US Coast Guard 'Alarmed' By Mariners Turning Off AIS

[soin2la]

Canadian recreational vessels over 20 meters (66') that can carry more than 12 passengers require AIS.

If there are only 2 on board but it CAN carry more than 12, then what?

What Northern Spy said. If it is carrying passengers, it is not recreational.

That is why all the small whale watching vessels are 12 passenger. 13 puts them in anoter category; different regulations, inspections, captain licencing, etc. And more cost.

I suppose I should take back my earlier comment to ASD. I'm surprised how many people don't grasp or know where to find AIS and Traffic Regs. which are really not ambiguous.

But I won't.

 

[Baker]

The term in aviation is "carrying passengers for hire". I would assume that would apply here as it relates to commercial vessels.

 

[Greg S]

Size and the term "passengers" are taken right from a government of Canada document online. The type of vessel was either "non commercial " or "recreational", I don't recall which but it definitely referred to a pleasure boat, NOT a commercial boat. Read this the night before I posted while I was looking up some other information. It caught my I so I read it more thoroughly. Next day, presto, this thread appears and I know an answer as far as Canadian boats go.

Canadian recreational vessels over 20 meters (66') that can carry more than 12 passengers require AIS.

If there are only 2 on board but it CAN carry more than 12, then what?

 

[Woodland Hills]

As a “Mariner”, I resent being lumped in with those that are creating this problem when it’s “fishermen”, a sub-set of Mariners, who are making this an issue. Why can’t they just say so directly and clearly: it is fishermen who are the problem.

 

[Northern Spy]

Size and the term "passengers" are taken right from a government of Canada document online. The type of vessel was either "non commercial " or "recreational", I don't recall which but it definitely referred to a pleasure boat, NOT a commercial boat. Read this the night before I posted while I was looking up some other information. It caught my I so I read it more thoroughly. Next day, presto, this thread appears and I know an answer as far as Canadian boats go.

By definition, in Canada, a passenger vessel is any vessel that carries at least one passenger. A passenger is generally anyone who pays for a trip on a vessel.

Here is the law in Canada:
Navigation Safety Regulations, 2020 (SOR/2020-216)
See section 118

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2020-216/index.html

AIS Class A

118 (1) The following vessels must be fitted with an AIS Class A:

(a) vessels that are 20 m or more in length, other than pleasure crafts;

(b) vessels that carry more than 50 passengers;

(c) vessels transporting substances, materials or articles to which the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, published by the IMO, applies;

(d) vessels carrying pollutants, as defined in section 165 of the Act, in bulk;

(e) dredges or floating plants that are located in any place where they constitute a collision hazard to other vessels; and

(f) towboats that are 8 m or more in length.

Marginal note:AIS Class A or B

(2) Every vessel, other than a vessel referred to in subsection (1), that is engaged on a voyage other than a sheltered waters voyage must be fitted with an AIS Class A or an AIS Class B if

(a) it is a passenger vessel; or

(b) the vessel is 8 m or more in length and carries a passenger.

 

[oscar]

$35k fine for not keeping big brother informed of your identity and location every moment you're away from dock. Boggles the mind. That's as bad as the FAA's version called ADSb-out. And that's the agency who prides themselves on overreach and unnecessary bureaucracy.

I assume you drive with your lights off at night?

 

[Seevee]

$35k fine for not keeping big brother informed of your identity and location every moment you're away from dock. Boggles the mind. That's as bad as the FAA's version called ADSb-out. And that's the agency who prides themselves on overreach and unnecessary bureaucracy.

I assume you drive with your lights off at night?

Driving without your car lights on would be akin to not have your nav lights on during night boating.



The ADSb is simply a control grab that the FAA wants to spy on us.... just like the AIS can be. They may have some safety implications, but there's NO reason to identify one with either. All we need to know is that there's a boat (or plane) that we might hit.


For me, my ADSb is the kind I can shut off if I just choose to be not followed. Same with my AIS. Some folks prefer the privacy over the risks..... and I'm one.

 

[soin2la]

By definition, in Canada, a passenger vessel is any vessel that carries at least one passenger. A passenger is generally anyone who pays for a trip on a vessel.
(2) Every vessel, other than a vessel referred to in subsection (1), that is engaged on a voyage other than a sheltered waters voyage must be fitted with an AIS Class A or an AIS Class B if...

And then there is always the Governmental regulation vagueness.
To the first highlight:
These two vessels can be "paid for use." Hotei operates on a per person rate and is classed as passenger. Ascente can be "rented" with no specified number of people and is classed as pleasure.

To the second highlight, I've yet to find a clear definition of "sheltered waters."
https://tc.canada.ca/en/marine-tran...etins/sheltered-waters-voyages-ssb-no-08-2017

What is missing from that SSB is British Columbia, which was unchanged from two years previous and can be quite vague.
i.e. “The waters of the Strait of Georgia….not including the waters of Boundary Bay.” The same regulation is specific about the southern boundary of Georgia Strait, but not the northern boundary.
https://tc.canada.ca/en/marine-tran...s-voyages-ssb-no-03-2015-amendment-2015-05-29

Further, if Georgia Strait is sheltered waters, how does Transport Canada deem it to be open waters, when insisting BC Ferries passengers cannot remain in their cars on lower decks?

 

[Conrad]

Driving without your car lights on would be akin to not have your nav lights on during night boating.



The ADSb is simply a control grab that the FAA wants to spy on us.... just like the AIS can be. They may have some safety implications, but there's NO reason to identify one with either. All we need to know is that there's a boat (or plane) that we might hit.


For me, my ADSb is the kind I can shut off if I just choose to be not followed. Same with my AIS. Some folks prefer the privacy over the risks..... and I'm one.

Just curious...what risks?

 

[PPandE]

I assume you drive with your lights off at night?

So we're comparing apples to kittens now.

Broadcasting my identity and location doesn't help me see where I'm going.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

So we're comparing apples to kittens now.

Broadcasting my identity and location doesn't help me see where I'm going.

Helps other boats/ship to see you so there is no collision, especially in fog.

 

[PPandE]

Helps other boats/ship to see you so there is no collision, especially in fog.

So admittedly there is an added safety benefit to others in low visibility. How does broadcasting my identity help with that?

 

[rslifkin]

So admittedly there is an added safety benefit to others in low visibility. How does broadcasting my identity help with that?

With AIS, if they can see your boat name and such, it's easier for them to hail you and ask about passing intentions, etc. And it gives an idea of whether the thing you can't see yet (other than ais and radar) is 40 feet long or 400.

 

[BDofMSP]

The ADSb is simply a control grab that the FAA wants to spy on us.... just like the AIS can be.

Who are these people who work for the FAA or USCG that just sit around and "spy on us"? What possible information could they be gaining by knowing that I, yet again, left the slip and headed out to one of my favorite anchorages? I mean they have a TON of these reports by now- they must be about to conclude something and take action right?

Lots of people on this site know the folks who work for these agencies. Please share (without naming names of course) what these deep state operatives are doing with our deeply private location information. I might want to stop keeping myself safe and turn mine off.

BD

 

[Greg S]

...

Here is the law in Canada:
Navigation Safety Regulations, 2020 (SOR/2020-216)
See section 118

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2020-216/index.html

...

Yes, that looks like the definitive regulation but it certainly wasn't what I had been reading. What I read was a notice of some sort, no line numbers and article numbers, rather sentences and paragraphs.

Thanks for finding this.
GS

 

[Woodland Hills]

It has been our experience that having AIS prevents us from being boarded. All the CG has to do is look us up on their historical record to see where we have been 24/7/12, there is thus no need to board us. This was clearly demonstrated last spring traveling from the Bimini area to Lake Worth: boats all around us were being approached and hailed by the CG, many were even boarded. We just motored right through without even a radio call.

 

[High Wire]

Surf fishing on the beach or crabbing in a 100ft boat, tempers flare when spots are burned.

 

[Seevee]

Just curious...what risks?

The risk of collision. While it's very rare, it IS there. However, one can argue the see and be seen concept.


So one has to decide on what level of protection they want vs the level of giving their personal info out there. I could argue strongly to just have a name (to hail them) speed size and direction. In a plane, just altitude, speed and direction. No need for personal info, BUT the govt want that. Why, to spy. And there's numerous reasons to spy and often abused.

 

[Seevee]

Who are these people who work for the FAA or USCG that just sit around and "spy on us"? What possible information could they be gaining by knowing that I, yet again, left the slip and headed out to one of my favorite anchorages? I mean they have a TON of these reports by now- they must be about to conclude something and take action right?

Lots of people on this site know the folks who work for these agencies. Please share (without naming names of course) what these deep state operatives are doing with our deeply private location information. I might want to stop keeping myself safe and turn mine off.

BD

It could be anyone wishing to cause you harm. I've personally seen the FAA look for folks just to make up anything against them, true or not. While most are honest, many are not.



Competitors also like to know what you're doing, where your stopping. Perhaps to steel your customer, find your fishing spot or whatever.



We are WAY over spied on and WAY too much personal info out there. I'm lucky and built my whole life on privacy years ago, and it's paid off well. Hard to do that now.

 

[slowgoesit]

So admittedly there is an added safety benefit to others in low visibility. How does broadcasting my identity help with that?

I'll bet you benefit from others broadcasting their AIS identity, . . .

not sure why the recalcitrance in having the common courtesy to do the same.

Unless it is to protect you from the aliens looking down from above, who want nothing better than to abduct and probe . . . well, getting ahead of myself.

New Flash, the aliens from above already have you on down looking surveillance, so broadcasting your AIS or not is a moot point!

 

[soin2la]

This has now reached the comical.
I must keep others from knowing who I am, all the while posting to any number of social media sites.

A simple boat name, a simple Google search can cough up all sorts of stuff, except maybe on TF where many are on a first name basis, but there are just too many Toms to keep track of.

 

[BDofMSP]

I can understand the concern about other individuals accessing location data. I for one get notifications from Marinetraffic.com about several members on this site, not because I want to do anything with it (I don't even know them) - I just like to admire their adventures. But they have no say in whether I do or not.

But that's very different than implying that these systems were created or are being used to facilitate government spying. Certainly if there are criminal activities suspected (or charged) these data can be applied against someone. But I have little sympathy for criminals who are dumb enough to leave piles of evidence laying around. And just as often the evidence can be used to support an individual, such as verifying where I was when I claimed an accident happened, or wasn't when someone else claims that.

Sorry, I hate when threads get political so I'll stop focusing on the government conspiracy rant. I certainly respect your right as a pleasure craft to not use AIS. If commercial users have a serious problem with it, I'd suggest they take appropriate political action rather than simply ignore the law.

BD

 

[PPandE]

It has been our experience that having AIS prevents us from being boarded. All the CG has to do is look us up on their historical record to see where we have been 24/7/12, there is thus no need to board us. This was clearly demonstrated last spring traveling from the Bimini area to Lake Worth: boats all around us were being approached and hailed by the CG, many were even boarded. We just motored right through without even a radio call.

Well there's a government of, by and for the people... "Report your location 24/7 or be subject to harassment, and you can thank us for reducing the unconstitutional inconvenience."

 

[PPandE]

I'll bet you benefit from others broadcasting their AIS identity, . . .

not sure why the recalcitrance in having the common courtesy to do the same.

Unless it is to protect you from the aliens looking down from above, who want nothing better than to abduct and probe . . . well, getting ahead of myself.

New Flash, the aliens from above already have you on down looking surveillance, so broadcasting your AIS or not is a moot point!

Actually, no, I don't. I mind my own business. Location, speed and direction in my immediate vicinity, yes; identity, no.

Enough of this. This is a debate that will never be settled in this forum. Only witnessing a government overreach will convince someone with faith in the government that it could happen. The cynical ones will never have faith in government ethics. Have fun out there.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

So the USA has had 2 incidence of having a military ship hitting a commercial ship. Both military ships had their AIS shut off. (I understand why the military turns them off) But in a congested harbor they should have had their AIS on. Maybe avoiding the accidents.

I also understand the anti-government mentality. I agree with some of it. However this is a SAFETY issue. We are always saying here on TF that safety comes first.

If it were not for AIS, a 57 ft yacht would have T-boned me out by Pine Island. So yes I believe in AIS and it saved my beautiful wife and my lives.

 

[Baker]

So the USA has had 2 incidence of having a military ship hitting a commercial ship. Both military ships had their AIS shut off. (I understand why the military turns them off) But in a congested harbor they should have had their AIS on. Maybe avoiding the accidents.

I also understand the anti-government mentality. I agree with some of it. However this is a SAFETY issue. We are always saying here on TF that safety comes first.

If it were not for AIS, a 57 ft yacht would have T-boned me out by Pine Island. So yes I believe in AIS and it saved my beautiful wife and my lives.

I'd have to wonder just how much AIS played a role in the collision. I am hving a hard time believing it played much of a roll. WHen big ships collide, they usually know it 30 minutes in advance...

 

[High Wire]

So would transmitting speed and direction data without vessel name be an acceptable compromise? That would still give anti-collision assistance while giving the capt some privacy.

 

[angus99]

This has now reached the comical.
I must keep others from knowing who I am, all the while posting to any number of social media sites.

A simple boat name, a simple Google search can cough up all sorts of stuff, except maybe on TF where many are on a first name basis, but there are just too many Toms to keep track of.

Not to mention that most of us display out boat’s name, hailing port and registration numbers 24/7. Even with AIS off, we’re not exactly operating in stealth mode.

 

[PPandE]

So would transmitting speed and direction data without vessel name be an acceptable compromise? That would still give anti-collision assistance while giving the capt some privacy.

Yes. And an informal, unregistered call sign might also be helpful. Users should have the option of reporting identity.

The FFAs original plan for their Next gen air traffic control system was driven by a desire to shift the cost of ATC from the government to the users. Existing government funded radar facilities are to be replaced by on board "ADS-b out" transmitters on each aircraft, paid for by the aircraft owner.

So, when not in my best interest, unless required by an enforceable law, I'll not be continuously broadcasting my identity.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

So would transmitting speed and direction data without vessel name be an acceptable compromise? That would still give anti-collision assistance while giving the capt some privacy.

I think when you set up AIS, the only requirement is your MMSI number. Many folks do it this way.