What Kathy said!


"Mothra" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've been involved in 3 different lawsuits - 2 of which went to court
and none of which involved paddling. As long as a paddling club
doesn't charge to take trips, classes, whatever - just has a general
membership fee and none of the officers or directors has any monetary
investment, you're fine without insurance.

The real story is that there is no deep pockets to sue. The club has a
few hundred members paying maybe $20 each to belong. No lawyer is
going to take a case for that money. There is also no people to sue in
a club situtation. Sure you could try to sue the directors, officers,
trip leaders, etc but in reality that dog won't hunt. And lawyers know
it.

People are only too happy to sit on a jury and award huge payouts when
an insurance carrier or company is paying out the tab. Lawyers know
that. So go ahead - get club insurance - you're more likely to get a
lawsuit by buying insurance than by just going without as a volunteer
organization put together for recreation of its members and no profit
motive.

Dick Pierce, a paddler and Professor of Law at George Washington
University, pretty much agrees with my assessment though he won't tout
it publically. Read a book called "The Terrible Truth About Lawyers"
and you'll get a better understanding about why volunteer membership
clubs absolutely do not need liabiality insurance.

Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:
The only real strong point of the ACA is instruction and safety. Their
insurance program allows instructors protection that just isn't
available commercially. And if you do have an ACA certified instructor,
you have some clue to the level of competence that he has acquired.

I would differ with that last statement somewhat, as I've paddled with
an ACA "Open water" instructor who is uncomfortable in 2' seas, has no
endurance and won't paddle within 50 yards of a rock, except when
landing. How this person ever got their rating is beyond me, but I've
heard of several similar situations.

Brian, go to
http://www.acanet.org/instruction/kayak_instruction.lasso and read
the syllabi for the various ACA courses. There seem to be many stages
of classes, especially in ocean kayak (which is essentially unknown
territory for me, represented by all those articles in "Canoe & Kayak"
and "Paddler" which I irritably skip).

Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.

Think of it as the "one-room schoolhouse" model, since, in the scope
and scale of society that's kinda what our clubs are. The
fourth-graders teach the first-graders to count. The sixth-graders
teach the second-graders addition and subtraction. The seventh graders
teach multiplication and division, the eighth-graders teach fractions.
the 11th-graders teach geometry, and the 12-graders teach algebra. So,
perhaps, in the progression of skills and classes set up by the ACA,
the specific instructors you have observed are actually acting within
the parameters of their certifications, even though they might be
highly uncomfortable if asked to exceed those parameters.

And always remember that, absent a few idiots who try to make a living
by turning a recreational activity into a job, ours is essentially a
VOLUNTEER activity and the standards are commensurately... uh,
"flexible"?


[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? How twisted is that? ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.


-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
.. rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
.. Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
.. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
.. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================

On Oct 31, 2:32 pm, Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:

To respond to Brian. 1. I've had pretty good luck on the whitewater
side. Most of the instructors are very competent and pretty good
teachers. I'm only certified in SWR, and while I sometimes disagree
with subject matter and teach methods with some instructors, I have a
lot of respect for the ability of every ACA SWR instructor I've met.

I can't comment on the whitewater side of things, since I'm not into it,
but I would think that the nature of the activity dictates that to be an
instructor, one has to possess significant skills. I expected that on
the sea kayaking side, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
Apparently, one can be certified as an "open water" instructor without
actually paddling on anything other than flat water, unless that's
changed in the last three years. Apparently, there is no requirement to
demonstrate skills in actual, typical open-water conditions, which is an
utterly outrageous situation. In my mind, "open water" means one needs
to be able to deal with wind, waves, rocks, surf and other boat traffic.

Brian, it's clear that you're no fan of the ACA, and you're not alone,
but exactly where do you get the information to back up those
outrageous claims? You've met an incompetent instructor? One? Maybe
two? Big sample to generalize from.

I can tell you from first hand candidate and evaluator experience going
back several years that people can and do get denied Open Water and WW
certs if they can't perform, and that the standards do require actual
performance of the skills. My experience covers canoe, kayak, WW, and
Touring, and I've found the bar to be set pretty high. YMMV.

Steve

I never have understood the PA deal. Georgia Canoeing Association is an
affilitate. We use ACA insurance for races and instruction, and our
trips are waivered Common Adventurer events with a "Trip Coordinator,"
who may or may not be an "officious busybody." Atlanta Kayakers, on the
other hand, has trip "hosts" who suggest a venue; that's the extent of
their administration. No waivers, no insurance, no officers, no dues,
no bylaws, just a web site and paddling events.

Steve

wrote:
On Oct 31, 2:32 pm, Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:

To respond to Brian. 1. I've had pretty good luck on the whitewater
side. Most of the instructors are very competent and pretty good
teachers. I'm only certified in SWR, and while I sometimes disagree
with subject matter and teach methods with some instructors, I have a
lot of respect for the ability of every ACA SWR instructor I've met.

I can't comment on the whitewater side of things, since I'm not into it,
but I would think that the nature of the activity dictates that to be an
instructor, one has to possess significant skills. I expected that on
the sea kayaking side, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
Apparently, one can be certified as an "open water" instructor without
actually paddling on anything other than flat water, unless that's
changed in the last three years. Apparently, there is no requirement to
demonstrate skills in actual, typical open-water conditions, which is an
utterly outrageous situation. In my mind, "open water" means one needs
to be able to deal with wind, waves, rocks, surf and other boat traffic.

Brian, it's clear that you're no fan of the ACA, and you're not alone,
but exactly where do you get the information to back up those
outrageous claims? You've met an incompetent instructor? One? Maybe
two? Big sample to generalize from.

I can tell you from first hand candidate and evaluator experience going
back several years that people can and do get denied Open Water and WW
certs if they can't perform, and that the standards do require actual
performance of the skills. My experience covers canoe, kayak, WW, and
Touring, and I've found the bar to be set pretty high. YMMV.

I don't doubt what you're saying, but what I've seen and heard points
out how inconsistently the programs are administered. Between that and
the constantly increasing cost of being affiliated with them, the ACA is
doing a great job of shooting itself in the foot. It would be great if
they could get their act together, but I'm not holding my breath.
Luckily for the ACA, they have a lot of skilled individuals that are
doing a great job and compensating somewhat for the lack of organization
at the top.

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:
The only real strong point of the ACA is instruction and safety. Their
insurance program allows instructors protection that just isn't
available commercially. And if you do have an ACA certified instructor,
you have some clue to the level of competence that he has acquired.
I would differ with that last statement somewhat, as I've paddled with
an ACA "Open water" instructor who is uncomfortable in 2' seas, has no
endurance and won't paddle within 50 yards of a rock, except when
landing. How this person ever got their rating is beyond me, but I've
heard of several similar situations.

Brian, go to
http://www.acanet.org/instruction/kayak_instruction.lasso and read
the syllabi for the various ACA courses. There seem to be many stages
of classes, especially in ocean kayak (which is essentially unknown
territory for me, represented by all those articles in "Canoe & Kayak"
and "Paddler" which I irritably skip).

Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.

Think of it as the "one-room schoolhouse" model, since, in the scope
and scale of society that's kinda what our clubs are. The
fourth-graders teach the first-graders to count. The sixth-graders
teach the second-graders addition and subtraction. The seventh graders
teach multiplication and division, the eighth-graders teach fractions.
the 11th-graders teach geometry, and the 12-graders teach algebra. So,
perhaps, in the progression of skills and classes set up by the ACA,
the specific instructors you have observed are actually acting within
the parameters of their certifications, even though they might be
highly uncomfortable if asked to exceed those parameters.

And always remember that, absent a few idiots who try to make a living
by turning a recreational activity into a job, ours is essentially a
VOLUNTEER activity and the standards are commensurately... uh,
"flexible"?


[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? How twisted is that? ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.


-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
. rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
. Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================


Brian Nystrom wrote:
Larry C wrote:
The only real strong point of the ACA is instruction and safety. Their
insurance program allows instructors protection that just isn't
available commercially. And if you do have an ACA certified instructor,
you have some clue to the level of competence that he has acquired.
I would differ with that last statement somewhat, as I've paddled with
an ACA "Open water" instructor who is uncomfortable in 2' seas, has no
endurance and won't paddle within 50 yards of a rock, except when
landing. How this person ever got their rating is beyond me, but I've
heard of several similar situations.

Brian, go to
http://www.acanet.org/instruction/kayak_instruction.lasso and read
the syllabi for the various ACA courses. There seem to be many stages
of classes, especially in ocean kayak (which is essentially unknown
territory for me, represented by all those articles in "Canoe & Kayak"
and "Paddler" which I irritably skip).

Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.

Think of it as the "one-room schoolhouse" model, since, in the scope
and scale of society that's kinda what our clubs are. The
fourth-graders teach the first-graders to count. The sixth-graders
teach the second-graders addition and subtraction. The seventh graders
teach multiplication and division, the eighth-graders teach fractions.
the 11th-graders teach geometry, and the 12-graders teach algebra. So,
perhaps, in the progression of skills and classes set up by the ACA,
the specific instructors you have observed are actually acting within
the parameters of their certifications, even though they might be
highly uncomfortable if asked to exceed those parameters.

And always remember that, absent a few idiots who try to make a living
by turning a recreational activity into a job, ours is essentially a
VOLUNTEER activity and the standards are commensurately... uh,
"flexible"?

I agree with what you're saying with one exception; it seems to me that
it's folly to "certify" people with marginal skills, as they may take
that certification and try to use it to do things that they're not
really qualified for.

I absolutely agree that training is valuable and the more trained
paddlers there are on the water, the better it is for the entire
paddling community. That's one of the reasons that we don't require
people who take our trip leader training course to actually lead trips.
What we try to do is to teach people the necessary skills and lead them
to a realistic evaluation of their abilities and deficiencies. We
actively encourage people to go on to take other types of training. Our
basic philosophy is that trained trip participants are nearly as
important/beneficial as trained trip leaders.

[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? How twisted is that? ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.

I have some friends who are ACA coaches that share your annoyance.

I'll have to disagree with this statement. From my experience, the
great majority of ACA certified instructors are "outdoor
professionals", camp counselors, guides, heads of school outdoor
programs, etc. I know that CCC has a very strong volunteer ACA training
program, but outside of that I think you will find that most ACA
instuctors have monetary reasons to maintain the training and the
insurance.

It's surprising how many of the SWR instructor candidates take the
course and never teach.

Larry


Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. *Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.



[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? *How twisted is that? *ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Winston-Salem, NC, USA
. * * * * * * * * * *rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
. * * Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
. * * * * * * * * * * rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================

Could be. My view is fairly parochial, since I have had nothing to do
with any ACA instructors (or any kind of instruction since I took a
couple of NOC clinics in the early '90s) except for our little cadre of
volunteer SW S&R instructors in the DC area.

We were real lucky there. Jeff Davis, the Safety chairman for the
Canoe Cruisers' Ass'n, got himself certified by Charlie as an IT.
Jeff's policy as CCA Safety chair was to present threee two-day classes
each summer, open to CCA members only, and charge only a $15 equipment
fee. For that fee each student got a copy of Charlie Walbridge &
Wayne Sundmacher's book, a prusic loop that he made in class, and two
days of instruction. Further, any student was welcome to return for a
refresher class, absolutely free, if he would act as an assistant and
perform safety overwatch during the in-water units of instruction (this
meant Jeff always had upstream- and downstream-safety without sending
any of the students out of hearing distance).

Well, sometime in the mid-'90s my friend Bob Bonnet and I started to
make a habit of assisting Jeff at all three of his summer classes[1],
and once Jeff became certified as an IT he started using his safety
classes as Development and Certification workshops -- sorta OJT for us
candidate instructors.

After Jeff certified me and Bob as SW S&R Instructors I became safety
chair of the Monocacy Canoe Club, and I decided to leverage Jeff's
cartification: I got the MCC steering committee to agree to sponsor up
to four MCC members each year to the tune of a $25 membership in the
CCA and the $15 equipment fee -- $40 each -- to attend Jeff's classes
enough times to become certified instructors. I kept hinting to Jeff
that he should set up some kind of IT program within his club, the CCA,
but he never did. Nevertheless, as a result of this MCC program, by
2002 or so we had 20 or 25 certified SW S&R instructors in the
Baltimore-Washington area, and the three clubs (CCA, MCC, and Greater
Baltimore CC) were presenting, amongst them, six classes per summer,
each of which could have two or more certified instructors, and some of
which accepted as many as 20 students.

For the MCC safety classes, I arranged to have two instructors, four
assistants (who had been through the class) and up to 16 students.
This meant, for certain exercises where the students waited in line for
their turn to perform a particular evolution -- say, the strainer swim
and the zip-line crossing, we could split the class into two section,
each with an instructor and two safety-boaters, so the students
wouldn't have to wait so long in line. Essentially, we had an 8:1
student:instructor ratio (or better) and an 8:3 student:rescuer ratio
(or better).

[1] Bob and I spent so much time in Jeff's classes because we were just
pushing our way up to Class IV and (in Bob's case -- he was a kayaker)
Class V, without mentors, and driving all up and down the coast probing
for ourselves things like Section IV, the Watauga, and the Bottom
Moose. The thing abour S&R skills -- any skills, for that matter -- is
that if you don't practice, you forget, and by good fortune or good
judgement, we never got realtime practice from serious situations on
the river. So we kept going to Jeff's classes so that we would be
sharp if anything *did* occur.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
.. rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
.. Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
.. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
.. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================

Larry C wrote:
I'll have to disagree with this statement. From my experience, the
great majority of ACA certified instructors are "outdoor
professionals", camp counselors, guides, heads of school outdoor
programs, etc. I know that CCC has a very strong volunteer ACA training
program, but outside of that I think you will find that most ACA
instuctors have monetary reasons to maintain the training and the
insurance.

It's surprising how many of the SWR instructor candidates take the
course and never teach.

Larry


Recruiting volunteer instructors is always difficult, and most
certified instructors (at least in the whitewater world) take the
certification for volunteer activities, not to teach for pay[1]. ?Given
that, and given that more certified instructors is good for the sport,
as a whole, it makes sense to certify anyone who has mastered ***the
specific skills (and any prerequisite skills, of course) covered in the
course ***, and demonstrated the ability to actually teach those
skills.



[1] this is a separate beef of mine: that I have to pay ACA an
additional annual fee to retain my Swif****er Safety and Rescue
certification... PAY for the privilege of giving away several perfectly
good weekends to VOLUNTEER to teach something that we all hope every
paddler will learn? ?How twisted is that? ?ACA oughta be giving FREE
memberships to anyone who will take the trouble to become certified
then give up the time to teach safety and rescue.

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Winston-Salem, NC, USA
. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
. ? ? Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================

Well, Steve, I assure you, FWIW: when I coordinated a GCA trip last
Fall, ***I*** was an "officious busybody".


wrote:
I never have understood the PA deal. Georgia Canoeing Association is an
affilitate. We use ACA insurance for races and instruction, and our
trips are waivered Common Adventurer events with a "Trip Coordinator,"
who may or may not be an "officious busybody." Atlanta Kayakers, on the
other hand, has trip "hosts" who suggest a venue; that's the extent of
their administration. No waivers, no insurance, no officers, no dues,
no bylaws, just a web site and paddling events.

Steve

Do you expect me to be surprised at that news? I'm sorry i missed
that trip.

On Nov 2, 10:29 am, "Oci-One Kanubi" wrote:
Well, Steve, I assure you, FWIW: when I coordinated a GCA trip last
Fall, ***I*** was an "officious busybody".

Steve
Non-Certified Officious Busybody