"Courtney" wrote in message
ink.net...
You're right about many western boaters freaking out about rocks.
Personally I love them. They make the rapids fun and full of
possibilities!

I don't know anything about class III and less generally rated by canoeist
and IV and V by kayakers. I haven't really paid that much attention to
what
paddlers are rating what. I personally find that in a canoe or a kayak
the
rapids seem about the same to me. In fact strangely enough, I find
paddling
some class IV's in my canoe easier than in my kayak. Yet I've paddled V's
in my kayak but would never take my canoe on one. Don't ask me why
because
really I don't know why. I know everyone is different but I can't see why
there would be a real difference between kayakers and canoeists and their
ratings? As I mentioned I personally find them to feel basically equal.
I
can understand that I see more kayakers on class IV / V. Maybe that's it.
Can you expand on how you came to that?

Courtney

Sure, let me try to explain.

Read the rating scale; who is it written for? If it were truly just a
quantitative descriptive scale which allowed boaters to make their own
assessments about whether or not a rapid could be run, then why does it
contain such qualifiers as 'easy', 'moderate', 'advanced'? Those descriptors
are accurate only from the eye of a kayaker: class 1 really IS 'easy', class
2 really is 'novice', class 4 IS 'advanced', class 5 IS 'expert'. But to a
traditional open canoe, no floatation, no saddle, those descriptors are
skewed, especially at the upper end. Class 1 is novice, class 2+/3- is
'advanced', class 3+/4- is 'expert', class 5 is suicidal. Its NOT an
'intermediate' canoeist who is running large class 3 rapids. Intermediate
canoeists are the folks who lead summer camp. :-)

(Let me add, also, that this is not an inappropriate or immature type of
canoe. Tripping or recreational canoes are traditionally one of the most
common inland vessels on rivers, especially in the east. When a canoe is
given rocker, floatation, a saddle and thigh straps, gear is lashed in,
etc...it becomes a new thing. A canoe-kayak hybrid. As such (being more
similar to a kayak than a tripping canoe), the rating scale will naturally
tend to fit better. But remember; the scale is allegedly NOT supposed to be
taking different types of boats into consideration...)

But canoeists are the ones who spend their lives on the smaller rapids. Yes,
they probably do feel quite similar in a canoe or a kayak, but the
difference is that an open general-purpose boat is at the upper sweet spot
of its intended use range in class 2, while a kayak is way at the bottom.
Canoeists will be able to clearly differentiate between a class 2- and 2+
river, because those differences will affect their boat greatly. A kayak,
however, will not be much affected by the differences, and will not be so
good at differentiating the ratings. Thus, Class 1-3 rapids are pretty much
defined by how they affect canoes, class 3-5 by how they affect kayaks.

--riverman

riverman, what are the odds of disaster? Is that what we are trying to
figure out? How far can we go to the edge of the safety net, and not
fall out. For each of us the safety net is at a different point, all
things considered!

I came across this interesting article that I think might apply:

The Odds of Disaster -
http://tinyurl.com/646ot

One way of analysing the - go/no go - scenario, is to consider
threshold factor. Such as threshold temps when hazardous results are
certain. Can you as an experienced kayaker, define those thresholds for
those of us who don't have the experience.

Brian Nystroms experience recently of the gasp reflex at 50F would
indicate a higher risk before cold water hypothermia would occur. What
are the specific risks, and what are the thresholds. A swim in a class
IV tropical river may be that after a long swim, you get chewed on by
pirrana, or crocadile, but the actual swim wasn't so bad.

We still may go, but we will have a better idea what to expect.

What is beyond a blind turn none of us can ascertain, but that is the
thrill of life! TnT

"Tinkerntom" wrote in message
ups.com...
riverman, what are the odds of disaster? Is that what we are trying to
figure out? How far can we go to the edge of the safety net, and not
fall out. For each of us the safety net is at a different point, all
things considered!

I came across this interesting article that I think might apply:

The Odds of Disaster -
http://tinyurl.com/646ot

That IS an interesting article; I suggest everyone read it! Good find, tom.

The summary is both important and counterintuitive:
Providing such things as insurance cause people to assume higher risks; a
process called "moral hazard". Drivers drive worse because they are covered.
People take health risks because they are covered. The climbers in the story
took out insurance on their climb, because a certain baseline of protection
is wise, but similarly they knew that too much protection causes moral
hazard, so they chose NOT to carry their satellite phone on the climb, as it
would have made them take more risks, thinking rescue was only a phone call
away.

To me, that underscores the importance of recognizing the essential, but
minimal safety precautions we should take. Too much protection = too much
moral hazard (as a raft guide, we knew about this 20 years ago, when we
decided NOT to give our clients helmets. We called it the 'gladiator
syndrome': give them helmets and they feel invincible and inevitably get
hurt more often than if they feel a bit vulnerable.)


One way of analysing the - go/no go - scenario, is to consider
threshold factor. Such as threshold temps when hazardous results are
certain. Can you as an experienced kayaker, define those thresholds for
those of us who don't have the experience.

I'm a canoeist, not a kayaker, but your question is well-taken. The response
is; if not me, then who? As a beginner kayaker, are YOU qualified to define
those thresholds? I think not...which is why we have such things as
protocols (minimal acceptable gear, safety procedures, etc). Which is also
why it is so crucial that things like the Rating Scale are well-understood,
accurate, and provide enough info to be useful.

Not sure where this post and reply are coming from (you didn't include any
hint as to what post you were responding to), but this is really interesting
anyway.

--riverman

On 26-Jan-2005, "riverman" wrote:

Providing such things as insurance cause people to assume higher risks; a
process called "moral hazard".

Also called "risk homeostasis". When something is used or changed to
decrease risk, people tend to increase the risk to its original level
by changing something else. Unfortunately, since people are _extremely_
poor at assessing risk, their attempts to maintain a level of risk
often turn into increased risk. Perfect example - all the four-wheel-
drive SUVs in the ditches along the roads in winter here in the Great
White North.

Risk homeostasis has been discussed a lot in the context of kayaking
on the Paddlewise mailing list. It's a big problem unless the paddler
is aware of it and compensates.

Mike

PS - I've also heard it called "Volvo Syndrome" - put someone in a
safer car and they drive like idiots.

Richard Ferguson wrote:
I have read somewhere that you can add up the air and water
temperature
to determine the degree of hypothermia hazard. What I don't remember
is
the range of total temperature that was relatively safe vs. unsafe.
I
did some google searching without finding what I was looking for. I
did
find some survival time tables as a function of water temperature,
and
one reference that said you should wear a wet suit if either the air
or
water temperature is under 65 degrees F.

I don't see where air temperature is really a factor for this, since it
can have a high variability and only some relation to water
temperature. You can check out some sites on Web sites at sites or
gages with air and water temperature. The two are related at times for
natural streams, especially at the extremes, for very cold and very
warm periods. But where the water temperature is effected by other
factor, glacier runoff, rain, snowmelt, and the ever-present dam
releases, the two aren't well related.

Some examples in Washington State a

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wa/nwis/uv..._no= 12056500
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wa/nwis/uv...te_no=12058800

The first is above a reservoir, the second below, at slightly different
elevations but not significantly for many cold days.

Interesting thought, but questionable application.

--Scott--

Scott M. Knowles "Opinions expressed are entirely my own."

Hydrologist, MS-Geography

"All things merge into one, and a river runs through it."
- Norman MacLean

"wsrphoto" wrote in message
oups.com...
Richard Ferguson wrote:
I have read somewhere that you can add up the air and water
temperature
to determine the degree of hypothermia hazard. What I don't remember
is
the range of total temperature that was relatively safe vs. unsafe.
I
did some google searching without finding what I was looking for. I
did
find some survival time tables as a function of water temperature,
and
one reference that said you should wear a wet suit if either the air
or
water temperature is under 65 degrees F.

I don't see where air temperature is really a factor for this, since it
can have a high variability and only some relation to water
temperature. You can check out some sites on Web sites at sites or
gages with air and water temperature. The two are related at times for
natural streams, especially at the extremes, for very cold and very
warm periods. But where the water temperature is effected by other
factor, glacier runoff, rain, snowmelt, and the ever-present dam
releases, the two aren't well related.

Some examples in Washington State a

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wa/nwis/uv..._no= 12056500
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wa/nwis/uv...te_no=12058800

The first is above a reservoir, the second below, at slightly different
elevations but not significantly for many cold days.

Interesting thought, but questionable application.

--Scott--


Hee hee. I hate when I do that.

--riverman
(PS: its not HOW the air temp affects the water temp that matters. Its how
the air and water temp affect YOU.)