Community Attitudes to Aged Care Reform – Qualitative...

FINAL REPORTMarch 2015

Ipsos Project: #14-052329-01

Transport Safety VictoriaBoating Behaviour 2014

Project Contact: Daniel Evans

Contact address: Building 1, Level 2

658 Church Street

RICHMOND VIC 3121

Office phone: (03) 9946 0850

Mobile: 0402 119 658

Email: [email protected]

AcknowledgementsIpsos would like to thank Transport Safety Victoria for funding this study and for their help and assistance in the development of the project. We would also like to thank the members of the public who took part in this study, without whose input, the research would not have not been possible.

Contents1. Research context............................................................................................................................................ 9

1.1 Background 9

1.2 Research context 10

2. Research design......................................................................................................................................... 11

2.1 Study method 11

2.2 Interpretive notes 14

3. Main findings.............................................................................................................................................. 16

3.1 Boating trips 16

3.2 Boating experience 37

3.3 Opportunities for improvement across Victoria’s waterways and boat launch locations 63

3.4 Safety behaviour 67

4. Demographics............................................................................................................................................. 86

Appendix 1 – Questionnaire.............................................................................................................................. 89

Appendix 2 – Discussion guide......................................................................................................................106

Appendix 3 – Email subscriber analysis........................................................................................................110

Transport Safety Victoria14-052329-01 TSV Boating Behaviour Report | March 2015 |

Executive summaryThis report details findings of a quantitative and qualitative study which aimed to understand Victorian recreational boaters’ behaviour and attitudes regarding safety, waterways and boating infrastructure – the first of its kind based on a survey of registered boat owners derived from registration data.

The project involved an online / telephone survey of 1,035 Victorian registered boaters (randomly selected to reflect registered boaters) who were mailed an invitation to participate in an online survey and two qualitative focus groups undertaken after the quantitative phase had been completed. Taken together, the quantitative sample size and mode for selecting the quantitative sample delivers a statistically representative sample which provides good insight into Victorian recreational boaters’ behaviour and attitudes.

Quantitative fieldwork was conducted from 27 August 2014 through to 21 September 2014 with the results obtained reflecting a point in time benchmark of Victorian boaters’ attitudes and behaviour. Qualitative focus groups took place on 14 and 15 October 2014.

Boating tripsThe majority of boaters surveyed (76%) said they stored their boat at their registered address with 15% saying they kept the boat at another address, also out of the water. Almost nine-in-ten (88%) boaters had used their boat in the previous 12 months, with the majority of boaters (84%) using their boat during the peak period (October through April), while around one-third used it during the off-peak period (May through September) (35%). Across the year, survey participants used their boats on average 19 times; May through September participants used their boat 9.1 times, and those in October through April on average 16.2 times.

The majority of boaters commenced their trip in the morning post sunrise (72%), while the next most common time period for boating to commence was in the afternoon (22%). Less than one-in-five (18%) commenced their boat trip in the morning before sunrise, while one-tenth (10%) commenced in the evening. Half cabin operators were the most likely to commence their usual trip before sunrise (35%), while yacht (keel boat) operators were more likely to say they commenced their usual trip in the afternoon (49%). Furthermore, boaters whose usual trip purpose was fishing were more likely to commence their trip before sunrise (24%), while those undertaking touring/cruising (40%) or who were part of an organised club activity (58%) were more likely to commence their trip in the afternoon.

The most frequent trip duration was over three hours (58%). Boaters nominated trip durations of 3 to 4 hours (25%), followed by trips of 4 to 5 and 5 to 6 hours (17% and 16% respectively). In addition, trips commenced after sunset were more likely to be under one hour in duration (36%).

The most common purpose for boating was to go fishing (64%), followed by ‘water skiing/wakeboarding/knee boarding, etc.’ or ‘touring / cruising’ (18% and 17% respectively). Half cabin and open boat operators were both more likely to have nominated their main purpose as fishing (86% and 68% respectively), while cabin cruiser (50%), PWC (47%), trailer sailer (66%) and yacht (keel boat) (61%) operators were all more likely to say their main purpose was touring/cruising. In addition qualitative research participants revealed both familial and emotional reasons for boating, including quality family time, building life skills for their kids, relaxation and adventure.

Where trips were undertakenFor the majority, the most common waterway for boating on was bays/inlets at 53%, followed by four-in-ten (42%) who said they mostly boated on inland waters most often and 5% who said coastal waters.

Based on the nominated trip commencement location, the most common body of water for those who boated on inland waters was Lake Eildon (25%), followed by one-in-five (20%) whose trip commenced on the Murray River, 7% who said Lake Eppalock and 6% who said Goulburn River.


For trips which commenced in bays/inlets, the most common body of water was Port Phillip Bay – with almost six-in-ten (57%) indicating this waterway. The most common locations for trip commencement within Port Phillip Bay were Patterson River, with 8% saying this, followed by Portarlington and Sorrento (5% each).

Over one-in-ten (11%) of those who said they boated on bays/inlets used locations that were part of Western Port. The most common location trips commenced at were Newhaven, Hastings and Corinella – each at 2%.

More than one-in-ten (12%) of those who said they boated on bays/inlets said their trip commenced on Gippsland waters. Most commonly, boaters described ‘Gippsland Lakes’ (5%) with no further information about the water body name, followed by 2% who said Lakes Entrance, and 1% each for Lake Wellington, Paynesville, Lake Victoria and Other – Gippsland.

One-in-five (20%) of those participants who boated on bays/inlets, used locations outside of Port Phillip Bay, Western Port and Gippsland Lakes across Victoria. The most common of these was Port Albert (5%), followed by Port Welshpool, Corner Inlet and Sydenham Inlet (2% each).

On average, boaters travelled 93.6 km from where the boat was stored to where the boat was launched. Those from Regional Victoria were more likely to travel further to launch (124.9km) compared to those from Metro Melbourne (65.4 km).

Boating experience

Usage and launchingEighty-eight percent had used their boat at least once in the previous 12 months. More than half of survey participants (53%) said their reason for not boating in the last year was that they had been too busy or involved with work or other activities, followed by 13% who cited health/illness/age issues – while a similar proportion said the boat needs work/maintenance/repairs or they have another/several other boats (11% and 10% respectively).

For the majority, the reason given why they finished their usual trip on the water was that they needed to get back home (53%), followed by around one-quarter (27%) who said the fish had stopped biting and 20% who said it was getting dark. A similar proportion cited deteriorating weather or passenger preference/fatigue of others (16% and 14% respectively).

The greatest average distance travelled to launch was for those whose reason for finishing their trip was, ‘It’s getting dark’ at 134.5 km, followed by fatigue - both of the passengers and of the master (131.2 km and 111.1 km respectively) and those who had reached their on water destination (108.3 km).

For those whose boat was stored on land, the main reason given as to why they launched at the water body they mentioned was that it was closest to where they live (37%); while almost one-third (31%) said, ‘it provides best access to where I want to use my boat’. Three-quarters (75%) indicated their mentioned launch location was in fact their preferred launch location.

The most common reason given by those who did not use their preferred launch location was that it was too far to travel (24%), followed by a similar proportion who said they used ‘several different launch locations’ (22%), there was a ‘lack of/poor ramps/launching facilities’ or ‘it depends where I fish’ (21% each). Boaters from Metro Melbourne were significantly more likely to say that their preferred launch location was ‘too busy/congested’ compared to those from Regional Victoria (15% vs. 2%).

Almost one-quarter (23%) said they were not able to launch from their preferred location in the past 12 months on at least one occasion – those boating on bays/inlets were more likely to not be able to launch (33%). Of those who could not launch, almost half (46%) said that they ended up giving up on boating that day, while around one-third (36%) said they ended up launching from another location. The qualitative research highlighted that it is likely that the proportion of boaters having difficulty launching may be even higher due to an unknown number who elect not to go boating on peak use days.


Satisfaction with boating experienceHighest satisfaction for boating experience on Victorian waterways was for ‘waterway draft for my boat’ with a rating of 7.3 out of 10, followed by ‘aids to navigation on the water’ (6.8) and ‘hazards in the waterway’ (6.7). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘destination jetties’ (5.6) and ‘access to landside attractions’ (5.9).

Highest satisfaction for those whose boat was stored at either the registered address or another address was for ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at non-peak period’ (7.7 out of 10), followed by ‘boat ramp proximity to my home address’ (7.3) and ‘signage’ (6.5). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘fish cleaning facilities’ (4.4), followed by ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (5.0). In addition, boaters from Metro Melbourne were more dissatisfied with the parking at boat launch areas (4.8 vs. 6.7) and the ‘wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (4.0 vs. 6.0) compared with those from Regional Victoria.

In the qualitative research, there was a strong view that Port Phillip Bay was an underutilised resource that lacks many of the facilities that make other Australian locations great places to boat. This includes sufficient launching and mooring facilities, and marinas to provide a pleasant destination for lunch. Those who boated elsewhere (particularly in Gippsland or on Lake Eildon) were typically more satisfied with the facilities available. As such, many boaters who predominately use Port Phillip Bay felt that the Victorian Government was not providing sufficient infrastructure in return for their licence and registration fees.

Satisfaction with berths and swing mooringsAlmost all boaters (86%) who indicated their boat was not kept on land or in dry storage said the boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth and 13% said on a swing mooring.

Highest satisfaction for boaters who indicated their boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth was for ‘boat proximity to my home address’ and ‘weather and tide protection’ each at 7.9 out of 10. In addition, both ‘security’ and ‘provision of shore power’ were rated at similar levels (7.5 and 7.2). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘availability of alternative berth / mooring’ (3.9) followed by ‘on-water refuelling services’ (5.3).

Highest satisfaction for boaters who indicated their boat was kept at a swing mooring was for the ‘boat proximity to my home address’ at 7.9 out of 10, followed by ‘value for money’ (6.8) and its ‘weather and tide protection’ (6.4). The lowest rated area was the ‘on-water refuelling services’ at 2.9 followed by ‘sewage pump-out facilities’ (3.5).

Personal Water Craft (PWC) Almost two-thirds (64%) indicated that the PWC owned was not the first one. For over four-in-ten, the reason given as to what attracted them to PWC riding was, ‘thrill seeking, speed’ (41%), while a similar proportion said that the PWC was a ‘family craft’ (39%), followed by around three-in-ten (31%) who said they had been boating for a while and prefer a PWC.

Value for moneyOverall value for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps was low at 4.8 out of 10, those from Metro Melbourne indicated significantly lower value for money (4.2) compared to those from Regional Victoria (5.4). In addition, overall rating for boat registration fee was also low at 4.8 out of 10.

More than one-third of all who had boated in the previous 12 months indicated that they would be willing to pay more for their registration if it helped improve boating infrastructure at the locations where they boated (36%). This reflected a qualitative finding that while participants do not feel the registration fee is expensive; they believe that a greater proportion of these fees should be returned to boating infrastructure improvements.


Opportunities for improvement across Victoria’s waterways and boat launch locationsThe main area for improvement nominated by those who said they would be willing to pay more for their boat registration was they wanted to have ‘improved boat launch / retrieval facilities’ (68%), followed by four-in-ten (41%) who said they would like to see ‘better navigation aids and signage’ and a similar proportion who said there was a need for ‘better boating safety education programs’ (37%).

The main areas mentioned by all those who had boated in the previous 12 months in regards to anything they thought should be considered with regard to boating facilities was ‘better / increased access to ramps launching facilities’ (18%), followed by over one-in-ten (13%) who mentioned parking fees at launch areas, ‘free access / excessive fees / no launch parking fees’. Eight percent provided comments relating to ‘better / increased access to facilities’ or ‘better / increased access to parking’.

These suggestions were echoed in the qualitative research. Additionally qualitative participants wanted to see more destinations with places to tie up, such as marinas. There was also strong support for the idea of a centralised ‘app’ which would provide, for example, safety information for each vessel type, access to all webcams, weather and perhaps the ability to register trips with Volunteer Marine Rescue Groups.

Safety behaviour

Boating risksBoaters believed their usual boating trip was very low risk with a mean score of 2.5 out of 10 – on a scale from 0 through 10 where 0 meant ‘not risky at all’ and 10 meant ‘extremely risky’. In the qualitative research, this often reflected the confidence boaters felt in their own abilities, with many having several decades of experience. However, it was agreed that for less experienced or safety conscious boaters, it can be a very dangerous pastime.

Importance of having all necessary safety equipment for the boatMore than three-quarters (77%) said they checked the safety equipment before every trip on the water. Of those that did not check before every trip, one-in-ten (10%) said they checked once every few months, 8% said monthly and a small proportion 2% said they checked weekly. There was a relationship between frequency of the safety checks and number of times the boat was used in the previous 12 months - the more trips undertaken, the more frequent safety checks were undertaken on the boat.

Overall ratings indicated a high importance of the need to have all necessary equipment when boating with an average rating of 8.9 out of 10. Participants operating a cabin cruiser (9.5) or half cabin (9.4) indicated a significantly higher level of importance, whereas those who operated an open boat indicated lower importance (8.7). In addition, those who boated on coastal waters indicated significantly higher importance at 9.8.

Life jacket use Almost six-in-ten (56%) said they wore a lifejacket personally every time, while around one-third (32%) said they wear one on some occasions. One-in-ten (10%) said they never wear a lifejacket. When compared to the research undertaken in 2006, there was significantly more who said they wore a lifejacket every time in 2014 (56% vs. 46%).1 In addition, there were fewer participants in 2014 who said they never wore a lifejacket compared to 2006 (10% vs.19%).

Just under six-in-ten (59%) said someone else on their boat wore a lifejacket every time, while one-third (34%) said that others wore one on some occasions. In comparison to the 2006 research, there were more boaters

1 Marine Safety Victoria New Marine Safety Regulations. Qualitative and Quantitative Research Findings (2006). Quantum Market Research Commissioned by TSV.


who said that someone else wore a lifejacket on some occasions in 2014 (34% vs. 27%). In addition, in 2014 there were fewer who said that someone else never wore a lifejacket compared to 2006 (4% vs. 12%).

Undertaking safety behaviour The most frequently undertaken safety activity was checking the weather with almost all (89%) saying they ‘always’ did this before going out on the water. This was followed by three-quarters (76%) who said they check/run the engine and over two-thirds who said they tell someone where they are going and when they will be getting back (69%). The activities which were undertaken least frequently were to ‘always’ check waterway web cams (10%), flares (32%) and a safety checklist (47%).

The most common way that boaters checked the weather was by using the Bureau of Meteorology (bom.gov.au) website (75%), followed by those who said radio or TV (24% and 22% respectively). Other less common mentions included, Willy Weather (14%), webcams located at waterways (13%), and by talking to friends/colleagues and newspapers (12% each).

The most common way that boaters found out about boating information was through ‘other boat owners’, with almost four-in-ten saying this (38%). One-third (33%) said they used the ‘internet’ to source this information, while a similar proportion said ‘published boating guides’ (27%), ‘general internet search/Google’ (25%) and the ‘tackle and bait shop’ (24%). Just over one-in-twenty (6%) said they obtained this information from Transport Safety Victoria. Qualitative research participants felt that information about boating (particularly updated regulations) could be provided by mail with the annual registration notice, as this would be a good way to reach all registered boaters.

Safety campaignsHighest recollection for safety campaigns was for Lifejackets saves lives with almost two-thirds (65%) indicating they remembered it, followed by almost half who remembered the Steer clear of big ships campaign (49%). Less than one-third (30%) said they remembered It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing it while around one-quarter remembered the Get on board on life jackets campaign. Lowest recollection was for Will your boat float – with 6% saying they remembered it and Be cool respect the rules, 10%.

Qualitative research participants were concerned about some inexperienced boaters who put themselves and others at risk – sometimes wilfully, but more often as a result of ignorance. As such, participants wanted to see further education and regulation of boating. Suggestions included a practical exam as part of the licencing process, the implementation of ‘L’ and ‘P’ plates, a 0.0% blood alcohol tolerance and a blanket rule for life jackets.


1. Research contextThis section covers areas related to context of the research including background to the project, the need for research and key objectives of the study.

1.1 BackgroundTransport Safety Victoria (TSV)

Transport Safety Victoria (TSV) is the Victorian independent statutory transport safety regulator for bus, rail and maritime modes whose main purpose is to achieve the highest practical safety standards in the respective areas of transport2. TSV’s main functions include3:

Licensing, registration, and accreditation

Monitoring risk and safety management systems of industry participants

Monitoring of transport safety legislation compliance

Enforcement of safety legislation when required

Transport safety investigation and reporting

Provision of advice and recommendations to the respective ministers

Transport safety issue education, guidance and training

Transport safety policy development

Victorian representative for national reform

Maintenance of government, industry, and community stakeholder relationships.

TSV and the maritime industry

TSV is responsible for commercial and recreational maritime, and Victorian waterway safety standards under the Marine Safety Act 2010 (Vic), Marine Safety Regulations 2012 (Vic), Transport Integration Act 2010 (Vic), and the Transport (Compliance and Miscellaneous) Act 1983 (Vic), Transport (Safety Schemes and Compliance and Enforcement) Act 2014 and Transport (Infringements) Regulations 2014.4 TSV is also responsible for the administration of the National System of Commercial Vessel Safety within Victoria which regulates domestic and commercial vessel safety standards in relation to certificates of survey, competency and safe operations.5

2014 Boating Behaviour Study

Under the Transport Integration Act 2010 (Vic), one key function of the TSV is to commission research into transport safety.

In August 2014, TSV commissioned Ipsos to design and conduct a study of Victorian recreational boaters. The study was designed to understand the purpose, frequency, location and duration of recreational boating trips across the state. Additionally this project aimed to report on boaters’ safety behaviour, the effectiveness of

2 Transport Safety Victoria (2014). About Transport Safety Victoria. Retrieved September, 23, 2014 from http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/about-transport-safety-victoria

3 Transport Safety Victoria (2014). About Transport Safety Victoria. Retrieved September, 23, 2014 from http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/about-transport-safety-victoria

4 Transport Safety Victoria (2014). Commercial maritime. Retrieved September, 23, 2014 from http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/commercial-maritime; Transport Safety Victoria (2014). Recreational maritime. Retrieved September, 23, 2014 from http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/recreational-maritime; Transport Safety Victoria (2014). Waterways. Retrieved September, 23, 2014 from http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/waterways

5 Transport Safety Victoria (2014). Commercial maritime. Retrieved September, 23, 2014 from http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/commercial-maritime


http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/commercial-maritime

http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/waterways

http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/recreational-maritime

http://www.transportsafety.vic.gov.au/maritime-safety/commercial-maritime

TSV’s safety campaigns, and Victorian boaters’ satisfaction with waterways and facilities. The study comprised an online survey and focus group discussions. Additional information regarding the study methodology can be found in Section 2: Research Design.

1.2 Research contextThe need for research

With 2,000km of coastline and 160 managed waterways in Victoria utilised by approximately 180,000 Victorian registered recreational boats, there is a need for TSV to better understand Victorian boaters’ behaviour and characteristics to inform TSV decision-making. This research coupled with other TSV information will enable TSV to proactively mould its regulation and risk management strategies, educational programs, investigations and compliance operations, operational policy, and other TSV undertakings.

The key objectives of the study and outcomes

The main aim of the survey was to improve TSV’s understanding of the safety attitudes and behaviours of recreational boaters across the different boating classes (i.e. cabin cruiser, half cabin, open boat, personal water craft (PWC), trailer sailer, and yacht) over the last year. Specifically TSV had particular interest in understanding and ascertaining any relationships between:

Registered address postcode and location of trip origin;

Location of trip origin and trip destination / boating purpose;

Boat type and trip purpose;

Activities that reflect safety attitudes;

The range and comparability of factors that influence the launch location;

Level of user satisfaction with current recreational boating infrastructure and services; and

Awareness of key TSV safety campaigns.


2. Research designThis section describes the design of the study including, the study method, design of the sample, weighting, fieldwork dates, qualitative focus groups and notes on interpreting the report.

2.1 Study methodThe 2014 Boating Behaviour Study comprised two discrete and complementary methods:

1. An online survey of 1,035 Victorian boaters

2. Two focus group discussions.

2.1.1 Online surveyThe 2014 survey was administered as an online survey with an option for participants to complete the survey via telephone if they preferred.

Ipsos worked with TSV in the design of a questionnaire that averaged 15 minutes in length. Respondents were asked to base their answers on their behaviour in the previous 12 months. Around 12% of the survey sample did not use their boat in that period and therefore did not answer the behavioural questions.

2.1.2 Sample designAs the proportion of recreational boat types and their locations are different across Victoria, a stratified randomised sample was employed, which involved dividing the registered boating population into smaller groups; boat type and location of registered address (i.e. Metro Melbourne and Regional Victoria). This type of sample captures the key characteristics of the boating population, allowing inferences to be drawn that reflect the overall population. Metro Melbourne was defined as greater Melbourne and its suburbs, while Regional Victoria was all other areas.

A randomly selected sample of boat owners from the Victorian registration database was chosen which reflected each of the types of registered boats across Victoria. In order to obtain sample sizes that would allow meaningful analysis, some of the less represented boat types as well and registered owners from Regional Victoria were over-represented in the survey sample.

Table 1 below, outlines the boat types that were sampled as part of the study, their representation within the Victorian population and the number approached to participate in the survey. In addition the final column displays the proportion of each type within the mailed sample. These proportions were then weighted back to the population when analysis was undertaken (see Section 2.1.4).

Table 1: Sample composition, sample for mailing and distribution

Vessel typeProportion of

population(%)

Metro Melbourne sample mailed

(n)

Regional sample mailed

(n)

Proportion of sample(%)

Cabin cruiser 3% 627 627 14%

Half cabin 16% 821 820 19%

Open 69% 768 771 18%

Personal water craft 9% 915 914 21%

Trailer sailer 1% 597 597 14%

Yacht (keel boat) 1% 604 604 14%

Total 8,665 4,332 4,333 100%


2.1.3 FieldworkAll respondents were initially sent an invitation letter in the mail with instructions to complete the survey online or over the phone.

During the fieldwork period it became apparent that the desired number of half cabin, open and PWC boat type owners was not going to be achieved, and so a secondary mailing comprising an additional random sample to boost these numbers was undertaken.

Overall, 8,665 registered boat owners received a letter by mail to invite them to take part in the study (see Table 2). Fieldwork was conducted from 27 August 2014 through to 21 September 2014, with the survey averaging 15 minutes in duration.

The response rate for the study was 12% with n=1,035 completions overall, which is comparable to other studies using a similar approach.

Table 2: Key fieldwork figures

n= % of total

Total sample available 8,665 100%

Total number of 1800 calls 136 2%

Completes through CATI hotline 71 1%

Return to sender 59 1%

TOTAL completions 1,035 12%

2.1.4 WeightingWhere a quantitative survey is designed to collect a survey sample to represent a population, demographic and other variables from the survey are often examined to see how accurately they reflect the population of interest. If the data is skewed in terms of these variables, results from the survey may not accurately reflect the views of the wider population.

As outlined in 2.1.2 above, the survey sample for the TSV Boating Behaviour project was deliberately skewed away from the population of interest to ensure we met the objective to represent the views of boaters across various vessel types.

In order to bring the sample back into line with the population, ‘weights’ were applied to the data. Weights are calculated based on the difference between the proportion of a certain type of respondent in the sample and the proportion of that type of respondent in the population (e.g. the proportion of Open Boats in the sample, relative to the population). In essence, applying weights to a dataset readjusts the achieved sample to resemble the population, removing any skew in the results.

The weighting scheme for the Boating Behaviour survey was developed to realign the responses received so that the data would reflect the characteristics of the Victorian boater population and responses from over-sampled sub-groups.

The weighting scheme that was developed was based on vessel registration population statistics for 2014 provided by TSV and took into account the following attributes:

Boat type Location – registered address

The following table displays the proportion of the sample as collected, the weighted sample proportions and the population proportions. As outlined below in Table 3, once the weighting scheme has been applied, the figures match those of the Victorian registered boater population, by vessel type and geography (i.e. Metro Melbourne, Regional). It is important to note that these population figures exclude canoes, houseboats, hovercrafts and commercial vessels as these were considered out of scope.


Table 3: Sample attributes and population comparisons

Boat Type Location As collected (%) Sample size (n) Weighted (%) Population (%)

Cabin CruiserMetro Melbourne 7% 71 2% 2%

Regional 8% 83 1% 1%

Half cabinMetro Melbourne 8% 80 9% 9%


Open boatMetro Melbourne 7% 77 29% 29%

Regional 7% 68 40% 40%

Personal water craft (PWC)Metro Melbourne 5% 54 7% 7%


Trailer sailerMetro Melbourne 12% 129 1% 1%

Regional 10% 103 1% 1%

Yacht (keel boat)Metro Melbourne 13% 132 1% 1%

Regional 12% 138 0% 0%

TotalMetro Melbourne 52% 543 49% 49%

Regional 48% 492 51% 51%

The following table outlines the weighted proportions of each boat type by location, water type boated on in previous 12 months and age. It is important to note, that 85% of boats within the population were open boats i.e. open and half cabin.

Table 4: Boat type from sample (weighted)

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Open boat 69 60 78 88 57 45 68 64 74

Half cabin 16 19 13 2 26 32 8 18 15

Personal water craft (PWC) 9 13 5 9 8 17 23 15 4

Cabin cruiser 3 4 2 1 5 4 1 2 4

Yacht (keel boat) 1 2 1 0 3 1 0 1 2

Trailer sailer 1 2 1 0 2 1 0 1 2

2.1.5 Qualitative focus groupsIn order to explore the quantitative findings in greater depth, two group discussions were conducted with people who participated in the quantitative survey. These individuals were randomly selected from the survey sample file and posted a letter asking if they were interested in participating in future research. One discussion group of eight people was held in Richmond on the 14 October 2014 with those who resided in Melbourne. One discussion group of five people was held in Rosebud with boaters who lived on the Mornington Peninsula on the 15 October 2014. While an effort was made to include a range of ages and genders in the research, participants ultimately reflected the survey sample in that all were male and all were aged over 40 years.

Each group discussion ran from 1.5 to 2 hours, and all participants received compensation to cover expenses associated with participation. The group discussions followed the discussion guide available at Appendix 2 of this document.


2.2 Interpretive notes

Quantitative resultsFor all survey results, tests of significance were conducted between key boater characteristics such as location, boat type, water type most often boated on and age. These were conducted at the 95% level of confidence and are reported where appropriate.

A sample of n=1,035 enables us to be 95% confident that at the overall level a feature of the Victorian boater population we are testing is within a range of ±3.1% of what the survey tells us. For example, this means that if we find that 50% of respondents said they boat on inland waters, we can be 95% confident that between 46.9% and 53.1% of the population represented by the sample actually did this.

A ‘significant difference’ means we can be 95% confident the difference observed between the two samples reflects a true difference in the population of interest, and is not a result of chance. Such descriptions are not value judgements on the importance of the difference. The reader is encouraged to make a judgement as to whether the differences are ‘meaningful’ or not.

Where significance testing has occurred between pairs such as Metro Melbourne vs. Regional boaters, this has been undertaken as an independent samples test. However, where significance testing has occurred between more than two categories within a group e.g. Water Type (Inland, Bays/Inlets, and Coastal), the significance testing used tests one category against the average of the others that are not in that category combined. Such a test is ideal for multiple comparisons as it reduces the likelihood of displaying a significant difference where one does not exist.

Statistically significant differences within tables/charts are displayed by green figures and arrows (9↑) and red figures and arrows (2↓). Green figures and arrows indicate the figure reported is statistically higher; red figures and arrows indicate the figure is statistically lower.

It important to note that analysis of questions where the overall sample size is less than or equal to n=60 should be treated with caution and any findings taken as indicative only.

How to read the tables in the report

For most questions reported, results are presented in a tabulated format, with the main table breaks ‘Total’, ‘Location’, ‘Water Type’, ‘Boat Type’ and ‘Age’ – as outlined in the table on following page.

The makeup for each of the breaks is as follows:

‘Total’ is the overall figure for that row ‘Location’ has two columns: Metro Melbourne and Regional ‘Water type’ has three columns: Inland, Bays/Inlets and Coastal ‘Boat type’ has six columns: Cabin Cruiser, Half Cabin, Open Boat, PWC, Trailer Sailer and Yacht ‘Age’ has three columns: less than 34 years, 35 – 54 years and more than 54 years.


Table 5: Example table

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

neR

egio

nal

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Yes 75 75 74 75 74 77 81 75 74 80 79 78 95 74 75

No 25 25 26 25 26 23 19 25 26 20 21 22 5 26 25

Qualitative resultsQualitative findings for this study have been included in the report where they add meaning to the quantitative results. Qualitative research is exploratory, and designed to provide in-depth insight into people’s opinions and the reasons they form and hold those opinions, outside of the rigid structure of a survey.

Unlike quantitative research, qualitative research does not aim to be representative of the broader population’s views. As such, the number of people who made each comment is not specified in qualitative reporting. Rather, qualitative reporting aims to capture the broad view of the group, and any points of divergence. Quotations are included to demonstrate particular findings where they clearly articulate the feelings of the broader group or a sub-group. Views that are only expressed by one individual are not reported on.


3. Main findings3.1 Boating tripsThe majority of boaters sampled (76%) stored their boat at their registered address with 15% saying they kept the boat at another address but out of the water. Boats from Regional Victoria were more likely to be stored at the registered address compared to those from Metro Melbourne.

Over the entire year, almost nine-in-ten (88%) used their boat. A clear majority of boaters (84%) used their boat during the peak period (October through April), while around one-third used it during the off peak period (May through September) (35%).

Just over one-in-ten (12%) said they did not use their boat in the previous 12 months. More than half (53%) said their reason for not boating in the last year was that they had been too busy or involved with work or other activities, followed by 13% who said health/illness/age issues – while a similar proportion said the boat needs work/maintenance/repairs or they have another/several other boats (11% and 10% respectively).

Across the year participants used their boats on average 19 times; May through September participants used their boat 9.1 times, and those who boated from October through April, on average 16.2 times.

The majority (72%) commenced their trip in the morning – post sunrise, while the next most common time period for boating to commence was in the afternoon (22%). Less than one-in-five (18%) commenced their boat trip in the morning before sunrise, while one-tenth (10%) began in the evening. Half cabin operators were the most likely to commence their usual trip before sunrise (35%), while yacht (keel boat) operators were more likely to say they commenced their usual trip in the afternoon (49%). Boaters whose usual purpose was fishing were more likely to commence their trip before sunrise (24%), while those undertaking touring/cruising or part of an organised club activity were more likely to commence their trip in the afternoon (40% and 58% respectively).

The most frequent trip duration was between 3 to 4 hours (25%), followed by trips of 4 to 5 and 5 to 6 hours (17% and 16% respectively). Trips commenced after sunset were more likely to be under one hour in duration (36%).

The most common purpose of boating was to go fishing (64%), followed by ‘water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’ (18%) or ‘touring / cruising’ (17%). Half cabin and open boat operators were both more likely to have said their main purpose was fishing (86% and 68% respectively), while cabin cruiser (50%), PWC (47%), trailer sailer (66%) and yacht (keel boat) (61%) operators were all more likely to say their main purpose was touring/cruising.

In the qualitative research, people also revealed more emotional reasons for boating, including quality family time, building life skills for their kids, relaxation and adventure.

Most commonly people boated with one other person (45%), while one-in-five (20%) said they usually went boating with two other persons.

For the majority, the most common waterway for boating was bays/inlets at 53%, followed by four-in-ten (42%) who said they mostly boated on inland waters most often and 5% who said coastal waters.

The most common body of water that trips commenced for those who boated on inland waters was Lake Eildon (25%), followed by one-in-five (20%) whose trip commenced on the Murray River, 7% who said Lake Eppalock and 6% who said Goulburn River.

The most common body of water that trips commenced on by those who said bays/inlets was Port Phillip Bay, with almost six-in-ten (57%) indicating this. The most common locations for trip commencement within Port Phillip Bay were Patterson River (8%) followed by Portarlington and Sorrento (5% each).

Over one-in-ten (11%) of those who said they boated on bays/inlets said locations that were part of Western Port. The most common location trips commenced in Western Port were Newhaven, Hastings and Corinella – each at 2%.


More than one-in-ten (12%) of those who said they boated on bays/inlets said their trip commenced on Gippsland waters. Most commonly, boaters put simply ‘Gippsland Lakes’ (5%) with no further information about the water name, followed by 2% who said Lakes Entrance, and 1% each for Lake Wellington, Paynesville, Lake Victoria and Other – Gippsland.

One-in-five (20%) of those participants who boated on bays/inlets, provided locations outside of Port Phillip Bay, Western Port and Gippsland Lakes across Victoria. The most common of these was Port Albert (5%), followed by Port Welshpool, Corner Inlet and Sydenham Inlet (2% each).

On average, boaters travelled 93.6 km from where the boat was stored to where the boat was launched . Those from Regional Victoria were more likely to travel further to launch (124.9km) compared to those from Metro Melbourne (65.4 km).

The following section covers areas related to boating trips including the location where participants store their boats, whether this is different to the registered address, the time of the year they use their boat and frequency of boat usage. In addition, this section looks at the time of day and length of participant’s usual boat trip, the usual purpose of boating and the waterways used.

3.1.1 StorageTypical place of storage All participants were asked where the registered boat was usually stored from a list of possible locations. As presented in Table 6 below, over three-quarters (76%) indicated they kept the boat at the registered address, while less than one-in-five (15%) said it was kept at a different address, not on water. Across the sample only a small percentage said the boat was berthed in a marina (3%), kept in dry storage or on a swing mooring (2% each) or berthed at a private jetty (1%).

Table 6: Where is this boat usually stored?

Place of storage %

At the registered address 76%

At another address, but out of the water (excluding dry storage) 15%

It is berthed in a marina 3%

It is kept in dry storage facilities 2%

It is kept on a swing mooring 2%

It is berthed at a private jetty 1%

It is berthed at a public jetty under a licence 0%

Other 1%

Q2. Where is this boat usually stored?(n=1035)

Boats from Regional Victoria were significantly more likely to be stored at the registered address compared to those from Metro Melbourne (85% vs. 66%), while boats from Metro Melbourne were more likely to be stored at another address, but out of the water (excluding dry storage) compared to those from Regional Victoria (21% vs. 9%), (see Table 7). Furthermore, boats from Metro Melbourne were more likely to be berthed in a marina (5% vs. 1%) or at a private jetty (2% vs. 1%).

Those who boated on bays/inlets were less likely to keep the boat at the registered address (70%). However, those who boated on bays/inlets were more likely to say the boat was berthed at a marina or was kept on a swing mooring (6% and 4% respectively).

Open boats were the most likely to be stored at the registered address (82%), while PWCs were most likely to be stored at another address, but out of the water (27%). Trailer sailers (10%) and PWCs (7%) were the most


likely to be kept in dry storage, while yachts (keel boats) (53%) and cabin cruisers (28%) were more likely to berthed at a marina. Furthermore, yachts (keel boats) were the most likely to be kept at a swing mooring (21%).

Those in the older age group (54 plus) were more likely to have their boat stored at a marina.

Table 7: Place of storage

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

neR

egio

nal

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

At the registered address 76 66↓ 85↑ 83 70↓ 79 36↓ 74 82↑ 63↓ 56↓ 7↓ 63 78 75

At another address, but out of the water (excluding dry storage)

15 21↑ 9↓ 13 16 7 10 18 13 27↑ 16 2↓ 32 15 14

It is kept in dry storage facilities 2 2 2 3 1 0 4 3 1 7↑ 10↑ 4 4 2 2

It is berthed in a marina 3 5↑ 1↓ 0↓ 6↑ 2 28↑ 2 1 0 7↑ 53↑ 0 1↓ 4↑

It is berthed at a public jetty under a licence 0 0 0 0 0 0 5↑ 0 0 0 0 2↑ 0 0 0

It is kept on a swing mooring 2 1 3 0 4↑ 0↓ 2 2 2 0 3 21↑ 0 2 2

It is berthed at a private jetty 1 2↑ 1↓ 1 2 0 12↑ 0 1 1 4 6↑ 0 0 2

Other 1 2 0 0↓ 1 11↑ 3 1 1 1 4↑ 4↑ 0 1 1

Q2. Where is this boat usually stored?(n=909 to 1035)

3.1.2 UsageTime of the year All boaters were asked when they used their boat in the last 12 months. Over the entire year, almost nine-in-ten (88%) used their boat, while 12% said they did not (Figure 1).

It is clear that most boating is occurring during the October through April period of the year (84%), while almost four-in-ten (39%) said they use their boat during the May through September period.

Figure 1: Boated in previous 12 months

88%

12%

35%

84%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Used boat Did not use boat May throughSeptember

October throughApril

Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat…? (n=1035)


As presented in Table 8, all those who said they boat on coastal waters (100%) said they used their boat during October through April in the previous 12 months. In addition, significantly more respondents that boated on bays/inlets indicated they used their boat during May through September (52%), while significantly fewer who boated on inland waters indicated the same (21%).

Yachts (keel boats) (73%) and cabin cruisers (62%) were more likely to be operated through the off-season period, while PWCs were less likely to be (16%).

Those who owned yachts were significantly more likely to say they boated at all times of the year (95%), while trailer sailer operators were slightly less likely (78%).

Table 8: Time of the year M

etro

M

elbo

urne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Column % Tota l

October through April 84 88 81 97 94 100↑ 86 84 84 85 76 92↑ 82 88 81

May through September 35 34 35 21↓ 52↑ 59 62↑ 44 33 16↓ 32 73↑ 17 31 38

Throughout the year 88 92 84 100 100 100 89 89 88 87 78↓ 95↑ 96 92 85

Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=909)

Reason for not using boat in past year Those who indicated they did not use their boat in the previous 12 months were asked why this was the case. As shown in Table 9, more than half (53%) said this was because they had been ‘too busy or involved with work or other activities’. The next most common reason was related to health/illness/age issues mentioned by 13%, while a similar proportion said the ‘boat needs work/maintenance/repairs’ or they have ‘another/several other boats’ (11% and 10% respectively).

Table 9: Reason behind lack of usage

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Column %

Tota

l

Have been too busy/involved with work/ other activities

53 42 58 - - - 38 31 58 55 34 50 100 43 56

Health/illness/age issues 13 14 12 - - - 5 25 12 0 30 6 0 0↓ 17↑

Boat needs work/maintenance/repairs 11 9 11 - - - 33 25 7 4 16 33 0 11 11

Have another/several other boats 10 11 10 - - - 0 12 12 0 14 6 0 37↑ 0↓

Recently purchased 6 3 7 - - - 0 0 7 11 0 0 0 4 7

Depends on the weather 4 14 0 - - - 8 0 5 11 0 0 0 5 4

Boating area has been closed/too far away from water

2 3 1 - - - 0 6 0 11 2 0 0 4 1

Planning to sell boat/no longer required

1 0 1 - - - 5 0 0 9↑ 0 6 0 0 1

Cannot afford/too expensive 1 0 1 - - - 0 6↑ 0 0 2 11 0 0 1

Launching/setting up too difficult without help/crew

1 1 0 - - - 13↑ 0 0↓ 0 10↑ 0 0 1 1

Family commitments 0 1↑ 0↓ - - - 16↑ 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0

Others 3 9↑ 0↓ - - - 0 7 0↓ 21↑ 2 6 0 8 1

None/nothing 3 10 0 - - - 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4


Q4. Why did you not use the boat in the last 12 months? (n=149)

Usage in the previous 12 months Those boaters who had used their boat in the last 12 months were asked how many times they used the boat in each of the time periods; October through April and May through September. On average, across the year participants said they used their boats 19 times, with those in May through September using their boat 9.1 times, and those in October through April on average 16.2 times (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Usage in the previous 12 months

19.0

9.1

16.2

Average per year In May through September In October through AprilAverage usage (number of times)

Q5. And approximately, how many times did you use the boat in the last 12 months? (n=from 450 to 909)

As presented in Table 10, over the whole year, highest usage was for yachts (keel boats) (35.9) and cabin cruisers (29.1) trips across the year. In addition, highest usage for October through April was for also for yachts (keel boats) (25.2) and cabin cruisers (22.2) trips on average for this period, while highest usage for May through September was also for yachts at 14.9 trips. Boaters were more likely to undertake trips on bays/inlets across the year (22.1), and less likely to undertake trips on inland waters over the same period (14.6).

Those aged up to 34 years were less likely to undertake trips across the year compared to those that were older.


Table 10: Usage in the last 12 months

Average usage (times)

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

October through April 16.2 17.6 14.6 13.7 17.9 18.4 22.2↑ 16.0 15.3 19.5 13.9 25.2↑ 9.0↓ 17.0 15.9

May through September 9.1 10.0 8.3 6.5 9.9 9.1 11.2 8.2 8.9 10.1 7.0 14.9↑ 3.9↓ 7.6 10.1

Average usage (12 months) 19.0 20.4 17.5 14.6↓ 22.1↑ 23.7 29.1↑ 19.2 17.9 21.0 16.3 35.9↑ 8.5↓ 18.9 19.7

Q5. And approximately, how many times did you use the boat in the last 12 months? (n=from 450 to 909)

Time of the day Those participants who had boated in the last 12 months were asked what time of the day their boating trip usually commences in a multiple response format. For more than seven-in-ten (72%), their boat trip commenced in the morning, post sunrise, while the next most common time period for boating to commence was in the afternoon. Less than one-in-five (18%) commenced their boat trip in the morning before sunrise, while one-tenth (10%) said the evening (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Time of the day

18%

72%

22%

10%

1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Morning – before sunrise

Morning Afternoon Evening Evening – after sunset

Q15. In the previous 12 months, what time of the day did you usually commence your trip? Multiple response (n=909)

Half cabin operators were the most likely to say they would commence their usual trip before sunrise (35%), while yachts (keel boats) were more likely to say they commenced their usual trip in the afternoon (49%), (see Table 11 below).


Table 11: Time of the day

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Morning – before sunrise 18 23 13 14 21 26 19 35↑ 16 7 2↓ 4↓ 15 23 15

Morning 72 70 74 71 74 61 75 64 73 77 83 67 79 70 73

Afternoon 22 20 24 27 18 21 18 16 22 37 26 49↑ 39 24 20

Evening 10 7 13 10 11 3 5 13 10 8 5 11 26 8 11

Evening – after sunset 1 2 1 0↓ 2↑ 0↓ 1 4 1 0 2 5↑ 0 1 1

Q15. In the previous 12 months, what time of the day did you usually commence your trip? Multiple response (n=909) Multiple

As seen in Table 12, boaters whose usual purpose was fishing were significantly more likely to commence their trip before sunrise (24%), while those undertaking touring/cruising were less likely to (5%). In addition, those who were touring/cruising (40%) and part of an organised club activity (58%) were more likely to commence their trip in the afternoon, whereas those whose purpose was fishing were less likely to do so (14%).

Table 12: Time of the day by purpose for boating in the last 12 months

Column % Fishing

Water skiing/

wakeboard/

kneeboard etc.

Touring / cruising

Organised or club activity

Racing Diving Sailing Other

Morning – before sunrise 24%↑ 9% 5%↓ 11% 0% - 6% 0%

Morning 72% 76% 69% 74% 74% - 86% 0%

Afternoon 14%↓ 33% 40%↑ 58%↑ 46% - 38% 100%

Evening 8% 13% 13% 26% 12% - 13% 0%

Evening – after sunset 1% 0% 5%↑ 2% 17% - 6% 0%

Q15. In the previous 12 months, what time of the day did you usually commence your trip? (n=909); Q6. What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months? (n=909)

Duration of the trip Participants who had boated in the previous 12 months were then asked about their usual trip duration. Overall, the most frequent trip duration was between 3 to 4 hours which was nominated by 25%. This was followed by trips of 4 to 5 and 5 to 6 hours (17% and 16% respectively) (see Figure 4 below).


Figure 4: Duration of the trip

4%9%

25%

17% 16%13%

7% 5%0% 3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Under 1hour

1 to 2hours

3 to 4hours

4 to 5hours

5 to 6hours

6 to 7hours

7 to 8hours

8 to 10hours

10 to 12hours

Morethan 12hours

Q16. And what was the usual trip duration? (n=909)

By boat type, yachts (keel boats) were more likely to have a trip of 3 to 4 hours duration (43%). In addition, trailer sailers (26%), yachts (keel boats) (13%) and cabin cruisers (10%) were more likely to undertake a trip of more than 12 hours (see Table 13).

Table 13: Duration of the trip

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Under 1 hour 4 3 5 6 2 0 2 2 4 11 1 0↓ 0 6 3

1 to 2 hours 9 10 8 14 5 3 6 3 9 15 6 12 5 10 8

3 to 4 hours 25 28 23 25 25 29 18 21 26 26 28 43↑ 27 21 28

4 to 5 hours 17 20 14 12 21 29 28 19 16 18 19 17 9 16 19

5 to 6 hours 16 19 14 11 22 8 10 17 18 11 9 8 1↓ 18 16

6 to 7 hours 13 8 18 12 14 10 14 17 13 6 6 3↓ 25 10 15

7 to 8 hours 7 7 7 10 4 15 9 12 5 10 2 3 0 11 4

8 to 10 hours 5 2 8 7 4 5 3 4 6 0 1 1 14 7 3

10 to 12 hours 0 1 0 0↓ 1↑ 0 1 2 0 2 1 1 0 1 0

More than 12 hours 3 3 3 3 3 2 10↑ 2 2 2 26↑ 13↑ 19 1 3

Q16. And what was the usual trip duration? (n=909)


As displayed below in Table 14, trips commenced after sunset were more likely to be under one hour in duration (36%) compared to trips commenced at other times. In addition, trips undertaken after sunset were also more likely to be 10 to 12 hours in duration (10%) compared to trips commenced at other times.

Table 14: Duration of the trip by the time of the day

Column %Morning – before

sunrise Morning Afternoon Evening Evening – after sunset

Under 1 hour 1 5 7 11 36↑

1 to 2 hours 14 6↓ 16 18 12

3 to 4 hours 17 24 39 34 13

4 to 5 hours 13 19 10 5↓ 2↓

5 to 6 hours 17 18 16 21 2↓

6 to 7 hours 14 15 5 4 11

7 to 8 hours 13 6 3 1 10

8 to 10 hours 6 6 1↓ 1 0↓

10 to 12 hours 1 0 1 1 10↑

More than 12 hours 4 2 4 3 3

Column n 114 663 268 82 25

Q15. In the previous 12 months, what time of the day did you usually commence your trip? (n=909) by Q16. And what was the usual trip duration? (n=909)

Purpose of use Those who had boated in the last 12 months were asked their usual purpose for boating in the last year. In total, almost two-thirds (64%) indicated their usual purpose was to go fishing. A similar proportion said ‘water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’ or ‘touring / cruising’ (18% and 17% respectively) (see Figure 5).

Figure 5: Purpose of boat use

64%

18% 17%

1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Fishing Water skiing/wakeboarding/knee

boarding etc.

Touring / cruising Organised or club activity

Q6. What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months? (n=909)

As displayed in Table 15, boaters who had boated on bays/inlets were significantly more likely to have said their main purpose was fishing (71%) and touring/cruising (22%), while those who boated on inland waters were more likely to have undertaken ‘water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’ (36%).

Half cabin and open boat operators were both more likely to have said their main purpose was fishing (86% and 68% respectively). In addition, cabin cruiser (50%), PWC (47%), trailer sailer (66%) and yacht (keel boat) (61%)


operators were all more likely to say their main purpose was ‘touring/cruising’. Further, trailer/sailer and yacht (keel boat) operators were more likely to say their main activity was an ‘organised or club activity’.

Table 15: Purpose of boat use

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Fishing 64 59 69 52↓ 71↑ 79 48↓ 86↑ 68↑ 14↓ 4↓ 2↓ 19↓ 62 67

Water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.

18 18 17 36↑ 4↓ 4↓ 2↓ 1↓ 21↑ 36↑ 0↓ 1↓ 66↑ 23 11↓

Touring / cruising 17 20 14 11 22↑ 14 50↑ 11 11↓ 47↑ 66↑ 61↑ 16 14 19

Organised or club activity 1 2↑ 0↓ 0↓ 2↑ 3 0 2 0↓ 3 23↑ 30↑ 0 1 2

Racing 0 0 0 0 0↑ 0 0 0 0↓ 0 1↑ 2↑ 0 0 0

Diving 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sailing 0 0 0 0↓ 0↑ 0 0 0 0↓ 0 7↑ 3↑ 0 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1↑ 0 0 0

Q6. What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months? (n=909)

Insight from qualitative study

In order to add meaning to the quantitative findings, the qualitative research included some discussion on why people boat and the factors influencing decision making around the time and location of their boating trips. These are detailed below.

Participants’ purposes for boating ranged from recreational to highly emotional. While most boated for a particular reason such as fishing, touring or racing, there were also more fundamental reasons why they enjoyed the pastime. For many, boating was deeply linked to family. Many had grown up boating with their parents, and now it was something they shared with their children. It was viewed as a healthy thing to do to foster life skills in children, and something the whole family could enjoy. Many also enjoyed taking friends out on their boat.

“To me, it’s an integral part of family. It gets the kids away from the TV and the Gameboys and everything they waste their life on, it provides something physical...it brings the family together.” (Melbourne)

Further, some discussed their love for the sense of adventure, survival and self-reliance boating could involve, particularly longer boating trips to more remote areas, such as the Bass Strait. Relaxation was also a big motivator. Those who liked fishing often said they enjoyed the peace and quiet of waiting for fish to bite, and others enjoyed the serenity of being out on the water.

“All the pressures disappear when you get on the water.” (Melbourne)

“Boating is a feel good thing to do.” (Mornington Peninsula)

“It’s practical, outdoors and a bit of self-reliance.” (Melbourne)

This strong emotional investment in boating contributed the frustration some felt in relation to boating experiences in peak periods, as discussed further in later sections.


Usual number of individuals on board with master Those who had been boating in the previous 12 months were asked how many people usually went boating with them. As seen in Figure 6, most commonly participants went boating with one other person (45%), while one-in-five (20%) said they usually went boating with two other persons. Just under one-in-ten (8%) said they usually boated with more than five others, while 7% said they boated alone.

Figure 6: Usual number of individuals on board with master

7%

45%

20%14%

2% 2%8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

None, I boaton my own

One otherperson

Two otherpeople

Three otherpeople

Four otherpeople

Five otherpeople

More thanfive persons

Q7. In the last 12 months, how many people usually went boating with you? (n= 909)

Those whose usual trip was on inland waters were significantly more likely to say the usual number of people they boated with was more than five persons (15%), (see Table 16). In addition, half cabin operators were more likely to say they went boating with two other persons (35%), while yacht (keel boat) masters were more likely to boat with four others.

Boat operators who were over 54 years of age were significantly more likely to say they boated with one other person (54%), while those aged up to 34 years were more likely to boat with more than five others (40%).

Table 16: Typical number of individuals on board with master

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

None, I boat on my own 7 7 8 8 7 4 2 9 7 8 7 11 5 7 8

One other person 45 37 54 37 52 49 41 44 47 37 55 33↓ 21 35 54↑

Two other people 20 24 17 18 20 40 25 35↑ 17 21 21 17 13 28 15

Three other people 14 18 11 17 13 4 21 7 16 11 11 14 21 14 14

Four other people 2 3 1 2 2 0 3 3 1 6 3 8↑ 0 4 1

Five other people 2 1 3 2 2 0↓ 1 2 2 6 1 4 0 3 2

More than five persons 8 10 6 15↑ 3↓ 3 6 1↓ 9 11 3 13 40↑ 8 6

Q7. In the last 12 months, how many people usually went boating with you? (n= 909)


Usual type of waterway used All those who had boated in the previous 12 months, were asked what type of water they boated on in the previous 12 months. Across Victoria, the most common waterway for boating was bays/inlets at 53%. This was followed by four-in-ten (42%) who said they mostly boated on inland waters most often and 5% who said coastal waters, excluding bays/inlets (see Figure 7).

Figure 7: Typical type of waterway used

53%42%

5%

Bays/Inlets

Inland waters (lakes and rivers)

Coastal waters (excludingbays/inlets)

Q8. Over the last 12 months, what type of water did you most often boat on? (n=909)

As displayed in Table 17, boaters from Metro Melbourne were significantly more likely to say they had boated on bays/inlets in the previous 12 months compared to boaters from Regional Victoria (64% vs. 41%), while those from Regional Victoria were more likely to say they went boating on inland waters compared to those from Metro Melbourne (53% vs. 32%).

Open boat operators were more likely to have boated on inland waters (53%). All other boat types less likely to have done so, except for PWCs. In contrast, cabin cruisers, half cabins, trailer sailers and yachts (keel boats) were more likely to have been boating on bays/inlets in the previous 12 months. Furthermore, those aged up to 34 years, were more likely to have boated on inland waters in the previous 12 months (79%) and were less likely to have boated on bays/inlets (17%).

Table 17: Typical type of waterway used

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Inland waters (lakes and rivers) 42 32↓ 53↑ 9↓ 5↓ 53↑ 44 15↓ 3↓ 79↑ 38 43

Bays/Inlets 53 64↑ 41↓ 85↑ 86↑ 43↓ 47 82↑ 93↑ 17↓ 56 53

Coastal waters (excluding bays/inlets) 5 3 6 6 10↑ 3 9 3 4 4 6 4

Q8. Over the last 12 months, what type of water did you most often boat on? (n=909)


Specific location of origin Boaters who had used their boat in the previous 12 months were asked which waterway their usual boating trip commenced on. These have been presented by each water type; inland waters, bays/inlets and coastal waters.

Inland waters (lakes and rivers)Across those who boated on inland waters (42% of the sample), the most common body of water that the trip commenced on was Lake Eildon – with one-quarter of the inland boaters saying this (25%), (see Table 18). This was followed by one-in-five (20%) whose trip commenced on the Murray River, 7% who said Lake Eppalock and 6% who said Goulburn River.

Table 18: Inland waters (lakes and rivers)

Inland waters (lakes and rivers) %

Lake Eildon 25%

Murray River 20%

Lake Eppalock 7%

Goulburn River (including Lake Nagambie) 6%

Rocklands Reservoir 3%

Lake Mulwala 3%

Lake Hume 3%

Lake Nillahcootie 3%

Lake Wartook 2%

Lake Charm 2%

Pykes Creek Reservoir 1%

Lake Narracan 1%

Lake Glenmaggie 1%

Other 23%

Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on inland waters (lakes and rivers)? (n=159)

As shown in Table 19, those who commenced their trip on Lake Eildon were significantly more likely to say their main purpose was ‘Water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’ (62%) as were those who commenced their trip at Pykes Creek Reservoir and Lake Narracan (99% and 94% respectively), (see Table 19). Those who commenced their trip on Lake Mulwala (89%) were more likely to say their man activity was ‘touring / cruising’, while those who commenced their trip at Lake Nillahcootie were more likely to go fishing (99%).


Table 19: Main purpose for boat use on Inland waters (lakes and rivers)

Row % Fishing

Water skiing/

wakeboarding/knee boarding

etc.

Touring / cruising



Total 52 36 11 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Eildon 23↓ 62↑ 15 0 0 0 0 0

Murray River 63 32 5 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Eppalock 36 64 0↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Goulburn River (including Lake Nagambie)

100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rocklands Reservoir 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Mulwala 0 11 89↑ 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Hume 41 56 2 1 0 0 0 0

Lake Nillahcootie 99↑ 0 1↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Wartook 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Charm 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pykes Creek Reservoir 6↓ 94↑ 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Narracan 0 99↑ 1 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Glenmaggie 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 62 23 15 0 0 0 0 0

Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on inland waters (lakes and rivers)? (n=159) by Q6. What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months?

Bays and InletsThose who boated on bays/inlets (53% of the sample) were provided with discrete options, including; areas within Port Phillip Bay, Western Port, Gippsland Lakes and a number of other popular boating locations.

Port Phillip Bay

The most common body of water that was boated on by those who said bays/inlets was Port Phillip Bay – with almost six-in-ten (57%) indicating this (see Table 20). The most common locations within Port Phillip Bay were Patterson River, with 8% saying this followed by Portarlington and Sorrento (5% each).

Table 20: Bays/Inlets - Port Phillip Bay

Bays/Inlets - Port Phillip Bay %

Patterson River 8%

Portarlington 5%

Sorrento 5%

St Leonards 4%

Rye 3%

Geelong (Limeburners Point) 3%

Mordialloc 3%

Mornington 3%

Werribee South 3%

Altona 2%


Bays/Inlets - Port Phillip Bay %

St Kilda marina 2%

Williamstown 2%

Safety Beach 2%

Queenscliff 2%

Frankston 2%

Indented Heads 2%

Clifton Springs 1%

Tootgarook 1%

Martha Cove 1%

Beaumaris 1%

Newport (The Warmies) 1%

Black Rock (Half Moon Bay) 1%

North Road, Brighton 1%

Other - Port Phillip Bay 1%

TOTAL - Port Phillip Bay 57%Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on bays/inlets? (n=697)

As displayed in Table 21, those who commenced their trip at Portarlington (100%), Werribee South (99%) and St Leonards (98%) were all significantly more likely to say their main purpose was fishing. In addition, those who commenced at Queenscliff (84%) and Williamstown (82%) were more likely to say their main purpose was ‘touring/cruising’. Further, those launching from Martha Cove were more likely to undertake ‘water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’ (54%).

Table 21: Main purpose for boat use on Port Phillip Bay

Row % Fishing

Water skiing/

wakeboarding/ knee boarding

etc.

Touring / cruising



Total 71 4 22 2 0 0 0 0

Patterson River 68 1 25 6 0 0 0 0

Portarlington 100↑ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sorrento 52 0 42 6 0 0 0 0

St Leonards 98↑ 1 0↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Rye 81 0 16 1 0 0 1 0

Geelong (Limeburners Point) 55 3 42 0 0 0 0 0

Mordialloc 90 0 9 0 0 0 0 0

Mornington 90 0 8 1 1 0 0 0

Werribee South 99↑ 0 1↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Altona 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

St Kilda marina 61 14 22 3 0 0 0 0

Williamstown 4↓ 0 82↑ 14↑ 1 0 0 0

Safety Beach 64 0 36 0 0 0 0 0

Queenscliff 13↓ 0 84↑ 2 0 0 1 0

Frankston 82 16 2↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Indented Heads 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Row % Fishing

Water skiing/


etc.

Touring / cruising



Clifton Springs 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tootgarook 24 0 76 0 0 0 0 0

Martha Cove 0↓ 54↑ 44 2 0 0 0 0

Beaumaris 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Newport (The Warmies) 82 0 10 4 3 0 2 0

Black Rock (Half Moon Bay) 94 0 3 3 0 0 0 0

North Road, Brighton 49 0 51 0 0 0 0 0

Other - Port Phillip Bay 4↓ 0 55↑ 38↑ 1 0 2↑ 0

Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on bays/inlets? (n=697) by Q6. What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months?

Western Port

Over one-in-ten (11%) of those who said they boated on bays/inlets said locations that were part of Western Port. The most common locations boated on were Newhaven, Hastings and Corinella – each at 2% (see Table22).

Table 22: Bays/Inlets - Western Port

Bays/Inlets – Western Port %

Newhaven 2%

Hastings 2%

Corinella 2%

Stony Point 1%

Tooradin 1%

Flinders 1%

Blind Bight 1%

Other - Western Port 1%

TOTAL - Western Port 11%Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on bays/inlets? (n=697)


The only notable difference by main purpose of trip was that those from Flinders were more likely to say their purpose was fishing (98%), (see Table 23).

Table 23: Main purpose for boat use on Western Port

Row % Fishing

Water skiing/

wakeboarding/knee boarding

etc.

Touring / cruising



Total 71 4 22 2 0 0 0 0

Newhaven 59 0 39 1 0 0 0 0

Hastings 83 0 15 1 0 0 1 0

Corinella 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Stony Point 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tooradin 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Flinders 98↑ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

Blind Bight 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other - Western Port 49 0 49 2 0 0 0 0


Gippsland Lakes

As shown in Table 24, of those who said they boated on bays/inlets, more than one-in-ten (12%) said their trip commenced on Gippsland waters. Most commonly, boaters put simply ‘Gippsland Lakes’ (5%) with no further information about the waterway name, perhaps indicating they boated on various parts of Gippsland Lakes. This was followed 2% who said Lakes Entrance, and 1% each for Lake Wellington, Paynesville, Lake Victoria and Other – Gippsland.

Table 24: Bays/Inlets - Gippsland

Bays/Inlets – Gippsland %

Gippsland Lakes – (No specific information) 5%

Lakes Entrance 2%

Lake Wellington 1%

Paynesville 1%

Lake Victoria 1%

Other – Gippsland 1%

TOTAL – Gippsland 12%Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on bays/inlets? (n=697)

Those who said ‘Gippsland Lakes – with no further information were significantly more likely to say their main purpose was ‘touring/cruising’ (84%) and less likely to say it was ‘fishing’ (11%), (see Table 25 below). In addition, those commencing at Lake Wellington were more likely to say their purpose was ‘fishing’ (99%), while those commencing from Lakes Entrance were less likely to say the purpose was ‘touring/cruising’ (4%).


Table 25: Main purpose for boat use on Gippsland Lakes

Row % Fishing

Water skiing/


etc.

Touring / cruising



Total 71 4 22 2 0 0 0 0

Gippsland Lakes – No specific information

11↓ 2 84↑ 2 0 0 1↑ 0

Lakes Entrance 77 19 4↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Lake Wellington 99↑ 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Paynesville 56 0 43 0 1 0 1 0

Lake Victoria 81 0 19 0 0 0 0 0

Other - Gippsland 0↓ 0 100↑ 0 0 0 0 0


Other bays/inlets in Victoria

Of those participants who boated on bays/inlets, one-in-five (20%) said locations outside of Port Phillip Bay, Western Port and Gippsland Lakes across Victoria (see Table 26). The most common boating location of these was Port Albert (5%), followed by Port Welshpool, Corner Inlet and Sydenham Inlet (2% each).

Table 26: Bays/Inlets - Others

Bays/Inlets – Others %

Port Albert 5%

Port Welshpool 2%

Corner Inlet 2%

Sydenham Inlet 2%

Wingan Inlet 1%

Inverloch 1%

Shallow Inlet 1%

Other 5%

TOTAL – Others 20%Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on bays/inlets? (n=697)

As shown in Table 27, those participants commencing their trip at Port Welshpool and Inverloch were more likely to say their main purpose of their trip was ‘water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’. In addition, those commencing at Inverloch were less likely to say their purpose was ‘fishing’, while those from Port Welshpool were less likely to be involved in ‘touring/cruising’.


Table 27: Main purpose for boat use on other bays/inlets in Victoria

Row %

Fishing

Water skiing/


etc.

Touring / cruising



Total 71 4 22 2 0 0 0 0

Port Albert 74 0 26 0 0 0 0 0

Port Welshpool 46 54↑ 0↓ 0 0 0 0 0

Corner Inlet 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sydenham Inlet 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wingan Inlet 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Inverloch 14↓ 67↑ 19 0 0 0 0 0

Shallow Inlet 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 80 5 13 1 0 0 0 0


Coastal watersFor those participants who said they boated on coastal waters (5% of the sample), the most common launch location was Portland with over one-third (34%) indicating this (see Table 28).6 This was followed for under one-in-five (16%) who said they launched at Barwon River, while 10% said Lorne. Smaller proportions said Torquay (7%), Apollo Bay and Mallacoota (5% each). It’s important to note that while the study targeted Victorian boaters, there was a small number n=5, who said their normal trip was launched from either Bermagui or Eden in NSW. It was decided to leave these boaters within the analysis as it was necessary to get a read on all Victorian registered boaters, regardless of where they boated.

Table 28: Coastal waters

Coastal waters* %

Portland 34%

Barwon River 16%

Lorne 10%

Torquay 7%

Apollo Bay 5%

Mallacoota 5%

Inverloch 4%

Bermagui (NSW) 4%

Port Fairy 3%

Eden (NSW) 2%

Other 9%

Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on coastal waters? (n=53).* Important to apply caution in interpreting these results due to the small sample size (n=53) for this question.

Due to the small sample size who indicated they boated on coastal waters (n=53), there were limited differences detected by main purpose of trip. The only notable difference was that those who commenced their trip at Torquay were more likely to say this was part of an organised or club activity (41%), and less likely to say they went fishing (0.0%), (see Table 29).

6 Important to apply caution in interpreting these results due to the small sample size (n=53) for this question.


Table 29: Main purpose for boat use on coastal waters

Row %Fishing

Water skiing/


etc.

Touring / cruising



Total 79 4 14 3 0 0 0 0

Portland 92 0 8 0 0 0 1 0

Barwon River 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lorne 89 0 11 0 0 0 0 0

Torquay 0↓ 17 42 41↑ 0 0 0 0

Apollo Bay 97 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

Mallacoota 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Inverloch 0 29 71 0 0 0 0 0

Bermagui (NSW) 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Port Fairy 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Eden (SW) 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 37 13 47 1 0 0 2 0

Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on coastal waters? (n=53) by Q6. What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months?* Important to apply caution in interpreting these results due to the small sample size (n=53) for this question.

3.1.3 Distance travelled to launchGiven the location where the boat was kept and the location where the boating trip usually commenced had been provided in the survey, the distance that boaters undertook before they launched was calculated. It should be noted that for five water bodies an exact location (postcode) was not known, so these were imputed based on TSV’s understanding of the most frequented launch locations. These water bodies and the locations imputed were; Glenelg River into Nelson, Murray River into Echuca, Loddon River into Loddon, Goulburn River into Nagambie and Gippsland Lakes (no further information provided) into Lakes Entrance. Those participants who boated on lesser known water bodies were excluded from this analysis.

As displayed below in Table 30, on average, boaters travelled 93.6 km from where the boat was stored to where the boat was launched. Those from Regional Victoria were more likely to travel further to launch (124.9km) compared to those from Metro Melbourne (65.4 km). In addition, those boating on inland waters (156.1 km) and open boat operators (106.1 km) were more likely to travel a greater distance. In contrast, those who boated on bays/inlets and cabin cruiser, half cabin, and yacht operators were more likely travel a lower distance to launch.

It is important to note that the median distance travelled overall was 56.4 km. The median is the value separating the higher half of the sample from the lower half of the sample and is a measure of the distribution of the values. The fact that the median is lower than the average indicates that the average is driven by the greater distances in the sample.


Table 30. Distance travelled to launch

DistanceTo

tal

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Average (km) 93.6 65.4↓ 124.9↑ 156.1↑ 52.5↓ 101 46.8↓ 59.5↓ 106.1↑ 95.5 80.6 23.5↓ 184.4 90.7 90.8

Median (km) 56.4 22.3 73.2 125.0 16.3 28.7 14.3 22.7 72.4 72.7 18.4 0.0 133.0 51.9 38.8Q1 Would you please tell us the postcode where this boat is generally stored? (n=1,035) by Q9. In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence? (n=826)


3.2 Boating experienceThis section of report covers areas related to boaters’ experiences, including choices around launch locations, satisfaction with boating on Victoria’s waterways and within Victoria, satisfaction with berthing and swing mooring, personal water craft characteristics and value for money.

3.2.1 LaunchingThe most common reason for ending a trip was to get back home (53%), followed by 27% who said the fish had stopped biting and 20% who said it was getting dark. A similar proportion said the reason was deteriorating weather or it was passenger preference/fatigue of others (16% and 14% respectively). The greatest average distance travelled was for those whose reason for finishing their trip was ‘it’s getting dark’ at 134.5 km, followed by fatigue - both of the passengers and of the master (131.2 km and 111.1 km respectively) and those who had reached their on-water destination (108.3 km).

For those whose boat was stored on land, the main reason given as to why they launched at the water body they mentioned was that it was closest to where they live (37%); while almost one-third (31%) said ‘It provides best access to where I want to use my boat’. Three-quarters (75%) indicated their mentioned launch location was in fact their preferred launch location.

The most common reason given by those who did not use their preferred launch location was that it was too far to travel (24%), followed by a similar proportion who said they used ‘several different launch locations’ (22%), there was a ‘lack of/poor ramps/launching facilities’ or ‘it depends where I fish’ (21% each). Boaters from Metro Melbourne were significantly more likely to say that their preferred launch location was ‘too busy/congested’ compared to those from Regional Victoria (15% vs. 2%). Congestion at launch locations was also a major complaint in the qualitative research, and contributed to a perception that boaters in Victoria get poor value for money.

Almost one-quarter (23%) said they were not able to launch from their preferred location in the past 12 months. This was more likely to be the case for those boating on bays/inlets (33%) and less likely to occur inland (13%). Of those who could not launch, almost half (46%) said that they ended up giving up on boating that day, while around one-third (36%) said they ended up launching from another location.

This sub-section of the report covers areas related to boaters’ experiences, including usual reasons for finishing trips, the reason for launching at the water body stated and preferred launch location. In addition, this section covers the reasons for not using their preferred launch location, the number of times they were unable to launch and resultant behaviour.

Reason for finishing the trip All participants who had boated in the previous 12 months were asked for the usual reason that they finished their trip on the water. For the majority (53%) the reason given was that they ‘needed to get back home’ (see Table 31). This was followed by over one-quarter (27%) who said the ‘fish had stopped biting’ and one-in-five (20%) who said ‘it was getting dark’. Furthermore, a similar proportion said the reason was ‘deteriorating weather’ or it was ‘passenger preference/fatigue of others’ (16% and 14% respectively).


Table 31: Reason for finishing the trip

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Need to get back home 53 45 61 54 53 32 53 50 55 44 50 37↓ 49 56 51

The fish stop biting 27 21 33 25 29 14 16 35 29 9↓ 2↓ 2↓ 5 19 34↑

It’s getting dark 20 17 23 33↑ 10↓ 11 8↓ 8↓ 21 36↑ 8↓ 9↓ 53 21 17

Deteriorating weather 16 19 13 11 20 15 12 23 15 14 11 5↓ 4 14 18

Passenger preference / fatigue (others)

14 14 14 21↑ 8↓ 16 8 14 14 19 8 5↓ 39 14 13

Fish catch limit is reached 11 12 10 8 12 26 14 19 10 3 2↓ 0 5 10 12

Fatigue (master) 8 6 10 8 7 19 3 4 9 16 3 3 9 8 8

Have reached my intended destination / to seek refuge / to stay overnight

5 5 5 2 7 1↓ 20↑ 5 3 1 31↑ 40↑ 0↓ 3 6

Tide/tidal changes 2 1 3 0 4 0 1 5 2 0 0 1 0 0↓ 4↑

Completed sailing/skiing/diving/boating activities

2 1 2 1 1 15↑ 4 0 2 4 4 3 0 1 2

Need extra fuel 2 1 2 3 1 1 0 1 1 9↑ 0 0 0 2 2

Too many boats/skiers/too congested/avoid busy times

1 2 0 0↓ 2↑ 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 1 2 0

Some other reason 1 0 1 2 0↓ 3 1 1 1 0 2 1 0 2↑ 0↓

Run out of bait/water/fuel 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

Completed club event/activities/race 0 1↑ 0↓ 0↓ 1↑ 0 0 0 0↓ 0 9↑ 22↑ 0 0↓ 1↑

Other commitments (NFI) 0 0↑ 0↓ 0 0 1 1 1↑ 0 0 2↑ 1 0 0 0

Return to work 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0↓ 0 1↑ 1↑ 0 0 0

Q17. Generally speaking, in the previous 12 months what was the usual reason that you finished your trip on the water? Is it because of..? (n=909)

When we look at the distance travelled from where the boat was stored to where the trip commenced, we can see that the greatest average distance was for those whose reason for finishing their trip was ‘It’s getting dark’ at 134.5 km (see Figure 8). This was then followed by ‘fatigue’ - both of the passengers and of the master (131.2 km and 111.1 km respectively) and those who had ‘reached their on-water destination’ (108.3 km).

Lowest distance travelled was for those who had completed a ‘club/race activity’ at 21.9 km, followed by those whose reason was ‘tidal changes’ (24.4 km) and those who ‘needed to return to work’ (47.3 km).7

7 It is important to note that for reasons with a sample size less than n=30, caution should be applied when interpreting the results, and as such these should be treated as indicative only.


Figure 8: Reason for finishing the trip by distance travelled to launch

Q17. Generally speaking, in the previous 12 months what was the usual reason that you finished your trip on the water? (n=826)

Reason for launch location useThose whose boat was stored on land (excluding dry storage) were asked why they launched at the water body they mentioned. As presented in Table 32, almost four-in-ten (37%) said the reason given was that ‘it is closest to where I live’; while almost one-third (31%) said ‘it provides best access to where I want to use my boat’. A considerably smaller proportion said it was ‘close to holiday house/caravan park/holiday/camp in the area’ (7%), while the same proportion said it was because of the quality of fishing, it was a safe launch/retrieval location or enabled them to meet with family/friends (5% each).

Participants who boated on inland waters (9%) and PWC riders (18%) were more likely to say they launched from their nominated location as it enabled them to meet with family/friends. In addition, those who operated a trailer sailer (18%) were more likely to say they chose that location as it allowed them to participate in club activities.


134.5

131.2

111.1

108.3

98.9

91.3

87.5

86.4

71.6

66.2

60.5

59.8

54.2

47.3

24.4

21.9

0 50 100 150

It's getting dark (n=99)

Passenger preference / fatigue (others) (n=77)

Fatigue (master) (n=43)

Have reached my intended destination / to seek refuge / to stayovernight (n=181)

Fish catch limit is reached (n=55)

Need extra fuel (n=10)

Too many boats/skiers/too congested/avoid busy times (n=7)

Need to get back home (n=392)

The fish stop biting (n=104)

Run out of bait/water/fuel (n=3)

Deteriorating weather (n=100)

Completed sailing/skiing/diving/boating activities (n=25)

Other commitments (No further information) (n=7)

Return to work (n=4)

Tide/tidal changes (n=11)

Completed club event/activities/race (n=63)

Distance (km)

Table 32: Why do you usually launch at this location?

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

It is closest to where I live 37 33 40 36 37 34 33 31 38 36 26 29 36 37 36

It provides best access to where I want to use my boat

31 32 30 26 36 33 33 45 29 25 28 36 19 28 35

Close to holiday house/caravan park/holiday/camp in the area

7 7 7 7 9 1↓ 4 5 8 10 2 0 0 10 6

Fishing/best fishing 5 2 8 9 2 3 3 2 6 0 0 0 1 3 7

It is the safest launch / retrieval location

5 7 2 3 7 3 15 6 4 4 11 18 4 8 3

Enables me to meet up with family / friends

5 5 4 9↑ 1↓ 6 0 2 4 18↑ 2 4 2 7 3

There is less traffic congestion here 3 4 1 1 4 3 7 5 2 2 2 0 0 4 2

It is the only option for this waterway 3 3 2 2 1 16 6 1 3 1 2 0 15 0↓ 4

Enables me to participate in club activities

2 2 2 3 2 0 0 2 2 0 18↑ 11 0 0 4↑

Other launch / parking options are too costly

2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 3 0 0 2 2

Boat is stored/moored at location 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1↑ 3↑ 4 0 0 0

Not answered 0 0 0 0 0 1↑ 0 0 0 1↑ 0 0 0 0 0

Storage area available 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2↑ 0 0 0 0

Other reason 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 23↑ 0↓ 0

Q10. Why do you usually launch at [RESPONSE AT Q9]? (n=521)

The following chart (Figure 9) displays the reason for launching by the distance travelled from where the boat was stored. Greatest distance travelled was for the reason ‘close to holiday house/caravan park/holiday/camp in the area’ (187.7 km) followed by ‘enables me to meet up with family / friends’ (174.1 km). Shortest distance travelled was because the ‘boat is stored/moored at location’ (26.1 km) followed by ‘it is the safest launch / retrieval location’ (43.2 km).


Figure 9: Reason for launching at location by distance travelled to launch

187.7

174.1

173.2

118.8

118.0

96.5

83.8

71.8

61.5

59.4

43.2

26.1

266.6

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Close to holiday house/caravan park/holiday/camp in the area (n=19)

Enables me to meet up with family / friends (n=23)

Storage area available (n=2)

Fishing/best fishing (n=7)

There is less traffic congestion here (n=13)

It provides best access to where I want to use my boat (n=156)

Enables me to participate in club activities (n=26)

It is closest to where I live (n=157)

Other launch / parking options are too costly (n=8)

It is the only option for this waterway (n=11)

It is the safest launch / retrieval location (n=39)

Boat is stored/moored at location (n=6)

Other reason (n=2)

Q10. Why do you usually launch at [RESPONSE AT Q9]? (n=470)


For qualitative participants decision making around where to boat largely depended on access and weather. Most boated near their home, although others would take boating holidays as far as Port Douglas. Several destinations in NSW were nominated, particularly Bermagui, with a number agreeing it offered better and more affordable launching options than available in Port Phillip Bay.

“You can go to Bermagui for instance, in the middle of the marlin season and the tuna season, and there will be 150 boats launching and retrieving. You won’t wait more than 10 minutes…because there’s the space, the facilities, four lanes, plenty of parking, toilets, cleaning tables. You don’t have that here.” (Mornington Peninsula)

“When we go to Bermagui, we don’t pay for any ramp fees, there’s washing facilities, cleaning tables…and you’ve got…six ramps in the township.” (Melbourne)

Beyond proximity to home, weather forecasts were the primary dictator of where, or if, to boat. Participants relied on a range of sources for weather forecasts, with some emphasising that it is best to rely on multiple sources to get the information required, as there is often conflicting advice. The Bureau of Meteorology and Willy Weather were widely used, but so were more boating specific weather sites such as See Breeze and Bay Winds. Some also relied on webcams to show the conditions on the water. It was agreed that poor weather often meant that boating trips were avoided or cancelled early. This led some to suggest greater provision of webcams, as further detailed in section 3.3, below.

“You look at one weather site, and it says it’s going to be fantastic, but another says it’s going to be blowing 15-20 knots. There’s no consistency”. (Melbourne)

Others deliberately chose to boat at times and places that would avoid big crowds, particularly when launching. Some launched early to avoid crowds, while others chose to boat only on weekdays, or would drive to different


ramps to find the shortest lines. Those who boated for fishing often sought out locations ‘where the fish were biting’.

“Eildon the week before Christmas is heaven on a stick. There’s no one there. Christmas week onwards, I won’t go. It’s too busy”. (Melbourne)

“Winter’s fantastic, because no one wants to go out. We do.” (Melbourne)

“For fishing, on a Saturday morning, I won’t go, ‘cause there’s too many people. Nine times out of 10 I go on a RDO or a weekday evening.” (Melbourne)

Preferred launch location in Victoria Those whose boat was stored at either the registered address or another address but out of the water, were asked if the waterway they usually commenced their trip at was their preferred launch location in Victoria. Three-quarters (75%) indicated their nominated launch location was in fact their preferred launch location – 25% said this was not their preferred location to launch (see Figure 10).

Figure 10: Preferred launch location in Victoria

75%

25%

YesNo

Q11. Is this your preferred launch location in Victoria? (n=521)

There were no notable differences across key demographics for this question (see Table 33 below).

Table 33: Preferred launch location in Victoria

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Yes 75 75 74 75 74 77 81 75 74 80 79 78 95 74 75

No 25 25 26 25 26 23 19 25 26 20 21 22 5 26 25

Q11. Is this your preferred launch location in Victoria? (n=521)


Reason for lack of use of preferred launch location Boaters who did not use their preferred launch location were asked why this was the case. This question was asked as a multiple response question, and the responses coded accordingly. As shown within Table 34, the most common reason given for not using the preferred launch location was that it was too far to travel – mentioned by almost one-quarter (24%). This was followed by a similar proportion who said they used ‘several different launch locations’ (22%), there was a ‘lack of/poor ramps/launching facilities’ or ‘it depends where I fish’ (21% each).

Boaters from Metro Melbourne were significantly more likely to say that their preferred launch was ‘too busy/congested’ compared to those from Regional Victoria (15% vs. 2%).

Across most boat types, the top reasons given for not using their preferred location were the same; ‘too far to travel’, ‘use several different launch locations’ and ‘lack of/poor ramps/launching facilities’. In addition, half cabin operators were significantly more likely to say that their preferred launch was ‘too busy/congested’ (29%). Furthermore, those who fished on coastal waters were more likely to say it ‘depends where I go to fish’ (72%).

Table 34: Reasoning for lack of use of preferred launch location

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Too far to travel 24 17 31 28 22 15 25 18 27 4 31 17 0 11 36

Use several different launch locations 22 36 8 24 20 27 24 15 22 35 38 17 0 29 16

Lack of/poor ramps/launching facilities 21 16 26 16 27 0 19 18 21 29 16 0 11 27 16

Depends where I go to fish 21 17 24 22 15 72↑ 19 18 23 0 0 0 0 15 26

Do have a preferred launch location - No Further Information

13 7 18 8 18 0 12 7 14 9 11 0 0 19 8

Too busy/congested 8 15↑ 2↓ 4 13 0 7 29↑ 5 0 8 0 11 15 3

Lack of facilities (No specific information)

7 8 7 7 8 0 0 11 6 9 4 17 0 14 2

Poor parking facilities 5 10 0 1 8 0 0 15 3 9 0 33 0 7 3

Depends on the activity/ boat being used

4 8↑ 0↓ 9↑ 0↓ 0 0 0 5↑ 0 4 17 0 0 7

High costs/too expensive 2 3 1 1 2 0 12 3 0↓ 17↑ 4 0 0 4↑ 0↓

Location mentioned (No specific information)

1 1 1 0 2 0 13↑ 0 0 12↑ 4 0 0 1 1

No fish cleaning facilities 1 1 0 0 1 0 7 4↑ 0 0 0 0 11 0 1

Don't know/none 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4↑ 0 0 0 0 0

I do not have a preferred launch location

3 5 0 6↑ 0 1 0 0 3 9 4 0 89 4 0↓

Other 2 3 1 0 3 6 12 4 0↓ 12↑ 4 17 0 1 2

Q12. Why don’t you use you preferred launch? (n=118)

How many occasions not able to launch from preferred location Those whose boat was stored at either the registered address or another address out of the water, were asked on how many occasions they were unable to launch from their preferred launch location in the previous year. Overall, almost one-quarter (23%) said they were not able to launch from their preferred location while the remainder (77%) were able to launch (see Figure 11).


Figure 11: How many occasions not able to launch from preferred location

77%

23%

Always able to launch

Not able to launch

Q13. On how many occasions were you unable to launch from your preferred launch location in the last year? (n=521)

Boaters using inland waters were more likely to say they were always able to launch from their preferred location (87%), while those boating on bays/inlets were less likely to say they were always able to launch (67%).

Those who indicated they could not launch at their preferred location were asked to enter the number of times they could not launch from there. Across the sample, boaters were unable to launch from their preferred location on average 5.7 times (see Table 35). No notable differences were detected for this question by key demographics.


Table 35: How many occasions not able to launch from preferred location

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Always able to launch (%)

77 74 80 87↑ 67↓ 90 81 70 77 80 86 85 90 74 78

Not able to launch (%) 23 26 20 13↓ 33↑ 10 19 30 23 20 14 15 10 26 22

Average number of occasions unable to launch from preferred launch location in the last year (Average)

5.7 6.8 4.3 4.3 5.9 15.5 8.5 6.8 5.4 5.3 6.0 7.0 4.1 7.1 4.4

Q13. On how many occasions were you unable to launch from your preferred launch location in the last year? (n=521)

Resulting behaviour Those who indicated they were unable to launch from their preferred launch location at least once in the previous year, were asked what they did when this was the case. As shown in Figure 12, almost half (46%) said that they ended up giving up on boating that day, while around one-third (36%) said they ended up launching from another location. One-in-twenty ended up returning later in the day and launched from their preferred launch location (5%).

Figure 12: Resulting behaviour

46%

36%

5%

14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

I gave up on boating thatday

I launched from anotherlocation elsewhere

I returned later in theday and launched then

Other

Q14. What did you do when you could not launch from your preferred launch location? (n=108)


Nearly all (94%) of those aged up to 34 years said they gave up on boating that day – significantly more than those who were older (see Table 36).

Table 36: Resulting behaviour

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

I gave up on boating that day 46 53 36 30 52 18 67 51 45 37 29 75 94↑ 43 47

I returned later in the day and launched then

5 7 3 8 4 27 0 5 6 0 6 0 0 1 9

I launched from another location elsewhere

36 33 39 37 34 55 26 41 33 46 59 25 6 53 20

Other 14 7 22 25 10 0 7 3 17 17 6 0 0 3↓ 24↑

Q14. What did you do when you could not launch from your preferred launch location? (n=108)


3.2.2 Satisfaction with boating experienceHighest satisfaction for boating experience on Victorian waterways was for ‘waterway draft for my boat’ with a rating of 7.3 out of 10, followed by ‘aids to the navigation on the water’ (6.8) and ‘Hazards in the waterway’ (6.7). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘destination jetties’ (5.6) and ‘access to landside attractions’ (5.9). Yacht (keel boat) operators were significantly more likely to say they were satisfied with ‘aids to navigation on the water’ (8.0) and ‘hazards in the waterway’ (7.8), while trailer sailer operators were also more satisfied with ‘aids to the navigation on the water’ (7.9) as well as ‘destination jetties’ (6.5).

Highest satisfaction for those whose boat was stored at either the registered address or another address was for ‘The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at non-peak period’ (7.7 out of 10) , followed by ‘boat ramp proximity to my home address’ (7.3) and ‘signage’ (6.5). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘Fish cleaning facilities’ (4.4), followed by ‘The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (5.0). Significantly lower satisfaction for ‘The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ was noted for those who fished (4.6). In addition, boaters from Metro Melbourne were more dissatisfied with the parking at boat launch areas (4.8 vs. 6.7) and the ‘wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (4.0 vs. 6.0) compared with those from Regional Victoria.

In the qualitative research, there was a strong view that Port Phillip Bay was an underutilised resource that lacks many of the facilities that make other Australian locations great places to boat. This includes sufficient launching and mooring facilities, and marinas to provide a pleasant destination for lunch. As such, many boaters who predominately use Port Phillip Bay felt that the Victorian Government was not providing sufficient infrastructure in return for their licence and registration fees. Those who boated elsewhere (particularly in Gippsland or on Lake Eildon), were typically more satisfied with the facilities available.

This sub-section of the report covers areas including satisfaction with a number of areas relating to boating experience on Victorian waterways and within Victoria.

Satisfaction with boating experience on Victorian waterways All participants who indicated they had boated in the last 12 months were asked to rate their satisfaction with a number of areas related to Victorian waterways. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 was ‘not satisfied at all’ and 10 was ‘totally satisfied’.

Highest satisfaction was noted for the ‘waterway draft for my boat’ with a rating of 7.3 out of 10. This was followed by ‘aids to the navigation on the water’ at 6.8 and ‘hazards in the waterway’ 6.7. Lowest satisfaction was for ‘destination jetties’ (5.6) and ‘access to landside attractions’ (5.9), (see ).


Figure 13: Satisfaction with boating experience on Victorian waterways

5.6

5.9

6.7

6.8

7.3

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

Destination jetties

Access to landside attractions

Hazards in the waterway

Aids to the navigation on the water

Waterway draft for my boat

Average satisfaction score (0 - 10)

Q18. For this question, we would like to ask your satisfaction with a number of areas relating to your boating experience on Victorian waterways. Would you please answer these questions on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all and 10 would mean totally satisfied? If a statement is not applicable, or you do not know, please select that option. (n= from 632 to 873)

As displayed below in Table 37, those who boated on bays/inlets provided significantly higher satisfaction ratings for the ‘hazards in the waterway’ and ‘aids to navigation on the water’ (7.3 each), while those that boated on inland waters provided significantly lower ratings for hazards in the waterway’ (6.0) and ‘aids to navigation on the water’ (5.9).

Those who operated a yacht (keel boat) were significantly more likely to say they were satisfied with ‘aids to navigation on the water’ (8.0) and ‘hazards in the waterway’ (7.8), while those with a trailer sailer were also more satisfied with ‘aids to the navigation on the water’ (7.9) as well as ‘destination jetties’ (6.5).

Table 37: Satisfaction with boating experience on Victorian waterways

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Waterway draft for my boat 7.3 6.9 7.7 7.5 7.1 7.8 7.2 7.0 7.4 6.9 7.8 7.1 7.0 6.9 7.6

Hazards in the waterway 6.7 6.7 6.8 6.0↓ 7.3↑ 7.0 6.7 7.2 6.6 6.5 7.4 7.8↑ 6.6 6.6 6.8

Aids to the navigation on the water 6.8 6.9 6.6 5.9↓ 7.3↑ 7.3 7.2 7.4 6.6 6.6 7.9↑ 8.0↑ 6.6 6.7 6.8

Destination jetties 5.6 5.6 5.6 4.9 5.9 6.6 5.5 5.7 5.6 5.3 6.5↑ 5.3 6.7 5.1 6.0

Access to landside attractions 5.9 5.7 6.0 5.6 6.0 7.0 5.6 5.3 6.0 5.8 6.6 5.4 6.7 5.5 6.1

Q18. For this question, we would like to ask your satisfaction with a number of areas relating to your boating experience on Victorian waterways. Would you please answer these questions on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all and 10 would mean totally satisfied? If a statement is not applicable, or you do not know, please select that option. (n= from 632 to 873)


Satisfaction with boating facilities within Victoria Those whose boat was stored out of the water (at either the registered address or another address) were asked to rate their satisfaction with a number of areas related to their boating facilities in Victoria. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 was ‘not satisfied at all’ and 10 was ‘totally satisfied’.

As shown in Figure 14, highest satisfaction was noted for ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at non-peak period’ at 7.7 out of 10. This was followed by ‘boat ramp proximity to my home address’ (7.3) and ‘signage’ (6.5). Lowest satisfaction was recorded for ‘fish cleaning facilities’ at 4.4, followed by ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (5.0).

Significantly lower satisfaction for ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ was reported by those who fished (4.6), while significantly higher satisfaction was for those who were ‘water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc.’ (6.7). Those whose main activity was ‘racing’ were totally satisfied with ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at non-peak period’ (10). Furthermore, significantly lower satisfaction for fish cleaning activities was found for those whose main activity was ‘organised or club activity’ (1.6).

Figure 14: Satisfaction with boating experience within Victoria

4.4

5.0

5.8

5.9

6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5

7.3

7.7

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0

Fish cleaning facilities

The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peakperiod

Parking at boat launch areas

Boating information (boat ramp cameras, notices, etc.)

Behaviour of other boaters at the ramp

Design of the boat ramp

The amount of sand / weed at boat ramp

Physical condition of the boat ramp

Signage

Boat ramp proximity to my home address

The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at non-peak period


Q19. For this question, we would like to ask your satisfaction with a number of areas relating to your boating experience within Victoria. Would you please answer these questions on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? If a statement is not applicable, or you do not know, please select that option. (n= from 312 to 499)

Boat rampsAs displayed in Table 38, boaters from Regional Victoria provided higher satisfaction ratings for two areas – ‘behaviour of other boaters at the ramp’ (6.6 vs. 5.5) and ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (6.0 vs. 4.0) compared to those from Metro Melbourne. In addition, those who boated on bays/inlets provided significantly lower satisfaction with ‘the wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period’ (at 3.9) – while those who boat on inland waters provided higher ratings (6.6). Further, those with a yacht (keel boat) provided a significantly lower rating for ‘boat ramp proximity to my home address at 4.0.


Table 38: Satisfaction with boat ramps

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at non-peak period

7.7 7.4 8.1 8.1 7.5 7.1 8.1 7.3 7.9 7.7 7.9 8.2 8.6 7.6 7.9


7.3 7.1 7.5 7.1 7.4 7.9 7.0 7.1 7.4 7.1 6.8 4.0↓ 7.8 6.8 7.6

Physical condition of the boat ramp 6.4 6.3 6.5 6.2 6.6 7.1 6.8 6.7 6.4 6.2 7.1 7.7 6.4 6.2 6.6


6.3 5.9 6.6 6.7 6.0 5.6 6.5 5.4 6.5 5.8 7.1 7.6 7.1 6.0 6.4

Design of the boat ramp 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.1 6.6 6.3 6.5 6.2 6.0 7.0 8.1 6.5 6.1 6.3

Behaviour of other boaters at the ramp 6.1 5.5↓ 6.6↑ 6.6 5.6 5.5 6.5 5.6 6.2 5.5 6.1 5.9 6.6 5.6 6.4

The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period

5.0 4.0↓ 6.0↑ 6.6↑ 3.9↓ 3.6 4.6 3.9↓ 5.3 4.7 5.8 6.7 5.8 4.5 5.4



Launching was an issue for a key group of boaters – those who stored their boats on land, and typically conducted most of their boating activity on Port Phillip Bay. In regional Victoria, access to launches was seen to be much easier, with limited congestion and short or no wait times.

“You can moor pretty much anywhere at Eildon…there are a number of jetties, the wait time is generally either immediate or nothing more than 10 minutes….it’s lifestyle, it’s boating at your house, which is what the Gippsland lakes is all about too. Convenient boating with easy access and lifestyle makes boating enjoyable.” (Melbourne)

Launching onto Port Phillip Bay was seen to be a problem on peak days throughout the main boating season (from around September to April). This issue predominately hinged on waiting times, with participants complaining that they often had to wait up to three hours to launch their boat. This reflects the quantitative finding that metropolitan boaters were more likely to cancel a trip due to congestion at launching. Generally, it was agreed that anything over half an hour to 45 minutes is too long to wait.

“At Sorrento, if the sun shines – it doesn’t even have to be hot – you can’t get in. To be able to launch and retrieve your boat, you have to be [at Mornington boat ramp] at 3am”. (Mornington Peninsula)

Additionally, congestion at and around boat ramps led to safety concerns. Some said they felt concerned about other people (particularly children) walking around the ramp while they are launching, and also the congestion of the boats on the water around boat ramps. Others worried about supervising their own children while launching, given that the children could not, by law, wait in the car or boat. Given the difficulty accessing ramps, many felt that ramp launching fees were unreasonable.

For some, concerns around a lack of ramps were particularly acute at present given the closures of Black Rock and North Road launching ramps due to storm damage. There was frustration that damage takes a long time to remedy, and that this causes increased congestion at nearby boat ramps in the interim.

“At the moment Black Rock and North Road are both closed, and there’s only two ramps to service that side of the bay, Mordialloc and St Kilda. The number of boats that are going to be getting in and out of there…. it’s going to be absolute chaos, you’re going to have to get down there at 2am to get on the water.”


Launch and boating informationBoaters from Metro Melbourne were more dissatisfied with the parking at boat launch areas compared with those from Regional Victoria (4.8 vs. 6.7) (see Table 39). In addition, the same was true for those who boated on bays/inlets – having lower satisfaction with the parking at boat launch areas (5.0) while those who boated on inland waters provide higher satisfaction (6.9).

Trailer sailer operators were the most satisfied - rating all areas higher except for ‘fish cleaning facilities’. In addition, half cabin operators were the least satisfied (4.7) with parking at boat launch areas, while trailer sailers and open boat operators provided higher satisfaction (6.9 and 6.1 respectively).

Those aged older than 35-54 years were significantly less satisfied with the parking at launch areas (5.0).

Table 39: Satisfaction with launch, and boating information

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Signage 6.5 6.1 6.8 6.2 6.6 7.3 6.6 6.8 6.4 6.4 7.2↑ 7.9 6.7 6.2 6.6


5.9 5.8 6.0 6.1 5.7 6.7 6.6 5.7 6.0 5.5 6.8↑ 7.9 5.8 5.7 6.1

Parking at boat launch areas 5.8 4.8↓ 6.7↑ 6.9↑ 5.0↓ 4.6 5.2 4.7↓ 6.1↑ 5.1 6.9↑ 7.6 6.7 5.0↓ 6.3

Fish cleaning facilities 4.4 3.8 4.9 4.3 4.3 5.8 4.9 4.5 4.4 4.0 5.2 5.5 2.2 4.3 4.6



As with launching, qualitative research found that participants’ satisfaction with Victoria’s boating facilities more broadly varied considerably depending on where they typically went boating. Again, those using Port Phillip Bay reported far more issues – particularly around infrastructure – than others.

Boaters who predominately utilised waterways in Gippsland or Lake Eildon tended to be satisfied with the facilities available. They felt that there were plenty of quality, free launching locations and destination moorings. The main concern for this group was busy and at times dangerous waterways at peak times, such as Christmas.

“[Poor infrastructure at Port Phillip Bay] is why we looked somewhere else, that’s why we went to Gippsland lakes. And we’re still exploring.” (Melbourne)

“At Gippsland lakes, we don’t pay for anything. I’ve got a jetty fee for my own jetty, that’s all”. (Melbourne)

Those who boated on Port Phillip Bay generally sighted more issues around infrastructure and safety, and appeared more dissatisfied with the cost of licensing and registration. The primary concern for this group was a lack of, or poor quality launching ramps (as discussed above) and destination moorings. The former issue tended to be an issue for those who store their boats on land, while the latter was of greater concern for those who utilise a swing mooring, particularly those with yachts.

For Port Phillip Bay boaters, there was a unanimous view that Melbourne lacks the excellent boating facilities of New South Wales or Queensland.

“Port Phillip Bay is a great resource that’s completely and totally underutilised because the facilities aren’t there.” (Melbourne)



To some extent, the lack of facilities at Port Phillip Bay was seen to be dictated by geography. It was acknowledged that Port Phillip Bay is a very large body of water, meaning that destinations can be quite far away. Additionally, it lacks natural safe harbours. However, there was frustration that little to no effort had been made to build marinas or other safe harbours.

“We can’t even get into Safety Beach. So the only place we can go is Blairgowrie, which is scarily expensive, or Queenscliff. We can go to Geelong as well, but we don’t do that very often because it’s not very well protected in a good Northerly.” (Melbourne)

Concern around this issue centred on both leisure and safety. Yachters in particular wanted to see destinations with moorings and restaurants for lunch that they could utilise for day trips, reflecting dissatisfaction with landside attractions as found in the survey. Further, the lack of a safe place to take shelter in the event of sudden inclement weather was viewed as a major danger when boating on the Bay. This reflects the quantitative finding that there was low satisfaction with destination jetties in Victoria.

“There aren’t enough places to seek refuge. I’ve been out at Hastings and an unexpected change has come. It hasn’t been life threatening but it’s been bad enough that I don’t want to sit out here anymore, so I’ll try to go in. And you go in, and there’s 200 boats waiting to get in…we’re all bobbing up and down like mad men.” (Mornington Peninsula)

“There’s not much to do on the bay…you just go out, smell the seals, then come back.” (Melbourne)

“Safety comes back to infrastructure….if you’ve got somewhere that’s not so far between to go to…safe harbours. If there’s nothing between Sandringham and Mornington, it’s a long way with no harbours.” (Melbourne)

“Who hasn’t been out on the bay when it’s gone from dead flat… to a metre swell in under 20 minutes, and when you haven’t got a safe harbour…it’s dangerous.”(Melbourne)


3.2.3 Satisfaction with berthing and swing mooring This sub-section of the report covers areas including the proportion of those who berth or moor their boat, satisfaction with berthing arrangements and satisfaction with swing mooring arrangements.

Almost all (86%) boaters who indicated their boat was not kept on land or in dry storage said the boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth and 13% said on a swing mooring.

Equal highest satisfaction for boaters who indicated their boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth was for ‘boat proximity to my home address’ and ‘weather and tide protection’ each at 7.9 out of 10 . In addition, both ‘security’ and ‘provision of shore power’ were rated at similar levels (7.5 and 7.2). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘availability of alternative berth / mooring’ (3.9) followed by ‘on-water refuelling services’ (5.3).

Highest satisfaction for boaters who indicated their boat was kept at a swing mooring was for the ‘boat proximity to my home address’ at 7.9 out of 10, followed by the mooring’s ‘value for money’ (6.8) and its ‘weather and tide protection’ (6.4). The lowest rated area was the ‘on-water refuelling services’ at 2.9 followed by ‘sewage pump-out facilities’ (3.5).


Percentage of those who berth or moor their boat Boaters who indicated their boat was not kept on land or in dry storage were asked if their boat was contained within a berth or moored. As displayed in Figure 15, almost all (86%) said the boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth, 13% said on a swing mooring and 1% said their boat was not in water.

Figure 15: Percentage of those who berth or moor their boat

86%

13%

1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

At a berth or in a pen berth On a swing mooring My boat is not in-water

Q25. Is your boat contained within a berth or moored? (n= 290)

All trailer sailer operators whose boat was not kept on land indicated their boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth, while 96% of cabin cruisers and 73% of yacht (keel boat) operators indicated the same (see Table 40). One-quarter (25%) of yacht (keel boat) operators said their boat was kept on a swing mooring while 4% of cabin cruisers said this was also where the boat was kept.

Table 40: Percentage of those who berth or moor their boat

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

sAt a berth or in a pen berth 86 84 89 100 85 89 96↑ - - - 100 73↓ 0 89 85

On a swing mooring 13 14 11 0 14 11 4↓ - - - 0 25↑ 100 9 14

My boat is not in-water 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 - - - 0 2 0 1 1

Q25. Is your boat contained within a berth or moored? (n= 290)

Satisfaction with berthing arrangements Boaters who indicated their boat was kept at a berth or in a pen berth were asked their satisfaction with a number of areas related to their current berthing arrangements. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 was ‘not satisfied at all’ and 10 was ‘totally satisfied (see Figure 16 below).

Equal highest satisfaction was noted for ‘boat proximity to my home address’ and ‘weather and tide protection’ each at 7.9 out of 10. In addition, both ‘security’ and ‘provision of shore power’ were rated at similar levels (7.5 and 7.2). Lowest satisfaction was for ‘availability of alternative berth / mooring’ at 3.9 out of 10 followed by ‘on-water refuelling services’ (5.3).


Figure 16: Satisfaction with berthing arrangements

3.9

5.3

6.1

6.8

6.9

7.2

7.5

7.9

7.9

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

Availability of alternative berth / mooring

On-water refuelling services

Sewage pump-out facilities

Landside facilities (toilets, showers etc.)

Value for money

Provision of shore power

Security

Weather and tide protection

Boat proximity to my home address


Q26. How satisfied are you with your current berthing arrangements? Would you please answer this question on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? (n= from 154 to 228)

Differences by demographics were limited across berthing area satisfaction (see Table 41). However, boat operators from Regional Victoria were significantly less satisfied with the ‘provision of shore power’ compared to Metro Melbourne boat operators (5.7 vs. 8.2). In addition, those who boated on inland waters were significantly less satisfied with this measure as well (0.2). Further, those who boated on inland waters were more satisfied with ‘sewage pump-out facilities’ (8.8).

Table 41: Satisfaction with berthing arrangements

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler

Saile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s


7.9 7.7 8.3 8.4 7.9 8.5 8.2 - - - 9.0 7.5 - 7.9 8.0


7.9 7.6 8.4 8.4 7.9 7.6 7.8 - - - 8.0 8.0 - 8.1 7.8

Security 7.5 7.7 7.1 6.7 7.5 7.5 7.2 - - - 9.0 7.8 - 7.7 7.4


7.2 8.2↑ 5.7↓ 0.2↓ 7.5 7.7 6.6 - - - 10.0 8.2 - 7.4 7.2

Value for money 6.9 7.0 6.8 6.5 6.9 7.7 6.7 - - - 6.0 7.2 - 6.2 7.1


6.8 7.3 6.1 5.0 6.9 6.5 6.8 - - - - 6.9 - 6.5 6.9


6.1 6.1 6.3 8.8↑ 6.1 4.7 6.7 - - - 3.0 5.3 - 5.3 6.4


5.3 5.2 5.5 5.6 5.3 4.7 5.3 - - - 3.0 5.3 - 5.0 5.4


3.9 4.3 3.4 3.7 3.9 4.2 3.9 - - - - 3.9 - 3.6 4.0

Q26. How satisfied are you with your current berthing arrangements? Would you please answer this question on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? (n= from 154 to 228)


Satisfaction with swing mooring arrangements Boaters who indicated their boat was kept at a swing mooring were asked their satisfaction with a number of areas related to their current mooring arrangements. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 was ‘not satisfied at all’ and 10 was ‘totally satisfied’.

As shown in Figure 17, highest satisfaction was for the ‘boat proximity to my home address’ at 7.9 out of 10. This was followed by the mooring’s ‘value for money’ (6.8) and its ‘weather and tide protection’ (6.4). The lowest rated area was the ‘on-water refuelling services’ at 2.9 followed by ‘sewage pump-out facilities’ (3.5).

Figure 17: Satisfaction with swing mooring arrangements

4.1

2.9

3.5

3.8

5.7

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.8

7.9

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

Other services




Security

Storage or provision of tender (if applicable)

Servicing arrangements for mooring tackle


Value for money


Q27. How satisfied are you with your current swing mooring arrangements? Would you please answer this question on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? (n= from 30 to 58)

The only notable differences by demographic were by location, with those from Regional Victoria providing significantly higher satisfaction compared to those from Metro Melbourne for ‘value for money’ (8.5 vs. 5.9), ‘storage or provision of tender (if applicable)’ (8.6 vs. 5.1) and ‘other services’ (6.0 vs. 3.0), (see Table 42).


Table 42: Satisfaction with swing mooring arrangements

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler

Saile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s


7.9 7.9 7.9 - 7.9 7.4 9.0 - - - - 7.7 10.0 8.0 7.9

Value for money 6.8 5.9↓ 8.5↑ - 6.7 9.3 3.0 - - - - 7.5 8.0 7.7 6.6


6.4 5.6 8.1 - 6.3 9.3 4.0 - - - - 6.8 5.0 7.1 6.2


6.3 5.5 8.0 - 6.3 8.6 5.5 - - - - 6.5 2.0 5.8 6.6


6.2 5.1↓ 8.6↑ - 6.3 3.0 7.5 - - - - 6.0 1.0 5.7 6.5

Security 5.7 5.5 6.2 - 5.7 7.7 4.5 - - - - 6.0 3.0 5.5 5.9

Other services 4.1 3.0↓ 6.0↑ - 4.1 2.7 0.0 - - - - 4.5 - 4.7 3.9


3.8 3.3 5.0 - 3.8 3.0 3.0 - - - - 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.8


3.5 3.4 3.5 - 3.4 5.9 2.5 - - - - 3.7 2.0 4.7 3.2


2.9 2.4 3.8 - 2.9 4.0 1.0 - - - - 3.4 - 4.3 2.6

Q27. How satisfied are you with your current swing mooring arrangements? Would you please answer this question on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? (n= from 30 to 58)


3.2.4 Personal Water Craft (PWC) This section covers findings related to PWCs including the proportion of those who have owned a PWC for the first time and the reason for the attraction to PWC riding.

Almost two-thirds (64%) indicated that the PWC owned was not the first one that they had owned. For over four-in-ten, the reason given as to what attracted them to PWC riding was, ‘thrill seeking, speed’ (41%), while a similar proportion said that the PWC is a ‘family craft’ (39%), followed by around three-in-ten (31%) who said they had been boating for a while and prefer a PWC.

Percentage of those who have owned a PWC for the first time All boaters who were Personal Water Craft (PWC) operators were asked if the registered PWC was the first one they owned. As displayed in Figure 18, almost two-thirds (64%) indicated that this PWC was not the first one they owned, while the remainder (36%) said this was their first one.

Figure 18: Percentage of those who have owned a PWC for the first time

36%

64%

YesNo

Q28. Is this the first PWC you’ve owned? (n= 88)

There were no notable differences by demographics (see Table 43).

Table 43: Percentage of those who have owned a PWC for the first time

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Yes 36 32 46 24 46 38 - - - 36 - - 55 36 30

No 64 68 54 76 54 62 - - - 64 - - 45 64 70

Q28. Is this the first PWC you’ve owned? (n= 88)


Reason for attraction to PWC riding All PWC operators were asked what attracted them to PWC riding. For over four-in-ten, the reason given was, ‘thrill seeking, speed’ (41%), while a comparable proportion said that the PWC is a ‘family craft’ (39%), (see Table 44). This was followed by around three-in-ten (31%) who said they had been boating for a while and prefer a PWC and a similar proportion who said it was the ‘price’ or that they used it for ‘water skiing’ (20% and 19% respectively).

Table 44: Reasoning for attraction to PWC riding

Reason %

Thrill seeking, speed 41%

Family craft 39%

Have been into boating for a while, and prefer PWC 31%

Price 20%

Water skiing 19%

Appearance 14%

Flexible/versatile/provides another option 7%

Fun 7%

Easy to use/store/launch 5%

Own several PWC 4%

Something else 3%

Something different 3%

Fishing 3%

Q29. What attracted you to PWC riding? (n=88)


A number of PWC riders attended the discussion groups. For this group, there were major concerns around the safety and behaviour of other PWC riders. It was felt that PWC riders deservedly have a poor reputation in Victoria’s waters due to careless and dangerous behaviour, but that there are some people who use PWCs in a safe way.

“They are the sports car of the water, but there’s a safe way to run them and an unsafe way to run them.”

These PWC riders used their PWC with their children and emphasised the importance of instilling safe behaviour in their children when they acquire their restricted marine licence at 12 years of age. There was strong demand for a more rigorous licensing system and regular policing of boating to ensure safety for PWC users and other users of the marine environment.

“[It’s important to] lay the [safety] foundations when they’re young.” (Melbourne)

“It’s all about educating 20 year olds to get a license. Maybe it is a practical test, not just tick a few extra boxes on your license.” (Melbourne)

This discussion of licensing in relation to safety among PWC riders fed into a broader discussion about the need for practical licensing, discussed in further detail in section , below.


3.2.5 Value for moneyOverall value for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps was low at 4.8 out of 10 - those from Metro Melbourne indicated significantly lower value for money (4.2) compared to those from Regional Victoria (5.4). In addition, overall rating for boat registration fee was also low at 4.8 out of 10.

More than one-third of all who had boated in the previous 12 months indicated that they would be willing to pay more for their registration if it helped improve boating infrastructure at the locations where they boated (36%).

This reflected a qualitative finding that while participants do not feel the registration fee is exorbitant, they are not seeing any return on their fee in the form of improved infrastructure.

This sub-section of the report describes areas related to boaters’ value for money such as the value seen in boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps, their boat registration fee and their willingness to pay more to improve boating infrastructure.

Boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps All participants who stored their boat on land, excluding dry storage were asked to what extent they agreed that they feel they get value for money for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10 where 0 means ‘low value’ and 10 means ‘high value’.

As seen in Table 45, the overall rating for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps was low at 4.8 out of 10. Those from Metro Melbourne indicated significantly lower value for money (4.2) compared to those from Regional Victoria (5.4). In addition, those with a trailer sailer saw significantly greater value in the amount paid for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps (6.0).

Table 45: Value for money - boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Average value 4.8 4.2↓ 5.4↑ 5.3 4.6 3.3 4.7 4.8 4.8 4.5 6.0↑ 4.5 6.3 4.1 5.2

Q20. To what degree do you feel you get value for money for the amount you pay for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps? (n=662)

Boat registration value All participants who had boated in the previous 12 months were asked if they felt they got value for money for the amount they pay for their boat registration fee. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10 where 0 means ‘low value’ and 10 means ‘high value’.

The overall rating for value of boat registration fee was low at 4.8 out of 10 (see Table 46).

There were no notable differences by key demographics.

Table 46: Average value from boat registration fee

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Average value 4.8 4.6 5.0 4.9 4.7 4.6 5.6 4.8 4.6 5.8 5.5 4.8 6.1 4.4 5.0


Q21. To what degree do you feel you get value for money for the amount you pay for your boat registration fee? (n=909)

Willingness to pay more to improve boating infrastructure As shown in Figure 19, more than one-third (36%) of all who had boated in the previous 12 months indicated that they would be willing to pay more for their registration if it helped improve boating infrastructure at the locations where they boated.

Figure 19: Willingness to pay more to improve boating infrastructure

36%

64%

YesNo

Q22. Would you be willing to pay more for your registration if it helped to improve boating infrastructure at the locations where you go boating? (n= 909)


There were no notable differences by key demographics (see Table 47).

Table 47: Willingness to pay more to improve boating infrastructure

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Yes 36 41 31 34 39 25 46 41 33 44 39 40 39 36 36

No 64 59 69 66 61 75 54 59 67 56 61 60 61 64 64

Q22. Would you be willing to pay more for your registration if it helped to improve boating infrastructure at the locations where you go boating? (n = 909)


Frustration around access to and availability of boating facilities (as outlined above in section 3.2.2) fuelled a more general dissatisfaction with the costs associated with boating among qualitative participants. While it was agreed that the cost of licencing and registration is not a major economic impost, boaters felt that they did not get much in return for their fees. This was particularly the case for participants who had been boating for a long time and had seen very little money invested in the industry. When licence and registration fees were introduced it was understood that the money would go into boating infrastructure, but they felt that this had not been delivered as there was little to no evidence of investment in boating, particularly on Port Phillip Bay.

“In my lifetime there haven’t been any additional facilities (for boaters in Victoria)” (Mornington Peninsula)

“The amount of money that the government take off boaties a year, for what we get, is really poor.” (Melbourne)

While the majority of dissatisfaction over licencing and registration costs were driven by a perceived lack of infrastructure, there was also a view that there are many unwarranted fees associated with boating. Some felt that it was unreasonable to charge a registration fee for both the boat and trailer, and for both a boating and fishing licence. This created a perception that the government takes whatever opportunity it can to make money off boaters, without offering much in return.

“No matter where you turn you get slugged” (Melbourne)

“The government is happy to take money from registration fees, fishing licence fees, boat licence fees, tax of petrol…but there’s no give back” (Mornington Peninsula)

In addition to launching and destination facilities, parking was also raised as an infrastructural concern, particularly in Melbourne. Some boaters were particularly concerned at the distance from their boat they had to park after launching. Boats were viewed as a considerable asset, so leaving a boat unattended caused anxiety. Navigation aids were typically not a key concern – as many now utilised GPS technology – although for some fishers, lack of or dim lighting on markers at night was a safety concern.


3.3 Opportunities for improvement across Victoria’s waterways and boat launch locations

In overview, the main area for improvement provided by those who said they would be willing to pay more for their boat registration was that they wanted to have ‘Improved boat launch / retrieval facilities’ (68%), followed by four-in-ten (41%) who said they would like to see ‘better navigation aids and signage’ and a similar proportion who said there was a need for ‘better boating safety education programs’ (37%).

The main areas mentioned by all those who had boated in the previous 12 months in regards to anything they think should be considered with regard to boating facilities was ‘better / increased access to ramps launching facilities’ (18%), followed by over one-in-ten (13%) who said mentions related to parking fees at launch areas ‘free access / excessive fees / no launch parking fees’. Eight percent said comments related to ‘better / increased access to facilities’ or ‘better / increased access to parking’.

These suggestions were echoed in the qualitative research. Additionally qualitative participants wanted to see more destination moorings such as marinas. There was also strong support for the idea of a centralised ‘app’ which would provide, for example safety information for each vessel type, access to all web cams, weather and perhaps the ability to register trips with Volunteer marine rescue groups..

This section of the report covers areas for improvement across Victoria’s waterways and boat launch locations, including, areas for those who said they would be willing to pay more for their registration – in a prompted format, and an open ended question which asked if there was anything else they think should be considered with regard to boating facilities.

Areas for improvement across Victoria’s waterways - prompted Those who said they would be willing to pay more their boat registration if it improved boating infrastructure at the locations where they went boating were asked what things they would like to see improved across Victoria’s waterways.

By far, the main reason given by over two-thirds (68%) was that they wanted to have ‘improved boat launch / retrieval facilities’ (see Table 48). This was followed by four-in-ten (41%) who said they would like to see ‘better navigation aids and signage’ and a similar proportion who said there was a need for ‘better boating safety education programs’ (37%). Sixteen percent said they would like ‘improved search and rescue services’ (16%).

Boaters from Regional Victoria were more likely to say they would like to see ‘more police/fisheries officers/law enforcement’ compared to Metro Melbourne boaters (5% vs. 0%), while those from Metro Melbourne would like to see more marinas compared to Regional Victorian boaters (3% vs. 0%).

Those who boated on bays/inlets were more likely to say they would like ‘better/additional/more accessible jetties’ and would like to see ‘more police/fisheries officers/law enforcement’ (4% each).

Those who operated a yacht (keel boat) were more likely to say they would like to have ‘better/additional/more accessible jetties’ (18%), but were less interested in ‘improved boat launch / retrieval facilities’ (20%). Alternatively, half cabin operators were more likely to desire ‘improved boat launch / retrieval facilities’ (87%).

Boaters over 54 years of age were more interested in seeing ‘more police/fisheries officers/law enforcement’ and ‘more/better/cheaper parking’ (4% each) compared to those who were younger.


Table 48: Areas for improvement across Victoria's waterways - Prompted

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Improved boat launch / retrieval facilities

68 73 62 69 67 84 53 87↑ 65 72 71 20↓ 77 75 63

Better navigation aids and signage

41 42 39 40 42 32 42 38 38 60 40 34 77 48 33

Better boating safety education programs

37 38 36 39 35 47 42 37 38 32 40 38 66 37 36

Improved search and rescue services

16 16 17 11 20 21 19 17 14 25 23 24 0 16 18

Better/additional/more accessible jetties

2 3 1 0↓ 4↑ 0 11 2 2 0 10 18↑ 1 1 4

Better/more destination/activities access

2 1 4 5 1 0 4 0 3 4 0 2 0 1 4

More police/fisheries officers/law enforcement

2 0↓ 5↑ 0 4↑ 0 4 0 3 0 7 3 0 0↓ 4↑

More marinas 2 3↑ 0↓ 0 3 0 5 2 2 0 0 3 0 1 2

Better wash/hose down areas

2 3 0 3 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 3

None/nothing 0 0 0 0 0 0 1↑ 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

Other 0 0 0 0 0 1 2↑ 0 0↓ 0 1 3↑ 0 0 0

Q23. What things would you like to see improved across Victoria’s waterways or boat launch locations in regards to recreational boating? (n = 360)


Areas for improvement across Victoria’s waterways - unprompted All those who had boated in the previous 12 months were asked if there was anything else they think should be considered with regard to boating facilities. This question was asked as an open ended question, and the responses coded accordingly (see Table 49).

The main comments mentioned related to ‘better / increased access to ramps launching facilities’ mentioned by almost one-in-five (18%). This was followed by over one-in-ten (13%) who provided comments related to parking fees at launch areas ‘Free access / excessive fees / no launch parking fees’, while 8% said comments related to ‘better / increased access to facilities’ or ‘Better / increased access to parking’. Across the sample, just over one-third (34%) said ‘none/nothing’.

Table 49: Areas for improvement across Victoria's waterways - Unprompted

Areas for improvement %

Better / increased access to ramps launching facilities 18%

Free access / excessive fees / no launch parking fees 13%

Better / increased access to facilities (No Further Information) 8%

Better / increased access to parking 8%

More better maintained updated markers signs lights speed signs 5 knot buoys 7%

Better / increased access to jetties marina's tie up facilities wharves floating jetties 6%

(Inconsiderate) behaviour by other people yobbos hoons / needs addressing by water police 5%

More water police enforcement security guards coastguards 5%

More / better (fish) cleaning facilities 3%

Questions are invalid not relevant / responses questions not applicable, responses don't apply to boat location selected

3%

Fees should not go into consolidated revenue should be spent on facilities improvement 3%

Sheltered safe protected launch ramp anchorage mooring areas 3%

More education boater advice information / bag limit fish size info / chart info access 3%

Better / increased access to (fresh) water / to wash motor boat 3%

Jet skiers - PWC's should be better regulated / have separate facilities / areas lanes / ramps 3%

Better / increased access to toilets showers amenities change rooms 2%

Improve promote boating tourism destinations / develop destination infrastructure develop attractions create destinations

2%

Rubbish recycling bins / bins emptied 2%

Not answered 2%

Better / increased access to (public) moorings berths 2%

Other mentions 10%

None/nothing 34%

Q24. Is there anything else you think should be considered with regard to boating facilities? (n = 909)


Suggestions to improve Victoria’s waterways for recreational boaters primarily centred around the infrastructural limitations of Port Phillip Bay, as discussed in section 3.2.6. Those who stored their boats on land wanted to see more and better quality launching facilities to reduce congestion at boating ramps.

Boaters also wanted to see better mooring destinations, particularly in the form of large marinas with deep water, where boaters could take day trips and stop for lunch. It was felt that providing such facilities would be excellent for the Victorian economy. However, it was lamented that previous attempts to build marinas were often met with planning restrictions and protests from a ‘vocal minority’. Blairgowrie Marina was used as an


example of a marina that had been built but had not met its potential because of planning restrictions and interference from the non-boating community.

“Every impediment was thrown into [Blairgowrie] Marina” (Mornington Peninsula)

“The government hasn’t made it easy for developers to create opportunities for boating around the bay. Either because greenies have said ‘don’t do it’ or they’ve made it too hard for private enterprise to get involved.” (Melbourne)

Some also suggested a better, centralised source of information about boating in Victoria, particularly the condition of waterways. It was suggested that there could be a centralised source of webcams to view the water conditions, particularly from a safety perspective. While there are currently a number of webcams available, these are all on different websites, and some felt there could be more webcams introduced.

“I’d like to have webcams strategically placed around the bay, and one website where you can go to see a dozen webcams. This is not a question of convenience, it’s a question of safety. And it won’t cost much money.” (Melbourne)

Additionally, focus groups were used as an opportunity to test the idea of a centralised phone app about boating in Victoria. There was considerable enthusiasm about this idea. In particular, it was viewed as a great location for the centralisation of webcams. Additionally, participants felt it could include weather reports, safety information for each boat type, and could push out information about new safety regulations or any news about boating in Victoria. It was also suggested that the app could include the ability to track your trip, and register a trip with Volunteer Marine Rescue Groups. Some thought people may feel more comfortable alerting the Volunteer Marine Rescue Groups through an app than they do making a phone call. Importantly, it was emphasised that such an app should be free and should be funded by boat registration fees.

“A lot of people don’t have the confidence to get on the radio and talk to the coast guard.” (Mornington Peninsula)


3.4 Safety behaviourOn a scale from 0 through10 where 0 means ‘not risky at all’ and 10 means ‘extremely risky’, boaters believed their usual boating trip was very low risk with a mean score of 2.5 out of 10. In the qualitative research, this often reflected the confidence boaters felt in their own abilities, with many having several decades of experience. However, it was agreed that for less experienced or safety conscious boaters, it can be a very dangerous pastime.

More than three-quarters (77%) said they checked the safety equipment before every trip on the water. Of those that did not check before every trip, one-in-ten (10%) said they checked once every few months, 8% said monthly and a small proportion 2% said they checked weekly. There is a relationship between frequency of the safety checks and number of times the boat was used in the previous 12 months - the more trips undertaken, the more frequent safety checks were undertaken on the boat. Some participants in the qualitative research utilised checklists to remind them of these processes, and felt they were a useful tool.

Overall ratings indicated high importance in the need to have all necessary equipment when boating with an average rating of 8.9 out of 10. Participants operating a cabin cruiser (9.5) or half cabin (9.4) indicated a significantly higher level of importance, whereas those who operated an open boat indicated lower importance (8.7). In addition, those who boated on coastal waters indicated significantly higher importance at 9.8.

Almost six-in-ten (56%) said they wore a lifejacket personally every time, while around one third (32%) said they wear one on some occasions. One-in-ten (10%) said they never wear a lifejacket. In addition, just under six-in-ten (59%) said someone else on their boat wore a lifejacket every time, while one third (34%) said that others wore one on some occasions. Some qualitative participants had recently begun wearing life jackets all the time, particularly because the new designs were so comfortable. However, the main reason people did not wear life jackets all the time (particularly when they were not required to by law) was comfort, and also some concern that they can be restrictive and potentially dangerous when yachting.

The most frequently undertaken safety activity was checking the weather, with almost all (89%) saying they did this every time. This was followed by three-quarters (76%) who said they check/run the engine and over two-thirds who said they tell someone where they are going and when they will be getting back (69%). The least frequent activities undertaken ‘always’ were to check waterway web cams (10%), check flares (32%) and undertake a safety checklist (47%). In addition, almost three-in-ten (28%) said they never check flares, while 10% said they never undertake a safety checklist.

Nearly all (99%) said they check the weather sometimes, most times or always. The most common way that boaters checked the weather was by using the Bureau of Meteorology (bom.gov.au) website (75%), followed by a similar proportion who said radio or TV (24% and 22% respectively). Other less common mentions included, Willy Weather (14%), webcams located at waterways (13%), by talking to friends/colleagues and newspapers (12% each).

The most common way that boaters found out about information to do with boating was through ‘other boat owners’ – with almost four-in-ten saying this (38%). One third (33%) said they used the ‘internet’ to source this information, while a similar proportion said ‘published boating guides’ (27%), ‘general internet search/Google’ (25%) and the ‘tackle and bait shop’ (24%). Just over one-in-twenty (6%) said they obtained this information from Transport Safety Victoria. Qualitative research participants felt that information about boating (particularly updated regulations) could be provided by mail with the annual registration notice, as this would be a good way to reach all registered boaters.

Highest recollection of safety campaigns was for Lifejackets saves lives with almost two-thirds (65%) indicating they remembered it, followed by almost half who remembered Steer clear of big ships (49%). Less than one third (30%) said they remembered It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing it while around one quarter remembered the Get on board on life jackets campaign. Lowest recollection was for Will your boat float – with 6% saying they remembered it and Be cool respect the rules 10%.

Qualitative research participants were concerned about some inexperienced boaters who put themselves and others at risk – sometimes wilfully, but more often as a result of ignorance. As such, participants wanted to see further education and regulation of boating. Suggestions included a practical exam as part of the licencing


process, the implementation of ‘L’ and ‘P’ plates, a 0.0% blood alcohol tolerance and a blanket rule for life jackets.

This section of the report covers areas related to boater safety, including the boater's perceived risk when boating, participants frequency in undertaking safety checks for the boat, the importance of having all necessary safety equipment for the boat, life jacket use and their frequency in undertaking of safety behaviour. In addition, the section covers how they check the weather before boating, how they get information about boating safety and awareness of previous boating safety campaigns.

Perceived riskiness of boating activity Participants were asked to consider their usual boating trip in the previous 12 months and indicate how risky they felt the activity was. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through10 where 0 means ‘not risky at all’ and 10 means ‘extremely risky’. In general, participants believed their usual boating trip was very low risk with a mean score of 2.5 out of 10 (see Table 50).

Ratings for this question were similar across key demographics, with no notable differences detected.

Table 50: Perceived riskiness of boating activity (Q30)

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Average perceived riskiness 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.5 3.5 2.2 2.7 2.4 2.9 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.5 2.5

Q30. Considering you usual boating trip in the last 12 months, how risky do you feel this activity is for you? (n=907)

Frequency of safety checks All those who had boated in the previous 12 months were asked how often they checked the safety equipment on their boat. As presented in Figure 20, more than three-quarters (77%) said they checked the safety equipment before every trip on the water. Of those that did not check before every trip, one-in-ten (10%) said they checked once every few months, 8% said monthly and a small proportion 2% said they checked weekly.

Figure 20: Frequency of safety checks

77%

2%8% 10%

3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Before every trip onthe water

Weekly Monthly Once every fewmonths

Less often


Q31. How often do you check the safety equipment on this boat? (n=909)

Those who boated on inland waters were more likely to check the safety equipment before every trip on the water (92%), while those boating on inland waters were less likely (66%), (see Table 51). Cabin cruiser (56%) operators and yacht (keel boat) operators were both less likely to undertake a safety check before every trip on the water.

Table 51: Frequency of safety checks

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Before every trip on the water

77 72 82 92↑ 66↓ 66 56↓ 66 80 86 68 46↓ 91 72 79

Weekly 2 4↑ 1↓ 0↓ 3 11 6 2 2 4 4 11↑ 4 1 3

Monthly 8 10 6 1↓ 12↑ 13 17↑ 8 7 4 8 25↑ 0↓ 10 7

Once every few months 10 12 7 3↓ 15↑ 4 16 17 8 5 16 17 5 15↑ 6

Less often 3 3 4 3 3 5 4 5 3 2 4 2 0 2 4

I don’t - this is done by somebody else

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 0 0↑ 0↓ 0 0 0 0 1↑ 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Q31. How often do you check the safety equipment on this boat? (n=909)

When viewing this question, it important to compare the number of times the boat had been used in the previous 12 months to the frequency of safety equipment checks. As displayed below in Table 52, those who checked the safety equipment before each trip, on average used the boat 16.6 times in the year, while those that were checking the equipment weekly used the boat around 64 times, on average in the previous 12 months. Independent of those that check their safety equipment before each trip, there seems to be relationship between frequency of the safety checks and number of times the boat was used in the previous 12 months. Put simply, the more trips undertaken, the more frequent safety checks were undertaken on the boat.

Table 52: Average times boat was used by different safety equipment check frequencies

Average

Before every trip on

the water

Weekly Monthly

Once every few

months

Less often Other

Average times boat was used 16.6↓ 64.8↑ 27.5↑ 22.7 11.5↓ 34.7↑

Q5. And approximately, how many times did you use the boat in the last 12 months? (n=450 to 909)

Perceived importance of having all necessary safety equipment for the boat All participants who had been boating in the previous 12 months were asked to consider their usual boating trip and indicate how important they feel it is to have all the necessary safety equipment. This question was asked on a scale from 0 through 10 where 0 means ‘not important’ and 10 means ‘extremely important’.

Overall, participant’s ratings indicated high importance in the need to have all necessary equipment when boating with an average rating of 8.9 out of 10 (see Table 53). Participants operating a cabin cruiser (9.5) or half cabin (9.4) indicated a significantly higher level of importance, whereas those who operated an open boat indicated lower importance (8.7). In addition, those who boated on coastal waters indicated significantly higher importance at 9.8.


Table 53: Perceived importance of having all necessary safety equipment for the boat

Average

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler

Saile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Average perceived importance 8.9 9.1 8.7 8.7 9.0 9.8↑ 9.5↑ 9.4↑ 8.7↓ 9.2 9.3 9.2 8.6 9.0 8.9

Q32. Considering your usual trip, how important do you feel it is to you to have all the necessary safety equipment for the boat? (n=909)

Life jacket usePersonal use

All participants who had been boating in the previous 12 months were asked how often they would personally wear a lifejacket. Overall, as shown in Figure 21, almost six-in-ten (56%) said they wore on every time, while around one third (32%) said they wear one on some occasions. One-in-ten (10%) said they never wear a lifejacket.

When compared to the TSV research undertaken in 2006, there were significantly more who said they wore a lifejacket every time in 2014 (56% vs. 46%).8 In addition, there were less in in 2014 who said they never wore a lifejacket compared to 2006 (10% vs.19%).

8 Marine Safety Victoria New Marine Safety Regulations. Qualitative and Quantitative Research Findings (2006). Quantum Market Research Commissioned by TSV.


Figure 21: Personal life jacket use

56%

2%

32%

10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Every time Every second time On some occasions Never

Q33. When you go boating, how often would you personally wear a lifejacket? (n=909)

As displayed below in Table 54, those who operated a PWC were significantly more likely to wear a lifejacket every time (87%). In addition, those who operated a cabin cruiser (63%), half cabin (48%) and yacht (keel boat) were significantly more likely to wear a lifejacket on some occasions. Furthermore, significantly more cabin cruiser operators indicated they would never wear a lifejacket (21%).

Table 54: Personal life jacket use

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Every time 56 58 55 62 54 37 15↓ 38↓ 59 87↑ 53 26↓ 84 50 60

Every second time 2 1 2 2 2 0 1 2 2 0 2 3 0 3 1

On some occasions 32 31 33 28 33 60 63↑ 48↑ 29 12↓ 41 63↑ 13 37 29

Never 10 11 9 8 12 3 21↑ 12 10 1↓ 4 8 3 10 10

Q33. When you go boating, how often would you personally wear a lifejacket? (n=909)

Use by others on boat

All participants who had been boating in the previous 12 months were also asked how often someone else on their boat would wear a life jacket that they carried. Overall, just under six-in-ten (59%) said someone else on their boat wore a lifejacket every time, while one third (34%) said that others wore one on some occasions (see Figure 22). Under one-in-twenty (4%) said that any others never wore a lifejacket.

In comparison to the 2006 TSV research, there were more boaters who said that someone else wore a lifejacket on some occasions in 2014 (34% vs. 27%). In addition, in 2014 there were fewer who said that someone else never wore a lifejacket compared to 2006 (4% vs. 12%).


Figure 22: Lifejacket usage by others on boat

59%

2%

34%

4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Every time Every second time On some occasions Never

Q34. Not thinking of yourself, how often would someone on your boat wear a lifejacket you carry? (n=909)

As displayed in Table 55, those who operated an open boat (63%) and PWC (86%) were significantly more likely to say that someone else wore a lifejacket when on their boat ‘every time’. In addition, those who operated a cabin cruiser, half cabin or yacht (keel boat) were significantly more likely to say that others wore a life jacket ‘on some occasions’.

Those who boated on inland waters were significantly more likely to say that someone else on their boat would wear a lifejacket ‘every time’ (69%), while those who boated on coastal waters were more likely to say that someone else wore a lifejacket on some occasions (62%).

Those aged up to 34 years were more likely to say that someone else on their boat wore a lifejacket every time (89%), while a significantly higher proportion of those aged 35-54 (5%) said that someone else wore a lifejacket every second time.

Table 55: Lifejacket usage by others on boat

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Every time 59 58 59 69↑ 53 34 20↓ 37↓ 63↑ 86↑ 54 27↓ 89↑ 54 61

Every second time 2 2 3 3 2 0 1 2 3 2 2 3 0 5↑ 0↓

On some occasions 34 36 32 25↓ 39 62↑ 70↑ 51↑ 31 9↓ 41 65↑ 11 36 34

Never 4 3 6 3 6 3 9 9 4 0 3 5 0↓ 4 5

Q34. Not thinking of yourself, how often would someone on your boat wear a lifejacket you carry? (n=909)

Undertaking of safety behaviour All participants who had been boating in the previous 12 months were asked to indicate how often they undertook a number of activities before going out on the water. This question was asked on the following scale; never, sometimes, most times and always.

Of all the activities, checking the weather was most frequently undertaken with almost all (89%) saying they did this ‘always’ before going out on the water (see Figure 23). This was followed by three-quarters (76%) who said


they check/run the engine and over two-thirds who said they tell someone where they are going and when they will be getting back (69%). The least frequent activities undertaken ‘always’ were to check waterway web cams (10%), check flares (32%) and undertake a safety checklist (47%). In addition, almost three-in-ten (28%) said they never check flares, while 10% said they never undertake a safety checklist.

Figure 23: Undertaking of safety behaviour

89%

76%

69%

66%

47%

32%

10%

7%

15%

17%

17%

26%

16%

6%

3%

7%

10%

8%

17%

24%

20%

1%

3%

4%

9%

10%

28%

65%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Check the weather

Check engine/run engine

Tell someone where I am going on the water andwhen I will be back

Check the battery

Undertake a safety checklist

Check flares

Check waterway web cams

Always

Most times

Sometimes

Never

Q35. How often do you undertake the following activities before going out on the water? (n=909)

Check the weatherAs displayed in Table 56, almost nine-in-ten (89%) said they check the weather always before going out on the water, while 7% said most times, 3% said sometimes and 1% said never. Those that operate a yacht (keel boat) were the most likely to say they always checked the weather (96%), while those operating a PWC were the least likely (73%). In addition, those aged up to 34 years were more likely to say they never checked the weather (14%) compared to those that were older - where none said they would not check the weather before going out on the water.

Table 56: Check the weather

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler

Saile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 14↑ 0 0

Sometimes 3 2 4 7↑ 0↓ 0 2 0 4 3 2 1 2 1 5

Most times 7 6 8 8 7 4 8 4 6 22↑ 4 3 4 6 8

Always 89 91 87 83 93 96 90 96 89 73↓ 95 96↑ 80 92 87


Check the batteryTwo-thirds (66%) said they checked the battery always before going out on the water, 17% said most times, 8% said sometimes, while 9% said they never did (shown in Table 57 below). Those that boated on inland waters were more likely to say they never checked the battery before going out on the water (17%), while those that boated on bays/inlets were less likely to say never (3%). In addition, significantly more that were open boat


operators said they would never check the battery before going out on the water (12%), while a significantly lower proportion of half cabin operators said the same (2%).

Table 57: Check the battery

Column %To

tal

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 9 7 12 17↑ 3↓ 9 2 2↓ 12↑ 5 13 4 0 5 13

Sometimes 8 7 9 8 8 5 15 9 7 6 11 15 0↓ 10 7

Most times 17 20 14 15 20 4 17 19 16 27 21 18 31 20 15

Always 66 66 65 60 69 82 65 71 65 62 56 62 69 66 65


Check flaresAs displayed in Table 58, just under one-third (32%) said they always checked the flares always before going out on the water, 16% said most times, 24% said sometimes and 28% said they never checked the flares before going out on the water. Boaters from Regional Victoria, those that boated on inland waters and PWC operators all were significantly more likely to say they never checked their flares before going out on the water. In addition, significantly more boaters who boated on coastal waters said they checked their flares most times as did those aged 35-54 years.

Table 58: Check the flares

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 28 20↓ 36↑ 55↑ 7↓ 20 12↓ 6↓ 31 52↑ 11↓ 9↓ 40 21 32

Sometimes 24 27 20 11↓ 35↑ 7↓ 40↑ 32 22 12 39↑ 55↑ 23 21 25

Most times 16 18 14 8↓ 20 41↑ 19 19 16 15 17 15 12 23↑ 11

Always 32 35 30 25 38 32 29 43 32 20 33 21↓ 26 35 31


Undertake a safety checklistJust under half (47%) said they always undertook a safety check before going out on the water, 26% said most times, while 17% said sometimes and 10% said never (see Table 59 below). Those who were yacht (keel boat) operators were significantly less likely to always undertake a safety check always (30%) and were more likely to say they undertook a safety check sometimes (36%).


Table 59: Undertake a safety checklist

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 10 11 9 8 11 12 19 8 9 17 10 5 29 12 8

Sometimes 17 15 19 10 22 19 25 23 15 10 26 36↑ 23 19 15

Most times 26 25 27 30 23 23 19 15 27 36 25 29 4 28 26

Always 47 50 45 52 44 46 37 54 48 37 38 30↓ 44 42 52


Check engine/run engineAs presented in Table 60, over three-quarters (76%) said they always checked the engine before going out on the water, 15% said most times, 7% said sometimes and 3% said never. The only notable difference by key demographic was that yacht (keel boat) operators were significantly more likely to check the engine always (89%).

Table 60: Check engine/run engine

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 3 3 2 4 1 3 3 2 3 1 4 1 14 2 2

Sometimes 7 7 7 5 8 14 2 9 8 2 6 4 14 8 6

Most times 15 16 14 12 17 12 15 17 14 19 9 7 30 17 12

Always 76 74 77 79 74 71 80 72 76 78 81 89↑ 42 73 79


Check waterway web camsThe majority (65%) said they never checked waterway web cams, 20% said sometimes, 6% said most times and 10% said always (see Table 61 below). Those boating on bays/inlets were more likely to say they checked waterway webcams most times (10%) and sometimes (28%). Those who boated on inland waters were more likely to say they never checked waterway web cams (81%).

Table 61: Check waterway web cams

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler

Saile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 65 59 70 81↑ 51↓ 72 62 59 67 59 66 53 74 64 64

Sometimes 20 21 18 11↓ 28↑ 7 23 18 20 12 24 34↑ 5 19 21

Most times 6 10 3 0↓ 10↑ 14 9 9 5 12 8 9 0 6 7

Always 10 10 10 8 11 6 5 14 8 17 2↓ 4 21 11 8



Tell someone where I am going on the water and when I will be backAs displayed in Table 62, more than two-thirds (69%) said they always tell someone where they are going on the water and when they will be back, 17% said they did this most times, 10% said sometimes and 4% said they never did this. Those who boated on bays/inlets were less likely to say they never told anyone where they were going and when they will be back (1%), while those from inland waters were more likely to say they never undertook this behaviour (8%).

Table 62: Tell someone where I am going on the water and when I will be back

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Never 4 3 5 8↑ 1↓ 0↓ 4 1 5 2 7 2 16 3 4

Sometimes 10 14 7 9 12 8 16 10 10 9 8 14 4 11 10

Most times 17 17 18 16 19 8 16 23 15 24 25 21 27 16 18

Always 69 66 71 67 68 84 64 66 70 65 61 62 53 70 68


Source used to check weather Those who had boated within the previous 12 months were asked how they checked the weather before going out on the water. By far, the most common way that boaters checked the weather was by using the Bureau of Meteorology (bom.gov.au) website (75%), (see Table 63 ). This was followed by a similar proportion who said radio or TV (24% and 22% respectively). Other less common mentions included, Willy Weather (14%), webcams located at waterways (13%), by talking to friends/colleagues and newspapers (12% each). One percent (1%) said they checked the weather via the TSV website.

Yacht (keel boat) (94%) and trailer sailer (93%) operators were more likely to say they used the Bureau of Meteorology (bom.gov.au) website. In addition, those who boated on bays/inlets and half cabin operators were more likely to say they used Willy Weather.


Table 63: Source used to check weather

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Bureau of Meteorology (bom.gov.au) website

75 76 74 68 80 85 83 82 73 73 93↑ 94↑ 86 83 69

Radio 24 22 27 27 22 26 28 18 26 21 30 27 26 20 28

TV 22 21 24 27 18 28 19 16 25 15 16 13 26 22 22

Willy Weather 14 11 17 1↓ 23↑ 16 16 29↑ 11 6 14 11 19 14 14

Webcams located at waterways

13 15 12 7 18 10 14 18 12 16 14 13 5 18 10

I talk to friends/colleagues

12 11 14 12 13 7 10 12 13 8 11 12 0 16 10

Newspapers 12 14 9 13 12 3↓ 11 9 13 14 11 6 26 8 14

Look out the window/visual/check for myself

6 4 9 7 6 0↓ 4 2 7 10 1 2 0 5 7

Seabreeze 5 7 2 3 6 8 8 9 3 4 3 10 0 8 3

Phone app/Pocket Weather/Weather App/Google

4 6 2 5 3 9 5 2 3 11 3 3 5 5 3

Elders/Weather 3 1 4 4 2 0↓ 1 2 3 2 3 0 0 0↓ 4

Weatherzone 2 2 2 3 0↓ 4 1 2 2 3 2 2 14 3 0↓

Transport Safety Victoria website

1 3↑ 0↓ 1 2 3 0 1 1 5 2 2 0 2 1

Other websites 2 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 2 1

Other 4 2 6 2 6 2 4 3 4 2 6 4 0 5 3

I don't check the weather before going out

1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1

Q36. How do you check the weather before heading out on the water? (n=909)

Source used to obtain information on boating safety, areas to launch etc. All those who had been boating in the previous year were asked where they got their information on boating safety, areas to launch and the like. This question was asked as a multiple response question and the responses coded accordingly. The results have been presented in Table 64 below.

The most common way that boaters found out about information to do with boating was through ‘other boat owners’ – with almost four-in-ten saying this (38%). One third (33%) said they used the ‘internet’ to source this information, while a similar proportion said ‘published boating guides’ (27%), ‘general internet search/Google’ (25%) and the ‘tackle and bait shop’ (24%). Just over one-in-twenty (6%) said they obtained this information from Transport Safety Victoria.

Those aged 35-54 years were significantly more likely to say they used the internet to source their information (44%), while those aged older than 54 years were less likely to (25%).

Cabin cruiser (18%), trailer sailer (18%) and yacht (keel boat) (13%) operators were significantly more likely to say they obtained their information from Transport Safety Victoria.


Table 64: Source used to obtain information on boating safety, areas to launch, etc.

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Other boat owners 38 37 38 35 40 37 28 44 37 30 40 36 35 44 33

Internet 33 35 30 28 34 55 28 36 30 44 39 33 10 44↑ 25↓

Published boating guides

27 28 27 23 32 20 34 26 29 14 42↑ 35 8 25 30

General internet search/Google

25 26 23 23 26 30 21 27 23 36 34 22 34 32 19

Tackle and bait shop 24 28 20 20 26 29 14 32 24 15 6↓ 2↓ 14 28 22

Friends/family/colleagues

22 22 23 27 20 13 20 24 22 27 20 11↓ 10 27 19

I don't actively search out this information

17 17 17 21 16 5 25 16 17 17 17 22 28 12 21

Boat shop 11 10 11 10 11 7 13 14 10 12 4 5 4 11 10

VicRoads 7 7 7 11 4 2 8 5 7 9 10 6 1↓ 5 8

Transport Safety Victoria

6 7 5 4 7 7 18↑ 7 4 10 18↑ 13↑ 4 6 6

Tourist Information Centre

6 7 5 8 4 0↓ 4 4 6 8 7 3 0 7 5

Waterway manager 3 4 1 2 4 2 9↑ 5 1 7 6 5 0 4 2

Land manager /council 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 1 2

Other 1 2↑ 0↓ 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 3 1 14↑ 1 0

Q37. Where do you get your information on boating safety, areas to launch etc.? (n=909)


3.4.1 Safety campaigns All participants who had boated in the previous 12 months were provided with a list of previous boating safety campaigns and asked which of them they recalled. It’s important to note that no images or campaign materials were used for this question, only the tagline from the campaign. The limitation with undertaking recall using this method is that only the tagline recall is measured, and it is possible that a tagline could be confused or diluted with other information out there (false recall). While not undertaken here, asking respondents what they remember specifically about an ad may lead to distinguishing between levels of ‘false’ recall and ‘true’ recall.

Highest recollection was for Lifejackets saves lives with almost two-thirds indicating they remembered that one, followed by almost half who remembered Steer clear of big ships (see Figure 24). Less than one third (30%) said they remembered It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing it while around one quarter remembered the Get on board on life jackets campaign. Lowest recollection was for Will your boat float – with 6% saying they remembered it and Be cool respect the rules at 10%.

Figure 24: Awareness of boating safety campaigns

65%

49%

30%

23%

14%

10%

6%

21%

17%

22%

18%

24%

16%

11%

15%

34%

47%

59%

62%

74%

82%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Life jackets save lives

Steer clear of big ships

It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing it

Get on board on life jackets

Don’t let your boat go up in smoke

Be cool respect the rules

Will your boat float?

I remember that one

I have some recollection

Not at all

Q38. Of the following: which boating safety campaign do you recall? (n=909)

Life jackets save livesAs shown in Table 65, almost two-thirds said they remembered this campaign, 21% said they had some recollection and 15% said they could not remember it. Given this campaign was undertaken in 2002 – 2003, 65% indicating they remember it would appear to be a high level of recall. Those from Regional Victoria were significantly more likely to say they did not remember it (21%), while those from Metro Melbourne were less likely to not remember the campaign (8%).


Table 65: Life jackets save lives

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 15 8↓ 21↑ 17 13 5 14 11 16 13 12 14 20 11 17


21 19 22 17 23 25 24 21 20 24 26 25 0↓ 28 16

I remember that one 65 73 57 66 64 70 62 68 65 63 62 61 80 61 67

Q38. Of the following: which boating safety campaign do you recall?? (n=909)

Steer clear of big shipsThe Steer clear of big ships campaign has been delivered by the Port of Melbourne Corporation for the previous seven years with a focus on Port Phillip Bay boaters. Almost half said they remembered the Steer clear of big ships campaign, 17% said they had some recollection, while around one third (34%) said they could not remember it at all (see Table 66). Boaters from Metro Melbourne had significantly higher recollection compared to those from Regional Victoria (64% vs. 35%). In addition, those who boated on bays/inlets and half cabin operators had higher recall of the campaign, while those who boated on inland waters and those aged up to 34 years had lower recall.

Table 66: Steer clear of big ships

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 34 19↓ 50↑ 50↑ 22↓ 25 32 23↓ 35 46 34 25 86↑ 29 35


17 18 16 16 16 23 10 15 17 15 20 16 0↓ 25↑ 11↓

I remember that one 49 64↑ 35↓ 34↓ 61↑ 51 58 62↑ 47 39 45 59 13↓ 45 55



It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing itAs shown in Table 67, less than one third (30%) said they remembered the It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing it campaign, (22%) said they had some recollection and almost half (47%) said they could not remember it at all.

There were no notable differences by demographics detected.

Table 67: It's only a lifejacket if you're wearing it

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 47 39 56 50 46 31 46 45 48 49 38 35 66 55 41


22 26 19 22 24 14 28 28 21 22 25 28 22 19 25


Q38. Of the following: which boating safety campaign do you recall? (n=909)

Get on board on life jacketsThe Get on board on life jackets campaign ran in 2005 through to 2007 in conjunction with the introduction of lifejacket laws in 2005. The majority (59%) said they could not remember the Get on board on life jackets campaign, 18% said they had some recollection and almost one-quarter (23%) said they remembered it (see Table 68).


Table 68: Get on board on life jackets

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 59 57 61 58 61 55 57 56 60 60 55 58 45 62 58


18 20 16 13 21 25 23 19 18 17 22 24 8 24 15



Don’t let your boat go up in smokeThe Don’t let your boat go up in smoke campaign is the most recent TSV campaign, running over 2013/14 targeting open boats operating on inland waters. As seen in Table 69, almost two-thirds did not remember the Don’t let your boat go up in smoke campaign, one-quarter (24%) had some recollection, while 14% said they remembered it.



Table 69: Don't let your boat go up in smoke

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 62 59 66 64 62 51 62 63 64 51 56 63 65 62 63


24 26 22 18 27 36 24 25 22 29 29 27 9 25 24



Be cool respect the rulesThe Be cool respect the rules campaign was targeted at PWC operators and was undertaken in 2012/13. Almost three-quarters (74%) had no recollection of this campaign, 16% had some recollection, and 10% said they remembered it (see Table 70). Those aged older than 54 years had significantly higher recollection (15%), while those aged 35-54 years had significantly lower awareness (3%).

Table 70: Be cool respect the rules

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in C

ruis

er

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 74 71 77 73 75 76 79 71 75 66 72 80 66 78 71


16 18 14 16 16 18 11 17 15 27 18 15 26 19 14

I remember that one 10 11 9 11 9 7 10 12 10 8 9 5 8 3↓ 15


Will your boat float?The Will your boat float campaign was undertaken in 2011/12. Most (82%) said they did not remember the Will your boat float campaign, 11% said they had some recollection while around one-in-twenty (6%) said they recalled it (see Table 71 below). There were no notable differences by demographics detected.

Table 71: Will your boat float?

Column %

Tota

l

Met

ro

Mel

bour

ne

Reg

iona

l

Inla

nd

Bay

s/In

lets

Coa

stal

Cab

in

Cru

iser

Hal

f Cab

in

Ope

n B

oat

PWC

Trai

ler S

aile

r

Yach

t

<34

year

s

35 –

54

year

s

>54

year

s

Not at all 82 78 86 81 83 82 81 77 84 83 76 77 91 85 80


11 15 8 12 11 14 8 14 11 10 16 17 5 12 11




3.4.2 Qualitative insights on safetyInsight from qualitative study

Safety was acknowledged as one of the major issues facing people who boat, particularly as the popularity of the sport increases causing congestion around key launching locations. Weather, lack of education and lack of law enforcement were seen as particular concerns.

The biggest safety risk discussed was inclement weather. While boaters would typically avoid unsafe weather, many had experienced sudden and unexpected changes in weather while out on the water. Other boaters on the water who behave in a dangerous fashion also caused risks, even for highly experienced boaters. In addition, it was felt that the limited infrastructure – such as crowded launch ramps and a lack of safe harbours – was a safety issue, as discussed above in section 3.2.6.

Safety behaviour

In order to mitigate the risks described above, a range of safety strategies were employed by participants. Typically, they said they carried all equipment and undertook all checks described in the Victorian Recreational Boating Safety Handbook as required for their vessel type. Some also kept a checklist (such as a sticker) on their boat to remind them of the requirements, and this was felt to be a useful tool which should be used more widely.

Many also had changed their attitude to life jackets, largely because the newer, inflatable models were perceived as far more comfortable and less cumbersome than older, foam designs. For some this also reflected a change in attitude towards taking greater safety precautions. While participants generally wore a life jacket whenever they were legally required to do so, some said they wear a life jacket at all times. It was agreed that far more people now wear life jackets than ten years ago.

“I don’t even take mine off when I get in the car….I hardly notice I’ve got it on” (Mornington Peninsula)

“Now you do see fishermen on their own wearing a lifejacket, whereas ten years ago you didn’t see anybody wearing a lifejacket. You’re not going to catch everybody…but now I think it’s terrific the way everybody wears a lifejacket.” (Mornington Peninsula)

I’ve changed my opinion [on life jackets], I’ve started wearing mine all the time…just for safety. (Melbourne)

However, others chose only to wear life jackets when legally required to do so. For these participants, the main reason for not wearing life jackets all the time was comfort, and that they didn’t feel they were at risk, particularly in large boats. While it was agreed that newer designs were more comfortable, some felt that they were still restrictive on hot days. There was also some concern that the jackets can be restrictive and potentially dangerous when yachting. While it was felt that these issues had been overcome to some extent by the development of new, inflatable designs, some still preferred not to wear life jackets at all times.

“They’re a cumbersome object for no reason. It’s a deep cockpit, I’m steering down inside…at night I might, and in bad weather. As soon as I go out on Bass Strait I wear it all the time. But I’m better off being tethered to the boat than having a life jacket. If I’m out there on a life jacket it’ll just take me longer to die.” (Melbourne)

“They can hinder you, if you’re on a yacht and you’ve got to get up forward and get a sail down, it can trip you or catch you. “(Melbourne)

While some boaters were less diligent about wearing a life jacket outside of the required situations, they were concerned about friends and family members, and it was broadly agreed that children should always wear a lifejacket. Many also insisted that guests wear a life jacket, as it cannot be assumed that they will be strong swimmers.


It was also commented that some states have been providing the option to trade in the older style foam life jackets, for the newer, inflatable models, free of charge. There was strong support for introducing a similar initiative in Victoria, particularly given strong agreement that discomfort is one of the primary barriers to life jacket use, and that the inflatable models are far more comfortable than the foam style.

Boating education and enforcement

Focus group participants typically viewed themselves as highly experienced, and therefore felt very confident in their ability to mitigate safety risks. However, they were concerned about the risks presented by other boaters, either because they blatantly behaved in a dangerous manner, or because of inexperience. Inexperience was identified as the most common factor leading to risky behaviour. As such, there was strong demand for an increased police presence at popular boating locations, the provision of further education for new boaters and increased safety regulations.

“At Eildon, there’s a couple [of water police] on the water and a couple on the ramp and they check every boat out there. Good on them, I reckon that’s the way to do it, education.” (Melbourne)

Most participants developed their boating skills through family. Many had been boating as children and were therefore educated by their relatives from a young age. Those who took up boating independently often gained skills through clubs (such as yacht and fishing clubs) or through ‘trial and error’.

It was agreed that there is currently plenty of opportunity to gain boating skills through formal training at boating and fishing clubs, as well as information events. However, these are all programs that need to be sought out by an individual. As such, there was some concern that there isn’t any compulsory training required to obtain a boating licence, besides a multiple choice theory test. Many felt that it was far too easy to obtain a boating licence because licence providers are financially incentivised to pass licence applicants, or boating clubs provide the answers to their members.

“A lot of clubs…to get a license they’d have a function on a Saturday night, you all go and spend $50 on your dinner and they’ve got a big screen with all the questions and answers. You just pay your $90 and there’s your license.” (Melbourne)

As such, there was strong support for the idea of a practical licence test, which was understood to be the process in NSW and Queensland. It was felt that there was an inconsistency between the rigorous requirements to obtain a drivers’ licence compared to the requirements for a boating licence, with agreement that boating is by far the more dangerous activity. Additionally, it was suggested that an ‘L’ plate and ‘P’ plate be implemented so that more experienced boaters know to give newcomers additional space on the water.

“A lot more can go wrong in the water than on the road…but on the road you have to log 120 hours before you get a licence” (Melbourne)

Participant 1: “I think they need to probably bring in a practical test for boating licences.”Participant 2: “I agree, there’s no survival training, it’s all by the book.” (Mornington Peninsula)

There was also some discussion around the risks of alcohol and boating. Participants felt strongly that alcohol should never be consumed when boating and were very strict about this themselves. As such, there was demand for a 0.0% blood alcohol level requirement.

Similarly, it was felt quite strongly that the current laws around life jackets were confusing, with some still unsure what the requirements were. As such, it was argued that rather than having specific rules for different boats in different settings, a blanket rule should apply: that all people on boats wear a life jacket at all times. Some who are selective about when they wear life jackets at present said this would motivate them to always wear a life jacket.

“I don’t even know when a skipper needs to have a jacket on.” (Melbourne)


“I don’t like wearing it when I’m out fishing…I take it off when I stop….but if it was legislation, I’d wear it always” (Mornington Peninsula)

In addition, it was felt that TSV could provide more safety seminars to explain the regulations around boating and provide safety advice. One key point of contact that could be used to provide any information on safety was the annual registration notice, which would reach all registered boaters. It was agreed this could be used to provide any updates about new regulations, and also general safety advice or campaign materials, including the provision of a safety checklist sticker which boaters could include in their vessel. Further, some felt that maritime police had a responsibility to provide safety information to boaters, rather than focusing purely on law enforcement.


4. DemographicsThe following section outlines the unweighted demographics for the sample as collected.

Table 72: Boat type from sample by Usage in the last 12 months (unweighted)

Boat Type Total n

Yacht (keel boat) 25% 260

Trailer sailer 22% 232

Cabin cruiser 15% 154

Open boat 14% 145

Half cabin 14% 143

Personal water craft (PWC) 10% 101

HQ1.Boat type from sample (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat…(n=1035) - unweighted

Table 73: Boat type match with sample by Usage in the last 12 months (unweighted)

Total n

Yes 97% 1,000

No 3% 35

SQ2. This boat is registered as a HQ1? Is this correct? (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 74: Boat type for those that said No to SQ2 by Usage in the last 12 months (unweighted)

Total n

Open boat 34% 12

Half cabin 14% 5

Trailer sailer 11% 4

Yacht (keel boat) 9% 3

Cabin cruiser 3% 1

Personal water craft (PWC) 0% 0

Other (Please Specify) 29% 10

SQ3. So what type of boat is the boat with registration [REGISTRATION NUMBER FROM SAMPLE]? (n=35); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 75: Years as a boat owner by Usage in the last 12 months (unweighted)

Total n

Less than 1 year 1% 14

1 to 5 years 13% 132

6 to 10 years 17% 173

More than 10 years 69% 716

SQ4.How many years have you been a boat owner? (n=1035) ; Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted


Table 76: Boat club, fishing club or boating association membership by Usage in the last 12 months (unweighted)

Total n

Fishing club 9% 68

Boat club 6% 89

Yacht club 6% 340

Water Ski Club 2% 7

Field and Game/hunting 2% 3

Boating association 1% 76

Online/Internet/boating/sailing forum/website 0% 4

Marina 0% 2

Coast Guard 0% 5

Yachting Australia/Victoria 0% 4

Sunmade Association 0% 2

Scouts 0% 0

AVCG / AVCGA 0% 0

Other Clubs / Associations (Dive/Rowing/Boating) 0% 1

Other group 1% 11

None of the above 76% 521

SQ8. Are you a member of a boat club, fishing club or boating association? (n = 1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 77: Year obtained marine licence (unweighted)

Year range Total n

2010 - 2014 4% 37

2005 - 2009 25% 258

2000 - 2004 33% 346

1995 - 1999 14% 142

1990 - 1994 9% 94

1985 - 1989 5% 52

1980 - 1984 4% 39

1975 - 1979 3% 35

1970 - 1974 2% 21

1965 - 1969 0% 5

1960 - 1964 0% 5

1955 - 1959 0% 1

Q39. In what year did you obtain your marine licence? (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 78: Gender (unweighted)

Total n

Male 98% 1,017

Female 2% 18

Q40. Please select your gender (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted


Table 79: Age group (unweighted)

Age group Total n

18-24 years 0% 1

25-34 years 2% 17

35-44 years 8% 87

45-54 years 23% 233

55-64 years 33% 345

65+ years 34% 350

I’d prefer not to say 0% 2

Q41. Would you please tell us your approximate age? (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 80: Speak a language other than English (unweighted)

Total n

Yes 24% 249

No 76% 783


Q42. Do you mainly speak a language other than English at home? (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 81: Employment (unweighted)

Total n

Employed full time 46% 474

Employed part time 9% 97

Retired or pensioner 36% 377

Home duties 1% 7

School or secondary student 0% 0

TAFE or university student 0% 1

Unemployed 1% 8

Other (Please Specify) 6% 57

Prefer not to say 1% 14

Q43. Which of the following best describes you? (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted

Table 82: Highest level of education (unweighted)

Total n

Postgraduate degree (honours, Masters, PhD) 13% 134

Graduate diploma or graduate certificate 12% 124

Bachelor degree (undergraduate) 13% 133

Advanced diploma or diploma 13% 132

Certificate (TAFE) 14% 150

Year 12 9% 95

Year 11 10% 106

Year 10 or under 11% 113


Q44. What is the highest level of education that you have completed? (n=1035); Q3. In the last 12 months, did you use the boat… (n=1035) - unweighted


Appendix 1 – QuestionnaireIntroduction

[STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS]

Transport Safety Victoria (TSV) is currently undertaking this research that will help TSV better understand the way Victorian boaters use their boats. You have been randomly selected to take part in this Boater Survey.

The collective results from the survey will identify key issues facing boaters and will be shared with other parts of government to help prioritise areas for investment across Victorian waterways. All responses are anonymous in that your details will not be connected with any answers you provide.

The survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.


SECTION A: SCREENER QUESTIONS

[IF SAMPLE = 2 SKIP TO SQ3]HQ1 [HIDDEN QUESTION - RECORD BOAT TYPE FROM SAMPLE FILE]

SQ1 Our records indicate that you are the registered owner of the boat [REGISTRATION NUMBER FROM SAMPLE]. Is this correct?Yes 1

No 2

[IF SQ1 = 2 THANK AND TERMINATE]

SQ2 This boat is registered as a [BOAT TYPE FROM SAMPLE]? Is this correct?

Yes 1

No 2

[IF SQ2 = 2 ASK]

SQ3 So what type of boat is the boat with registration [REGISTRATION NUMBER FROM SAMPLE]?[IF SAMPLE = 2 QUESTION TEXT IS] What type of boat is your boat? If you have more than one, please answer the following questions based on the boat you use most often.

Cabin cruiser 1

Half cabin 2

Open boat 3

Personal water craft (PWC) 4

Trailer sailer 5

Yacht (keel boat) 6

Other (please specify) [IF SAMPLE = 2 DO NOT DISPLAY THIS CODE] 97

I do not own a boat [IF SAMPLE = 1 DO NOT DISPLAY THIS CODE] 7

[IF SQ3= 7 THANK AND TERMINATE]

SQ4 How many years have you been a boat owner?

Less than 1 year 1

1 to 5 years 2

6 to 10 years 3

More than 10 years 4

[IF SAMPLE = 2 SKIP TO SQ8]

SQ5 Are you usually the master of the boat with the registration [REGISTRATION NUMBER FROM SAMPLE]?

Yes 1

No 2


[IF SQ5 = 2 ASK]

SQ6 Would you be able to ask the usual master of this boat to complete the survey? Simply close the survey, and provide the survey link and login details to this person and they will be able to compete the survey. We are interested in obtaining information from the person who is the master of the boat most often.

[IF SQ5 = 2 ASK]

SQ7 You have been provided with this survey by the registered owner of the boat with the registration [REGISTRATION NUMBER FROM SAMPLE] because they believe you are the master most often for this boat. Is this correct?

Yes 1

No 2

[IF SQ7 = 2 TERMINATE AND THANK]

SQ8 Are you a member of a boat club, fishing club or boating association? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE. CODE 5 EXCLUSIVE]

Boat club 1

Yacht club 2

Fishing club 3

Boating association 4

Other group (please specify) 97

None of the above 5


[ASK ALL]

MAIN QUESTIONS

Q1 Would you please tell us the postcode where this boat is generally stored?

If you don’t know the postcode, please write the suburb here. [OPEN RESPONSE]

Q2 Where is this boat usually stored? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

At the registered address 1

At another address, but out of the water (excluding dry storage) 2

It is kept in dry storage facilities 3

It is berthed in a marina 4

It is berthed at a public jetty under a licence 5

It is kept on a swing mooring 6

It is berthed at a private jetty 7

Other (please specify) 97

Q3 In the last 12 months, did you use the boat [MULTIPLE RESPONSE][CODE 3 EXCLUSIVE]

October through April 1

May through September 2

Did not use the boat in the previous 12 months 3

[IF Q3 = 3]

Q4 Why did you not use the boat in the last 12 months? [OPEN ENDED]

[IF Q3 = 3 NOW GO TO Q39]

[IF Q3 = 1 OR 2]

Q5 And approximately, how many times did you use the boat in in the last 12 months?

Number of times[RANGE 1 – 1000]

In October through April

In May through September


Q6 What was your usual purpose for boating in the last 12 months? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

Fishing 1

Water skiing/ wakeboarding/knee boarding etc. 2

Touring / cruising 3

Organised or club activity 4


Q7 In the last 12 months, how many people usually went boating with you? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

None, I boat on my own 1

One other person 2

Two other people 3

Three other people 4

Four other people 5

Five other people 6

More than five persons 7

Q8 Over the last 12 months, what type of water did you most often boat on? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

Inland waters (lakes and rivers) 1

Bays/Inlets 2

Coastal waters (excluding bays/inlets) 3

Q9 In the last 12 months, where did your usual boating trip commence on [RESPONSE AT Q8]?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

[IF INLAND WATERS Q8 CODE 1 DISPLAY]

Lake Eildon 1

Lake Eppalock 2

Lake Narracan 3

Lake Glenmaggie 4

Lake Nillahcootie 5

Lake Hume 6

Lake Mokoan 7

Lake Nagambie 8

Lake Bolac 9

Lake Purumbeete 10


Lake Wartook 11

Lake Fyans 12

Lake Buffalo 13

Lake Bullen Merri 14

Lake Charm 15

Hopkins River 16

Loddon River 17

Kangaroo Lake 18

Pykes Creek Reservoir 19

Rocklands Reservoir 20


[IF BAYS/INLETS Q8 CODE 2 DISPLAY]

Port Phillip Bay

Altona 1

Black Rock (Half Moon Bay) 2

Clifton Springs 3

Frankston 4

Geelong (Limeburners point) 5

Geelong (St Helens) 6

Indented Heads 60

Martha Cove 7

Mordialloc 8

Mornington 9

Newport (The Warmies) 10

North Road, Brighton 11

Patterson River 12

Portarlington 13

Queenscliff 14

Rye 15

Safety Beach 16

Sorrento 17

St Kilda marina 18


St Leonards 19

Tootgarook 20

Werribee South 21


Western Port

Blind Bight 23

Corinella 24

Cowes 25

Hastings 26

Newhaven 27

Rhyll 28

Stony Point 29

Tooradin 30

Warneet 31


Gippsland Lakes

Lakes Entrance 33

Metung 34

Paynesville 35


Corner Inlet 37

Inverloch 38

Lake Tyers 39

Mallacoota Lakes 40

Port Albert 41

Port Welshpool 42

Shallow Inlet 43

Snowy River (Marlo) 44

Sydenham Inlet 45

Tamboon Inlet 46

Wingan Inlet 47



[IF COASTAL Q8 CODE 3 DISPLAY]

Apollo Bay 49

Barwon River 50

Inverloch 51

Mallacoota 52

Point Roadknight 53

Port Fairy 54

Portland 55

Torquay 56

Walkerville 57

Warrnambool 58


IF LAUNCHING FROM A BOAT RAMP [Q2=1 OR 2]

Q10 Why do you usually launch at [RESPONSE AT Q9]?

It is closest to where I live 1

It is the only option for this waterway 2

It is the safest launch / retrieval location 3

It provides best access to where I want to use my boat 4

There is less traffic congestion here 5

Enables me to meet up with family / friends 6

Other launch / parking options are too costly 7

Enables me to participate in club activities 8

Other reason (please specify) 97

Q11 Is this your preferred launch location in Victoria?Yes 1

No 2

[IF Q11 = 2 ASK]

Q12 Why don’t you use your preferred launch location?

[OPEN ENDED]

[IF LAUNCHING FROM A BOAT RAMP [Q2=1 OR 2]

Q13 On how many occasions were you unable to launch from your preferred launch location in the last year?


Never, I was always able to launch 1

Please enter number of times [RANGE 1 TO 365] [RANGE 1 TO 365]

[IF Q13 ≠ CODE 1]

Q14 What did you do when you could not launch from your preferred launch location?

I gave up on boating that day 1

I returned later in the day and launched then 2

I launched from another location elsewhere 3


Q15 [ASK ALL] In the previous 12 months, what time of the day did you usually commence your trip? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

Morning – before sunrise 1

Morning 2

Afternoon 3

Evening 4

Evening – after sunset 5

Q16 And what was the usual trip duration? Under 1 hour 1

1 to 2 hours 2

3 to 4 hours 3

4 to 5 hours 4

5 to 6 hours 5

6 to 7 hours 6

7 to 8 hours 7

8 to 10 hours 8

10 – 12 hours 9

More than 12 hours 10

Q17 Generally speaking, in the previous 12 months what was the usual reason that you finished your trip on the water? Is it because of…[MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

Deteriorating weather 1

Fatigue (master) 2

Passenger preference / fatigue (others) 3

It’s getting dark 4

Fish catch limit is reached 5

The fish stop biting 6

Need to get back home 7

Need extra fuel 8


Have reached my intended destination / to seek refuge / to stay overnight 9

Some other reason (please specify) 97

BOATING SATISFACTION QUESTIONS

[ASK ALL].Q18 For this question, we would like to ask your satisfaction with a number of areas relating to your boating experience on Victorian

waterways.

Would you please answer these questions on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? If a statement is not applicable, or you do not know, please select that option. [RANDOMISE].

Not satisfied at all

Totally satisfied

Don’t know / Not Applicable

Waterway draft for my boat 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Hazards in the waterway 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Aids to the navigation on the water

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Destination jetties 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Access to landside attractions 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

[IF Q2 = 1 OR 2]

Q19 For this question, we would like to ask about your satisfaction with a number of areas relating to your boating experience within Victoria.

Would you please answer these questions on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied? If a statement is not applicable, or you do not know, please select that option. [RANDOMISE].


Totally satisfied

Don’t know / Not Applicable


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Physical condition of the boat ramp

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Design of the boat ramp 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Parking at boat launch areas 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at peak period

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

The wait time needed to launch/ re-trailer at ramp at

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


non-peak period

Behaviour of other boaters at the ramp

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Fish cleaning facilities 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Signage 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Q20 To what degree do you feel you get value for money for the amount you pay for boat launching/parking fees at boat ramps?

Please answer on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean low value and 10 would mean high value?

Low value High value Don’t know / unsure

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Q21 To what degree do you feel you get value for money for the amount you pay for your boat registration fee?

Please answer on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean low value and 10 would mean high value?

Low value High value Don’t know / unsure

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Q22 Would you be willing to pay more for your registration if it helped to improve boating infrastructure at the locations where you go boating?

Yes 1

No 2

[IF Q22=1]

Q23 What things would you like to see improved across Victoria’s waterways or boat launch locations in regards to recreational boating? [MR]

Better navigation aids and signage 1

Improved search and rescue services 2

Better boating safety education programs 3

Improved boat launch / retrieval facilities 4


Q24 Is there anything else you think should be considered with regard to boating facilities?


[OPEN ENDED]

CABIN CRUISER OR YACHT (KEEL BOAT)

[IF BOAT TYPE FROM SAMPLE = 1 OR 6, OR SQ3=1 OR 6]

[NOTE: IF SOMEONE SAYS SQ3 = 97. THEN ANY QUESTIONS RUNNING OFF BOAT TYPE TO RUN OFF BOAT TYPE FROM SAMPLE]

IF BOAT IS BERTHED OR ON SWING MOORING

[IF Q2 = 4, 5, 6, 7 OR 97]

Q25 Is your boat contained within a berth or moored?

At a berth or in a pen berth 1

On a swing mooring 2

My boat is not in-water 3

[IF Q25 =1]

Q26 How satisfied are you with your current berthing arrangements?

Would you please answer this question on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied?


Totally satisfied Don’t know / unsure


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Security 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Value for money 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


[IF Q25 =2]Q27 How satisfied are you with your current swing mooring arrangements?

Would you please answer this question on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not satisfied at all, and 10 would mean totally satisfied?


Totally satisfied Don’t know / unsure


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Security 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Value for money 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Other services 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

PERSONAL WATER CRAFT

[IF BOAT TYPE FROM SAMPLE = 4, OR SQ3 =4]

[NOTE: IF SOMEONE SAYS SQ3 =97. THEN ANY QUESTIONS RUNNING OFF BOAT TYPE TO RUN OFF BOAT TYPE FROM SAMPLE]

Q28 Is this the first PWC you’ve owned? Yes 1

No 2

Q29 What attracted you to PWC riding? [MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

Have been into boating for a while, and prefer PWC 1

Appearance 2

Thrill seeking, speed 3

Price 4

Family craft 5


Water-skiing 6

Something else (please specify) 97

[ASK ALL]

SAFETY QUESTIONS

Q30 Considering your usual boating trip in the last 12 months, how risky do you feel this activity is for you?

Please answer on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not risky at all, and 10 would mean extremely risky.

Not risky at all Extremely risky Don’t know / unsure

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Q31 How often do you check the safety equipment on this boat? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

Before every trip on the water 1

Weekly 2

Monthly 3

Once every few months 4

Less often 5


I don’t - this is done by somebody else 7

Q32 Considering your usual trip, how important do you feel it is to you to have all the necessary safety equipment for the boat?

Please answer on a scale from 0 through 10, where 0 would mean not important, and 10 would mean extremely important.

Not important Extremely important

Don’t know / unsure

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

Q33 When you go boating, how often would you personally wear a lifejacket? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

Every time 1

Every second time 2

On some occasions 3

Never 4


Q34 Not thinking of yourself, how often would someone on your boat wear a lifejacket you carry? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

Every time 1

Every second time 2

On some occasions 3

Never 4

I never take anyone else on the boat 5

Q35 How often do you undertake the following activities before going out on the water? [RANDOMISE]Never Sometimes Most times Always

Check the weather 1 2 3 4

Check the battery 1 2 3 4

Check flares 1 2 3 4

Undertake a safety checklist 1 2 3 4

Check engine/run engine 1 2 3 4

Check waterway web cams 1 2 3 4

Tell someone where I am going on the water and when I will be back 1 2 3 4

Q36 How do you check the weather before heading out on the water? [RANDOMISE 1 TO 8] [MR]

Newspapers 1

Radio 2

TV 3

Webcams located at waterways 4

Bureau of Meteorology (bom.gov.au) website 5

Transport Safety Victoria website 6

Other websites (please specify) [CODE 7 ALWAYS BELOW CODE 6] 7

I talk to friends/colleagues 8


I don’t check the weather before going out 10

Q37 Where do you get your information on boating safety, areas to launch, etc.? [RANDOMISE 1 THROUGH 12] [MR]

Transport Safety Victoria 1

VicRoads 2

Friends/family/colleagues 3

General internet search/Google 4

Boat shop 5

Other boat owners 6

Waterway manager 7


Land manager /council 8

Internet 9

Published boating guides 10

Tackle and bait shop 11

Tourist Information Centre 12


I don’t actively search out this information 13

Q38 Of the following: which boating safety campaigns do you recall?

Not at all I have some recollection I remember that one

Don’t let your boat go up in smoke 1 2 3

Steer clear of big ships 1 2 3

Life jackets save lives 1 2 3

Get on board on life jackets 1 2 3

Will your boat float? 1 2 3

Be cool respect the rules 1 2 3

It’s only a lifejacket if you’re wearing it 1 2 3

DEMOGRAPHICS

Now just a few additional questions about you that will help us in the analysis of the data…

Q39 In what year did you obtain your marine licence? [RANGE 1900-2014]

If not sure, please provide your best estimate.

Q40 Please select your gender

Male 1

Female 2


Q41 Would you please tell us your approximate age? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

18-24 years 2

25-34 years 3

35-44 years 4

45-54 years 5

55-64 years 6

65+ years 7

I’d prefer not to say 9

Q42 Do you mainly speak a language other than English at home?

Yes 01

No 02


Q43 Which of the following bests describes you? [SINGLE RESPONSE]

Employed full time 1

Employed part time 2

Retired or Pensioner 3

Home duties 4

School or secondary student 5

TAFE or university student 6

Unemployed 7

Other [SPECIFY] 97

Prefer not to say 99

Q44 What is the highest level of education that you have completed? {SINGLE}

Postgraduate degree (honours, Masters, PhD) 1

Graduate diploma or graduate certificate 2

Bachelor Degree (undergraduate) 3

Advanced diploma or diploma 4

Certificate (TAFE) 5

Year 12 6

Year 11 7

Year 10 or under 8


On behalf of Transport Safety Victoria we would like to thank you for helping with this important survey.


Appendix 2 – Discussion guideThe following document is intended as a guide for Ipsos consultants as to the key areas to be addressed in the group discussions with members of the community rather than a rigid set of questions.

INTRODUCTION 5 minutes

[EFTPOS Cards]

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this important project.

The research is being conducted on behalf of Transport Safety Victoria to further explore some of the findings from the survey you participated in. We are going to be talking about your boating experiences, starting fairly broadly then narrowing in on some more specific issues.

Group discussions are just one of the ways we do research. They are particularly helpful when we are looking for in-depth feedback around what people feel about a certain issue, or we want to brainstorm new ideas. This is not a question and answer session.

We’ve got a lot to cover in this time, so one of my key roles is to keep track of the time, and to keep our conversations on track, and focused!

I also want everyone to have a chance to have their say so I might interrupt if we start to wander too far off track or I’m trying to give everyone a chance to speak and so that we can cover everything and finish up on time.

I’d like to point out that I’m not expecting that you’ll all to have the same point of view. There’s no right or wrong thing to say, in fact, it’s quite likely that you’ll all have different points of view, and that’s great. Please don’t feel like you have to agree with one another.

Housekeeping:

Ipsos is an independent market and social research consultancy

Audio recording for analysis purposes

Mobile phones

The session will go for about an hour and a half to two hours.

We will be reporting key themes that come up in all the group discussions in aggregate.

What we talk about will be confidential in that we will not attribute your name to comments in the report.

No right or wrong answers – we are after your views, your experiences.

Housekeeping issues / emergency exits

Any questions before we start?


2. WARM UP – PAIRED INTRODUCTIONS TASK 5 mins

To get things started, I’d like you to turn to the person sitting next to you.

I’m going to give you all exactly 3 minutes, to have a chat with your neighbour and see what you can find out about them, such as what type of boat they have, the main reasons they like boating and their favourite place to go boating.

When your time’s up, I’m going to ask each of you to report back on what you just found out about your neighbour and introduce them to the rest of the group.

(When half way through the 3 mins, prompt that it’s time to swap over)

KEY ISSUES 10 min

I’d like to start with a very broad discussion about boating...

What are the big issues for boaters at the moment?

[ALLOW FOR BROAD DISCUSSION AND MINIMAL FACILITATION – issues raised here may dictate order of subsequent sections of this guide]

BEHAVIOUR 15 min

I’m interested in knowing a bit about your boating behaviour and decision making.

How would you describe a ‘typical’ boating trip for you? Who do you go with, where and when? [ask all to contribute]

And within your typical use, what would be your perfect trip out in your boat? Describe it to me: company, weather, launch, location (new or a favourite?), catch, how long out on the water, time of day, purpose of trip, take along food / drinks?

When might your trip vary from this? What factors might mean you don’t get to achieve your “ideal boating experience”?

What factors influence decisions around when and where to take your boat out? [IF NECESSARY PROBE]

Availability of launch locations?

Weather?

Safety considerations?

Mooring location?

Proximity to home?

Anything else?

Infrastructure?


INFRASTRUCTURE 15 min

How do you feel about the quality of Victoria’s boating infrastructure? How does it compare with other places around Australia and the world? [IF NECESSARY, PROBE]:

Launching ramps

Parking

Jetties to assist launching

Navigation aids

Depth

Signage

What are you happy with? What is tolerable? What needs improvements? [IF NECESSARY PROBE

How long do you wait to launch? What is acceptable, tolerable and unacceptable?

Would improved infrastructure impact your boat use habits? How/why?

VALUE FOR MONEY 15 min

How do you feel about the costs of boating? Where do you get value? Where don’t you get value?

How much do you estimate you would spend on a typical trip out in the boat?

How do you feel about the cost of registration? How does it compare with car registration or the cost of registration in other states?

What do you know about the way registration funds are used? How do you feel about this?

How do you feel about the way the boating sector (e.g. infrastructure, search and rescue) are funded in Victoria?

SAFETY 15 min

What would you all say are the main safety risks associated with boating?

[IF NECESSARY PROBE] Weather, boat seaworthiness, ability to raise the alarm independently, operator’s skills.

How do you feel about these risks?

How frequently do you feel that boating incidents (including fatalities and serious injuries) take place?

How likely do you feel it is that these things could happen to you?

Has anyone had any accidents or near misses? Tell me about these.

What, if anything, do you personally do to minimise these risks?

[IF NECESSARY PROBE] have you purchased/ investigated purchasing additional (non-mandatory) equipment such as VHF radio, EPIRBs etc?

Does this differ in different circumstances (e.g. only in poor weather)?

Are there any other things you could do to mitigate these risks? Why is it that you don’t currently do these things?

Where do you get your information about how to minimise these risks from?

How do you feel about life jackets as a safety measure when boating? [probe for efficacy, pros and cons of wearing a life jacket]

How frequently do you all wear life jackets? (Feel free to be honest)

Are there certain situations in which you would or wouldn’t wear a life jacket? Why is this?


What motivates you to wear/not wear a life jacket? Why?

If you had someone out on the boat with you, do you get them to wear life jackets?

Does this vary with ‘type’ of person (how well you know them, age etc.)?

If you had company on the boat would this have an impact on your likelihood to wear a lifejacket would you say?

KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION 15min

How have you acquired your boating skills? [IF NECESSARY PROBE]:

Is boating a multigenerational thing?

Has anyone gotten in to boating without knowing anyone else to learn from and had to seek out information? Where did you get this info?

How do you stay up to date on boating regulations, equipment, safety etc?

Where do you get most of your information to help you decide where/when to boat?

[IF BOM RAISED] What specific information on the BOM site do you use? How do you feel about this?

How do you feel about the quality and accessibility of boating information? If someone was new to boating, do you think they’d be able to find the info they need? Why/why not?

Would you use a government website/app that was a one stop shop for boating related information? (Weather, webcams, safety, launching information)

Is there anything else you’d like to say or reiterate at all about anything we’ve discussed today?

[THANK AND CLOSE]


Appendix 3 – Email subscriber analysisIn addition to the random sample, an online survey was mailed to 2,500 members of TSV’s email subscriber list. From this, n=260 survey were completed between 27 August 2014 through to 21 September 2014, with a response rate of 10%.

The following analysis displays the findings from surveying the email subscriber list. It is important to note that not every question has been reported on, only those where there was a difference detected between the email subscriber and random samples. On the whole, across the majority of questions results were similar.

It is important to note that there was no population data for the email subscriber sample. As such, weighting for any sampling bias has not been undertaken, and any inferences in comparing these results to the random sample should be applied with caution.

Boater characteristics

Email subscribers boaters were more likely to be employed full time (65% vs 52%) and less likely to be a retiree or pensioner (17% vs. 29%) compared to the random sample.

They were also more likely to be highly educated - more likely to have a bachelor degree (undergraduate) (14% vs 6%).

Email subscribers were more likely to own a cabin cruiser (13% vs. 3%), half cabin (32% vs. 16%), trailer sailer (4% vs. 1%) and Yacht (8% vs. 1%). In contrast they were less likely to own an open boat (41% vs. 69%) and PWC (3% vs. 9%). It’s important to note though, these are the proportions that answered the survey, and weighting was not applied as no population of boat type for this sample was known.

They were also more likely be part of a yacht club (14% vs. 6%).

Boating behaviour

Email subscribers were more likely to be newer boat owners, with significantly more having been a boat owner for only 1 to 5 years (25% vs 15%), whereas significantly less had been owners for more than 10 years (58% vs 70%) compared to the random sample.

They were also more likely to boat in the off season - May through to September (49% vs 35%).

They were more likely to boat on bays/inlets (76% vs 53%) and significantly less likely to boat on inland waters (lakes and rivers) (18% vs 42%).

Significantly less email subscribers used their boat for water skiing/wake boarding/ knee boarding etc. (7% vs 18%), while significantly more were likely to use their boat for an organised or club activity (5% vs 1%).

Safety

Email subscribers were significantly more likely to feel that it is important that you to have all the necessary safety equipment for the boat (9.5 vs.8.9 out of 10).


Email subscribers were more likely to say that they always checked the weather before going out on the water (95% vs. 89%). In addition, they were less likely to not check flares (10% vs. 28%) and to not check waterway web cams (47% vs. 65%).

Email subscribers were more likely use the BoM (88% vs. 75%), Willy Weather (23% vs. 14%) and Webcams located at waterways (24% vs. 13%) to check the weather.

In addition, they were more likely to use Transport Safety Victoria to get information on boating safety etc. (41% vs. 6%).

Boating trips

Email subscribers were more likely to have their boats berthed in a marina (11% vs. 3%), and at a public jetty under a licence (2% vs. 0%).

They were more satisfied regarding signage (7.1 vs. 6.5 out of 10).

They were also more likely to have four other people on board the boat (7% vs. 2%).

Campaigns

In general, email subscribers were more likely to have some recollection of the campaigns.

Don’t let your boat go up in smoke: email subscribers were more likely to say I have some recollection (32% vs. 24%) and I remember that one (35% vs. 14%).

Steer clear of big ships: significantly more likely to say I remember that one it (73% vs. 49%).

Get on board on life jackets: significantly more likely to say I have some recollection (29% vs. 18%).

Will your boat float: Significantly more likely to say I have some recollection (20% vs. 11%) and I remember that one (14% vs. 6%).


Community Attitudes to Aged Care Reform – Qualitative...

Documents

Transcript of Community Attitudes to Aged Care Reform – Qualitative...