Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:23:21 +0200, Wilko wrote:
The international difficulty rating has nothing to do with consequences, but all with how difficult it is to stay on your line, because of the width of the line, the manouvering required because of holes, waves, rocks, drops, speed of current etc.. Hmmm according to the international scale of river difficulty (I found the following on the americanwhitewater.org site) class I - "... Risk to swimmers is slight; self-rescue is easy." class II - "... Swimers are seldom injured and group assistance, while helpful, is seldom needed. ..." class III - "... Injuries while swimming are rare; self-rescue is usually easy but group assistance may be required to avoid long swims. ..." class IV - "... Risk of injury to swimmers is moderate to high, and water conditions may make self-rescue difficult. group assistance for rescue is often essential but requires practiced skills. ..." class V - "... swims are dangerous, and rescue is often difficult even for experts. ..." class VI - " ... The consequences of errors are very severe and rescue may be impossible. ..." So each of the classes does define what the consequences are Cheyenne |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
Cheyenne Wills wrote: On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:23:21 +0200, Wilko wrote: The international difficulty rating has nothing to do with consequences, but all with how difficult it is to stay on your line, because of the width of the line, the manouvering required because of holes, waves, rocks, drops, speed of current etc.. Hmmm according to the international scale of river difficulty (I found the following on the americanwhitewater.org site) Exactly, you got the *American Whitewater* version of the classes, which for some bizarre reason includes consequences, not the international scale of *difficulty* rating. Apples and oranges. Difficulty and consequences have little do to with eachother, and I would understand it if they would add a seperate factor for consequences (maybe another one for remoteness etc., a al Corran style), but that would make the scale even more difficult to use. How do you rate consequences, anyway? I'm not a big fan of ratings, thinking that they should be nothing more than guidelines for people wanting to take a first trip down something when having done similarly rated rapids before. The real decision should be made on the spot, including the feelings and atmosphere of the moment. That decision making process should include the perceived consequences, not some bizarre combined rating. Is something a class IV because of a class I line with class VI consequences? What are class VI consequences exactly? Polluting the ratings makes them even less useful and more subjective, especially when you look at the regional differences already in effect (western U.S., eastern U.S., etc.). -- Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://wilko.webzone.ru/ |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
Here is an alternative guide to grades.
class I - "... Risk to swimmers is slight; self-rescue is easy." Take the Mother-in-law class II - "... Swimers are seldom injured and group assistance, while helpful, is seldom needed. ..." Take the Girlfriend class III - "... Injuries while swimming are rare; self-rescue is usually easy but group assistance may be required to avoid long swims. ..." Take the Wife class IV - "... Risk of injury to swimmers is moderate to high, and water conditions may make self-rescue difficult. group assistance for rescue is often essential but requires practiced skills. ..." Take the Mistress class V - "... swims are dangerous, and rescue is often difficult even for experts. ..." Take the Photographs class VI - " ... The consequences of errors are very severe and rescue may be impossible. ..." Take the Mother-in-law -- Dave Manby Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
Larry Cable wrote:
How about the problem being that the average raft customer treats the river as an amusement park ride and doesn't pay any attention to safety or instructions. No argument there. The only thing I'd add is that the rafting companies market it like it's an amusement park ride, so I can see where the customers get that idea. -- //-Walt // // http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040514/matson.gif |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
Larry Cable wrote:
Walt Typed in Message-ID: I have no problem with experinenced boaters with the proper training and experience shooting class V water. But rafts full of clueless tourists don't belong there. (and neither do I) However, the Lower Gauley is a Class III/IV river at best, most of the river being Class III. It's pool and drop, and although there are undercuts and other dangers, is relatively easy on swimmers. The problem with the commercial rafting operations is that they treat the tourists like so many sacks of potatoes. If the sacks bounce out of the rafts, the guide rounds them up and hopes he can find them all and that they're not too damaged. And if the sack gets hurt, well it's the sack's fault not the guide's. What's amazing is that they don't kill more people than they do. How about the problem being that the average raft customer treats the river as an amusement park ride and doesn't pay any attention to safety or instructions. I don't want to totally defend the rafting industry, which has it's share of problems, but a guide isn't any better than the crew he gets stuck with that day. Arnold Swartznegger couldn't handle a 16' raft full of tourist that are all air bracing and not getting a paddle in the water. Yet many passengers seem to expect that from the guides. We used to eat lunch at Dimple on the Lower Yough. I would predict which rafts were going to have trouble with pretty amazing accuracy. After awhile, my companions asked how I did it. It was pretty simple, you just watched how effective a stroke the paddlers were taking. If they were not paddling or using just the tip, banging each others paddles, etc, it was a good bet that they would bang the Rock at Dimple, not know how to high side and either flip or dump most of the people out of the raft. In the immortal words of a young female guide on the Upper Ocoee as she attempted to ferry to river left above Humongous when all of her "guest" just stopped paddling, PADDLE!PADDLE!!PADDLE!!! SYOTR Larry C. So, what I have seen, and read, is that experienced river runners tend to down grade a river. JAM |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
Walt wrote:
Larry Cable wrote: How about the problem being that the average raft customer treats the river as an amusement park ride and doesn't pay any attention to safety or instructions. No argument there. The only thing I'd add is that the rafting companies market it like it's an amusement park ride, so I can see where the customers get that idea. -- //-Walt // // http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040514/matson.gif Another load of crap. How many safety talk-ups have you given? JAM |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
So, what I have seen, and read, is that experienced river runners tend to down grade a river. I don't know where you live (i.e. what rivers you are familiar with). But someone who has just run the Royal Gorge (class IV, but guides call it class V [at least to customers]) successfully for the first time is NOT ready for Gore Canyon (real class V). |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
Larry Cable wrote:
J. A. M." Typed in Message-ID: References: Another load of crap. How many safety talk-ups have you given? JAM who are you asking? I've pushed rubber around since the 70's, teach kayaking several times a year and I'm a SWR instructor, so I've given one or two in my time. Walt is correct, raft trips are often marketed as an amusement park ride. Just go down to the Ocoee and see how they run the business there. SYOTR Larry C. I've been pushing rubber for 15 years and I have never heard anyone promote the trip as an amusement park ride. In fact just the opposite is true. The dangers and the level of physical activity required are spelled out in great detail. To tell the truth, I do talk up a rapid before I run it. I give the same talk up above Big Nasty at 2 feet and I do a 5 1/2 feet. Stay left!, don't run the hole! Then I take them right down the middle (2') into the hole. My crew is so happy that they made it that they don't even know they aren't having fun. JAM |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Near Deaths on the Lower Gauley
"J. A. M." wrote:
I've been pushing rubber for 15 years and I have never heard anyone promote the trip as an amusement park ride. In fact just the opposite is true. The dangers and the level of physical activity required are spelled out in great detail. I sincerely wish that what you are saying were true. Maybe the standards are higher in your neck of the woods. Where do you paddle? -- //-Walt // // http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040514/matson.gif |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Anyone using Sponsons? | Touring | |||
Lower Gauley River in WV Whitewater Questions | General | |||
Lower Gauley shuttle? | General | |||
Lower Gauley shuttle? | Whitewater | |||
2003 GAULEY RIVER RELEASE INFORMATION | General |