Is weed aways an obstruction ?
Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: General
Forum Name: Racing Rules
Forum Discription: Discuss the rules and your interpretations here
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13986
Printed Date: 24 Jun 25 at 10:37am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Is weed aways an obstruction ?
Posted By: Dakota
Subject: Is weed aways an obstruction ?
Date Posted: 24 Oct 22 at 5:48pm
|
This was a topic on a Facebook advice page . It was decided that clubs and events can and do write weed into their sailing instructions as a obstruction. But a lot of people felt weed was always an obstruction anyway and this was in the rule book, but no one could find the case study. Could the rules experts on here , give some advice on the matter.
 |
Replies:
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 24 Oct 22 at 10:04pm
|
Some might ask 'is weed ever an obstruction?'
Seriously though Here's the definition of Obstruction Obstruction An object that a boat could not pass without changing course substantially, if she were sailing directly towards it and one of her hull lengths from it. An object that can be safely passed on only one side and an object, area or line so designated by the sailing instructions are also obstructions. However, a boat racing is not an obstruction to other boats unless they are required to keep clear of her or, if rule 22 applies, avoid her. A vessel underway, including a boat racing, is never a continuing obstruction. The key phrase seems to be 'could pass' I think that the definition has to be read down to mean that the boat could not pass through the obstruction. Consider a patch of coloured water stained by a dye marker. It may be that a boat could not pass this patch of colour without changing course, but I don't think that anybody would argue that she couldn't just sail straight through it and that it was not an obstruction. The issue with a patch of weed is then, whether a boat could pass through it at all, or whether a boat, although more or less impeded could eventually pass through the patch of weed. Clearly if the weed is thick enough to stop the boat, it's an obstruction. But if it's not that thick and a boat could eventually push through, how does she stand? What if it's nearly that thick but not quite? So, in an area where patches of weed are a problem, I think it's wise to deal with the matter in the SI. You can't expect a consistent interpretation of the definition without some guidance. |
Posted By: Dakota
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 7:28am
|
Cheers for that , Brass
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 9:18am
|
But by that reasoning you don't know whether a given patch of weed - or other debatable object like floating rope - is an obstruction unless you try and fail to pass it, which rather defeats the point of the rule.
Pass is arguably an unfortunate choice of words since it can equally mean pass through, pass over, pass to the side etc. I submit the definition is primarily about the size of the object, and not its physical properties, and pass by is a better interpretation. And I'm not sure that defining patches of weed as or not as obstructions helps some. One floating strand of fucus doesn't comprise an obstruction. I submit its probably best to use the same logic as RRS 20, and if you don't think it's an obstruction then give room and protest. I don't believe its a protest that would often be won though. |
Posted By: MerlinMags
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 9:26am
| I saw that FB post, and went t |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 9:47am
|
Jim,
As you rightly say, the definition is primarily about size. For that reason I think you have to construe 'object' according to the dictionary definition of 'obstruction' a thing that impedes or prevents passage or progress; So a thing that impedes or prevents passage or progress; dye marker patch isn't an obstruction but a patch of weed that impedes a boat is. The single stalk of kelp is taken care of be the size criteria in the definition. If you have a problem with weed and want consistent application you need a SI. Note, what makes rule 20 work, after many iterations, is the 'soon need to change course' criterion. I think you could reasonably construe 'need to pass on one side or the other' or 'need to avoid' into the definition. |
Posted By: Dakota
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 9:51am
|
What are peoples actual experiences ? I’ve been sailing for 35 years always on narrow rivers or small lakes. I’ve known areas of weed near the bank marked off in some way as a obstruction or marks moved so they are out of a weedy area, but I’ve never had ever had anyone call for water to tack because of floating weed .
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 10:22am
I've done it. |
Posted By: 423zero
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 12:42pm
If floating weed banks are not in SI's, you don't have to give way, you can be bl,,dy minded, they haven't been keeping an eye out. I would give way (depending on circumstances  ) I would allow someone to run aground for a laugh, again, depending on the person involved.------------- Robert |
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 6:09pm
|
[QUOTE=MerlinMags] I saw that ------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: 423zero
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 6:36pm
 nice 'Headlines' Editor of prestigious yachting publication searching for 'weed'.
------------- Robert |
Posted By: Dakota
Date Posted: 25 Oct 22 at 7:44pm
 |
Posted By: The Q
Date Posted: 26 Oct 22 at 10:11am
|
Over the years the Broads Authority / Environment agency have been cleaning the Norfolk Broads.. Weed has been increasing year by year.. This year for the first time, we had to abandon racing for several months on Black Horse Broad (aka Hoveton Little Broad) because of the weed.. As for the river you could see the bottom maybe 20ft out from the river banks.. I've never seen the bottom of the river before, except in the depths of winter.. The weed and lilies think this is wonderful, clean water and a hundred years of farming fertiliser run off on the river bottom to grow on.. There are areas on the river, we used to sail into, but now have to call for water to clear it, as it's lily and weed infested... No one has questioned this it's just been accepted as the right thing to do. There is also the possibility of Hovers, the old name for a mass of weed / reed / grass / peat that has broken away from the bank.. they're not common but at least you can see them easily drifting down the river. Old broads classes had Spoon rudders Hydrodynamically not very good, but they catch a lot less weed than a modern spade rudder. ------------- Still sailing in circles |
Posted By: Paramedic
Date Posted: 27 Oct 22 at 3:32pm
with what result?
|
Posted By: JimC
Date Posted: 27 Oct 22 at 4:02pm
There's only one possible result. If you call someone to tack they *must* respond no matter how false the call is. If they don't like it the only recourse is to protest, which hasn't ever happened to me. |
Posted By: The Moo
Date Posted: 29 Oct 22 at 6:54pm
Pretty sure I have requested it for a larger patch of floating weed too at the home club and water given no question. |