"Michael Daly" wrote in message . cable.rogers.com...
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. If someone can't do this and needs a stirrup,
then they are in a more difficult situation. Personally, I consider
the stirrup a poor solution except in the case of an injured paddler
(i.e. it's a temporary solution to a problem, not a standard one)
or a disabled paddler who paddles under specific conditions (e.g. with
companions who are accustomed to aiding them with the stirrup).

Otherwise, if someone can't get onto the kayak without a stirrup they
are liability to themselves and to others. Need for a stirrup indicates
a greater problem with skill or fitness. Either learn to do it by
floating or realize that a kayak isn't for you.

Find an instructor, a good one and ask.
Local clubs like ours pull of rescue clinics the odd time. Cheap but
priceless.

This is the best idea. This will either identify the issues that lead
the OP to want a stirrup and get rid of them or make the paddler
realize that they shouldn't be paddling.

Mike

Hi Mike:
I am the fool that will put anyone I can fit in the cockpit of a boat
out on the water. Once I am comfortable i can get them back into the
boat we may hit salt water.
You are absolutely right in all your observations.
I know one lady that dropper over 100 Lbs just to get in a kayak and
paddle: The benefit of that far outweighed the risks of pond
paddling and a scoot into the inland protected areas we can find in
most places .
I hate like hell sending people back to the bowling allys or bingo
halls.
I have used a stirrup affair in getting one person back into the boat.
The stirrup is stowed all the time in my paddle float.
I have the odd experience that is trully funny. Folks stradling the
back deck, crawling up and sinking the cockpit then we pump like mad.
CRCA has a sticker, Kayaking and Canoeing is for everyone. OK that is
a bit too optemistic but why not try.
If a person has not at least 2 good practiced solo re entries under
their belt , solo paddling or paddling without some type of guide may
not be too wise,.
I still think this may be for an open Canadian type canoe. If that is
the case the job just became close to impossible
Chow
Alex
But You are right Mike...realy.

On 22-Oct-2003, (Alex McGruer) wrote:

CRCA has a sticker, Kayaking and Canoeing is for everyone. OK that is
a bit too optemistic but why not try.

I don't have a problem with people wanting to try, but everyone has to
realize that there are limits to their abilities and at some point it
becomes more of a risk than a hobby. I don't like saying what I did,
and I've taken flack for it in the past.

The example of the woman who lost weight is a good one. As you say,
she'll reap benefits beyond just kayaking as a result. If the initial
contact with kayaking encourages someone to lose weight/add strength/
get in shape/whatever and achieve a level of competence, then they
get more than just kayaking.

I don't know why folks take the attitude that everyone has some kind
of right to paddle regardless of physical ability or condition. For
example, in scuba diving, you aren't guaranteed a license - you can
flunk a course and be denied (except by unscrupulous operators).
When I got my license, one woman was tossed out of the course on the
first night because she simply couldn't do the most basic physical
tests. She was upset, but it was for her own good.

I'd rather send them away than see them in a body bag.

Mike

"Michael Daly" writes:

On 22-Oct-2003, (Alex McGruer) wrote:

CRCA has a sticker, Kayaking and Canoeing is for everyone. OK that is
a bit too optemistic but why not try.

I don't have a problem with people wanting to try, but everyone has to
realize that there are limits to their abilities and at some point it
becomes more of a risk than a hobby. I don't like saying what I did,
and I've taken flack for it in the past.

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.

[snip]
I don't know why folks take the attitude that everyone has some kind
of right to paddle regardless of physical ability or condition. For
example, in scuba diving, you aren't guaranteed a license - you can
flunk a course and be denied (except by unscrupulous operators).

And in kayaking, you don't NEED a license...so, yes, everybody DOES
have "some kind of right to paddle". A license is a legal
requirement that may or may not exist for a particular sport; it's
not some kind of Get Out Of Jail Free card that divine providence
issues you that guarantees you'll never get a smackdown.

[snip]
I'd rather send them away than see them in a body bag.

Appropriate, but in any given situation, you may have a lot more
choices than just those two.

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

On 22-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

A license is a legal
requirement that may or may not exist for a particular sport;

A scuba license has no legal status. It is a feature that is
maintained on a voluntary basis by participants (including
retailers) in the sport. You can dive without a license
if you can find someone who will lend/rent you the kit. No
one can prosecute you.

it's
not some kind of Get Out Of Jail Free card that divine providence
issues you that guarantees you'll never get a smackdown.

No, but in scuba, at least it's a sign that there are folks that
have the guts to say that not everyone is entitled to instant
gratification just because they think something's cool.

If enough idiots put themselves at risk, it'll attract the
attention of the politicians and they'll lean on all of us.
If idiots put _me_ at risk, it interferes with my pursuit of
life, liberty and happiness (as Americans would put it) and
I greatly object to that.

Mike

"Michael Daly" writes:

On 22-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

A license is a legal
requirement that may or may not exist for a particular sport;

A scuba license has no legal status. It is a feature that is
maintained on a voluntary basis by participants (including
retailers) in the sport. You can dive without a license
if you can find someone who will lend/rent you the kit. No
one can prosecute you.

There you go! You got a divine right to scuba.

it's
not some kind of Get Out Of Jail Free card that divine providence
issues you that guarantees you'll never get a smackdown.

No, but in scuba, at least it's a sign that there are folks that
have the guts to say that not everyone is entitled to instant
gratification just because they think something's cool.

And it's all about guts, hmmmm? And nobody does anything like this
in kayaking? My local whitewataer outfitter won't rent a boat to
anyone except if they sign a pretty long form in which they have to
specifically initial statements that they have various skills.
Somehow, I don't think this is atypical. I doubt you'll find a
whitewater outfitter who'll rent a hardshell boat to anyone with a
wallet and a pulse who walks through the door.

If enough idiots put themselves at risk, it'll attract the
attention of the politicians and they'll lean on all of us.

I've heard this assertion many times, but not once yet heard a
convincing argument to support it...merely emotional rants about
lawyers and litigious society and so on. 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. Meanwhile, here in Massachusetts, two women died kayaking
within the last couple of weeks, in what was quite likely a case of
insufficient preparation and/or skills and/or judgment. I have yet
to hear of any talk from any politicians anywhere who are deploring
the inherent dangers of kayaking and seeking to save paddlers from
themselves, and somehow I don't think it's gonna happen.

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

On 23-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

There you go! You got a divine right to scuba.

Hardly. You'd have a hard time finding a dealer that would
sell you air without a license unless you're in a tourist
haven offshore (Cuba's a good example). The key is that
it's a standard that's enforced within the industry - there's
no equivalent in paddling.

My local whitewataer outfitter won't rent a boat to
anyone except if they sign a pretty long form in which they have to
specifically initial statements that they have various skills.

Does a retailer similarly not sell a kayak to anyone who
walks in the door? Sorry, but this is where it breaks down.
While some may be reluctant to rent, there are lots of places
to buy gear without restriction.

I've heard this assertion many times, but not once yet heard a
convincing argument to support it

After several teenagers were killed in an avalanche in the Canadian
Rockies, a western federal politician has been ranting on setting up
controls for backcountry skiing. So far, her hysterics have been
largely ignored. Skiers aren't ignoring her yet. If she wasn't
in a minor opposition party, her voice in government might carry
further.

Sea kayakers in Canada are required, by law, to carry a throw rope
at all times. Most of us, even those with WW rescue training,
question the need. Other than towing, I can think of very few
uses for a throw rope in a sea kayak. A tow rope, maybe, but a
throw rope makes a mediocre tow rope. Someone thought it would be
a good idea and imposed it.

Meanwhile, here in Massachusetts, two women died kayaking
within the last couple of weeks, in what was quite likely a case of
insufficient preparation and/or skills and/or judgment.

Must have got that gear from one of those responsible dealers with
lots of guts.

Mike

"Michael Daly" writes:

On 23-Oct-2003, Mary Malmros wrote:

There you go! You got a divine right to scuba.

Hardly. You'd have a hard time finding a dealer that would
sell you air without a license unless you're in a tourist
haven offshore (Cuba's a good example). The key is that
it's a standard that's enforced within the industry - there's
no equivalent in paddling.

Michael, I will point out for the third time that an industry
practice by consensus does NOT equal a law. You DO have the legal
right to scuba. Do you want to start talking about moral rights?
Theology debate down the hall, please.

My local whitewataer outfitter won't rent a boat to
anyone except if they sign a pretty long form in which they have to
specifically initial statements that they have various skills.

Does a retailer similarly not sell a kayak to anyone who
walks in the door? Sorry, but this is where it breaks down.
While some may be reluctant to rent, there are lots of places
to buy gear without restriction.

Do you think that it's impossible to buy scuba gear off the net?
Would someone check my license if I tried to do so, and tell me I
couldn't buy without it?

I've heard this assertion many times, but not once yet heard a
convincing argument to support it

After several teenagers were killed in an avalanche in the Canadian
Rockies, a western federal politician has been ranting on setting up
controls for backcountry skiing. So far, her hysterics have been
largely ignored. Skiers aren't ignoring her yet.

Still no convincing argument. You are talking about a questioning
of outfitter practices related to backcountry skiing in
avalanche-prone territory, not governmental restrictions prohibiting
kayakers from taking to the water for their own good. There's no
slippery slope here, even if this particular one were sliding, which
it ain't.

If she wasn't
in a minor opposition party, her voice in government might carry
further.

And if the little frog had wings, he wouldn't have bumped his ass.
Do you think that perhaps there's a relationship between her
membership in a minor opposition party, and her championing of this
"cause"? Think about it.

Sea kayakers in Canada are required, by law, to carry a throw rope
at all times. Most of us, even those with WW rescue training,
question the need. Other than towing, I can think of very few
uses for a throw rope in a sea kayak. A tow rope, maybe, but a
throw rope makes a mediocre tow rope. Someone thought it would be
a good idea and imposed it.

And kayakers blow it off, and no one gets busted.

Meanwhile, here in Massachusetts, two women died kayaking
within the last couple of weeks, in what was quite likely a case of
insufficient preparation and/or skills and/or judgment.

Must have got that gear from one of those responsible dealers with
lots of guts.

Look, Mike, for all you know they built the boats themselves, or
borrowed them from a friend, or found them washed up on the beach,
or stole them from under someone's deck. But this brings up another
interesting point. You're opposed to the government being the nanny
and keeping us from hurting ourselves...but you want outfitters to
take on the role instead? Help me understand this because I'm
really not getting it. Regulation is regulation, and if someone's
saying, "Tut tut tut, no kayaking for YOU," what do you care if
their badge says The Gummint or Joe Bob's Kayaks?

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

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...

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 would have severely curtailed retail sales and
rentals. Maine had a similar proposal that was beaten down by an email
campaign. Politicians are chomping at the bit to get their hands into
our wallets and "safety" is one issue that the general public will bite
on, if there's any significant justification to it. Fortunately, paddler
deaths are few, but it would only take one unusually bad year and we'd
probably not be able to stem the legislative tide. We are a tiny
minority and we're certainly vulnerable to the voting public forcing
regulation on us "for our own good."

--
Regards

Brian

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.

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

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