Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
These were culled from the article "To Wear or Not To Wear, the PFD
Mandate Debate" in the Spring issue of Paddler Dealer, about the US Coast Guard's consideration of a mandatory-wear requirement for boats under 21'. The article is worth searching out, thoroughly covering the question of the pros and cons of mandated PFD use. In 2002 there were 750 boating fatalities in the US (all types of boats). The USCG estimates that 440 people could have been saved if they had worn PFD's. In 2002 drowning caused 524 of those boating fatalities. Of those more than 75% were in small boats (under 21'). 85% of those drowning deaths were not wearing PFD's. 90% of the fatalities were men. 50% of the canoeing and kayaking fatalities were fishermen. 40% of the canoe fatalities involved aluminum canoes. Kayaker's wear-rate for PFD's is 82% Jet skiers wear PFD's 97.5% of the time. The percentage is almost certainly because it is mandated for operation of a personal watercraft. My take on those statistics: Wearing a PFD can obviously save your life (duh). Mandating wear obviously increases the use of PFD's (duh again). A large percentage of the small boat fatalities tied to not wearing PFD's involve either fishermen or folks in aluminum canoes. I'd take that as an indication that these were not paddling enthusiasts but simply folks in boats with paddles. And I'd take that a step further and hazard a guess that that group is the least likely to have a comfortable, well-designed PFD. Canoe rental places aren't exactly passing out Lotus or Extrasports and I doubt that many folks who buy a $300 rec boat spring for a $100 PFD. I can't claim to wear my PFD 100% of the time. On a hot summer day on a gentle shallow stream I probably won't. Unless it becomes the law, and then I probably will. That said, I'm still opposed to mandates that infringe on my personal freedom of choice. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
Mike McCrea wrote:
sobering statistics snipped to save bandwidth My take on those statistics: Wearing a PFD can obviously save your life (duh). Mandating wear obviously increases the use of PFD's (duh again). PFD's are like seatbelts. There's no good argument against them and the evidence is that they save lives, but people can always manage to rationalize not using them, if that's what they want to do. I guess the appropriate term for this behavior is "natural selection". A large percentage of the small boat fatalities tied to not wearing PFD's involve either fishermen or folks in aluminum canoes. I'd take that as an indication that these were not paddling enthusiasts but simply folks in boats with paddles. And I'd take that a step further and hazard a guess that that group is the least likely to have a comfortable, well-designed PFD. Canoe rental places aren't exactly passing out Lotus or Extrasports and I doubt that many folks who buy a $300 rec boat spring for a $100 PFD. Both good point, but there are others that aren't mentioned. The majority of canoe accidents involving fishermen and rec paddlers are due to standing in the canoe or shifting positions, probably common occurrences when fishing. Alcohol also plays a huge part in boating fatalities. Aside from intoxication related problems (impaired operation, loss of balance, increased susceptibility to hypothermia), a high percentage of guys who die are found with their flys open, indicating that they were in the process "recycling" their chosen adult beverages at the time of their accident. I can't claim to wear my PFD 100% of the time. On a hot summer day on a gentle shallow stream I probably won't. Unless it becomes the law, and then I probably will. That said, I'm still opposed to mandates that infringe on my personal freedom of choice. I agree. It's a simple case of us not doing the right thing voluntarily and the government stepping in to force the issue. If people would only use their heads... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
I have been over this issue many times with people who won't wear their PFD
but in the end I have gone the route of natural selection if they are to stupid to wear it then maybe there is a greater reasoning involved so many people underestimate Darwin's theory but the guy who doesn't wear a helmet on a motorcycle or bicycle or a PFD in a boat might not be the type of genetic material we want lingering on. -- Abe Elias Diving Sparrow Paddle Co, http://home.cogeco.ca/~aelias "Michael Daly" wrote in message ... On 1-Apr-2004, Brian Nystrom wrote: PFD's are like seatbelts. There's no good argument against them and the evidence is that they save lives, but people can always manage to rationalize not using them, if that's what they want to do. I guess the appropriate term for this behavior is "natural selection". Minor nit - they don't rationalize, they justify. If they were rational, they'd wear it. People can justify anything, even the irrational. Mike |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
"Mike McCrea" wrote in message om... That said, I'm still opposed to mandates that infringe on my personal freedom of choice. Thanks for the statistics Mike. Part of me agrees with your last statement but I think in the end I'll accept the regulation. I used to ride a motorcycle. I was a kid and wore a helmet because NY had a helmet law. It's too easy on a beautiful day, or when going on a short spin to pass on the helmet (or pfd). The law makes us think twice. Especially the kids. I gave up bikes when someone with good aim clocked me with a bottle from an overpass on the Brooklyn Queens Expressway at rush hour. The helmet did double duty there. Without the laws too many kids will be 'cool' and avoid the hassle. Too many adults will either be fools or lazy. In the end everyone pays. I guess it's the clash of 'individual freedom' with 'no man is an island'. I recognize the other side of the argument though, as in 'where does it end?' Mandatory helmets while skiing or bicycling?, Mandatory kneepads when gardening? Mandatory lipitor for baby boomers? But mandatory use of pfd's is ok with me. Billy Sarokin |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
Brian Nystrom wrote:
The majority of canoe accidents involving fishermen and rec paddlers are due to standing in the canoe or shifting positions, probably common occurrences when fishing. When either touring or fishing in my very stable 20' canoe, I often stand - sometimes for extended periods - even in 'easy' white water. Paddling/poling and viewing are far more effective when standing - as is fly casting. Whenever I'm in white water, I ALWAYS wear a pfd but haven't needed it yet. The only time I dumped a canoe other than on purpose, I had been sitting the entire trip. The only time I ever fell out of a canoe other than on purpose was landing during extremely high winds on a very rocky shore where knee- and elbow-pads would have been of far more value than the pfd I had on. As for moving about in the canoe, both in still and moving water, it's a matter of knowing yourself, knowing the canoe & within limits knowing the conditions. Just standing is no sin, nor is going without a pfd in some conditions. Yours in the north Maine woods, Pete Hilton (Reg. Me. Guide) aka The Ent -- Don't ask the barber whether you need a haircut. D. S. Greenberg |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
William Sarokin wrote:
I recognize the other side of the argument though, as in 'where does it end?' Mandatory helmets while skiing or bicycling?, There are already countries where that helmet law for bicycling is in place. Living in a country where everyone has bicyles, I rarely see one, except for mountain bikers who go ride through rough terrain. Granted, we have seperate bicycle paths in a big part of the country, and everyone is used to watch out for bicycles: here they have the right of way when coming from the right, and hitting a bicyclist with a car means that you *always* get part of the blaim as a motorist. Mandatory kneepads when gardening? Mandatory lipitor for baby boomers? How about mandatory guns? Isn't there a town in the U.S. where everyone is supposed to own a gun? But mandatory use of pfd's is ok with me. Me too! Same goes for a helmet when running whitewater. IMNSHO Faceguards and elbow pads are optional for whitewater, as long as the individual getting hurt in their face or at their elbow pays for a decent part of the hospital costs themselves. -- -- 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/ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
The Ent wrote:
Brian Nystrom wrote: The majority of canoe accidents involving fishermen and rec paddlers are due to standing in the canoe or shifting positions, probably common occurrences when fishing. When either touring or fishing in my very stable 20' canoe, I often stand - sometimes for extended periods - even in 'easy' white water. Paddling/poling and viewing are far more effective when standing - as is fly casting. Whenever I'm in white water, I ALWAYS wear a pfd but haven't needed it yet. The only time I dumped a canoe other than on purpose, I had been sitting the entire trip. The only time I ever fell out of a canoe other than on purpose was landing during extremely high winds on a very rocky shore where knee- and elbow-pads would have been of far more value than the pfd I had on. As for moving about in the canoe, both in still and moving water, it's a matter of knowing yourself, knowing the canoe & within limits knowing the conditions. Just standing is no sin, nor is going without a pfd in some conditions. There's no doubt that standing and moving around are perfectly safe for an experienced canoeist. I also don't mean to imply that this is necessarily reckless or dangerous behavior. However, the statistics are clear that these are leading causes of capsizes and falls overboard that result in fatalities of canoeist. It seems pretty safe to conclude that this is due to inexperience in many, if not most cases. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
The problem is that too many people these days think that they're
entitled to personal freedom, but absolved from personal responsibility. If we accept responsibility for our actions rather than blaming someone or something else (the victim mentality), there is no need for such laws. However, we've become conditioned to place blame and litigate at the drop of a hat and such laws are a natural result. Everyone loses except the lawyers. Personally, I'd love to see unemployment lines full of trial attorneys, as it would indicate a return to personal responsibility and common sense. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
Ah, the old pfd debate! I'm afraid that I have to disagree with all the rest of you. Pfd's cannot be compared to automobile seatbelts or motorcycle helmets. Both the seatbelts and motorcycle helmets have been proven to reduce the severity of injuries and save lives. There is no such evidence regarding pfd's in sea kayaks (important point here, I am talking about sea kayaking). The Coast Guard's statistics simply reflect the percentages of people who participate in recreational boating that do and do not wear lifejackets. If you look at it from a different perspective, like whitewater boating statistics, you will see that the overwhelming majority of whitewater boating fatalities were in fact wearing pfd's! Are we then to assume that when participating in whitewater boating one will be safer without a pfd on? I mean, just look at the statistics! Very few whitewater fatalities were found without a pfd on! Of course not! Most people who do whitewater boating always wear a pfd, so it is only natural that the majority of fatalities associated with that activity will have on pfd's. I'll bet that every person reading this has gone out boating, fishing, sightseeing, whatever, any number of times while not wearing a life jacket. The simple fact of the matter is that probably at least 85% of those people who enjoy recreational boating are not wearing a lifejacket. So once again it is only natural that the fatalities should reflect that. What I find much more interesting is that 15% of the fatalities were in fact wearing their lifejackets and they died anyway. If you look a little deeper into the issue then it becomes obvious that experience, or rather lack thereof, plays a much greater roll in the fatalities then does equipment. The overwhelming majority of what are classified as sea kayaking fatalities are associated with people who have very little, if any at all, training or experience. These are precisely the kinds of people who will be inclined to paddle a rec boat and attempt to stand up in it, or paddle solo into hazardous conditions. These people are an accident looking for a place to happen and the fact that they finally got their wish while in a sea kayak is more coincident then any statement about the dangers of the sport. While these are the people who would most benefit from wearing a pfd, they are also, unfortunately, the one's who are least likely to do so. As for making the wearing of a pfd in a sea kayak a law --- I really hope not. If you really want to save lives then I believe mandatory instruction and certification would probably be much more effective, even though I am against that as well. When reviewing the sea kayaking related fatalities, once you discard the novices, then you see that what's left is a pretty even split between those who are found with their pfd's on, and those who are found to be not wearing one. So like I said at the beginning, I can see no actual evidence to suggest that pfd's are particularly effective as a safety device in your typical sea kayaking scenario. I am not trying to say that they do not have their place, but I see them to be no more or less important then any other piece of rescue and safety gear. Any piece of safety and rescue gear can save a life in the right scenario. But I believe it should be left up to the individual to choose how and when to apply it. Scott So.Cal. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal
There's no doubt that standing and moving around are perfectly safe for an experienced canoeist. I also don't mean to imply that this is necessarily reckless or dangerous behavior. However, the statistics are clear that these are leading causes of capsizes and falls overboard that result in fatalities of canoeist. It seems pretty safe to conclude that this is due to inexperience in many, if not most cases. Sounds like the law should be against standing in a canoe.... It seems ironic that we spend so much effort on the low count but high fatality factor and little effort on the high count low fatality factor. e.g. I would get on a bicycle without a helmet way before I got on one without gloves. 90% of [my?] falls result in hands being thrust out. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
NTSB, August 25, "Mandatory" PFD | General | |||
PFD Statistics and Mandatory-Wear requirment proposal | General |