On 24-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

Now, it's not clear to me that the need to use a
strap represents a huge increase in risk, but I'm not arguing that
point -- I'll assume that it does, and that if you can perform a
paddle float self rescue without a strap, you're bunches and bunches
safer than someone who can only perform a paddle float self-rescue
with a strap. [...]

That bigger problem being...?

If a person needs a strap, they are not capable of the basic physical
skill of floating on the surface and sliding onto the kayak. This
is usually because of some combination of strength, size, disability
etc. It could be because they are dumb, but we covered that with
the assumption that they would get training.

Disabled persons can get suitably set up with an alternate rescue
strategy, which may include no solo paddling and staying with folks
that they've done appropriate rescue practice with. I've met lots
of disabled athletes that are quite capable and are not a liability.
(my partner used to work with disabled athletes as a guide and
trainer)

If you don't have the strength or are so out of condition that you
need to mount a kayak like someone mounts a horse, that indicates
that you really shouldn't be paddling. Get into shape etc.

At all? Anywhere? Under any conditions?

If you can't do this without a strap, solo isn't for you and, if
you are paddling with me, say, that puts me at risk if I have to
help you. The conditions under which you go over are not conditions
under which I want to expend time and energy helping you back up onto
a kayak. If you can't do an effective solo rescue, you are not a
good target for an assisted rescue.

So the conditions under which you'd be safe are those where the
water is warm and shallow, so you can stay in the water as long
as it takes and either stand up to reenter or walk to shore and
reenter. In this case, you won't be paddling with too many sea
kayakers I've met.

Mike

Mary Malmros wrote:

Brian Nystrom writes:



Mary Malmros wrote:



Show me a reasonably
parallel situation where similar events have caused "the
politicians" to "lean on" participants as a whole -- presuably with
the effect of restricting their activity -- and I will perhaps be
somewhat more inclined to believe that someone dying because he
can't do a self-rescue is going to mean the end of kayaking as we
know it.



How soon they forget...



And how little they understand...



It was only a few months ago that paddlers in CT fought off an attempt
at registration w/mandatory training that was being (thinly) disguised
as a safety measure.



It was, but not in the sense that you're trying to portray it. This
bill, which has reared its ugly head before, was put forth as a
"homeland security" thing. The argument put forth was we gotta
register the kayaks so that furrin terrorists in kayaks can't land
somewhere and blow up the beach or something. This was extensively
discussed on NPMB, and the consensus was that it was 9/11 hysteria,
being used as a stalking horse for certain ricon Connecticut shore
property owners who didn't want the smelly common folk landing on
their beaches. And, of course, there's always a dummy or two in the
legislature who says, "Aha! Revenue source!" But it was never
about protecting the kayakers from themselves; it was about
protecting the rest of the world from them kayaking terrorists.


You're wrong Mary. That's the way a similar bill was put forth LAST
year. This year's bill was proposed under different aupices, the major
one being safety. I've read the transcripts of the hearing. Have you? It
was shot down largely because there is an average of only 1.2 kayaker
deaths in CT annually, which pretty much negated the safety argument.

--
Regards

Brian

"Michael Daly" writes:

On 24-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

Note that there was a hefty snip here...

Now, it's not clear to me that the need to use a
strap represents a huge increase in risk, but I'm not arguing that
point -- I'll assume that it does, and that if you can perform a
paddle float self rescue without a strap, you're bunches and bunches
safer than someone who can only perform a paddle float self-rescue
with a strap. [...]

That bigger problem being...?

If a person needs a strap, they are not capable of the basic physical
skill of floating on the surface and sliding onto the kayak. This
is usually because of some combination of strength, size, disability
etc. It could be because they are dumb, but we covered that with
the assumption that they would get training.

What about someone who can't float on the surface and slide into the
kayak without the help of a paddle float? Lotta people in that
category. Do you likewise consider them to be incapable of a "basic
physical skill" that, it seems, you consider a necessary skill for
someone to be able to kayak?

Disabled persons can get suitably set up with an alternate rescue
strategy, which may include no solo paddling and staying with folks
that they've done appropriate rescue practice with. I've met lots
of disabled athletes that are quite capable and are not a liability.
(my partner used to work with disabled athletes as a guide and
trainer)

If you don't have the strength or are so out of condition that you
need to mount a kayak like someone mounts a horse, that indicates
that you really shouldn't be paddling. Get into shape etc.

So, if someone has a permanent physical disability that prevents
them from using a "standard" self-rescue strategy, you can
paddle...but if you don't have the strength to do so, you shouldn't?
This smacks of a moral argument to me, regarding a matter where I
personally feel that practicality ought to rule the day. If someone
can't perform a "standard" self-rescue, does it matter why? Does it
matter if they're permanently disabled, or temporarily disabled, or
a small woman who's been told all her life that muscles aren't
ladylike, or a big slob who's been eating too many Chicken
McNuggets?

At all? Anywhere? Under any conditions?

If you can't do this without a strap, solo isn't for you and, if
you are paddling with me, say, that puts me at risk if I have to
help you. The conditions under which you go over are not conditions
under which I want to expend time and energy helping you back up onto
a kayak. If you can't do an effective solo rescue, you are not a
good target for an assisted rescue.

That's fine. I support 100% the right -- legal AND moral ;-) -- for
any paddler to make the call on who they paddle with, for any reason
whatsoever. It's your risk, it's your shuttle, and you're the one
who's gonna have to listen for n hours if your new paddling bud ends
up being a Jehovah's Witness Amway rep.

So the conditions under which you'd be safe are those where the
water is warm and shallow, so you can stay in the water as long
as it takes and either stand up to reenter or walk to shore and
reenter. In this case, you won't be paddling with too many sea
kayakers I've met.

Probably not, although back in the day when I lived by the sea, I
used to do trips with such people, from time to time. Right off the
beach, no one can do an unassisted self-rescue -- not until proven
otherwise, and I was taking people who'd never been in a boat
before. With people like that, you can never assume that they'll be
able to do anything, but noobs gotta start somewhere. Anyway,
they'll surprise you in both directions.

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

Brian Nystrom writes:

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010405010304080107050408
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Mary Malmros wrote:

Brian Nystrom writes:



Mary Malmros wrote:



Show me a reasonably
parallel situation where similar events have caused "the
politicians" to "lean on" participants as a whole -- presuably with
the effect of restricting their activity -- and I will perhaps be
somewhat more inclined to believe that someone dying because he
can't do a self-rescue is going to mean the end of kayaking as we
know it.



How soon they forget...



And how little they understand...



It was only a few months ago that paddlers in CT fought off an attempt
at registration w/mandatory training that was being (thinly) disguised
as a safety measure.



It was, but not in the sense that you're trying to portray it. This
bill, which has reared its ugly head before, was put forth as a
"homeland security" thing. The argument put forth was we gotta
register the kayaks so that furrin terrorists in kayaks can't land
somewhere and blow up the beach or something. This was extensively
discussed on NPMB, and the consensus was that it was 9/11 hysteria,
being used as a stalking horse for certain ricon Connecticut shore
property owners who didn't want the smelly common folk landing on
their beaches. And, of course, there's always a dummy or two in the
legislature who says, "Aha! Revenue source!" But it was never
about protecting the kayakers from themselves; it was about
protecting the rest of the world from them kayaking terrorists.


You're wrong Mary. That's the way a similar bill was put forth LAST
year. This year's bill was proposed under different aupices, the major
one being safety. I've read the transcripts of the hearing. Have you? It
was shot down largely because there is an average of only 1.2 kayaker
deaths in CT annually, which pretty much negated the safety argument.

I didn't read every word of the transcripts (did you?), but it was
my understanding that the safety thing was a MINOR issue, and
"homeland security" + revenue were the main issues. Got a cite on
those transcripts that says otherwise?

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.

"Michael Daly" ) writes:
On 19-Oct-2003, (Alex McGruer) wrote:

If you must use a stirrup to re enter a kayak you should not be out
alone. That is the rude truth.

I'd agree with that. In fact, they might consider another sport.

A standard paddle float re entry is a good option and sponsons may
help in your circomstance.

The problem with both these methods is that neither addresses the
problem of needing a stirrup. Both provide extra stability, but
the issue is that he can't get up onto the deck.

ISTR that someone already suggested learning to float on the surface
and slide onto the deck.

I've written here befor of my experince using an old horse collar PFD
under my hips to keep them on the surface while sliding into my small boat
from the side. Any boat cushion type floatation device would do.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

Mary Malmros ) writes:

Well, there's also a difference between how fit/skilled/whatever you
need to be to kayak, and how fit/skilled/whatever you need to be to
kayak solo. I don't think needing a stirrup should keep someone out
of kayaking as such, but if you do, you should recognize that your
limited ability to self-rescue creates some additional risk for you,
and (if you are sensible) restricts where you can paddle, and when,
and with whom.

the other approach is to choose a kayak suited to the paddler's ability.
nothing wrong with a bigger more stable kayak. or with anti-capsize aids
like sponsons.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

On 25-Oct-2003, (William R. Watt) wrote:

nothing wrong with a bigger more stable kayak. or with anti-capsize aids
like sponsons

And we've told you countless times that a boat that's more stable
in calm water is less stable in rough water - when you're more likely
to go over. But you _still_ don't get it!

Mike

On 25-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

What about someone who can't float on the surface and slide into the
kayak without the help of a paddle float?

I never said anything about that. I only said that there's a problem
if they can't get themselves back onto the kayak. How the kayak
is stabilized is a separate issue.

So, if someone has a permanent physical disability that prevents
them from using a "standard" self-rescue strategy, you can
paddle...but if you don't have the strength to do so, you shouldn't?

That's right.

This smacks of a moral argument to me,

Nothing of the kind. Disability isn't inability. Go check the
upper body strength on some of those wheelchair athletes. Doing
something different isn't the same thing as being unable to do
anything,

If a person is incabable of getting into the kayak because they
are weak/overweight/whatever, they can do something about it.
Alex gave one example where that happened with someone he knows.
I said that's a good thing. They should choose - either develop
the skill/strength/whatever to get into a kayak or stay out of
the kayak. Worst case - their own life is at stake.

Right off the
beach, no one can do an unassisted self-rescue -- not until proven
otherwise, and I was taking people who'd never been in a boat
before. With people like that, you can never assume that they'll be
able to do anything, but noobs gotta start somewhere

I've never said the problem was not knowing. It's not being able
to. Newbies can learn. If they can't or are unable to perform,
then it should be pointed out to them that they need to be able
to do it or give up on kayaking.

Mike

Mary Malmros wrote in
:

"Michael Daly" writes:

On 24-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

Note that there was a hefty snip here...

Now, it's not clear to me that the need to use a
strap represents a huge increase in risk, but I'm not arguing that
point -- I'll assume that it does, and that if you can perform a
paddle float self rescue without a strap, you're bunches and bunches
safer than someone who can only perform a paddle float self-rescue
with a strap. [...]

That bigger problem being...?

If a person needs a strap, they are not capable of the basic physical
skill of floating on the surface and sliding onto the kayak. This
is usually because of some combination of strength, size, disability
etc. It could be because they are dumb, but we covered that with the
assumption that they would get training.

What about someone who can't float on the surface and slide into the
kayak without the help of a paddle float? Lotta people in that
category. Do you likewise consider them to be incapable of a "basic
physical skill" that, it seems, you consider a necessary skill for
someone to be able to kayak?

Depends on the conditions.

When comparing a self-rescue using a paddle float and a self rescue using a
paddle float with some sort of stirrup the primary difference is how long
you're going to be in the water as it takes longer to set up the stirrup.

In water that is 70 degrees it probably makes little difference if you need
a stirrup to help reentry. As the water gets colder, staying in the water
longer than it takes just to set up a paddle float and reenter without a
stirrup would begin to put one in the risk of hypothermia. As the water
gets even colder, the amount of time it takes to exit the boat and set up a
paddle float for reentry may put you at risk of hypothermia. At that point,
it would not be safe for someone that can only self rescue using a paddle
float but can't roll to paddle solo.

"Michael Daly" writes:

On 25-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

What about someone who can't float on the surface and slide into the
kayak without the help of a paddle float?

I never said anything about that. I only said that there's a problem
if they can't get themselves back onto the kayak. How the kayak
is stabilized is a separate issue.

Right, but a paddle float is a tool, a stirrup is just another tool.
You can either use your tool of choice to get back into the boat, or
you can't. Why is someone who uses one tool reasonably self-reliant
and a person who uses another tool utterly unsafe?

So, if someone has a permanent physical disability that prevents
them from using a "standard" self-rescue strategy, you can
paddle...but if you don't have the strength to do so, you shouldn't?

That's right.

This smacks of a moral argument to me,

Nothing of the kind. Disability isn't inability. Go check the
upper body strength on some of those wheelchair athletes. Doing
something different isn't the same thing as being unable to do
anything,

And if someone can use a tool to do something, do they still have an
"inability"?

If a person is incabable of getting into the kayak because they
are weak/overweight/whatever, they can do something about it.

And if they CAN get into the kayak using a tool that isn't the same
as what you use...then they can get into the kayak. Period. Why
does it matter how they do it?

Alex gave one example where that happened with someone he knows.
I said that's a good thing. They should choose - either develop
the skill/strength/whatever to get into a kayak or stay out of
the kayak. Worst case - their own life is at stake.

Third choice: find a tool that they can use.

Right off the
beach, no one can do an unassisted self-rescue -- not until proven
otherwise, and I was taking people who'd never been in a boat
before. With people like that, you can never assume that they'll be
able to do anything, but noobs gotta start somewhere

I've never said the problem was not knowing. It's not being able
to. Newbies can learn. If they can't or are unable to perform,
then it should be pointed out to them that they need to be able
to do it or give up on kayaking.

Or -- one more time -- find another way.

--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield,
Other days you're the bug.