IE10 and below are not supported.

Contact us for any help on browser support

If Electronic Visual Distress Signals become accepted, should they be permitted on all sizes of pleasure craft and should there be restrictions on the types of voyages?

7 months ago
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

Consultation has concluded

  • tracelogix 8 months ago
    The pyrotechnic flares are toxic to an already troubled environment and the lack of an efficient collection and recycling/reuse program is an embarrassment to the Canadian government. EVDS should be REQUIRED and pyrotechnic flares should be outlawed as toxic, dangerous and completely unnecessary when there is a safe, effective alternative available.
  • Stuart Spracklan 8 months ago
    Will remove the disposal of expired flare issues & would be a lot safer to use aboard a vessel. Plus these could also be used by back country hikers without fear of causing fire.Probably better for the environment...Too many restrictions cause confusion!
  • Slowboatin 8 months ago
    Permitted on all sizes with no restrictions.
  • CHASELLINS 8 months ago
    EVDS signals should be accepted on all sizes of pleasure craft. I have a couple of one year old+ nephews aboard regularly and somehow they like to go below and open cupboards followed by pulling out my flares. Not safe. Fortunately, they have been been deterred quickly. EVDS and a working VHF radio are all that I need to get assistance.
  • remcanna 9 months ago
    Requiring pyrotechnic flares and their replacement every 4 years without providing an efficient method for their collection and disposal is, once again, evidence of a short-sighted governmental regulation. Failure to fund CPS effort to fill the void is also irresponsible. Give us a better way to ensure boater safety and protect the environment. Electronic flares are a better alternative. Do the smoke flares suggested also expire and require collection? If so, forget it!!!
    Hide reply (1)
    • thodgson 8 months ago
      I agree. Requiring a toxic, short-lived, and potentially dangerous safety device and not providing a universal means of disposal is leading to problems. EVDS is a better alternative tat fulfills the safety mandate.
  • Marcel Simard 9 months ago
    I have a number of expensive Expired flares to disposed of and I can't; thus causing a safety hazard at home not to mention an health & safety hazard to firefighters if they ever have to respond to a fire at my place; .... I would rather invest in a EVDS that would not expire in 4 years or so.
    Hide reply (1)
    • thodgson 8 months ago
      I agree, for a safety device they can actually be the cause of safety issues.
  • Jeff Evans 9 months ago
    Having participated with CCG, CPS and distress signal manufacturers to develop operator training materials, I was shocked at the personal risks the operator is exposed to when operating pyrotechnic flares. These risks increase dramatically in a crisis situation. As well, I experienced significant variability in the performance of the devices from that expected. I wholeheartedly support the introduction of EVDS as part of signal requirements. As well daytime signal requirements needs to be strengthened and expanded as current approved products vary in performance from very poor to excellent.
  • Ricmar 9 months ago
    I have taken quite a few " Boating safety " courses ; and actually was an instructor for this organization. The part of teaching how and when to use the flares bothered me. Something about igniting a hot flashing device around a vessel that could have had its fuel spilled , or potential explosive situation never really was the best thing to do. My thoughts of the environment also come into this, having to find when and where to take these devices to have then safely destroyed ( in Northern Ontario ) is a task in itself. EVDS should be the law ASAP . Also the lower level PFDs are a good idea also, but its the wearers decision ? to use this type or the bigger type. Not sure how this will be governed ? Steps forward for boaters and water use, people.
  • jswarts 9 months ago
    Yes they should be made legal and permitted on all sizes of pleasure craft.They are safer and because the don't have to be replaced every 4 years then boaters will be more likely to carry them.
  • f650gs 9 months ago
    I am in favour of replacing pyrotechnics with electronic visual distress signals on all sizes of pleasure craft and without any restrictions on types of voyages.
  • Dickson6297 9 months ago
    Yes they should be permitted without restriction. While I have current flares as required, and retain old flares for spares l also have 2 US made laser flares operating on lithium batteries. They are safer for my family to use, have a long run time and pose a lower enviro risk.
  • Drewskie 9 months ago
    Yes they should be acceptable for all sizes of pleasure craft. I fully support this change to replace the hazardous flares.
  • Kerry Deane-Cloutier 9 months ago
    yes, they should replace pyrotechnic distress signals for all pleasure craft. They function better and do not require frequent replacement, with the attendant difficulty in disposal of the old.
  • Dino 9 months ago
    Safety depends more on common senses than on common law. I have a EVDS and anticipate it will be safer to use and more effective in a Distress situation than the legislated pyrotechnics we carry on board. Currently legislated flares have environmental and safety issues.
  • Harrisc 10 months ago
    Just entered the kayaking boating world. On the safety side I think this is a great idea. They are more realiable and easier to use. Emergency equipement if avaialble and used properly is always a safety plus.
  • Andy 10 months ago
    Our research shows that EVDS are very effective and in many cases more effective that traditional flares. Traditional flares are not only a safety hazard they are a environmental concern as they require disposal every 4 years, sometime sooner. We fully support the new technology.
  • jmiller 10 months ago
    These should be allowed on all size vessels. They are both an improvement to flares and more environmentally friendly.I have had the "firefly" stobes on my vessel for 30 years now and find them a great asset. I strap them on to overboard devices and PFD's that the crew wear and know how to operate.
  • evan gatehouse 10 months ago
    Yes, permitted on all sizes. If they are considered equivalent or superior to traditional flares, why have any voyage restrictions.
  • DBadior 10 months ago
    I use a Weems & Plath C-1001 SOS Distress Light which us USCG certified in my pleasure boat. It works great but apparently won't meet the proposed multi colour LED spec I just read. The LED's are white only. Perhaps we could harmonize with our southern neighbours.
  • Panache 10 months ago
    I currently have a Rescue Laser Flare and it would be nice if it were legal in Canada. For offshore I would still have pyrotechnic flares but the laser should be ok for coastal cruising.
  • Patricia Nelder 10 months ago
    I say they should be permitted on all sizes of pleasure craft. The length of time that an electronic device will continue to signal visually far exceeds the time that a pyrotechnic distress signal functions. On offshore voyages it would be prudent to carry both electronic and pyrotechnic types of visual distress signals.
  • Michael Vollmer 10 months ago
    Wonderful advance in distress signalling !!!!! All vessels all voyages !!A key signalling device is a cell phone and use of *16 to contact the JRCC. Studies in New Zealand have shown the VAST majority of distress calls are made on *16. We need to maintain and broaden this in Canada. Huge efforts are being made to expand covereage and since everyone appears to have a cell phone as a permanent appendage it only makes sense to use this. As well this can be expanded to create "fencing" and provide safety warnings. New Zealand has done this very successfully. Lets enter the 21st Century in distress signally !!!!