It’s one of the most satisfying milestones in the yachting calendar – the moment when you reach up and start to tug off the masking tape around the waterline, signalling that the antifouling is at last complete, and the boat is ready to go back in the water.

[Comment on this article in our reader's Forum]

Like everybody else, we’ve spent a long and frustrating few weeks, waiting for the temperature to creep up to the magic 5 degree minimum decreed on the tin. With sharp frosts almost every night (it’s a very long time since we’ve seen such a long, uninterrupted cold spell) it began to seem we might reach our pre-booked pre-Easter launch date before any painting was done.

But thank goodness for retirement. We were able to make the most of an almost warm day on Friday to get the first coat on, skip the two really cold days of the weekend, and return to the yard on Monday for the second coat. Today we did the last of the cradle patches. Job done.

There’s a bit more fitting out to be completed once the boat is back afloat, but essentially she is ready for the season. And we ought to be looking excitedly ahead to going sailing. The trouble is that ISAF has thrown a spanner in the works, which is forcing us to rethink our plans for the season.

We were intending to have another go at the Royal Torbay YC’s biennial two-handed Triangle Race (Torquay-Kinsale-Treguier-Torquay) because we enjoyed it so much in 2008 – and indeed in 1990!

As it involves long sea crossings, this is run under ORC Category 2, which quite rightly requires a fairly comprehensive inventory of safety kit, including such big-ticket items as liferaft and Epirb and much more besides.

We spent a small (well, all right, not so small) fortune getting the boat up to Category 2 for our abortive Fastnet campaign in 2007, and consequently didn’t have to add anything to do the Triangle the following year.

But now ISAF in its wisdom has added an AIS transponder to the Cat 2 requirements, effectively adding most of £1,000 to the cost of doing the race. Not surprisingly, it has caused a lot of people to hesitate about taking part, as RTYC has acknowledged.

It’s hard to argue against safety requirements, but will an AIS transponder really make us any safer? It will make it possible for the race organisers to track our movements (although until we see the sailing instructions, we won’t know what the requirements are for actually switching the thing on). But in terms of our own safety capability, does it really add anything to the Epirb, DSC radio and radar we already carry?

In these cash-strapped times, it’s hardly surprising that this additional requirement is causing a lot of people to question whether they can afford to take part in a race like the Triangle which entrants have enjoyed over the years not least for the Corinthian spirit under which it is run.

It will be interesting to see whether the AIS “tax” causes any dent in enthusiasm for next year’s Fastnet Race, the biggest Cat Two event of the British offshore racing calendar.

It can be argued that in the context of the sort of budgets involved at the top of the offshore racing spectrum, £1,000 is very small change indeed. But by far the majority of racing fleets, even in events like the Fastnet, are made up of grass-roots supporters with much more limited funds, who have to think very carefully about buying new sails, new electronics, or anything else.

So in our case – and I am sure we are not alone – we are currently sitting uncomfortably on a seesaw of indecision. Do we bite the bullet, buy the kit and do the race? Or do we take the view that £1,000 would be better spent on an extended summer cruise? Think of all the French food and wine it could buy if we go for Plan B and exploring Britanny…..

What do you think? Is ISAF right to regard an AIS transponder as essential safety kit for offshore racing? (It is now not only mandatory for Cat 2 but also strongly recommended for Cat 3, which almost certainly means it will be a requirement for shorter races – eg cross-Channel jollies – in a couple of years’ time.)

Or is this yet another case of the nanny state gone mad, throwing the baby out with the bathwater. For it seems extremely likely that, far from encouraging greater safety on the racetrack, this measure will actually deter a lot of boats from getting to the start line. 

[Comment on this article in our reader's Forum]