The Mayor of Marlborough, Tom Harrison, came straight out and said the foreshore and seabed must remain in public ownership. The mayor said it was time to ignore the separatists With their outrageous and ever-insatiable demands. It was time to stop and reaffirm the egalitarian philosophy of our forefather treaty partners and move forward as one - New Zealanders.

The Minister of Fisheries, Pete Hodgson, was quick in his government's defence. The government will act to uphold the public's right to access and use of the foreshore and seabed," said Hodgson. "We will all be able to walk along the beach tomorrow as we do today."

All good stuff, but haven't we already lost much of our access to the foreshore already through private ownership and DoC's lock-up policy. When it comes to loss of access over private land we are equally at fault, because many of us have failed to respect landowners' rights by leaving gates open, scaring or even at times stealing stock. Access to national parks and DoC estates is frequently restricted for a variety of reasons, including the QEII covenants.

DoC forbids landing on 90 percent of Crown-owned offshore islands. Huge areas of coastal properties with riparian rights have been sold off to overseas buyers who have closed access often without having seen the place. Now we are all fearful that Maori will close up the remaining available space we have access to if they get control. Just who is the enemy here?

To find out how this all started we spoke with a local Kaumatua, Jim Elkington of Ngati Koata, one of the eight tangata whenua iwi of Te Tau Ihu from the top of the South Island, who lodged their claim in 1997.

The problem was in two parts, said Elkington. The first concern arose from the manner in which the Marlborough District Council was managing the process for marine farm site applications, he said. Iwi found by its own research that any local Maori applications for marine farm sites were turned down. Likewise, any objections to applications that were deemed to impede customary fishing by iwi were not upheld. So they saw an imbalance. To understand this we need to go back a bit further.

In 1883 the Maori Land Courts set aside some islands around D'Urville Island as Maori reservations, said Elkington. Again in 1986, Ngati Koata had put through another 42 islands as its right. These all have exclusive rights as fishing reserves to Ngati Koata people as defined in the 1883 act.

Since 1883 we have had this exclusive right, and we have never stopped anybody from having access to these waters and beaches. Then some of the large farms on D'Urville Island were sold into foreign ownership. Go down to the foreign ownership land where there are beautiful beaches and you will find signs saying No Landing or No Fishing, he says. This action was denying traditional access to the foreshore and beaches to families and other local users for picnics and fishing.

They were never put there by New Zealanders, nor were they put there by Maori people. So we are saying, exercise a bit of tina ranga tira (chieftainship) before none of us is allowed on our beaches. Even our Maori reservations attached to these farmlands have the same signs on them, and it's our private property, Elkington says.

In 1997 Te Tau Ihu lodged the claim to the Maori Land Court. To date all court action has been around which court will hear the case, which has yet to be put before the court. Iwi claim their partner is the Crown, not the local authority, and they are calling on the Crown to exercise this right.

We see the only difference will be a change of landlord. We believe we can do a better job than the district council. However, Elkington was clear to say that he could not speak for other iwi.

Given the recent statements in the media from other hui in the north and south, it is obvious that there will be those within Maoridom who share differing views, and who will continue to attempt to claim for more than they may be entitled to for future financial gain, thus fuelling the genuine concerns of all New Zealanders, and the need for the government to ensure that future generations continue to enjoy continued freedom of access to our foreshore and seabed.

If this means the Crown legislating and clawing back the access rights already lost through private ownership of land etc, then so be it.

It is unfortunate that the aggressive, dogmatic approach of DoC's policy makers and its marine reserve promoters has been allowed to continue unabated, detracting from the hard work of dedicated field staff working with endangered species and in park management.

If this government wants to escape from setting itself up with an election issue that will cost it votes, it needs to take positive action by taking charge of its out-of-control Department of Conservation policy makers, and returning the freedom of access to all of our foreshores and seabed to the people of New Zealand.

Keith Ingram, Editor
 

To Top

This irritating disclaimer started a few years ago after the tragic events of the 1998 Sydney to Hobart yacht race. Apparently the Bureau of Meteorology is running scared of litigation law, despite getting it right about the terrible depression that decimated the fleet that year, but was wrong about its potential full force. This, from the law's point of view, appears to be unforgivable.

This supercilious attitude is tantamount to saying that only the perfect should be allowed to remain in a profession. All imperfect people should quit now or eventually face some level of litigation that will destroy them anyway. It fails to mention that the legal profession itself is anything but perfect.

According to advice I have had over the years regarding escape clauses and disclaimers, they are little more than empty rhetoric against a legal system practised in the art of their circumvention.

Under fair and reasonable circumstances, and as a means of keeping the shonks at arm's length, the right to litigate is important. But when there is understandable misjudgement with notoriously flexible parameters, is that fair cause for legal attack?

Weather is fickle and its forecasting is as much art as science. Regardless of what computer models say, and regardless of the degree of human concurrence, there remains room for error. That is the nature of the beast, and everyone must live with the fact - especially sailors and farmers.

In my experience, our weather bureau gets it right most of the time, which is all I could fairly expect. To take anyone's advice as absolute is to throw out common good sense and caution. It is the very knowledge that is not always right that keeps my wits about me. But, ironically, those wits are being eroded by the legal system's demand that the weather bureau cries wolf much of the time.

Over the past few years, my wife and I have spent more time lingering in port for a strong wind or gale warning to become reality more than ever before. In most cases, the warnings amounted to nothing more than law-driven exaggerations.

The following is an extreme example, but nevertheless typical of the state of play. In February 2002, together with six other southbound yachts, we were anchored in Camden Haven, New South Wales, preparing to put to sea the following day. Out of the blue came a priority gale warning that a 50-knot southerly change was working its way up the coast.

We all stayed put and waited, and waited. The sky remained remarkably clear for a summer day, and there was not enough wind to blow out a candle at the height of the "Storm". A canoe could have been paddled south in perfect safety.

I have no doubt that a computer model predicted the change and, considering its total absence, was possibly disputed by a few human forecasters who knew better. They no doubt bit their tongues and played the game in which lawyers, and not their professional peers, are the umpires. This cry-wolf type of forecasting will, I believe, produce its own accidents, because a lot of sailors are sick and tired of waiting for a strong wind that proves to be nothing, or just a pleasant sailing breeze.
I know of two cases where frustration and disillusionment with modern forecasting led to skippers putting to sea during a strong wind warning against what would have been their better judgement pre-1998 (one got away with it, the other got clobbered.)

That's what happens when you cry wolf too often - mutual trust breaks down and warnings are ignored; not despite the so-called protection of litigation-inspired warnings, but because of them. Perhaps the flipside of this is that the next person to get into serious trouble by ignoring a warning could sue the legal profession instead of the weather bureau! Now that I'd like to see.

This need to attach a disclaimer to nearly everything society does will turn around and bite itself eventually because, as stated before, in the hands of a clever commission-driven lawyer, it is meaningless: merely an open-ended warning. And I can't see the Bureau of Meteorology's warning being any tighter. Look at it again:

Please be aware that wind gusts may be a further 40 percent stronger than averages given here, and that wave heights may be up to twice the height.

Limits have been set here that an opportunistic lawyer would, I suspect, crush in the first hearing. If his client can convince everyone that wind gusts were, in fact, 45 percent stronger and wave heights were, say 2.5 times the height, exactly what has been achieved by the disclaimer? This is how silly society has become. It reminds me of a background sign in an Emile Mercier cartoon I saw when I was a kid. It read, This notice is here to notify those who have not been notified for the purpose of noticing this notice. And now we must take such silliness seriously, expect of course, lawyers.

It would seem that the only way we can all get on with our lives is to presume that everyone else is crying wolf - with our fingers crossed!
 

To Top

I am very interested in your stories on workboats, both old and new, and have to ask if you will be doing a separate magazine just on workboats in the future? An enjoyable and informative magazine, and a credit to you all.

Jonothon Boyce, Thames

I never thought I would see the day when we were the 'Captain of the Heads.'. Thank for your comments, and watch out for New Zealand Workboats annual review in November. Ed...

Marine reserves
Dear Sir
I am pleased that Dr Roger Grace recognises that marine reserves are not fisheries management tools. He suggests that they are the national parks of the sea and are there to protect the biodiversity of the sea. Unfortunately, the logic of his thinking stops at this point. New Zealanders can still go into a national park, albeit in some areas with a permit, and hunt for food or fun. In a marine reserve they cannot. They cannot take fish for food from a reserve. He talks of kina barrens. We had kina barrens before the quota management system, and still have kina barrens in areas today. They are cyclonic, they happen and then for some inexplicable reason they move on and the area regenerates.

Snapper are rebuilding, not as fast as some would like, but they are returning to inshore areas and eating kina. He talks of 10 percent of our marine environment to be given some form of effective protection for biodiversity.

Let's be honest. If Dr Grace wants to lock up large areas to protect biodiversity, then it's one out, all out, and the only people permitted to enter are scientists with an approved permit. But no anchoring, as you might hit a bit of biodiversity and hurt it.

However, if he is promoting passive use areas, then once again be honest and declare this, and not try and feed the other users a plate of science gobbledegook. His debate is tainted green with no scientific evidence.

Karl Poutu, North Auckland

Electronic diesels
Dear Sir
What an excellent and most informative magazine which covers the whole maritime industry. A great read, in which I find myself enjoying reading about other facets of the commercial boating world. I am sure many tell you what an excellent job you do, and well deserved, too.

But enough of the backslapping, I have a request. Is there anyone who can give an objective view on electronic diesel engines, their advantages and weaknesses etc, and any pitfalls to watch out for? Have any other readers had experiences, good or bad, with electronic engines? Some discussion on this subject would interest me and I am sure other readers.

Barry Nichols, Tauranga

Good questions Barry. I look forward to readers' responses. Ed...
 

To Top

New workboat for the south coast by Keith Ingram

When Johnny and Libbie Persico of Island Bay in Wellington decided to build a new vessel for their Wellington-based fishing business, they had several criteria that they needed to consider.

The new vessel had to have good sea-keeping abilities and be able to work the south Wellington coast, Cook Strait and up the south-eastern coast of the North Island as required. Because of her wide operating range on coastal areas that lie open to the southerly conditions, she had to have a reasonable turn of speed and be able to accommodate two or three crew in comfort on extended or overnight voyages when required.
The vessel will be mainly used for crayfish and line fishing, but needed to be able to work in the charter field somewhere down the track if required. Persico was impressed by the lines and performance of the Western Australian crayboats which utilise a pot-tipper and a raised wheelhouse. The idea of using a pot-tipper to control heavy cray pots appealed to Persico, as a heavy swinging pot can be lethal on the unwary when working in lumpy conditions.

With this in mind, and having seen some of the new-generation fishing boat designs by Tim Barnett featured in Professional Skipper magazine, the approach was made to Barnett Offshore Design to come up with a vessel that was similar to recent proven vessels on the water, but needed to incorporate some of Persico's preferred features.

The Persico's first boat, called St Paul, was wooden, with so much aluminium over it used as protection or strengthening that they decided to go for a vessel constructed in marine alloy. The vessel was to be powered by a single engine, and therefore needed to have the horsepower to give performance, with the engine positioned to give stability and flat-line steaming in light conditions.

Another feature to ensure a dry wheelhouse was the step-up of 750mm into the bridge, which includes a small galley and a crew dining area. Although the vessel is principally designed for day boat use, internal access for'ard drops down to the crew accommodation where there are two comfortable double berths. Space to the area under the wheelhouse is accessed via a hatch in the wheelhouse deck. This void may be used for storing non-essential equipment.

Another consideration was Persico's wish to have the head and shower accessed internally at the foot of the steps. Adequate shelter also needed to be provided to the work deck area immediately behind the wheelhouse, with the remainder of the large work deck kept clear for stowing cray pots, or general use. It was not his intention to have a fish or bait hold or live cray tanks, as both crays and bait would be carried on deck.

Because the vessel would probably be berthed in a marina, consideration needed to be given for easy access from either the marina walkway or a dinghy when at anchor. The best option was to provide a transom door.
Once the final design was settled upon, the contract to build was let in two parts. Preliminary work on the hull began in a separate yard until space became available at Oceanraider's yard in Palmerston North, where final alloy construction of the vessel and internal and machinery fit-out was carried out.

The San Raffaele is named after Persico's late father, who was also a fisherman from Island Bay. With the knowledge he gained from his Dad by following in his footsteps some 30 years ago, Persico has continued to fish out of Wellington ever since, and had very clear ideas of what he wanted.

Once the team at Oceanraider received the first stage of the hull, work progressed very quickly. 'The boys were excellent to work with,' said Persico. 'Some of my ideas were a bit different, but the odd miracle was performed to ensure that these ideas could be incorporated without compromising the safety or performance of the vessel.'

Looking around the San Raffaele, we were impressed with her nice lines. Any similarity with the West Coast-designed vessels stops there. Her forefoot is very sharp and deep, giving her a fine entry. The hull then rises and widens out at the chines providing for a pronounced gull-wing to give stability and help keep the vessel dry when underway.

The shape of the bow above the chine is quite rounded, with a sturdy spare man sitting comfortably on the nose. The handrails on the foredeck are strong, and are positioned to give good security for crew who might be working on the foredeck. They also ensure a walk-round capability if and when the vessel is used for deepwater charter fishing for groper in the Cook Strait.

Her forward-facing windscreen is designed to eliminate glare, while providing additional space within the wheelhouse. These forward-facing screens are frequently seen on workboats for the self-draining ability in rough or rainy weather and enhanced visibility they offer. Couple this to a monthly polish and application of Rainex, and this style of screen still affords the best bridge visibility for day and night steaming in all conditions.

When we step down on to the work deck we find the cockpit helm station is to port. While this is unusual, it was Persico's personal preference after he had worked on a similarly-styled Western Australian boat here in New Zealand. Most cockpit helm stations are traditionally to starboard. While not set in law, the main reason for this is to assist in maintaining good visibility to starboard to ensure you give right of way to vessels approaching from this quarter.

The work deck helm station houses five levers. One pair of levers closest to the wheel operates the main engine, and another pair engages the line hauler and controls the drum speed. The final lever controls the idle valve on the engine when speed needs to be reduced below eight knots for trolling or slow manoeuvring.

Behind the helm station is the cray pot tripping table, and towards the centre is mounted the Australian-styled horizontal line hauler and warping drum. Adjacent to this area is the access hatch to below-decks storage and the aft engine room. From this point aft the decks are kept clear for pot storage when in transit.

San Raffaele has power to burn. A Scania DI 14 69M diesel producing 750hp at 2200rpm drives through a Twin Disc MG 511 IV integral vee-drive transmission. This gives a service speed of 18 to 21 knots laden, and around 25 knots when one is not concerned about the fuel bill and the throttle is wide open.

Access to service the engine room is via a watertight door and internal crawl way from the main amidships compartment, accessed through the deck hatch, or by de-dogging the flush-top hatch above the engine room when clearer access is required for servicing. On the aft bulkhead to the bridge to starboard is an access hatch to a small storage space or rope locker. The central door gives access up to the bridge and accommodation, with the heads and shower just inside to starboard.

The main conning position has excellent all-round vision. A small but functional galley is positioned behind the helm station port side, while to starboard is a settee and crew rest area with a fold-out table.

The helm station is well laid out. Dual hydraulic steering from HyDrive steering systems is suitable for multiple steering stations, with dual pumping systems for full power-assisted emergency backup, as well as emergency manual backup steering. The system can also incorporate a computerised autopilot, and may be operated by both traditional wheel or joystick controls.

The electronic package on the San Raffaele shows an innovative leap forward in thinking. Instead of opting for the run-of the mill conventional sounder/chart plotter package, Persico focused on the equipment that was going to make the money. This meant the eyes under the water in the form of a Simrad EQ60 echosounder and a Simrad CM60 three-dimensional charting and bottom-hardness plotting.

The EQ60 combines a highly efficient Simrad ceramic transducer and ultra-sensitive receiver technology. This, coupled with a powerful processor, displays images on a 15in high-resolution LCD display. The ES60 and EQ60 are able to record large amounts of data which can be played back at any time. This feature has become very popular with fishermen when doing stock biomass assessments. Raw echo data from the EQ60 is passed to the CM60 to deduce the seabed hardness. The hardness is then coded into colours ranging from dark purple for a soft bottom to yellow for a hard bottom.

Depth data from the EQ60 is combined with GPS latitude-longitude data to generate topographic seabed maps in real time. These results are combined seamlessly with the C-Map charts to form a powerful and complete three-dimensional navigation system.

The system can develop highly detailed bathymetric charts which are built up as the vessel passes over the area. The computer automatically carries out the calculations, and the chart becomes more accurate the more times the area is passed over. A crayfishermen working traditional coastal areas year after year can use this information to help plan when and where to harvest quota to ensure the best cost per unit effort, or CPUE.

Likewise, the Simrad equipment will help immensely when searching for new hunting grounds. Persico specified a Simrad AP22 autopilot to assist in taking the San Raffaele to the fishing grounds. Although her radar has not yet been fitted, her radar arch has been constructed to provide space for the integrated radar unit at the main conning position.

During sea trials we were impressed with the quietness of the vessel, although we knew immediately that there was a heap of power below once the engine was engaged and the vessel immediately idled at around eight knots.

Her ride was soft and even, even with the pronounced gullwing chines, with on-board engine noise being kept to a minimum. She was stable and dry in turns and was generally comfortable to travel on.

The San Raffaele will give both Johnny and Libbie Persico excellent service in the future, whether it be commercial fishing, or for charter or pleasure.

SPECIFICATIONS
LOA 14.6m
Beam 4.85m
Draft 1.5m
Fuel capacity 3500 litres
Water capacity 350 litres
Power Scania DI 14 69M 750hp
Construction Marine alloy
Designer Barnett Offshore Design Ltd
Builder Oceanraider Alloy Boats
 

To Top

This is just a selection of the articles in NZ Professional Skipper
- click here for subscription details to receive your own copy with ALL the content