Boat numbering poll

[Riprap]

Hi Guys.

There are complications pending with standardising boat numbers in the future. please partake, it's in your interests. Thanks.

[Ernst]

what about the guys with no number needed 15hp and under.

[Riprap]

See poll Ernst.

[Ernst]

done! :blue-biggrin:

[Just]

My boat number starts with "UR". I think this is the same as recreation. Am I correct?

[BassBaas]

I have two boats registered and one not required, the one I voted for is registered as SR but I cannot vote more than one time:
1. my other bass boat has a registration number starting with A (I suppose that may be a unique number to a specific surveyor - Club specific)
2. I also have a Monster bass which are not registered.

You can count one vote each for these polls as well.

[Riprap]

Just, "U" is normally used by one of the underwater unions I think. Do they still exist? Is it a recognised number prefix? Is it still valid? Perhaps check!

Now imagine in the future: You queue up with others for a cof for your boat. lots of paperwork, have to present your vessel at a testing station where brand new trained ntombies who have never been on a boat will go through the procedures, no reminders in the mail, penalties etc much like a cof on a vehicle!

OR

Organised bodies like SADSAA at provincial level draw in all the lost soul boat owners as country members for a nominal fee (but no voting rights) and a standard recognized numbering system with a fixed cof cost for all and this be presented to the department as an alternative i.o.w. a self controlled / regulated system.

The department thinks ok, there are 20 000 + boats on the waterways and @ say R400 pa = R8 000 000 bucks money for jam income and we want it. Why must we let the elite club and fishing okes get this income when the state can add it to the trough and create more red tape thus more jobs for bbbe fellows!

A scary scenario. :blue-rolleyes:

[Steve_basscoza]

I just recieved a new boat number...Why? Who knows

In my Honest opinion SAMSA offer ZERO added value to the boating fraternityand are, in fact nothing more than a REVENUE GATHERING arm of the Government who just consume money.

In the USA, boaters get value from their registration fees, Launch Ramps are built, as well as other facilities such as jetties etc. I do believe that Hell will freeze over before any benefits to boaters ever eminate from SAMSA

Their so called "standards" are fraught with inexplicable requirements & double standards (e.g. Life jackets must have the SABS mark and Euromark, USA Coastguard Approval, Lloyds Registry Approval etc. are "UNACCEPTABLE" to SAMSA for Recreational craft. If this policy was valid (and not just a result of what looks suspiciously like naked "cronyism"), then it logically follows that every ship passing through RSA territorial waters / calling into RSA ports should have their Sea Worthiness Certificates revoked because their Lloyds Registry / US Coast Guard etc. approved safety equipment must then surely be INFERIOR AND ILLEGAL.

I apologise, but I have nothing positive to say about SAMSA. To me they are a parasitical leech feeding vicariously in our wallets and offering ZERO in return.

There- I have had my rant!

[Steve_basscoza]

Reading back into the start of the thread, it would seem that there is a squabble over the share of the loot which gets fleeced off us every time we renew our COF certificates....

Further evidence of Parasitic Loot Gathering? Or am I incorrect in saying this!

It would be very refreshing to hear of anybody having received any value from SAMSA and I honestly look forward to reading any reply relating to any such occurrence.

(Apologies, obviously my "Rant Urge" was not fully purged.....)

[Peter]

Hi Steve. I agree with you 100%. There is absolutely ZERO added value. I have always kept my "Rant and Rage" in the back of my mind. I cannot unfortunately see any SENSE in the COF for Vessels on a Dam.

However, as you mention, that vast amount of income which they receive, will never be waived. So I assume as good an argument which all and sundry might have against the COF Requirements, it will always be necessary to have the Certificate.

The Insurance Companies have also jumped on the bandwagon, because if you dont have a 'Skippers" or a "COF", your claim for whatever reason will not be entertained. On that note, I wonder if you had an accident on the way to the dam and there was boat damage, would you need to present your Skippers and COF. I know when I damaged my gearbox on a rock, it was necessary to present the above documents with my claim.

[Riprap]

From November 2011 and found in this thread:
<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.bassfishing.co.za/bassingnews/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=80026&sid=309b8bc0092c53f585de0e906637ec9a#80026">modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=80026&sid=309b8bc0092c53f585de0e906637ec9a#80026</a><!-- l -->

Some important info from SAMSA through correspondence:

SAMSA has dubbed 2011 as the time we all go “back to basics” and change is necessary to return to legal compliance.
When inland waters were incorporated in 2007, it was never the intention that organised sporting bodies would morph into survey companies, a situation which is neither legal nor sustainable. Thus, the back to basics scenario!

Authorised agencies are water sport governing bodies, clubs or organisations affiliated to a governing body which have been recognised by SAMSA and designated as such.
A Safety Officer is a designated member of a water sporting club or organisation which is affiliated to an Authorised Agency.
The Safety Officer must have a document from the agency concerned which attests to (their) his or her designation and sets out which provisions of the Small Vessel Safety Regulations they are authorised to enforce.
This only extends to their own club or organisation’s members.

There has been a lot of criticism levelled at SAMSA on this site, yet their dedication and professionalism shown to demonstrate and return to a solid legal and logical base for all should be recognised and I urge readers to support this initiative as other pending and binding legislation has more of an impact than this has on our boating and bass fishing.

[Riprap]

Peter & Steve, I share your pain, I really do but legislation aside we have an even bigger problem on the horizon and one which those who are lucky enough to be able to correspond logically with officials are going to try and negotiate a better deal for ALL US BOATERS.

I will elaborate when more info and time.

[Peter]

:blue-badgrin: :blue-badgrin: :blue-badgrin: :blue-badgrin: Remember when Bicycles on the road needed to be Licensed. I still cant see the reason for boats on small inland waters needing COF :blue-lol: :blue-lol:

[Riprap]

Wahahaaaaa, remember dog tax and I take my dog fishing with me, would he need a fishing licence and a lifejacket!? :blue-smile:

[Ernst]

:blue-badgrin: :blue-badgrin: :blue-badgrin: :blue-badgrin: Remember when Bicycles on the road needed to be Licensed. I still cant see the reason for boats on small inland waters needing COF :blue-lol: :blue-lol:

you just gave them an idea where to make some more mony they gonna bring back bicycle tax and shove it into their own pockets and they will cover it up and say it is for safety imagine all the mtb guys having to pay taxes to cycle hahahahahahahaha