November
2004
Table
of Contents:
Pacific
Northwest |
|
Canadian Atlantic |
|
Northern California |
|
November
2004
|
|
Pacific
Northwest The Pacific Northwest Section technical meeting was held on September 17, 2004 at Cheer’s Restaurant in North Vancouver, BC. Fifty-six people turned out for what was to be an excellent meeting. The meeting was entitled “Cap Rouge II: Analysis of a Fishing Vessel Tragedy” by Mr. Robert Allan, President of Robert Allan Ltd. and Mr. Shane Neifer, Occupational Safety Officer, Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) of BC. The meeting commenced Friday evening with an excellent buffet dinner. On August 13, 2002, the fishing vessel Cap Rouge II capsized without advance warning. Five lives were lost. In May 2003, the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) of British Columbia retained Robert Allan Ltd. to try to determine why the vessel capsized, and to identify those vessel characteristics and uses that in turn may lead to demonstrating safer fishing vessel operations. In the first presentation of the evening, Mr. Robert Allan discussed the technical review carried out by his firm – a job made just that much more challenging given the poor state of vessel drawings and stability information. (Canadian federal regulations do not require approved stability information for this type of fishing vessel.) Mr. Allan first described the Cap Rouge II, including modifications since it was first launched in 1974. The vessel saw its function change at least twice, finally being rigged for salmon seining operations. The alterations increased the vessel weight and centre of gravity. The vessel’s condition and environmental considerations leading up to, and at the time of the tragedy, were reviewed. It was concluded that the vessel lacked sufficient reserve buoyancy to hold up against wind and sea conditions. Righting energy of the boat was grossly insufficient to prevent the capsizing. Notable lessons learned included the need for close monitoring of vessel modifications with respect to their impact on vessel stability. Mr. Allan also recommended that no fishing vessel should be designed with holds that, if fully loaded, would result in the vessel not meeting appropriate stability standards. (If the Cap Rouge II were fully loaded, the vessel would have sunk.) Mr. Allan also noted that naval architects must design vessels with adequate stability margin, since vessels invariably undergo a lowering of GM with time.
|
|
The second presentation was given by Mr. Shane Neifer. Mr. Neifer discussed the role of the Workers’ Compensation Board. Fully funded by Canadian employers, the WCB inspects, educates, consults and investigates accidents. In the case of the Cap Rouge II, Mr. Neifer was the investigating officer, and thus has worked closely with Mr. Allan. Mr. Neifer noted that in the ten years the number of fishermen has dropped from 20,000 to 8,500 yet fatalities have stayed constant. Between 1991 and 2003 there have been 66 fatalities – giving rise to the alarming statistic that in 2001, one in 1426 fishermen could be expected to die on the job. Mr. Neifer underlined that one key role of the WCB in BC is to educate fishing boat owners/operators with regards to vessel stability. To educate fishermen in this regard, the WCB gives presentations, produces clear to understand stability documentation and is shortly about to launch an information portal on the web. The evening presentations were filmed by Response Productions, a video production company. Response Productions is working with BC Seafood Alliance and WCB to produce a fishing industry safety video. The video, a series of modules on fishing safety is scheduled to be shown at Fish Canada West Show, November 5 – 6, 2004. Visit the web site www.masterpromotions.ca/fishwest for more details on the show. A lively discussion followed the two presentations. As a general observation, it was agreed that the stability status of all vessels comprising the West Coast fishing fleet should be examined. Questions of exactly what stability standards to apply, who should be responsible for the examinations, and who should pay for the study as well as the likely required refit work were left for people to ponder.
|
