritime Advisory Board. The RYA had seen this as an opportunity to press the issue of fishing gear in meetings and had used the RYA’s website to encourage the yachting community to make use of CHIRP. SJ said that RYA had also used the existence of EU Regulation on marking fishing gear as an element in its argument, but the NFFO (National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations) offered stiff opposition. The MCA and MAIB (Marine Accident Investigation Board), who observe at meetings, accepted that fishing gear is a major item in CHIRP discussions but did not seem impressed for the time being by the debate.
AM suggested that the European regulation is sufficient. What is needed is that it should be effectively applied in United Kingdom waters. However, he wondered how far the regulation extends to inshore fishing zones likely to be of most import to yachtsmen. He also noted that this regulation requires the tagging of all fishing gear, so that lost gear can be identified. However, there may be different motives for enforcement: was it for safety, or was it to help enforce fishery quotas? KF interjected that control of fishery policy is, indeed, a significant issue. AM concluded that Denmark, for example, enforces the regulation strictly and this probably extends throughout Scandinavia. Why could the United Kingdom not do the same? KF encouraged the collection of examples of local regulation and its enforcement across Europe, if there was a wish to advance this argument. KP wondered if the MCA and its opposite numbers in Europe are not in the best position to share their approaches.
SJ suggested that if legal enforcement is problematic then a ‘voluntary code’ may be the way to go, supported by appropriate implementation of European regulation. The RYA will try to inform itself on the nature of primary or secondary legislation that may be required. The meeting seemed unsure whether a ‘voluntary code’ would suffice.
SJ repeated his encouragement to clubs to promote the use of the CHIRP system with a view to building up a case that reflects the reality. The RM and the Chairman concurred that there is a need to heighten clubs’ awareness of the need to participate in this reporting in their own interest as well as that of the community as a whole.
Action: all clubs are asked to support the RYA’s initiative to use CHIRP to report fishing gear incidents.
16. Offshore Wind Farms
BG and SJ introduced the paper by Dr Susie Tomson on the RYA’s activity with regard to wind-farms, attached at Appendix 3. Publicity surrounding the launch of applications to construct Round Two wind farm sites makes it clear that Government intends this form of energy provision to be significant, with the Thames Estuary, Wash and North Wales/Solway Firth regions especially targeted. CYCC agrees that Dr Tomson’s focus in addressing planning applications is correct, with a view to ensuring that blades have a safe clearance above sea level of 22m, which is higher than the mast height of the average yacht, that zones should be properly marked, that farms should be designated as safety zones as opposed to exclusion zones and that enforceable commitments should be obtained to remove obsolete turbines.
BG noted that RYA’s action on this issue has its origins in the Robin Rigg Inquiry. The RYA remains adamant on its preference for safety zones in contrast to exclusion zones and believes that the MCA supports this position. On the other hand, the developers are seeking exclusion zones.
SJ noted that the RYA has identified additional important issues related to safety of navigation, notably the wind shadow created in the slipstream of turbines, interference with radar reception and interference with VHF transmissions. CT observed that these issues raise worries about electronic aids-to-navigation, so that Trinity House may need to focus on traditional aids in marking farms and their surroundings.
BW raised the concerns of the Yacht Clubs of Weymouth and the Royal Dorset YC about Powergen’s proposed wind farm on the Portland Harbour breakwaters and about the covert way in which Powergen seemed to be proceeding. He and his fellow flag officers in the yacht clubs were also concerned that the RYA was being slow to raise strong objections on this proposal and had communicated their concern to the RYA. He speculated on reasons for the RYA’s apparent stance on Powergen’s proposal. BG responded that this was a tactical matter; the RYA was waiting for the announcement that London’s Olympic Games bid called for the yachting events to be off Portland and Weymouth, since the RYA will then be in a position to use an amenity/tourist damage argument coupled with the national racing establishment in Portland. The announcement is expected in late January. The RYA needs to take great care in presenting its arguments, since in other wind farm proposals its line is to base its arguments primarily on safety of navigation, recognising that positions based on damage to the amenities are not normally sustainable. These have to be left to others. Once the announcement is made, the RYA will take a very strong line.
Following announcement of the Olympic bid, the RYA launched its process of objection to the Portland Harbour wind farm proposal and gained considerable media coverage for its views.
SJ, on behalf of Dr Tomson, reminded the meeting of her request for comments on sailing areas and routes in the location of proposed wind farms, any issues seen as arising both on Round One and Round Two wind farms. The relevant material had been circulated via the RYA’s Regional Liaison Officers, but support directly from CYCC clubs would be appreciated. SJ also said that the RYA is presently consulting with the MCA and Trinity House on the issues of marking, lighting and radar and VHF interference with a view to developing the RYA’s position and comments should go to him. The hon. secretary pointed out that it would be particularly helpful if the RYA could try to agree its position with the Government officials managing Round One and Round Two with the aim of principles being established for all bids by developers, rather than the RYA and clubs having to fight each application individually.
Action: All clubs to support Dr Tomson and SJ with information they can use to develop their arguments along the lines proposed.
17. SJ’s report on other matters dealt with by the RYA Cruising Committee
- VHF channel 16 watch by ships
SJ said that the RYA is waiting until 2005 to see if the decision is to cease listening watch on VHF channel 16. KF pointed out that H.M. Coastguard will continue to listen on VHF channel 16, but that this will not be mandatory for ships.
- RYA’s joint proposal with MCA for a directory of MMSI numbers
The MCA’s survey, about which CYCC sent out a circular on 1 June, had received little response and the idea had been abandoned. The hon. secretary reminded the meeting that the ITU offers online search through its Mobile Maritime Access and Retrieval System (MARS), at www.itu.int/ITU-R/terrestrial/mars/index.asp and this is updated weekly.
- Mobile telephones as an alternative to GMDSS and VHF
The RYA’s position is that yachts should fit and use a recognised form of communications such as VHF, if practical. A mobile phone can be an alternative but yachtsmen should understand the limitations of mobile phones as an emergency means of communication. The MCA does not recommend mobile phones except as a supplementary aid.
- Availability of European Union funding for boating facilities
EU funding is available for small harbours wishing to improve their facilities for leisure craft. The RYA is seeking to publicise the opportunity. RM suggested that the RYA should use CYCC to help it in this task.
- Marina Berth-holder Clubs
The RYA is seeking to publicise to yachtsmen the benefits of Berth-holder Clubs and is urging yachtsmen to shop around when looking for a suitable mooring or berth.
- RYA position on breath testing
The RYA accepted Government proposals in principle. Testing would not apply to non-professional yachtsmen not underway, nor to vessels not able to do over 17 knots or under 21 metres.
- Derogation for yachtsmen on red diesel
SJ noted that the RYA is starting to negotiate for the extension of favourable fuel duty, but that there is opposition in view of European Union regulation. BG said that the RYA is preparing two papers; one on the practical issues, for example the possibility that fuel docks may be unwilling to provide white diesel as well as red, and the other pressing the UK Government to apply for derogation, recognising that the UK may be give way to European pressure. AM pointed out that BMF must have a view, given its role representing power boat manufacturers. BG replied that BMF is contributing to the debate.
- Publication of tide times on the RYA website
SJ said that discussions were in progress with the UKHO, but that UKHO wished to claim royalties for any information published using its proprietary algorithms and harmonic constants. BG noted that various alternative services are available, including the offerings on the UKHO’s own website.
- RYA membership
SJ explained that the RYA continues to be concerned about the level of its membership. There is a feeling that more needs to be done to publicise the benefits of RYA membership, with particular emphasis on the work that RYA Cruising does for the cruising yachtsmen. Poor response to invitations to forums means that this form of publicity will probably be abandoned. Work-in-progress by the RYA needs to be publicised as well as issues that have been resolved. The Cruising Committee is addressing this aspect.
The Chairman thanked SJ for his contribution to the meeting and the information he had given. He hoped that the RYA Cruising Committee and CYCC will continue to develop their working relationship.
19. Crown Estates ground rent known as Fundus
This issue was extensively discussed at the 2003 Annual Meeting and AM had submitted a paper about the situations. BG has been following the issue in his capacity as chairman of the RYA’s Legal and Government Affairs Committee. BG explained that the RYA’s policy is to support legal action if a suitable case arises to establish a general principle. This has been difficult to achieve, given the unique nature of situations arising. BG further noted that two clubs had been in dispute with Crown Estates locally, basing their position on the Ipswich case, and Crown Estates had backed off to avoid confrontation.
AM considered that arguments seeking to limit the Crown’s right to fundus are weak, so that the real issue is the encouragement by Crown Estates to its agents to pursue the best rent they could achieve. The focus of action should therefore be on negotiating around the level and justification of amounts to be charged.
20. UKHO plans and its consultations with users
The hon. secretary introduced Howard Easton’s report (attached at appendix 4). The results of the spring UKHO consultative meeting were circulated to CYCC members on 17 April. The autumn meeting had been cancelled. The reality seemed to be that UKHO did not place a high priority on the user group relative to its other commercial pressures. The group nonetheless remains in existence and can be used at any time to draw concerns of cruising yachtsmen to the attention of UKHO. The meeting agreed that there is merit in maintaining CYCC’s presence in the group.
Action: Howard Easton is asked to continue his representation. The next user group meeting has now been set for 22 April and Howard requests CYCC members to contact him with agenda items at howard_easton@hotmail.com.
21. The dangers of single handed long distance races
AM drew CYCC’s attention to risks to safety at sea created by single handed sailing, notably racing in large yachts, due to the difficulty of maintaining a proper look-out. Collision Regulation Rule Five puts primacy on a proper look out by sight and hearing. Other aids, for example radar guard zones, were seen as additional means when appropriate. He pointed out that the Route du Rhum disasters last year were instructive about the claims in advance of the race about clever electronics being sufficient. He felt that ISAF’s position on the issue is insufficiently strong. The meeting sympathised but did not feel it was appropriate to take a position.
22. The Future of Navtex & Weatherfax available to cruising yachtsmen
The hon. secretary introduced Frank Singleton’s paper (attached at appendix 5). FS had been invited to attend the meeting in view of his long-standing voluntary services to the cruising community in publicising sources of weather forecasting. FS wished to raise awareness that Navtex (which is part of GMDSS – the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System) is based on obsolete technology and that weatherfax is becoming less available. Inmarsat C (which is also part of GMDSS) provides high seas forecasting over its SafetyNet system, but Inmarsat C transmissions are also based on largely obsolete telex technology and is, anyway, not typically fitted by yachtsmen. FS believes that opinion should be mobilised to encourage the development of appropriate replacements in the interests of the safety of cruising yachtsmen.
AM pointed out that many yachtsmen have not yet fitted Navtex. The concern is laudable, but he does not see any solution in the short term. KF noted that his continuing impression is that Navtex is currently operating satisfactory, especially now the conflict of transmissions between Niton and Ostend has been sorted out. BG thought that continuing NATO fleet requirements would protect the Northwood weatherfax transmission for the time being.
KF warned that equipment changes affecting the GMDSS arrangements would have to be agreed at the level of IMO and lobbying at this level, if successful, would lead to regulation and this, in turn, would lead to mandatory carriage of equipment, at least for SOLAS vessels. Thus there is a risk of action at the official level undermining the preference of cruising yachtsmen for any fit of equipment to be voluntary.
The meeting agreed that further work is needed before CYCC can take a position.
Action: the meeting confirmed that Frank Singleton would be a welcome guest at the next Annual Meeting.
23. Current issues confronting the Maritime & Coastguard Agency
KF explained that the organisation of the MCA is divided between operations and standards. KF is on the standards side and heads the Navigation & Communication Division under John Garnett. His concern is particularly with safety of navigation, and hence the implementation of SOLAS agreements including equipment standards and approval. His group pays approximately £5 million a year for coastal surveying and about the same to the Meteorological Office for shipping forecasts provided as part of GMDSS. On the communications side, he is concerned with the use of radio at sea and in negotiations at the International Telecommunication Union. This will also involve discussions with OffCom on the problem of ‘light regulation.’
KF confirmed that pressures on the radio spectrum continue to increase, hence the need to shave the boundaries of radar bands and make the reductions to spurious transmissions that go with this. He said that progress is being made in type approvals of VHF-DSC equipment. An international standard has been agreed and the UK is now driving forward the development of an adequate European standard.
KF summarised the MCA’s consultative process undertaken as it seeks to prepare new regulation. He said that his division operates two consultative committees, UKSON (United Kingdom Safety of Navigation) and MRAC (Marine Radio Advisory Committee). He said that the MCA is happy to extend the circle of persons consulted to any persons who believe that they have a useful contribution to make.
The Chairman thanked Kim Fisher for his courtesy in coming to the CYCC meeting and taking part in the debates. The meeting agreed that there would be a benefit to CYCC in joining the Unite Kingdom Safety of Navigation consultative group both to gain early warning of regulation affecting cruising yachtsmen and to have the opportunity to develop submissions.
Action: the hon. secretary to confirm to KF his readiness to join the group (until some other CYCC member felt they wished to take this responsibility). KF has since placed the hon. secretary on his distribution list.
24. Any other business
BG reminded the meeting that clubs are requested to provide the RYA with information about cruising routes in the regions of proposed wind farms in order to assist Ted Osborn’s and Susie Tomson’s project on this matter, as discussed in agenda item 16 above.
25. Next meeting – Thursday 13 January 2005
Thursday 13 January is proposed for the 34th Annual Meeting, given that next year’s London Boat Show will be from 6 – 16 January 2005. As noted above, the Editors’ Meeting is proposed to be held the previous evening. The hon. secretary will advise on the location in due course.
DAVID DARBYSHIRE
Hon. Secretary of CYCC
Appendix 2
Trinity House User Group (THUG), Dr. Ray Glaister - agenda item 12
Trinity House uses THUG to obtain views of users on proposed changes to AtoN, and annually in October, to present major plans and permit discussion on major navigational issues. Following pressure from the CYCC, TH agreed to request views by email, so that these could be speedily forwarded to the CYCC representatives. Additionally TH advise us of changes to buoyage, e.g. approaches to River Deben, that we publicize.
During 2003 views were sought on
Scarweather Sands Wind Farm (May/June);
Use made of Racons (June);
East Solent AtoN on DW route into E Solent (September);
Coquets Lighthouse sector light (September);
Future Requirements for Major Floating Aids (No comments received);
Longstone Lighthouse fog signal (November);
2020 The Vision Marine Aids to Navigation Strategy (Comments required by 23 February).
Racons
Five CYCC members responded to the question of the use made of racons by yachtsmen, agreeing that these would not be seriously missed, whereas all but one other respondent (including the RYA) felt them to be useful. It is important (if we are to argue against payment of Light Dues – and associated registration issues - by yachts) that no aids are seen as required by yachtsmen that are not required by large ships.
Fog Signals
The Longstone Lighthouse consultation raises the general question of the need for fog signals. Kit Power raised the interesting distinction in pleasure boating fraternity between “Navigators” and “Joy Riders”. For the first group (who are likely to be targeted for Light Dues) a fog signal is nice to hear but not really necessary, while the Joy Riders, out for a day sail in an open boat (and highly unlikely to be targeted for Light Dues) do need things to warn them of hazards. Kit Power amplifies “Of course "navigators" badly need fog signals (and lights) if the GPS fails. With the (so far) great reliability of the system I don't personally take this danger too seriously (but it is certainly a good reason to regularly record one's position against that possibility). I thus don't think we need press for the retention of off shore fog signals - nice, but not essential, is my view and if others agree it might be worth taking the initiative with Trinity House and suggesting that line of approach in the future. It would enhance our reputation as a constructive and cooperative body.
2020 The Vision Marine Aids to Navigation Strategy
CYCC representatives have been asked to download this from the TH web site. There are only two specific references to leisure craft
(page10) “In the context of technological advances, GLAs have long recognised the significant reduction in the navigational value of audible fog signals. However their limited application in a hazard warning role and in the protection of major floating AtoN and offshore structures mean that they retain a limited but valid safety role for the fishing and leisure user. Fog signals/Audible signals maybe continued subject to a risk assessment on a case by case basis.”41
(page 14) “In view of the foregoing it is unlikely that the level of service can change, unless: ………The mandatory licensing of all leisure craft with compulsory training of their owner/operators, similar to that required of all light aircraft pilots and road users. ……..”
We may however wish to comment on generalities.
Appendix 3
Offshore Wind Farms - agenda item 16
CYCC member clubs have been expressing concern about the threats to safety and freedom of navigation posed by Government plans for renewable energy developments, notably wind farms proposed for shallow coastal waters in the Thames Estuary, the Wash and between the Solway Firth and north Wales in the North West. Their concern is heightened by plans proposed in other areas of special sailing and touristic interest, such as Portland.
The RYA is committing resources under Dr Susie Tomson towards fact finding and representation to planning inquiries. For example, she met our member BCYC last summer in relation to the Scarweather Sands proposals.
It seems quite clear that the Government intends to press ahead with its plans and is, of course, supported by the construction industry in particular. Thus the Financial Times reported on 13 December: "Developers rush to build wind farms - Plans for the world's biggest offshore wind harm construction programme have been increased by almost 20% because of higher demand from developers, government ministers will announce....."
Dr Tomson has properly identified that the vital points to represent to Government and planning authorities are to ensure that turbines have a clearance above water level of a safe height, that while safety zones around farms are acceptable to mariners, that farms are properly marked (see also agenda papers for agenda item 11(d) about the Trinity House 2020 visioning paper) and that obsolete sites are removed.
The question arises to consider the effort appropriate to negotiate outline planning principles to be applied to all wind farms as well as to represent the leisure cruising community at specific planning inquiries.
Dr Tomson has prepared a status report on the current position, which she has also posted with appropriate links on the RYA's website, and this is set out below. She is giving Stephen Johnson copies of relevant maps & etc. to distribute at our meeting.
OFFSHORE WIND FARMS: Update from the RYA
Susie Tomson, RYA Planning and Environmental Officer
9 January 2004
Round One Wind Farm Sites
Construction has started on the Round One Wind Farm sites.
North Hoyle was the first to come into commission and is reported to be having a greater impact on radar and VHF than previously thought and the local MCA office are carrying out some research into this (reported by Peter Lloyd, Welsh Yachting Association and RYA-PEC ).
The public inquiry into the Scarweather Sands development in Swansea Bay was attended by RYA who continued to object to the application of an 'exclusion zone'. The inspector's report is anticipated in March.
Round Two Wind Farm Sites
Applications by developers for a Crown Estate licence for Round Two sites have been considered and the sites were published on the Crown Estate website - these sites must be formally accepted by developers by January 20th 2004.
Once the Crown Estate licence sites are confirmed the developers will have to complete an Environmental Impact Assessment containing information relating to usage of the site and navigational risk amongst other issues. Each developer must also apply for the various consents required prior to beginning construction. Any organisation or member of the public can comment on the Environmental Impact Statement as well as objecting to clauses in the draft consents.
The Energy Bill
Currently the Energy Bill is going through Parliament, which will enable developers to establish safety zones around the turbines and wind farm sites. These will have to be based on a detailed risk assessment. It is unclear at this stage how these regulations will be implemented.
Position of recreational boating on offshore wind farms.
The RYA developed its position on offshore wind farms in relation to minimum rotor clearance height, safety zones, marking and lighting and dereliction. We made some progress in the Round One developments removing 'exclusion zones' and establishing a minimum clearance height of 22m above MHWS for the majority of the sites.
We are now faced with larger developments and need to assess whether we object to the specifics of each project or to an entire project and its location.
In order to inform this debate we have been identifying the sailing areas and cruising routes within the Government's three strategic wind farm development areas.
Identification of Cruising Routes and Sailing Areas
The RYA was consulted and responded in detail to the DTI's Strategic Environmental Assessment for the Round Two wind farm sites. The main omission in this work was the absence of any data relating to recreational boating. The RYA-PEC decided that it was imperative that this information was collected and approached the DTI's SEA team for funding to help with the collection of this data. This was not forthcoming, as the DTI did not see this information as a priority to the wind farm project.
RYA-PEC decided that this was a priority for recreational boating and RYA funds have been made available to take on a researcher to develop this work. The work is being carried out by Emma Ormsby (researcher); Susie Tomson (RYA) and Ted Osborn (RYA-PEC and Cruising Association).
At present draft maps (see below) based on local knowledge, cruising almanacs and pilot books are being constructed utilising the RYA's GIS system. The data contained on the map pertains to cruising routes and sailing areas. Cruising routes are defined as recreational use - heavy, medium and light and traditional routes - heavy, medium and light. Sailing areas are defined as general sailing areas and racing areas. Once these draft maps are completed they will be sent to local clubs, the Cruising Association and RYA regional committees for comment. Several regional workshops may also be held in March to finalise the information.
We need views on the following:
1) The draft maps: We would like you comments on the routes and sailing areas in the draft maps. If you are able to contribute to this work and would like to receive a copy of any of the draft maps to comment on, please contact Emma Ormsby at environment@rya.org.uk.
2) The specific developments: Comments on the locations of the proposed Round Two developments: Feed back comments to Susie Tomson at susie.tomson@rya.org.uk
3) Review the RYA position on offshore wind farms from Round One sites: May 2003: Feedback comments to Susie Tomson at susie.tomson@rya.org.uk
4) Marking, lighting, radar and VHF interference: The RYA position is currently being developed in Consultation with the MCA and Trinity House - contact Stephen Johnson, Cruising Manager at Stephen.Johnson@rya.org.uk.
Appendix 4
UKHO Small Craft Liaison Group, Howard Easton - agenda item 20
Howard Easton, CYCC representative on the UKHO's Small Craft Liaison Group draws our attention to his assessment of this group's work. The question arises as to how best to take advantage of UKHO's openness to dialogue that deals with substantive matters, especially the form and presentation of charts. His current views are:
“I really have nothing to add to the comments (see below) I made after the last United Kingdom Hydrographic Office meeting. The liaison with them is as much use as we make of it. The UKHO are pretty open, do respond to what the meeting says, but the Small Craft Liaison meetings are infrequent, often postponed, and generally handled in a way that says "we at the UKHO have more useful things to do with our time."
The meeting scheduled for 10th October has again been put off to a future date to be decided. I have not pushed the UKHO for a new date, since I have only received two comments from members about items which might be raised, one of which I have dealt with directly and am waiting a reply (the programme for WGS84 changeover). No great point in harassing UKHO on behalf of CYCC, if the CYCC has no great issues to raise.
The other aspect of consultation is, of course, news. I have sometimes wondered if this has been a contributory factor to the deferral of meetings - the UKHO have struggled to meet many of the deadlines they have given us.”
Selected comments sent to CYCC members after the 21 February 2003 meeting
CYCC clubs should bear in mind that UKHO made clear that it welcomes suggestions related to charts that are being redrawn. This particularly applies to the coverage of leisure portfolios. CYCC clubs may wish to consider whether they want to make suggestions.
We should bear in mind that UKHO necessarily gives priority to its commercial customers. Accordingly, the more feedback that leisure users can give to UKHO on chart amendments or coverage, particularly for areas not recently surveyed or likely to be surveyed, the more positively our interests are likely to be regarded. This ought to give clubs issuing sailing directions an excellent opportunity to effect changes that they would like to see made to UKHO products.
UKHO's focus is on its standard navigational charts, of which UKHO distributes 50,000 a week and which form 75% of its income. Standard charts are up-to-date at the time of sale. Last year UKHO has issued nearly 500 new charts and editions and will issue about 430 this year. New North Atlantic routing charts were released in 2002 and the South Atlantic set in March 2003.
Leisure charts and leisure portfolios are annual snapshots of standard charts and contain identical information to standard charts at the date of printing. They are not, however, updated to the time of sale. They are usually printed just before the start of the sailing season. In future, leisure folios will be expanded up to standard size, in order to help clarity and updating.
The Clyde portfolio, based on redrawn charts as part of the WGS84 conversion process, should be published in time for the 2004 London Boat Show. UKHO is consulting the Clyde clubs and will welcome changes to coverage and suggestions.
Appendix 5
Future of Navtex & Weatherfax, Frank Singleton - agenda item 21
Frank Singleton, whose weather forecast information web-site is invaluable to most of us, sadly was unable to join our Annual Meeting, due to a conflicting engagement. However, he has sent remarks that he believes we will find it worth while to consider about the desirable next steps in broadcast forecasts. These are set out below.
The question arises as to how CYCC may best address and follow up with the MCA, the Meteorological Office and IMO (through ISAF), bearing in mind that this is a GMDSS issue, the developments that Frank considers necessary.
"1. NAVTEX is obsolete technology as is painfully obvious. OK, it works after a fashion and I am proponent but, as Chris Pink says, if INMARSAT-C had come along a little earlier, then NAVTEX would not. Any terrestrial radio communications system is subject to problems in operation. It does concern me that the powers that be ie IMO etc. seem to have no plans for son of NAVTEX. When it comes it is, surely, going to have to be satellite based with all the implications that will have for leisure (and other small vessel) users. Should we be lobbying now for consideration to be given to a more efficient replacement suitable for use by non SOLAS as well as SOLAS vessels?
2. Radiofax is, again, obsolete. There are some discussions going on in IMO (I am not up to speed on this one) about a satellite replacement. First, will receiving equipment be suitable for small non SOLAS vessels? For example, could it be receive only and not costly in terms of capital and running costs? Has or is any thought being given to using digital methods e.g. GRIB rather than analogue?
3. INMARSAT-C is a component of the GMDSS but is, effectively, ruled out for small vessels on cost grounds. There are some low cost sets - one was manufactured for and sold cheaply to Australian fishermen. Why is such kit not more openly available? Is there any real reason why a mass produced receive only set could not be made available for leisure, non SOLAS, use? The technology is simple and someone with a little radio knowledge could do so. There is a mini C receiver about to become available but, I think, it is likely to be more than many yachtsmen would wish to spend.
4. Met Services have far more information at their finger tips than is or can be made available to leisure sailors using present communications systems ie VHF/MF/HF voice, text or fax. Is anyone thinking about how to make, say, GRIB products more easily available in a broadcast form? I suspect that this comes back to the concept of broadcast data streams from satellite. After all, I can get a 7 kb for download as an email attachment giving me, effectively, 8 charts of wind vectors at 1 degree spacing over the Med from Spain to Italy. Free from the US. That kind of information as a broadcast download would be beneficial to commercial ships as well as the leisure community. (This is really back to item 2 but takes the question rather wider.)"