{"id":1791,"date":"2021-11-01T00:56:27","date_gmt":"2021-11-01T00:56:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/?p=1791"},"modified":"2021-11-15T19:03:56","modified_gmt":"2021-11-15T19:03:56","slug":"defining-a-vessel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/2021\/11\/01\/defining-a-vessel\/","title":{"rendered":"Defining a vessel"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"western\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: large;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-1798 alignleft\" src=\"http:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/MSA-1995.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"124\" height=\"175\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/MSA-1995.jpg 614w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/MSA-1995-212x300.jpg 212w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/MSA-1995-567x800.jpg 567w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/MSA-1995-283x400.jpg 283w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 124px) 100vw, 124px\" \/>In 1995 the newly-consolidated Merchant Shipping Act<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">, which creates maritime offences, <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">applied to<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> \u201c<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><i>every description of vessel used in navigation\u201d<\/i><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> and this seemed <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">all-encompassing<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> enough until 2005 that is, when the High Court ruled that to be \u201c<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><i>used in navigation<\/i><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">\u201d <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">means making<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> an ordered progression over the water from one place to another. <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">C<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">raft that <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">were<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> simply used for having fun without the object of going anywhere therefore <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">fell outside<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> the <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">law<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">. This <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">led to <\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">the acquittal of someone being prosecuted for a fatal <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">collision with a stationary vessel<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p class=\"western\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: large;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Panic, but few things move more slowly, it seems, than maritime law. A consultation was <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">tri<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">ed in 2009 but this proved inconclusive. <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">But<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> here we are now, 16 years after the original ruling, with a <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">fresh<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> consultation on what is now <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">term<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">ed <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><i>\u201cpersonal watercraft\u201d<\/i><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> (PWC) to bring leisure vessels once again <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">under<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> the law.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_1795\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1795\" style=\"width: 227px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-1795\" src=\"http:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/Kite-surfer.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"227\" height=\"131\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/Kite-surfer.jpg 900w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/Kite-surfer-300x174.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/Kite-surfer-768x445.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/Kite-surfer-800x463.jpg 800w, https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/files\/2021\/11\/Kite-surfer-691x400.jpg 691w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 227px) 100vw, 227px\" \/><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-1795\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">WikiCommons pic of kite surfing hydrofoil popular in California<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p class=\"western\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: large;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">The proposal is to define a PWC as any type of craft <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">which<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><i> (a) is situated wholly or partly in or on water; (b) is used, or is capable of being used, to carry one or more persons; and (c) is less than 24 metres in overall length<\/i><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">. So far so good, but it is always possible to snatch defeat <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">from <\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">the jaws of victory. There is an exclusion for children\u2019s toys, which is fine, but also for <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><i>\u201can unpowered craft which is less than 2.5 metres in overall length\u201d<\/i><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">. This means that paddleboards count as PWCs but windsurfers <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">which<\/span><\/span> <span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">are less than 2.5m<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> and a lot of non-displacement craft like kite surfers and hydrofoils, both of which can travel at spectacular speeds, <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">remain<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> outside the law.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p class=\"western\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: large;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Does this matter since many harbours, including Salcombe, have <a href=\"https:\/\/www.salcombeharbour.co.uk\/byelaws\">byelaws<\/a> w<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">hich define a <\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">vessel in such <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">a way that covers everything, including hydrofoils and even pontoons<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">? The answer is yes. In 2013 legislation was <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">enact<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">ed to enable harbours to use Harbour Directions instead of byelaws for m<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">ost<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> purposes. Harbour Directions are intended to be simpler, quicker, more flexible and cheaper to make than byelaws \u2013 but they <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">are tied to<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 definitions. A harbour would still need to make byelaws if it wished to <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">cover<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> all windsurfers, for <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">example<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\">.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p class=\"western\"><span style=\"font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: large;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">There is, of course, a solution \u2013 apart from the long-standing joke that a vessel should be defined in law as \u201canything that floats\u201d. <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">Salcombe\u2019s proposal is<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> to allow harbours <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">with<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> byelaws to use th<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">e same<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> definition of a vessel in <\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\">their<\/span><\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"> Harbour Directions.<\/span><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><span lang=\"en-GB\"> The consultation ended on 1 November. Will Salcombe\u2019s view prevail? We will have to wait and see, but please not another 16 years.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In 1995 the newly-consolidated Merchant Shipping Act, which creates maritime offences, applied to \u201cevery description of vessel used in navigation\u201d and this seemed all-encompassing enough until 2005 that is, when the High Court ruled that to be \u201cused in navigation\u201d means making an ordered progression over the water from one place to another. Craft that were simply used for having fun without the object of going anywhere therefore fell outside the law. This led to the acquittal of someone being&#8230;<\/p>\n<div class=\"more-link-wrapper\"><a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/2021\/11\/01\/defining-a-vessel\/\">read more<span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Defining a vessel<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1791","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","entry"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1791","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1791"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1791\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1802,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1791\/revisions\/1802"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}