Logic indicates that if we're going to demand licensing of quite safe activities like kayaking, then we must demand that activities that are more dangerous are also licensed.
Data confirms that if we go on actual injuries and say that sailors and kayakers need licenses, then also anyone who bodysurfs should have a license, because bodysurfers get injured more often than kayakers or sailors. Actually, probably anyone who goes on a passenger ship should have a special license, too, because they often end up injured.
It's a bureaucrat's fantasy! Imagine your aunt having to go to get her Ocean Liner Passenger License, with its special training course on how to hang on to a balcony handrail, how to safely dance to an Abba covers band, and how to ensure she doesn't get injured playing shuffleboard. Of course, since lawn bowls causes about as many hospitalisations as sailing, and many more than canoeing or inflatables, Aunt Ethel would already know about getting certificates, because logically if we are going to demand licensing for canoes then we must also demand licensing for lawn bowlers.
Accidental poisoning is far more dangerous than boating, in terms of number of hospitalisation - does that mean everyone needs an "Australian Eating and Drinking License"?
Three times as many people are hurt using ladders as using watercraft each year. How many of those who are calling for licensing have done a course on ladder safety and paid for a ticket? If they reckon that they can use a ladder safely without a license, why do they reckon other people can't use a SUP without a SUP license?
Far more people are injured each year using tools than using watercraft. How many people here have a Saw License, a Hammer Certificate, and a framed Cert III in Screwdriver Safety? If you don't need a license for something as comparatively risky as using tools, why do you need one for SUPping, kayaking or li-loing?
Plenty of people suffer injuries from water or other hot liquids prepared by other people. If we're going to be logical we should probable all have a Hot Liquid Materials Safe Handling ticket before we demand anyone get a kayak license.
Lots of people hurt while boating are passengers. Quite a few tragedies have been caused by passengers aboard boats. Does that mean that before anyone goes out for a twilight sail or a run on their mates Riviera, they should go and sit for a Commonwealth Government Safe Boat Passenger License? How can you say such a person does not need a license but then say that someone who uses a kayak on a creek needs a license?
By the way, I spent about 20 years investigating accidents, including boating fatalities, and have had a few people I know killed sailing. I'm not ignorant about safety, just trying to say that if we are going to try to use licensing to improve it then passive boating is one of the last places to look at. We should each have licenses for different types of tools, being a car passenger (distracting a driver can kill people), swimming, bodysurfing, surfing, ladder use, cycling, rollerskating, bushwalking, boiling water, etc etc etc.
PS- Yes, Cisco, we did tell our grand-daughter how to use a kayak. We also taught her how to use a scooter and how to use a tricycle. If she needs a license for a kayak on our creek, then surely she needs a license for riding her trike along our veranda. And as for the fact that we taught her how to kick a footy.....well, I'm off to ring up the Backyard Footy Licensing Board to book her in for her theory exam. :-). *