PaddleWise Topics PaddleWise Stories PaddleWise Photo Album

Who's Who on PaddleWise PaddleWise Links PaddleWise Home

Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 05:22:41 -0700
From: "Fred T, CA Kayaker"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] How would you  Change to: Can You deal with

>
> In six years of serious ocean paddling I have never needed my lifejacket but
> wear it for the day I do. I...
>
> If I had a choice between loosing my spray skirt or my PFD then I would give 
> up the PFD every time
>
>         David

A year and a half ago I was paddling North of Malibu, CA.  That day the 
water temp was around 52 F and the air temp was in the mid
60's.  I was dressed for the water temp and was miserably hot paddling and 
thought I had lost my mind.  North of me a few miles a tragedy unfolded 
that I heard about on the news that evening.
A group was paddling a outrigger canoe.  They were struck by an unexpected 
wave, capsized and six men (if my memory doesn't fail me) were now in the 
water.  Two decided to make for shore about 100 yards away.  They both died.
Reason:  Hypothermia???  Drowning.  Real reason:  Neither had on a PFD, 
were not dressed for the water temperature and the others stayed with the 
boat.  These guys were club members, owners of the boat and experienced 
paddlers, but not smart ones in my mind.  They paid a tragic price for 
their carelessness.

The day may have come and gone that we were assisted physically and 
psychologically by the safety precautions that we take as the norm such as 
wearing a PFD.  Not realizing that if we had not been wearing the PFD that 
things would have taken a far different course.  Fear isn't always bad.  It 
has a way of helping to keep us humble and alive longer.

Old aviation saying:  "There are Old Pilots and there are Bold Pilots, but 
no such things as Old Bold Pilots."

Fred
California Kayaker




From: "Richard Kemmer"
Subject: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:58:41 -0500

Fred writes:

> Two decided to make for shore about 100 yards away.  They both 
> died. Reason:  Hypothermia???  Drowning.  Real reason:  Neither had
> on a PFD, were not dressed for the water temperature and the others
> stayed with the boat.

This is confusing.  Not being dressed for the water still implies hypothermia.
That others stayed with the boat is irrelevant to the cause of drowning
(although, of course, the others might have saved them after the cause
occurred).  And, if the cause was hypothermia and others stayed with the boat,
PFDs might actually have contributed to the drownings.

PFDs are paradigmatic for paddlers.  The simple assumption is that, if you're
wearing a PFD, your life is not in danger.  That is a vast oversimplification.
The PFD paradigm needs careful assessment.  When are PFDs advantageous and
when are they not?

I recall reading the fantastic story of a man who fell off a commercial ship
in Lake Superior and swam four miles to shore.  The reporter was incredulous
because the man was not wearing a PFD.  In fact, had this man been wearing a
PFD, he most likely would have succumbed to hypothermia long before reaching
shore, since the PFD would have impeded his swimming and kept him in the water
longer.  

In a personal experience, I once capsized my canoe in a river and had my PFD
snag in a strainer.  Driven into the strainer by the current, I escaped only
when a rib snapped, allowing me to roll off a pointed branch and reach the
surface for air.  Had the PFD snagged two or three inches lower, It would have
held me underwater and and caused me to drown.


When the human body floats, only the face remains above water.  A PFD adds
perhaps two inches of "freeboard" to the body.  The question is one of
trade-offs -- are the extra couple inches worth risking other problems?  For
sea kayakers, who are liklely to capsize in open water off shore and stay with
their boats, the answer is clearly yes.  But if a good swimmer decides to swim
for shore, jettisoning the PFD might be a consideration.  And, if paddling a
small river with deadfalls, the best place for a good swimmer's PFD might be
on the deck.   

Finally, another consideration is the PFD itself.  Many current CG "approved"
PFDs fail to turn swimmers onto their backs, and many float up around the
neck, where they make swimming all but impossible and actually impede kayak
reentry. 


The assumption that a PFD will always save one's life is almost as dangerous
as not wearing one.  I would enjoy a discussion by experienced paddlers of the
REAL pluses (and minuses) of PFDs.

Rick




Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 10:33:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steve Cramer
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

On Sat, 19 Aug 2000, Richard Kemmer wrote:

> PFDs are paradigmatic for paddlers.  The simple assumption is that, if you're
> wearing a PFD, your life is not in danger.  That is a vast oversimplification.

Indeed it is. Does anyone believe it? 

Thus the motivation for the cumbersome "Personal Flotation Device"
monicker. It won't save your life; it's not a "Life Jacket."

> In a personal experience, I once capsized my canoe in a river and had my PFD
> snag in a strainer.  Driven into the strainer by the current, I escaped only
> when a rib snapped, allowing me to roll off a pointed branch and reach the
> surface for air.  Had the PFD snagged two or three inches lower, It would have
> held me underwater and and caused me to drown.

Scary. Of course, had you not been in a PFD, you might have been lower in
the water, and fully enmeshed in the strainer. 

> When the human body floats, only the face remains above water.  A PFD adds
> perhaps two inches of "freeboard" to the body.  

Yours, perhaps. I float vertically with my entire head out of the water.
Or were you talking about an unconscious floater?

> The question is one of
> trade-offs -- are the extra couple inches worth risking other problems?  For
> sea kayakers, who are liklely to capsize in open water off shore and stay with
> their boats, the answer is clearly yes.  But if a good swimmer decides to swim
> for shore, jettisoning the PFD might be a consideration.  And, if paddling a
> small river with deadfalls, the best place for a good swimmer's PFD might be
> on the deck.

Our club paddles lots of small white water rivers with deadfalls. NO ONE
paddles with PFD on the deck.
 
> Finally, another consideration is the PFD itself.  Many current CG "approved"
> PFDs fail to turn swimmers onto their backs, and many float up around the
> neck, where they make swimming all but impossible and actually impede kayak
> reentry. 

True, USCG Type III vests are only required to float you, not turn your
face to the air. But they don't float up around the neck if they fit
right. You seem to have two issues combined here: turning swimmers on
their back (implies unconscious) and impeding swimming (implies conscious,
active effort). What's good for one may not be good for the other.

> The assumption that a PFD will always save one's life is almost as dangerous
> as not wearing one.  

I really don't think that is true. Read the CG fatality reports,
especially recreational boaters on inland waterways. Most fatalities,
except in serious white water, were not wearing PFDs. Not for any of the
rational reasons you've cited, just ignorance and belief that they didn't
need it. "Hell, I can swim." Famous last words.

> I would enjoy a discussion by experienced paddlers of the
> REAL pluses (and minuses) of PFDs.

I am not aware of any fatalities caused by PFD wearing. Anyone else?




From: KiAyker@..
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 11:02:48 EDT
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

   We have been through this all before. I have always taken the position 
that PFD's are not necessarily necessary, and have had to endure the back 
channel threats to my life as a result. You will find that, on this subject 
particularly, most people on this list are quite narrow minded and not even 
willing to consider that there can be some exceptions to the rule. Oh well. 
I'm up for the fight.

> I really don't think that is true. Read the CG fatality reports,
> especially recreational boaters on inland waterways. Most fatalities,
> except in serious white water, were not wearing PFDs. Not for any of the
> rational reasons you've cited, just ignorance and belief that they didn't
> need it. "Hell, I can swim." Famous last words."

   Statistics can be so much fun! For instance, IF most boaters are not 
wearing PFD's, then it would be logical to assume that most boating 
fatalities would not be wearing PFD's either. It does not necessarily imply 
that had they been wearing a PFD they would not have become a fatality! OK, 
so you qualified this statement by saying "except for whitewater." So I can 
assume that most whitewater fatalities are wearing PFD's? Can I therefore 
assume that I have a greater chance of survival in whitewater by not wearing 
a PFD then I would if I were wearing one? I mean, just look at the statistics!

   I do not believe it is really possible in most scenarios to state 
unequivocally that this person would have survived had they been wearing a 
PFD, or that person would not have survived had they not been wearing one. We 
will no doubt get any number of anecdotal stories from people who claim that 
they are alive today as a result of wearing their PFD. The fact is that one 
has no way of actually knowing whether or not they might have survived just 
the same had they not been wearing their PFD.

   Please understand I am not trying to make a case against PFD's here. I do 
believe that most people should be wearing a PFD most of the time while 
participating in this sport. My position has always been simply that there 
are some legitimate exceptions to the rule.

Duck and cover!

Scott
So.Cal.




Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 09:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jackie Fenton 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .

Fred writes:

> Two decided to make for shore about 100 yards away.  They both died.
> Reason:  Hypothermia???  Drowning.  Real reason:  Neither had on a
> PFD, were not dressed for the water temperature and the others stayed
> with the boat.

There was a very good discussion about rip currents and pfd's on
PaddleWise some time ago.  Might offer some possibilities to what 
happened.  Of course, the debate on whether "to wear or not to wear" 
will always be there.  I am convinced :-)

See http://www.paddlewise.net/topics/technique/rips-fpd.html

Cheers,

Jackie




Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 13:52:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steve Cramer
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 KiAyker@ wrote:

>    We have been through this all before. I have always taken the position 
> that PFD's are not necessarily necessary, and have had to endure the back 
> channel threats to my life as a result. You will find that, on this subject 
> particularly, most people on this list are quite narrow minded and not even 
> willing to consider that there can be some exceptions to the rule. Oh well. 
> I'm up for the fight.

I don't intend to fight about it. I wear mine all the time. In 11 years 
of boating a very wide range of water, I've never felt I would be safer 
with it off. YMMV. You can -- and will -- do whatever you want. 

I'll concede there may be some exceptions. What are they? I don't mean
anecdotes like the original poster. I mean situations where if you saw
your child paddling with a PFD on you'd tell him or her to take it off.

> I really don't think that is true. Read the CG fatality reports,
> especially recreational boaters on inland waterways. Most fatalities,
> except in serious white water, were not wearing PFDs. Not for any of the
> rational reasons you've cited, just ignorance and belief that they didn't
> need it. "Hell, I can swim." Famous last words."
> 
> Statistics can be so much fun! For instance, IF most boaters are not 
> wearing PFD's, then it would be logical to assume that most boating 
> fatalities would not be wearing PFD's either. It does not necessarily imply 
> that had they been wearing a PFD they would not have become a fatality! OK, 
> so you qualified this statement by saying "except for whitewater." So I can 
> assume that most whitewater fatalities are wearing PFD's? Can I therefore 
> assume that I have a greater chance of survival in whitewater by not wearing 
> a PFD then I would if I were wearing one? I mean, just look at the statistics!
  
I'm glad you're having fun. I'm not going to debate this bit, however.
  
> I do not believe it is really possible in most scenarios to state 
> unequivocally that this person would have survived had they been wearing a 
> PFD, or that person would not have survived had they not been wearing one. 

You may have a point. Feel free to tell me under what circumstances a sea
kayaker out of his boat is safer without a PFD than with one. I am having
trouble coming up with any I think are reasonable.

> Please understand I am not trying to make a case against PFD's here. I do 
> believe that most people should be wearing a PFD most of the time while 
> participating in this sport. My position has always been simply that there 
> are some legitimate exceptions to the rule.

As I said, I'm willing to be educated as to what these may be. For my
simple mind, it's easier to just wear it all the time. One less decision
to make.

> Duck and cover!

But keep your nose above water.

Steve




From: KiAyker@
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 14:35:29 EDT
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

In a message dated 8/19/00 10:53:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
cramer@ writes:

> You may have a point. Feel free to tell me under what circumstances a sea
> kayaker out of his boat is safer without a PFD than with one. I am having
> trouble coming up with any I think are reasonable. 

   Once again, we've already been through this all before some time ago and I 
know there is nothing I can say or do to try and convince those of you who 
have already closed your minds on this issue. But for the rest of you 
thinking folks who might not have been around in the previous discussions I 
will give you a couple of typical scenarios where I chose not to wear my pfd.
   I grew up body surfing the waves of Southern California. I am quite 
skilled and comfortable swimming in large waves. I am now an avid kayak 
surfer. Now please understand that I never come out of my boat. But in the 
event that I did end up swimming in large surf I would feel MUCH safer 
without a pfd on. The pfd would impede my ability to dive under said waves 
leaving me at the mercy of the nastiness on top. Please understand that this 
applies to me. Certainly someone who does not have any experience swimming in 
surf should probably be wearing a pfd.
   I also enjoy spearfishing from my kayak. I will use my boat to transport 
me to where I want to be, and then jump out and look for fish. When I'm done 
I'll climb back into the boat and paddle to another reef. Certainly I'm not 
going to be wearing my pfd while I spearfish. And if I'm dressed for the 
water and already jumping in and out of the boat in order to swim around, 
what possible benefit do I hope to realize from replacing my pfd each time I 
climb back into the boat? I don't think I'm any safer in this situation with 
a pfd on then I am without it.
   As far as my kids are concerned they are required to always wear a pfd in 
the kayak. And I always wear a pfd when I'm kayaking with my kids. My point 
is, and always has been, that there are SOME legitimate reasons for SOME 
individuals to pass on wearing a pfd while in a kayak. It's an individual 
decision that I have given a great deal of thought to and I should not be 
condemned or ridiculed for my choices simply because you choose to live in a 
black and white world.

Scott
So.Cal.



Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:48:43 -0700
From: Dave Kruger
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

Sigh.  We have indeed been through this before.  Scott and I both feel that an
**experienced** body surfer/surf swimmer is impeded by a PFD, and for the
reason he states succinctly above.  (For the record, my times as a body surfer
date back to the '50's and ended in the late '60's, while Scott is still doin'
it!)  I suspect that unless a person has considerable experience in surf, our
conclusion seems nutsoid.

I suggest that before anybody rails against Scott's assertion that a PFD in
surf is a liability for an experienced surfer, they *do* a few tens of hours of
swimming in 6-8 foot surf (even 4-foot surf can thrash you, but 6-8 foot stuff
"teaches" you what to do faster).

It might be useful for us to find out what the bulk of kayak surfers wear:  PFD
or no PFD.  How many folks on this list surf 4-8 foot waves in their kayaks?  I
bet not too many.

Note:  1. I am *not* claiming that a PFD should be avoided in WW.  I have no
experience as a WW kayaker or WW swimmer.  2. In all of the sea kayaking I do,
I *always* wear the PFD.  I do not kayak in surf.  Too old and treacherous.

-- 
Dave Kruger
Astoria, OR




From: B00jum! 
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 03:18:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

Just to add some fuel to the burgeoning flames..

There is an article by Eric Soares (Tsunami Rangers) on this exact
subject:
http://www.watertribe.com/Magazine/July2000/July00Soares.asp

In it he outlines several situations where a pfd may be a hindrance.
The main argument seems to be that pfds impede your ability and speed
of swimming.  The first rule from the article is: this is only an
option if you are a *good* swimmer.

While I still wear my pfd for surf kayaking, I'm beginning to question 
the value of it.  As it stands, my roll is good enough that its not
really an issue.  OTOH, if I were to wet exit (hey, it could happen 8) 
the level of bouyancy it provides could be an impediment to swimming
my (WW) kayak back to shore.

This is either an argument for no pfd or for a lower bouyancy pfd, I'm 
not sure which.

I've also wondered about wearing a pfd in very calm flatwater,
especially when the shore is so close.

OB disclaimer: Obviously the general rule is 'when in doubt, wear it'.

For the record, I've been *very* grateful for my pfd when wet exiting
in rapids.  I learned first hand that a pfd makes for a good cushion
when slam dancing with rocks.

To skip around this topic a bit - I'm also thinking about the canoe
team that capsized and the two who swam to shore drowned, while the
ones who stayed with the boat survived.  I'm forgetting now, did the
two who swam don pfd's?  In any case, my suspicion is that in cold
water, swimming itself can assist the process of hypothermia as you
shed your radiated heat into the passing water.  Given this its a real
close judement call of whether you can make it to shore in time before
hypothermia gets critical (and thus the question of keeping the pfd
becomes relevant).  If your close enough, but the pfd would slow you
down (and lets assume that you are sans boat as well) then loosing the
pfd may be your best option.

Anecdotally, I've also heard of another situation for loosing (as
opposed to not wearing) your pfd.  In river running there are some
holes that are 'keepers'.  If you've wet exited in the hole and the
hole keeps recirculating you no matter what you do, one option is to
lose the pfd and swim *under* the recirculating water.

[By the Bye: I see that this topic has been debated before, but
speaking for those of us who joined up in the last year, we'd love to
hear the summary &/or new information.  Then again, I may be speaking
for just myself 8]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
snark@          aka Glen Acord	  http://www.tulgey.org/~snark
	if ($snark eq "boojum") {vanish("softly","suddenly")}




From: "Jack Fu"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 07:40:45 -0700

I am an experienced ww river kayaker and sea kayaker.

Anyone who does not wear a PFD in river ww is damned stupid. 

BOOjum says:

> If you've wet exited in the hole and the hole keeps 
> recirculating you no matter what you do, one option is
> to lose the pfd and swim *under* the recirculating water.

Yes, there are documented cases where a person out of his 
boat is caught in a "keeper" hole in a river, and the PFD
helps keep him there, preventing him from sinking low enough
so he can swim out from the bottom of the recirculating pattern.
I know of one such case personally. The paddler was a highly 
experienced ww paddler and slalom racer. He was recirculated 
(sucked down into the hole, then pushed back up to the surface
a few feet downstream, then sucked upsteam and down again into
the water, etc.) two or three times. On the last time, being 
extremely cool-headed, he dumped his PFD and actually HELPED 
the current suck him down by doing a "reverse" breast stroke. 
(Imagine you're being sucked down vertically, feet first. You 
sweep your hands from near your hips upward toward your head.) 
He popped up again about 10 feet downstream from the hole and 
was not recirculated again. His paddling companions then were
able to rescue him.

But this is an extremely rare kind of occurrence. And this 
paddling group violated one of the prime safety rules: When
you are paddling near keepers, at least one person should
be standing on the bank with a throw rope. If a person is
caught in the keeper, use the throw rope! In this particular
case no one was manning a throw rope.

Every responsible ww club or group I have ever paddled with 
requires that you wear a PFD. No exceptions.

Jack Fu
47-37-39 N, 122-07-57 W 




Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 11:27:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steve Cramer
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

On Sat, 19 Aug 2000, Dave Kruger wrote:

> Sigh.  We have indeed been through this before.  Scott and I both feel that an
> **experienced** body surfer/surf swimmer is impeded by a PFD, and for the
> reason he states ....
> 
> I suggest that before anybody rails against Scott's assertion that a PFD in
> surf is a liability for an experienced surfer, they *do* a few tens of hours of
> swimming in 6-8 foot surf 

Dave, why the sigh? I haven't seen any "railing." Lighten up a little.

I'm not a body surfer/swimmer, so I accept your opinion as to how to do
it. My question was for paddlers, not swimmers.
 
> It might be useful for us to find out what the bulk of kayak surfers
> wear: PFD or no PFD.  

Indeed, that is the question. Surfers, how about it? A little more
broadly, if you are, perhaps of necessity, attempting a surf landing with
someone who may flip and swim, do you tell him to take off his PFD?

> Note:  1. I am *not* claiming that a PFD should be avoided in WW.
> I have no experience as a WW kayaker or WW swimmer.  

Swimming in WW is hard enough for me with a PFD. I wouldn't want to try it
without one.

> 2. In all of the sea kayaking I do, I *always* wear the PFD.  

Me, too.

> I do not kayak in surf.  Too old and treacherous.

The surf is or you are? ;)

Steve




Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 09:55:32 -0700
From: Dave Kruger
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

Steve Cramer wrote:
 
> Dave, why the sigh? I haven't seen any "railing." Lighten up a little.

Yeah, you got me on that one.  I should lighten up.
 
> I'm not a body surfer/swimmer, so I accept your opinion as to how to do
> it. My question was for paddlers, not swimmers.
>
>> It might be useful for us to find out what the bulk of kayak surfers wear:
>> PFD or no PFD.
>
> Indeed, that is the question. Surfers, how about it? A little more
> broadly, if you are, perhaps of necessity, attempting a surf landing with
> someone who may flip and swim, do you tell him to take off his PFD?

No.  That person should make the decision based on their experience in surf of
that size.  An inexperienced person should *not* be out in big surf (over 6
feet).  However, if stuck in big stuff, the PFD is probably a net benefit to a
totally inexperienced person -- they will eventually wash ashore, and the
flotation will help the waves to move them to shore.  If nothing else, it makes
recovery of the body easier .

>> I do not kayak in surf.  Too old and treacherous.

> The surf is or you are? ;)

Surf more than me!

-- 
Dave Kruger
Astoria, OR




From: Melissa Reese
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 10:35:07 -0700
Subject: [Paddlewise] To PFD or not to PFD - this is the queston...

Hi.  I've just written - and deleted - a far too long post on this 
issue of wearing/not wearing, and/or removing a PFD while in surf.  
I'll try to make this one much shorter (I need to go to sound-byte 
school)...

I too, am an avid bodysurfer, having spent much of my time during my 
college years in So. California surf (The Wedge - at Newport 
Beach/Balboa, and various other places).  I too, prefer to swim in 
surf without a PFD, for the reasons mentioned by Scott and Dave.  

By the way, to the other women on the list:  Even in warm water 
bodysurfing situations, when a wetsuit may not be necessary,  I do 
recommend a *one piece* bathing suit (ask  me how I know this :-)).

And Steve asked:

> Surfers, how about it? A little more broadly, if you are, perhaps 
> of necessity, attempting a surf landing with someone who may flip 
> and swim, do you tell him to take off his PFD?

If they're not comfortable in the surf, whether they can hold on to 
the boat or not, I'll *not* suggest they remove the PFD.  It may be a 
bumpy ride to shore, but they'll most likely survive.  Also, 
depending on how large the swell is, and how close to shore you are, 
it's a good idea to sometimes check the depth, as I've often seen 
exhausted swimmers, frantically swimming, not aware that they could 
simply stand up and walk the rest of the way in.

I do feel it's important though, for a kayak surfer to be comfortable 
with surf swimming (and even bodysurfing).  If one is not yet 
comfortable (or at least familiar) with these, I feel it's useful to 
practice them before paddling in surf situations.  

There are other issues we have to consider as well when we're in the 
surf with our boats (besides ourselves and our boats).  Other 
swimmers, surfers, and boaters.  If at all possible, and especially 
when there are other people in the water, it's important for us to 
not allow our boats to go tumbling freely in the surf, as they could 
do serious damage to another person's well-being.  This, of course, 
makes us deal with surf differently than if we were just ourselves, 
without a boat.  And of course, don't forget the helmet.

A little aside here, from my bodysurfing experiences:  As backup 
safety equipment for offshore paddling, I'll take along a pair of 
swim fins.  If I find myself in an extended swim scenario, these 
could help get me to where I'm going a lot faster (especially if I 
have to swim against any current).

Melissa
(well, it was long, but much shorter than the first one!)




From: "Whyte, David"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] To PFD or not to PFD - this is the queston...
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 13:34:37 +1000

Those of us who spent our youth at the beach bodysurfing and surfing know
the answer we've seen it happen. Most embassing for the women concerned.

And even for males who don't tie the cord tight enough in their swimmers
before hitting the big surf can suffer the same fate

David




From: B00jum!
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 02:33:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

Jack Fu writes:

 > I am an experienced ww river kayaker and sea kayaker.
 > 
 > Anyone who does not wear a PFD in river ww is damned stupid. 
 > 
 > 

Just to clarify - I wasn't contemplating *not* wearing a pfd in river
ww.  The anecdote was to illustrate one possible case where it _might_
be useful to loose the pfd, but certainly not a case of going sans
pfd.

I've also thought over the surf issue and decided, that while in my
kayak I'd much prefer to have it on.  I've seen enough kayak/kayak and 
kayak/surfboard collisions to be assured that the extra padding will
come in handy 8)  I think the pfd/swimmer issue doesn't take into
account possible injury (esp in surf &/or rock gardens).  If I've been 
thrashed around and am feeling out of sorts, for whatever value of
'out of', I'd *really* like to have the pfd on to assist in my
flotation.

So far, in all the questionable pfd cases (needing to swim, etc) it
doesn't strike me that there is a compelling reason *not* to wear your 
pfd in the first place.  If you later get into a situation where
loosing the pfd may help, then you can burn that flotation when you
get to it 8)

I think this just leaves flatwater.  How many people paddle flatwater
w/o a pfd or with a pfd 'on deck'?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
snark                aka Glen Acord	  http://www.tulgey.org/~snark
	if ($snark eq "boojum") {vanish("softly","suddenly")}




From: "Dave Williams"
Subject: [Paddlewise] Subject: Re: How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 13:56:16 +0700

I have one thing to offer on this topic.

[Mounting soapbox]

A LOT of the deaths attributed to not wearing a PFD happen in cold water. I
say that you should wear a PFD at all times when in water that's too cold to
spend the night in.

[Dismounting soapbox]

[Starring at the box again, but not mounting]

However, say you're in a group of experienced paddlers in calm water, with
the air and water temperatures both very high, and a PFD very handy... why
is it imperative to wear it?

> From the always TROPICAL Far East,

Dave

Phuket, Thailand




Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 13:09:49 -0700
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

Wes Boyd wrote:
> 
> At 02:33 AM 8/21/00 -0400, B00jum! wrote:
> 
> >I think this just leaves flatwater.  How many people paddle flatwater
> >w/o a pfd or with a pfd 'on deck'?
> 
> On warm, calm water, on a warm day, on a familiar and small inland lake, I
> have been known to put the PFD under the bungees. 

As mentioned by some, this when to PFD and not to PFD question has been
raised before.  I hesitated to join in the postings, but since a few
postings carry the no-PFD flag, I thought I should weigh in with a
strong pro-PFD stance.

Comfort?  There is hardly any excuse for not wearing one.  If a PFD is
uncomfortable find one that is comfortable.  More and more models have
more and more points of adjustment and better designs for comfort while
paddling.

Hot weather?  I have paddled in 90 percent humidity and 97 degree air
temperature with no wind and relentless sun beating down.  Whenever
those conditions got unbearable, I took off my PFD...wait a second, not
the way you think: I dipped it into the water to get it soaking wet and
put it on again immediately.  It is surprising how cooling a wet PFD
that is soaking your T-shirt can be.  Also I dip my hat constantly in
the water for the same cooling effect.  If you know how to roll, roll
for rotary cooling.  If others are around, do a reverse Eskimo bow
rescue using their bow...tip yourself over until your entire upper body
and head are soaked and then hip snap and pull yourself back up.

Surf? I guess there may be a good argument for not using a PFD when
playing in surf.  I don't play in surf.  If I am coming through surf, I
am coming in once with plans to come out later, once.  A PFD offers more
protection and options than not wearing one.  Don't the Tsunami Rangers
who famously play in surf wear PFDs as a rule?

Flatwater that is absolutely calm?  You never know when conditions may
change.  The sea, and even a lake, can be fickle that way.  If the PFD
is comfortable (which it certainly can be) and, if you can cool off if
it hot while wearing a PFD (methods outlined above), then why not wear
it at all times.

Anecdotal info?  I know a mention of anecdotal info was referred to as
likely to come in the pro-PFD position.  I have one involving me.  I
have given it several times on this listserver and bored with re-stating
it.  All I can do is assure you that I am unequivocally positive I would
not be here to be in a position to bore you if I had not been wearing a
PFD on a calm day on water that was calm. 'Nuff said.

ralph diaz




Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:44:07 -0700
From: Dave Uebele
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

In my more morbid moments, I view a PFD as something to make it
easier for the coast guard or SAR to find and retrieve your body
after you drown or die of hypothermia. But this is up in the 
Pacific Northwest where the water is cold enough to be the main killer.

Never mind any arguements about whether it restricts you ability
to swim.

If help is close by, you can huddle and conserve heat
while a rescue attempt is being made.  Trying to swim or thrashing about
you just lose heat that much faster. If help is not close, lets hope you can
get back into your kayak fast, and get someplace to warm up.

If you are wearing something to keep you warm in the water, it might
provide approx as much flotation as a PFD. Though not as likely to help
keep your head out of the water.  Still most of those wont work 
indefinately, they just slow the heat loss.

dave




From: [Ralph C. Hoehn]
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 14:24:55 EDT
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

In a message dated Mon, 21 Aug 2000 12:43:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Wes Boyd 

.. This year, I started wearing an inflatable PFD under conditions when all of the above don't quite apply. The inflatable fits me better, has more flotation and is cooler and less restrictive than the regular PFD, and I may just continue using it on lakes when I don't nned the insulation of the regular PFD.
-- Wes

Wes,

Which kind of inflatible do you use? Is it only ripcord activiated or is there an automatic inflation feature also?

Ralph C. Hoehn
http://www.PouchBoats.com




Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:01:06
From: Wes Boyd
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD

At 02:24 PM 8/21/00 EDT,[Ralph C. Hoehn] wrote:

>Which kind of inflatible do you use? Is it only ripcord activiated or is
there an automatic inflation feature also?

The West Marine logoed SOSspender, of the Type III persuasion, mouth or
ripcord activated.  There is a Type I inflatable available, at considerably
more price, with safety harness involved -- but doesn't seem very
applicable for my purposes.  It's not the ideal thing for all conditions,
but is useful in conditions where I find a regular PFD excessively hot and
constrictive.

Your mileage may vary -- but remember that it's you doing the risk
assessment for yourself.

-- Wes




From: "Dave Williams"
Subject: [Paddlewise] The ongoing, uninspiring PFD debate
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:19:36 +0700

Ralph wrote:

> Hot weather?  I have paddled in 90 percent humidity and 97 degree air
> temperature with no wind and relentless sun beating down.

When was the last time that the water temperature was hotter than the air
temperature in NY?  It gets that way here at latitude 8 quite often.
Nothing, including rolling or dipping, cools you down for more than a few
seconds... if at all.  Maybe inflatable PFDs would work in tropical
conditions.

However, standard PFDs have foam inside and foam is an excellent insulator.
Foam against your body can make you overheat if conditions are right.  If
you're paddling at any speed faster than lilly-dipping, you're going to get
hot in a PFD if both the air AND water temperatures are high enough.  Those
conditions are normally accompanied by dead calm weather over here.  I see
no logical reason to wear a PFD in those conditions.  Sure, the weather can
change.  I've got a PFD with me AT ALL TIMES.  It doesn't take more than a
few seconds to put it on.

> Surf? I guess there may be a good argument for not using a PFD when
> playing in surf.  I don't play in surf.

I do play in the surf and I go out in storms too.  You should have a PFD in
the surf most of the time.  However, there are times when it can be
dangerous.  Those times are rare.  If you've ever been in the 'impact zone'
when really big waves are picking you up and tossing you 'over the falls'
you'd understand.  I reiterate, those circumstances are rare.

> Don't the Tsunami Rangers who famously play in surf wear PFDs as a rule?

Rangers smangers.  Other than the cool name, I don't see that they're doing
anything special.  There are plenty of paddlers who can do everything that
they do... but, of course, they don't have a cool club name.

Don't the Tsunami Rangers  play in COLD water and around rocks?  Sure
they do.  They should wear PFD while in those conditions.  They should also
wear helmets at all times when surfing around rocks to protect their famous
heads.

> Flatwater that is absolutely calm?  You never know when conditions may
> change.  The sea, and even a lake, can be fickle that way.  If the PFD is
> comfortable (which it certainly can be) and, if you can cool off if it hot
> while wearing a PFD (methods outlined above), then why not wear it at all
> times.

Do you wear a PFD while snorkeling?  Do you have one nearby while
snorkeling?  Gee, what if the weather changes?

This whole PFD debate is beyond boring.  If you feel that you need to wear a
PFD all the time, then wear the darn thing.  All of these monotonous 'across
the board' statements about PFDs are truly unsound given the wide variety of
conditions that exist in the watery realm.  Learn how to swim and work on
your self-rescue technique.  Use your personal judgement to access the
situation to see if it warrants having your PFD on or not.

Cheers anyway,
PFDave

Latitude 8
Southern Thailand




Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:37:40 -0700
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] The ongoing, uninspiring PFD debate

I don't want to belabor the point but there are several questions you
ask that invite answering.  But before answering them I would like to
state two things:

1.  You certainly have a right to choose not to wear a PFD under certain
cirmcumstances or that a person can choose to not wear a PFD under all
circumstances.  An exception would be for commercial or club trips where
the company and club insist that you comply with a wear-PFD mandate.

2.  Sometimes in these kinds of arguments about what a person should do,
it is often worthwhile turning around the question.  So instead of
someone like me coming up to a person and asking them or telling them to
put on their PFD or to zip it up fully, would you or anyone go up to a
person who is already wearing a PFD on the water and tell them or ask
them to take it off? 

Now to some of your questions: 

Dave Williams wrote:
> 
> Ralph wrote:
> 
>> Hot weather?  I have paddled in 90 percent humidity and 97 degree air
>> temperature with no wind and relentless sun beating down.
> 
> When was the last time that the water temperature was hotter than the air
> temperature in NY?

Last week we had a few days in which the water was about 10 degrees
Fahrenheit warmer than the air.  Generally you find this kind of
differential happens in August and September.  Of course, I am being
precise in answering your question.  The temperature of the water is
75-78 and those daytime air temperatures were in the middle 60s.  Your
point was that water at 88 or whatever it is out your way does not have
an immediate cooling effect.  But even it would if it makes you wet and
the water evaporating off your wet shirt or body would feel cooling.

> However, standard PFDs have foam inside and foam is an excellent insulator.
> Foam against your body can make you overheat if conditions are right.  If
> you're paddling at any speed faster than lilly-dipping, you're going to get
> hot in a PFD if both the air AND water temperatures are high enough.  Those
> conditions are normally accompanied by dead calm weather over here.  I see
> no logical reason to wear a PFD in those conditions.  Sure, the weather can
> change.  I've got a PFD with me AT ALL TIMES.  It doesn't take more than a
> few seconds to put it on.

Good luck in putting it on if you suddenly capsize and you are in the
water trying to hang on to your paddle and boat when weather has turned
suddenly nasty and the sea is beginning to rage.  Oh, I know it can be
done and have practiced drills for hanging on to that all while putting
on a PFD.  But let me tell you something...it is a lot easier to deal
with all that if you have the PFD already nailed on to you, i.e. one
lest thing to worry about in a self-rescue.

>> Don't the Tsunami Rangers who famously play in surf wear PFDs as a rule?
> 
> Rangers smangers.  Other than the cool name, I don't see that they're doing
> anything special.  There are plenty of paddlers who can do everything that
> they do... but, of course, they don't have a cool club name.
> 
> Don't the Tsunami Rangers  play in COLD water and around rocks? 

I get the feeling that the Tsunami Rangers would still wear PFDs if they
were in similar surf conditions in hotter weather.  But I don't know
that for a fact.  I doubt though that they wear the PFDs to ward off the
effects of cold water.  While the PFD may help in that department, they
have their wet suits for that.

>> Flatwater that is absolutely calm?  You never know when conditions may
>> change.  The sea, and even a lake, can be fickle that way.  If the PFD is
>> comfortable (which it certainly can be) and, if you can cool off if it hot
>> while wearing a PFD (methods outlined above), then why not wear it at all
>> times.
> 
> Do you wear a PFD while snorkeling?  Do you have one nearby while
> snorkeling?  Gee, what if the weather changes?

You are comparing apples and oranges.  There is a difference between
paddling and swimming.  You wear helmet and elbow guards when roller
blading but not when walking or running; why? because one has greater
risk than the other of injury.  Back to paddling and swimming. Generally
in swimming it is a situation you control; you try to stay within your
swimming capacity and range. and, in snorkeling, you increase your
swimming ability with fins and a mask.  You snorkel off a beach or
boat.  In paddling you may be far from shore, out of your range of
swimming ability.  There are chances that you may lose that fine nice
floating platform you paddled out in.  Or you may want to climb back
aboard.  The PFD gives you an added measure of bouyancy that helps you
remount.  If you need to blow up a paddle float, the PFD keeps you from
sinking with each blow into the inflation tube.  Try blowing up a paddle
float when not wearing a PFD; you will find that the action tends to
sink you a bit.  
 
> This whole PFD debate is beyond boring.  If you feel that you need to wear a
> PFD all the time, then wear the darn thing.  All of these monotonous 'across
> the board' statements about PFDs are truly unsound given the wide variety of
> conditions that exist in the watery realm.  Learn how to swim and work on
> your self-rescue technique.  Use your personal judgement to access the
> situation to see if it warrants having your PFD on or not.

I am sorry you are bored and you find this monotonous.  But thanks for
your questions since it helps illuminate the choices regarding wearing a
PFD and why it is generally a good idea to wear one.

ralph diaz  




From: "Dave Williams"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] The ongoing, uninspiring, turning comical, PFD
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:44:23 +0700

Howdy Risky Ralph,

> 1. You certainly have a right to choose not to wear a PFD under certain
> cirmcumstances or that a person can choose to not wear a PFD under all
> circumstances.  An exception would be for commercial or club trips where
> the company and club insist that you comply with a wear-PFD mandate.

Yes, I totally agree that PFDs should be worn by commercial operators and
clubs if that is the law.

> 2. Sometimes in these kinds of arguments about what a person should do,
> it is often worthwhile turning around the question.  So instead of someone
> like me coming up to a person and asking them or telling them to put on
> their PFD or to zip it up fully, would you or anyone go up to a person who
> is already wearing a PFD on the water and tell them or ask them to take it
> off?

Of course I wouldn't ask someone to take a PFD off!  What in the world is
going through your head, man?  If someone wants to wear one, great.  What
I'm saying is that it should be up to the individual.  That individual
hopefully is using sound judgement when considering the consequences.  I'm
not some kind of 'anti-PFD' psycho.

> Your point was that water at 88 or whatever it is out your way does not
> have an immediate cooling effect.  But even it would if it makes you wet and
> the water evaporating off your wet shirt or body would feel cooling.

Yep, it might have a bit of an "immediate cooling effect", but that doesn't
mean much in the long term.  I can't be bothered dipping buckets of water
over my head every other stroke... I usually prefer to paddle when I go
paddling.

> Good luck in putting it on if you suddenly capsize and you are in the
> water trying to hang on to your paddle and boat when weather has turned
> suddenly nasty and the sea is beginning to rage.  Oh, I know it can be done
> and have practiced drills for hanging on to that all while putting on a PFD.
> But let me tell you something...it is a lot easier to deal with all that if
> you have the PFD already nailed on to you, i.e. one lest thing to worry
> about in a self-rescue.

First of all, I don't "suddenly" capsize.  If I do, I roll... case
dismissed.

Second of all... Oooooo, yuk, now I really don't want to wear one.  When did
they start "nailing" them on you!

Plus, I've never seen the state of the sea change faster than I could put a
PFD on.  I also tend to look around while I'm paddling.  Every paddler
should strive to be competent at understanding weather signs.

I said:
> Don't the Tsunami Rangers  play in COLD water and around rocks?
> Sure they do.  They should wear PFD while in those conditions.

You said:
> I get the feeling that the Tsunami Rangers would still wear PFDs if they
> were in similar surf conditions in hotter weather.  But I don't know that
> for a fact.  I doubt though that they wear the PFDs to ward off the effects
> of cold water.  While the PFD may help in that department, they have their
> wet suits for that.

Perhaps you misunderstood me.  "Those conditions" I referred to were BOTH
cold water and ROCKS.  They should wear a PFD around rocks.  They just
happen to be in cold water too, which is another very important time to wear
one.  I would.

You said:
> Flatwater that is absolutely calm?  You never know when conditions may
> change.  The sea, and even a lake, can be fickle that way.  If the PFD is
> comfortable (which it certainly can be) and, if you can cool off if it hot
> while wearing a PFD (methods outlined above), then why not wear it at all
> times.

I retorted smartly:
> Do you wear a PFD while snorkeling?  Do you have one nearby while
> snorkeling?  Gee, what if the weather changes?

You came back lamely with:
> You are comparing apples and oranges.  There is a difference between
> paddling and swimming.

Nope, I'm not comparing fruit.  We are talking about paddlers swimming.

> You wear helmet and elbow guards when roller blading but not when walking
> or running; why? because one has greater risk than the other of injury.
> Back to paddling and swimming. Generally in swimming it is a situation you
> control; you try to stay within your swimming capacity and range. and, in
> snorkeling, you increase your swimming ability with fins and a mask.

How can you say that you have control while swimming?  Can you control the
possibility of one of those sudden weather changes occurring?

You can also increase your swimming ability by practicing.  Not relying on
'gadgets' is almost always better.

> You snorkel off a beach or boat.

Yes, and I would be much farther away from either of those than I ever would
be from my kayak.

> blah, blah, blah... The PFD gives you an added measure of bouyancy that
> helps you remount.

Yep, and it catches everything on the deck.

> I am sorry you are bored and you find this monotonous.  But thanks for
> your questions since it helps illuminate the choices regarding wearing a PFD
> and why it is generally a good idea to wear one.

Are you throwing your hands up like you 'won' or something?  Good one dude!

Judgement is the issue.  My point is that it IS safe not to wear a PFD under
certain conditions.  Experienced kayakers should be free to access the
situation or conditions and decide whether to wear a PFD or to merely have
it easily accessible.

What I'm NOT saying is that they don't have their value.  Of course they do.
There are plenty of times when it would be foolish not to put one on.  For
example, you should always have one on in cold water or cold weather.

Cheers,
Dave (12 time zones away from that wonderful police state)

Phuket, Thailand




From: LedJube@
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:21:16 EDT
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] The ongoing, uninspiring PFD debate

In a message dated 8/22/00 1:44:57 PM, [Ralph Diaz] writes:

> I am sorry you are bored and you find this monotonous.  But thanks for
> your questions since it helps illuminate the choices regarding wearing a
> PFD and why it is generally a good idea to wear one. 

    When I started paddling, not so long ago, I hated wearing my PFD. For all 
of the same reasons that people have mentioned, they are restrictive at 
times, hot other times and not neccessary 99 % of the time. These days I swim 
much less yet wear my PFD much more. While for some experts, in some very 
specific conditions, a PFD can be a hinderance, I have not heard anyone 
deliver any convicing arguement against there use while actually paddling. On 
the other hand, the statistics show that PFD use significantly reduces the 
chance of loss of life. Besides, who amoung us couldn't use a couple of extra 
pockets?  ;-)
    For non-experts, PFD use should be a non-issue. In the sudden fear and 
anxiety that can accompany an unscheduled capsize, a PFD an make the 
difference between life and death. What more can we ask of our PFD's.  If an 
expert doesn't want to wear a PFD, that is their right. As for us mere 
mortals, we will be best served by following the conventional wisdom on this 
issue.

Jed  (happy to play the lemming and wear my PFD even when I don't think I'll 
need it)




From: "Jack Fu"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] How Would You:  Change to. . . .PFD
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:41:07 -0700

> I've seen enough kayak/kayak and kayak/surfboard collisions to be 
> assured that the extra padding will come in handy 8)

Good point! A few years ago I was kayaking surfing with a friend. We
are both competent surfers but not experts by any means. We were coming
in on the same wave, close to each other. My friend did someting wrong
and his kayak (a Crossfire) shot toward me, hitting me directly over my
heart. I was extremely lucky. My PFD was the kind made of vertical
minicel (or some dense foam material like it) tubes. The bow hit
directly on a tube, rather than between two tubes.

I felt a stab of pain like I'd never felt before in my life. It was
excruciating. All I could see was a pitch-black universe with several
brilliant yellow flashes going off. Fortunately I had enough presence
of mind to pop my skirt. I then passed out as I fell out of my boat.
Then I came too as the waves rolled me ashore, because I remember
trying to stagger up the beach. Then I passed out again. Then I was in
a tropical paradise of beaches, brilliantly colored flowers, waving
palms, and a blue sea. I was lying on the beach looking at the sky
with the shadows of the waving palm fronds constantly passing over
my face. Then I realized that they were not palm fronds; they were
human heads looking down at me in concern. I had been hauled up
the beach and laid on my back, and my friend and some bystanders and
a lifeguard were looking at me to see if I was okay. I was, except for
a fractured rib.

I think my PFD helped me (the unconscious me) to float and be rolled
up to the beach. Also, it softened the impact of the kayak bow on
my rib cage.

Jack Fu
47-37-39 N 122-07-57 W

PS: The little dream I had about the tropical paradise seemed to
last a long time, but I was told after I came to that I was out
only for a few seconds!

And where did the scenery of the dream come from? From the murals
in one of those tourist-trap Chinese-Hawaiian restaurents I had
been to recently.




From: Rick Sylvia
Subject: [Paddlewise] The PFD discussion from a rookie's point of view
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:21:18 -0400

Folks, I've read some of the PFD discussion..... deleted most before
opening. Wanna know what a rookie thinks?  I think the discussion is up in
the ozone layer, well above the experience of most paddlers. We don't have
the gizillion miles logged on the water with numerous experiences in all
types of hair raising situations  - WE'RE STILL LEARNING. But, we all -- you
and I alike -- represent paddling every time we talk to a friend, carry a
boat on our vehicle, launch, or browse through an outfitters store (or
worse, end up on the news for something we did or didn't do).

Therefore, I'm going to wear my PFD even in 2 foot water, 10 feet from
shore, when the water is like glass.  And where do you think I'll get an
education so I can join discussions like this with pertinent information and
opinion...... from you guys, the experienced "mentors" (whether you
recognize and accept it, or not) as well as personal experiences. So, what
example do you want to set for the rookies like me? PFD.... or no PFD?  It
shouldn't matter that there may be situations when an individual can choose
not to wear one - they still represent paddling to everyone who ever finds
out about your choice.  Do we want the image of saftey first, or safety as a
choice?  And remember, the average person, regardless of cirumstances at the
time of the choice, will equate PFD with Safety and no PFD with no safety.
It's been drilled into us for years!  We don't understand the nuances!

When and if I get to a level when I can consider myself able to hold my own
in these discussions, I'm still going to wear a PFD in 2 foot water, 10 feet
from shore, when the water is like glass, BECAUSE A ROOKIE MAY BE WATCHING
AND EMULATING MY EXAMPLE!!!!!

To me this is not unlike a professional athlete. Sure, he can chose to act
and think however he/she wishes, and endorse whatever product he/she wishes,
just like you can choose to wear or not wear a PFD, but in the end, kids are
looking up to this individual and treating them as a role model, just as
rookie paddlers look up to some of you folks.  Whether you asked for it or
not, are you going to accept the responsibility that comes with being a role
model and drive home the use of PFDs?

Here's a last example that might hit a little harder.... would you put a gun
to your head and pull the trigger while your child watches?  Even if you
knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it was unloaded, and there was zero
risk to you whatsoever, what do you think you just taught your child who
looks to you for education and doesn't know all the other things that you
know?  Like the child, we see PFD or no PFD.  We don't see the circumstances
and subtle nuances.  

With all that said, and recognizing that the PFD is a choice each and every
time we wear it or toss it aside, and regardless of circumstances, isn't
there more to gain by wearing it than not wearing it?

Rick 




From: dldecker
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:51:06 -0400
Subject: [Paddlewise] Darwins theory of the PFD debate

If you wear your PFD you might not drown or if you do you body will be
easily recovered . If you live your genes are at a better chance of being
passed on

If you don't wear your PFD you stand a good chance of drowning and or your
body not being found for several days and you gene pool belongs where it
belongs, crab food.

I can't make you wear a PFD, just like I can't make you not wear one. It is
a individuals choice if they want to be recycled as crab food or not.
Lighten up people.

Dana




Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 15:30:30 -0700
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] The PFD discussion from a rookie's point of

Rick Sylvia wrote:

> shore, when the water is like glass.  And where do you think I'll get an
> education so I can join discussions like this with pertinent information and
> opinion...... from you guys, the experienced "mentors" (whether you
> recognize and accept it, or not) as well as personal experiences. So, what
> example do you want to set for the rookies like me? PFD.... or no PFD?  It
> shouldn't matter that there may be situations when an individual can choose
> not to wear one - they still represent paddling to everyone who ever finds
> out about your choice.  Do we want the image of saftey first, or safety as a
> choice?  And remember, the average person, regardless of cirumstances at the
> time of the choice, will equate PFD with Safety and no PFD with no safety.
> It's been drilled into us for years!  We don't understand the nuances!
> 
> When and if I get to a level when I can consider myself able to hold my own
> in these discussions, I'm still going to wear a PFD in 2 foot water, 10 feet
> from shore, when the water is like glass, BECAUSE A ROOKIE MAY BE WATCHING
> AND EMULATING MY EXAMPLE!!!!!

This is a valid point which probably doesn't apply much to Dave Williams
who is off in Thailand where not many rookies are going to be going down
to a launch site with a brand new boat from a large outdoor shop and
taking his/her cues from what seasoned paddlers are wearing, carrying
and doing.  

Years ago in a local club we started getting into a debate about whether
to require wearing PFDs on club trips.  Before a blowup developed that
eventually split the club and paddlers in two, I was one of the two trip
leaders doing most of the club's trips.  I wore a PFD, the other one did
not.  I brought up the point you make above, leading by example, to get
the guy to understand how people pick up on what leaders and experts do.
He gave his argument about not needing it and being able to whip the PFD
on in an instant if trouble hit, etc., and that he would just tell
people they need to wear theirs.  So I said "Well, how do we explain to
newcomers that you are not wearing a PFD but I am?"  He thought a minute
and said "Oh, tell them you are unsure of your rescue skills and that's
why you need to wear a PFD." Forgetting that my rescue skills were
nearly the equal of his, imagine what participants on a trip would make
of that!  I failed to see why I had to throw ashes on my head because he
didn't want to wear a PFD.  Eventually the sxxt hit the fan locally and
the split occured.

ralph




Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:56:59 -0700
From: Dave Flory 
Subject: [Paddlewise] PFD/Safety equipment debate

Perhaps an oblique look at the PFD/Safety Equipment discussion. In my
case, I have always hated hats, and still hate hats. However, and this is
a big HOWEVER, I am blessed with an almost perfect head, unsullied by
very many of those filamentous protrusions which so common on most
people's cranial areas. As a result I always wear a hat when I am
Kayaking, since I live in a High UV area of the West Coast, California. I
rarely forget to use the 45 sunblock, but I never forget the hat, not
after that one time that I did forget it some 35 years ago when I was
paddling my old Royak out to a dive site. Second degree burns all over a
bald head is really uncomfortable. For the same, and other reasons like
broken glass and rocks, I always wear hardsole rubber bootees. I paddle a
SOT boat. I've seen people with 2nd and even 3rd degree burns on their feet.

When I was a motorcycle rider for 30 years, and a motorcycle cop for 14,
I ALWAYS wore a helmet. Helmets are odiously uncomfortable, but I've seen
at least a dozen cases where people died, or were thereafter very
vegetative, solely for the lack of wearing one. A couple were less than 5
mph accidents where the head impacted something solid like a a rock (edge
of the concrete sidewalk) or a kayak (a car) and suffered fatal damage.
I've come off of a motorcycle at over 100 mph two times. One time the
helmet saved me from serious injury; it was totally destroyed, the other
time I miraculously escaped with 3 quarter sized abrasions and not even a
bruise. (no scratches were to be found on the helmet.)

I feel the same way about my PFD that I do about my hat/helmet, love/
hate. It's hot/bulky but I wear it anyway. If I get too hot I go for a
short dip in the water which is never warmer than about 55 here. If I
lived in warmer climes, I might modify that policy, somewhat, the way I
did with the ballistic vest when I was M/C officer. If I wore it during
the day with temp. at over 80 or so I would get prickly heat rash and
couldn't sleep at nite. A cop can't afford to be overly tired at work,
especially a motorcycle rider, so I would stop and put it on at dusk, and
wore it all the time at under 75 degrees. The threat that vest was
intended to defeat was, statistically, 90% at night, so I felt I could
probably get away with it. You play the odds and sometimes you win,
sometimes you lose. When losing means my life, and not my money, I'm a
_lot_ more careful.

I enjoy my life, and spent a lot of time and work stuffing my head with
egregious facts that I don't want to lose. I don't advocate laws which
compell reasonableness, however reasonableness is interpreted. I do
believe in evolution having observed it in action on many occasions. I
don't willfully try to become an example of it's action. Your mileage may
vary. I'm willing to accept the discomfort of the PFD for the promise of
being able to continue to experience the joy of paddling my little teeny
boat in intimate contact with power of the immensely huge ocean. I once
got to touch an orca when I was in the water. It could have disposed of
me in an instant. I felt exalted the same way I do when kayaking. The sea
can dispose of me any time s/he feels like it, but perhaps because I have
always treated it gently and with respect for its moods, s/he has not
become enraged with me, yet, so I am able to continue a lifelong love of
the sea in my 62nd year.

Fair winds and happy bytes,
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Dave Flory, San Jose, CA.            
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Speak softly and study Aikido, then you won't need a big stick.  ©2000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------




From: "Seng, Dave"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] Darwins theory of the PFD debate
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 12:52:35 -0800

dldecker wrote:

> If you wear your PFD you might not drown or if you do you 
> body will be easily recovered . If you live your genes are
> at a better chance of being passed on
> 
> If you don't wear your PFD you stand a good chance of drowning
> and or your body not being found for several days and you gene pool 
> belongs where it belongs, crab food.

  One thing that has kind of struck me as strange during this debate about
whether or not to wear a PFD is that no one (as best I can recall) has
mentioned how easy it is to simply remove a PFD if you suddenly find
yourself in a situation where it has become a detriment.  I'm not talking
about a situation like being hung up on a sweeper or anything like that, but
rather about open water or even surf.  If a PFD is a hindrance in that type
of situation I'd bet that most folks could shed their PFD in less than 30
seconds.  

  My point is that IMO it's better to have it and be able to get rid of it
than to not have it and really need it.

  As always, it's best to try things for yourself and use the methodology
that works best for you.  I'm a bit of a klutz and have found that trying to
put on my PFD in water conditions that could cause me to capsize, while
holding on to my paddle and kayak, is pretty tough.

  The issue is one that every person needs to decide for themselves,
hopefully rationally and not based on ignorance or even worse - bravado or
stupidity.

  I'm in total agreement with Rick Sylvia's comments about education and
setting a good example - it's a concept that I believe in strongly.  Someone
someday might benefit from something one of us "taught" them as we walked by
them at the boat launch while wearing a PFD.  Maybe - and maybe not -
doesn't make a difference for me - I do it because it _might_ make a
difference.  I choose to wear a PFD all the time.

  For WW paddling there isn't any option as far as I'm concerned - just do
it.  In open water I've never needed a PFD and short of being knocked
unconscious really have a hard time imagining a situation where it would be
necessary, but I do it.  No skin off my nose and I sweat like a horse any
time I'm paddling and it's over 60F anyway, PFD or no PFD it doesn't matter.

  Besides, without that PFD where are you going to stash your knife, flares,
compass, whistle, and that all important snack?

  In my mind the issue isn't really so much about PFD's per se, but rather
about education of the paddling public in general - how many of us have read
almost every year about someone who died while paddling in shorts and a
t-shirt, without a PFD, by themselves, etc, etc?

Dave Seng
Juneau, Alaska




From: [Ralph C. Hoehn]
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:34:10 EDT
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] Darwins theory of the PFD debate

Dave Seng wrote:

> I'm in total agreement with Rick Sylvia's comments about education 
> and setting a good example - it's a concept that I believe in strongly.
> Someone someday might benefit from something one of us "taught" them
> as we walked by them at the boat launch while wearing a PFD.

I never wore a PFD when I grew up paddling in the North Sea (early 1970s).
Few people thought about PFDs for paddlers in those days. As a consequence
I caused my parents grey hair many a time paddling in pretty marginal
conditions, I'm sure. Even if anyone had told me to wear one, I'd never
seen my father in a PFD, therefore there was obviously no need. 

I'm pretty attached to my kids and I think a lot about lessening the potential
consequences of risky situations, in which they might find themselves. I would
not be caught dead without a PFD on or near the water, even if there were no
other reason for it than to set an example for them. My comfort level is
considerably increased by seeing them deploying safety gear. Setting an example
is the only effective way to convince them to do so.

Ralph Hoehn
http://www.PouchBoats.com



Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:15:23 -0400
From: Rich Kulawiec 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] The PFD discussion from a rookie's point of

Tomorrow afternoon I'll be doing some slalom training in flat water
during what's likely to be a hot, humid afternoon.  I'll be wearing
not just a PFD, but also a helmet.  I doubt if I'll really need either:
I've *never* flipped on the river I'll be training on, not in ten years.
And at least in flat water, I'm usually not clumsy enough to bang the
gate poles into my head.  And no doubt it's gonna get pretty hot out
there, especially when I start doing 45-second interval sprints.
But I'll wear them tomorrow and every day that I'm out there for two reasons:

	1. They are both essential safety gear and I would never paddle
	without them.

	2. There will be people passing by and watching.  Some of them
	will (if I'm lucky) get the idea that even the good paddlers
	wear a PFD, so maaaaaaybeeeee the next time they're out on
	the same river in an alumnium canoe *they* should wear a PFD.
	If we're all lucky, one day this will help avert an accident.

---Rsk




From: "Michael Daly"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] The ongoing, uninspiring PFD debate
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 20:41:46 -0400

From: "Dave Williams"

> Do you wear a PFD while snorkeling?  Do you have one nearby
> while snorkeling?  Gee, what if the weather changes?

I wear a PFD when snorkling.  It's a snorkling vest actually and
it's inflatable.  I also wear a weight belt and farmer john.
I use the weight to help me get near neutral bouyancy and inflate
the vest if I want to stay at the surface.  Fully inflated it
gives me enough bouyancy to swim a long time even if tired.
Being a poor swimmer, I wouldn't be without it.

Mike

PS - I think the overheating effects of a PFD are exaggerated.
I wear a PFD and farmer john in any but _very_ warm water
conditions.    




From: "Sailboat Restorations, Inc."
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] The ongoing, uninspiring PFD debate
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:21:34 -0400

> PS - I think the overheating effects of a PFD are exaggerated.
> I wear a PFD and farmer john in any but _very_ warm water
> conditions.

Me, too.

I've read this whole PFD thing with some interest.  Of course, it's as big a
debate in the sailing community as it is here.  IMO, a PFD is far more
essential in a sea kayak than on a sailboat, although I consider it pretty
important gear on a sailboat, as well.  I *always* wear my PFD kayaking.  It
has occurred to me that I look pretty silly, launching into a shallow pond
to go bird watching wearing my full safety gear setup.  I can live with
that.

OTOH, I have very mixed feelings about people telling me I *have* to wear
one, especially other boaters.  For some reason, it really bugs me, pisses
me off, to have some boater come up to me and sanctimoniously lecture me or
"inform" me of the "proper" way to do things.  I'm not sure why this is.
I'm willing to consider that it may be my own shortcomings that make me feel
this way.  But my general feeling is that boating is an individual thing,
and I resent someone purporting to impose their own personal views on me as
to how it should be done.  ....

On the other other hand. . . I'm not necessarily opposed to regulations
requiring the use of PFD's by boaters (even all boaters, maybe especially
all boaters).  A carefully considered societal determination that a rule is
appropriate is different from some individual taking it upon himself to be
the self-appointed evangalist of the boating community. . . . It's not
really a simple issue.  Not at all.  Goes to the very heart of our basic
political philosophies.

Well, anyway, I always wear my PFD while kayaking.  Always.

Mark




Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 19:24:26 -0700
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] PFD/Safety equipment debate
From: D Lee 

I see the PFD issue like I see the seat belt issue.  Some people say you
don't need to wear a seat belt in a parking lot at 5 mph, or they claim
they don't need one driving to the grocery store where the speed limit is
<25 mph.  Or statistically they can drive 100,000 miles before an
accident is likely to happen.  But when that drag racer comes across the
intersection at 65 mph and clobbers them, they won't have time to put it
on.  Or when the kid coming the other way bends over to pick up a nickel
that he dropped, and crosses the center line, you've got a 50 mph head-on
collision that isn't going to wait until you buckle up.

Similarly, you might not need a PFD 99.9% of the time, but if and when
you do need it, you might not have time to put it on.  Let's say you're
drifting down a river and tip on an unseen log or rock, knock yourself
unconscious when falling, and your paddling partner doesn't look back for
a minute or two.  Life is full of freak accidents, and the odds favor
those who take prudent measures.

Darrell Lee
Alameda, CA




Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 11:19:45 +0100
From: (Dirk Barends)
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] PFD debate fuel?

When doing my regular 2 hours paddle along the coast of the lake where I
live, I admit to seldom wear my PFD. I admit to be hypocrite, but I will
never encourage people to not wear a PFD, even if I think it is safe.
(Broke this rule now by admitting here that I don't always wear a PFD.
But as a punishment for this, tomorrow I will go paddling with my PFD!)
If someone asks me if they should wear their PFD I will always say yes,
because I figure that if they have to ask, the probably should?

My own rule for wearing a PFD or not, is if I can swim to shore
after falling in the water. But if not, I will probably not paddle there too!
Because if I then fall overboard, and I cannot swim to the shore, 
I will have to rely on help from others, who probably will not be there
when I need them. And I just don't like to paddle dangerously with the idea
that if something goes wrong I will rely on the rescue of others,
who might not even be there (in time)?
If I do go paddling with a PFD on, the risks of falling
in the water and the risks when in the water should also
be minimal then, and self rescue should be a reliable option.

The argument for always wearing a PFD because the example you give to
others, sounds very valid to me, but on the other hand I have been worried
about my actual paddling (alone with an open canoe) on the lake here could
in fact inspire people to do the same thing without the judgment
(for one, not to paddle with an offshore wind, and two the water
should be warm enough _for me_ for a 1000 meter swim) and
paddling skills that I have?
A lot of summer tourists here will likely see me paddling into the harbor,
and because it seems to go so easy (I often heard it looks
that way, can't help it) they could decide to paddle on the lake also?
Which I think can be unsafe with or without a PFD.
A PFD will not prevent falling in the water
_and_ may give a false sense of security.

To some this loose ends of thinking may be boring thoughts.
Perhaps my tolerance for boredom is higher?
Or can I find the d[elete] button easier:=)

Dirk Barends




From: Rick Sylvia 
Subject: [Paddlewise] FW: The PFD discussion from a rookie's point of
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:39:20 -0400

SNIP

> So let me just say, what about people like Duane Strosaker and Doug
> loyd and how about Ed Gilliet. These guys do some pretty intense solo
> trips that could easily send the wrong message to beginners. Should
> they stop?
   
Not to be a smart a__, but I'll bet that Doug wore his PFD during his recent
revisit to the Storm Islands, as do Duane and Ed when they do intense solo
trips.

> Whether or not one wears a pfd is, I feel, in the same category as
> whether or not it is OK to paddle alone. 
 
I disagree. While I do think that solo trips play a part in the bigger
safety issue, I think that they are too disimilar to be discussed within the
context of the PFD portion.  Afterall, spare batteries for a VHF radio can
be considered a  safety issue, but not deserving (IMHO) of inclusion in this
discussion. I think you have to classify similar items together, discuss
them as a group, then, interlink groups together, taking them all into
consideration when paddeling and making your personal decision.  All the
classifications together is what I would call the "safety matrix".

For example, I might create a classification called "Self Rescue Items".
I'd include both PFDs and Paddle Floats init and possibly some other items.
I wouldn't include discussion of items/topics that fit into a classification
called "Skill Level", or "Group Dynamics", or "weather conditions", etc.
since I'm talking specifically about self rescue "items", not skills and
methods, otherwise, "Skill Level" might be included.  Although I think all
the categories contribute to the "safety matrix" and must be considered as a
whole when you make your personal decision, I think it's too difficult to
talk about disimilar classifications simultaneously and have a meaningful
discussion.

On the extreme side, carrying beans for dinner is a safety issue ---  what
if you get gas cramps, your skills are compromised as a result, and you
capsize and can't self rescue properly?  Again, not trying to be a smart
A__, but I think it's important to prevent "scope creep" when discussing
certain topics. This topic isn't "SAFETY" in general, it started
specifically as PFDs (I think...it's been so long now).  

Anyway, some very good points of view have been brought to light
demonstrating that a simple issue on the surface isn't so simple when you
get into the details. While some of my thoughts have been challenged, I'm
still of the opinion that the PFD should be worn at all times, but I
certainly respect everyones right to make their own decision, and am
thankful to have the opportunity to participate in these discussions which
challenge my mindset and make me think......... now if I could just convince
my wife that I really do use my brain from time to time..... :-)

Rick




From: Rick Sylvia 
Subject: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 17:19:35 -0400 

I saw something at lunch today that I had to chuckle over, so just for fun,
:-)   I thought I'd stir up the almost dead PFD saga  (it's like "saving the
life" of a topic).  I checked the "Canoe & Kayak" Editorial Submissions
Guidelines (available for all to see on their Web Site), and verified that,
under Photo Submissions, it says "... and do not use images that show a lack
of commen sense, lack of knowledge about paddlesports, or disregard for
safety or the Environment.  People are usually wearing life preservers in
photos we select....".

An advertisement caught my eye at lunch today.  Don't recall the
manufacturer, but it's a 3-Person sit-on-top, with a photo of 3 kayakers in
one on the water and NONE of them wearing a PFD.  Advertising dollars sure
speak volumes!!!!   There's also a photo of a WW kayaker standing up on a
run (at least that's what it looked like to me)!?!?   Would someone help me
understand "commen sense", please?  

Anyway, I care, so I had to share......and stir, and stir, and stir.....then
stir just a tad more

Rick

PS - Come to think of it, I didn't see a PFD on Ernie in the Photo Contest
section either!!!!!!  What kind of example is that for the next generation
of paddlers? "Canoe & Kayak" editors apparently don't participate in
Paddlewise discussions! (except for Ralph).

Note:  If you don't read the magazine, there was a photo of Ernie from
Seasame Street's Bert and Ernie characters, with Ernie in a scaled to fit
boat, on some water, sans PFD.




Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 22:39:04 -0700
From: Doug Lloyd
To: Rick Sylvia
Subject: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine (add

Rick Sylvia said:

> I saw something at lunch today that I had to chuckle over, so
> just for fun, :-)  I thought I'd stir up the almost dead PFD saga

I don't want to stir up any trouble with the PFD debate, especially in
my Codeine induced brain-deadness this week, but I would like to say
that any water sports person who doesn't wear a PFD the majority of
times out on the water is a bloody idiot - and that's coming from
someone who is accused of also being one (for other reasons).

I see unsafe actions portrayed in woodworking magazines all the time,
including advertisements. I see numerous letters to the editor actually
printed, but I've never seen one (and I assume they do get written)
taking the editors to task for the unsafe practices portrayed in the
adverts. Definitely a double standard. A friend of mine has written to
C&K Magazine over a number of theses types of safety issues, but has
never been published in the letter to the editor column (though he did
get a reply back once).

Well, as I'm suffering a bout of AIDS right now (Acquired Intelligence
Deficiency Syndrome) I'll cease and desist post haste from stirring the
waters. However, I would like to add some useful information to PW, as
I've not contributed much lately other than off-topic dribble (which I
see a lot of from others too, on this list over the past year).

We had a Canadian Safe Boating Symposium in March here in BC, and some
of the information shared was very interesting regarding PFD's. Most
PW'ers know all this stuff, but some newbies might benefit. The keynote
speaker, Dr Micheal Tipton, found that even individuals wearing "life
jackets" and immersion suites were at high risk of drowning in cold
water, if adrift in a rough, confused sea state with multiple wave
patterns. Apparently, a video was shown of waves washing over the head
of an individual so dressed, and it was noted that only 150 ml of water
would be sufficient to drown the victim. There is now more research
being done with respect to equipping a splash guard that integrates with
the lifejacket to protect the face. It makes me wonder how well one
would fair with no PFD.

While I was on my summer holiday with my family, I stopped in at the
Courtney-Comox Coroner's Office to compare notes where upon we continued
to help each other finish up our respective reports on the kayaker who
died last spring kite sailing across Georgia Strait (he, his coroner's
report/recomendations; and me, a Sea Kayaker article). We talked a fair
bit about hypothermia and PFD use. He was late with his appointment with
me, as he was just returning from investigating a death of a fisherman
whose boat plowed under a wave while reversing. Two guys went in the
water, and the one without the PFD died. He said it was a clear-cut
case, and added it to his thick file of boaters who die with no PFD on.

As an aside, it was interesting to note that the coroner also does
critical incident debriefing and runs a men's group for rescue personnel
suffering Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. He was very interested in the
Storm Island story, in particular the aftermath with Dave and Dave's
belligerence at having the story published and what the trigger points
were/are. It gave me some insight and understanding that I did not have
prior to the informative meeting with him. Cold incidents of a long
duration figured prominently in his highlights. I find this stuff more
interesting and relevant than long posts about sharks and kayaking, but
that's just me :-)

As far as other interesting information from the Safe Boating Symposium,
here are a few highlights:

- Rescuers are being trained to keep hypothermia victims horizontal when
lifting them out of the water.
- The "gasp reflex" has been studied in much more detail, and it would
appear one's breath cannot be held for more than 5 seconds in 10 degree
C water -- for the average victim with minimal thermal protection.
- Most drowning deaths occur within 2 to 3 meters of safe refuge.
- Grip strength tests show a marked loss such that the plastic wrap of a
simple rescue device could not be opened, and if it was, not deployed.
- If muscle temperature is below 27 degrees C,  skin becomes
anesthetized and nerve  impulses to said muscles are so impaired that
functionality is lost.
- Swimming, of course, increases convective cooling, but if you must
swim for some reason, use the legs only as less blood from the legs
moves to the core than from the arms.
- Forget the space blanket if you are shivering above water after a
wet-cold incident. A large plastic bag works much better, as most of the
cooling is via convection and evaporation, rather than via radiation of
heat from the body.
- Those at greater risk are individuals with a low percentage of body
fat, have consumed alcohol or drugs,  and have been through some trauma
or are fatigued.

Add lack of a PFD and those influenced by poor role modeling within
national outdoors magazines, if you like!

BC'in Ya
Doug Lloyd (who keeps thinking of unsubsribing from the list, but can't
seem to do it)




From: NEWTOT
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 08:05:29 -0500
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs

Even more irritating than ads showing people being "unsafe" are the SUV and
4-wheeler ads showing their vehicles destroying the environment - they always
drive through a creek at a high rate of speed.  This is ILLEGAL due to the
sediment stirring up and choking the stream.  In my mind, there is nothing worse
than romanticizing such destruction and encouraging customers to attempt such
things!

Also, on the PFD debate, I would like to mention the affect on your checkbook.
Last weekend my paddle buddies went for a short sunset paddle near the campsite
in calm conditions on a small lake.  The lake patrol approached them and ask to
see their flotation devices - having none on or in the boat, each was fined $75
!  It became dark during this exchange, so the patrol said he would escort them
safely back to the campground.  Apparently, during the escort, the patrol speeds
off to chase a motor boat, leaving them vulnerable!  They had planned to return
before dark, but not now.  So they paddled alone to camp and the patrol
eventually found them to finish the ticket writing.

$75 and harrassment is another good reason to wear/carry a PFD!

Tim
Boat'n in the Ozarks




Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 09:47:00 -0700
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine 

All the magazines have been guilty of being laissez-faire about PFDs.

1) For the longest time back in the past, Sea Kayaker seemed to be
resisting having paddlers wear PFDs in the magazine's cover art.  The
covers were not fotos but painted art work and it seemed to be purer not
to have that ghastly practical thing on the subject.  It became quite an
issue for some of us Northeasterners.  Finally Carl White of Hopewell
NJ, who also at one time edited the Anorak newsletter, sent them a few
letters calling the editors to task for this.

In the issue that Carl's letter regarding the covers was published, the
cover was that of clearly an Inuit paddler of yore, i.e. pre-PFDs.  I
don't know if it was coincidental or being cute.  Sea Kayaker certainly
has a pro-PFD policy now albeit some of its ads lack PFDs, which is
really hard for them to control.  As far as I can see, most if not all
of the magazine written copy and stories do have the paddlers wearing
PFDs.

2) Canoe & Kayak when it was run by Dave Harrison featured his editor's
column in each issue with a picture of him.  He was never wearing a PFD
in the foto. He was finally needled into redoing the photo cum PFD and
recognized in an editorial the role model aspect.  Again, ads may have
people without PFDs and is difficult to control.  I do work for C&K but
have no inside info about policy but I was pleasantly surprised to hear
that their instructions to authors stress that fotos have paddlers
wearing PFDs and acting responsibly.

3) My own flirtation with the PFD cover issue.  In terms of full
disclosure, having pointed a finger at two of the mags, I must confess
my own temptation.  First of all there are fotos in my book that have
people without PFDs that I really had no control over.  These are stock
fotos I needed and got from Klepper's files when I visited the factory. 
Germans were (are) loath to wear PFDs (more on that below in #4). 
Second, when it came to shoot a cover for the book I was up at LL Bean's
SK symposium with the publisher.  I asked Janice Lozano to do the photo
(she is a partner with her husband Bill in the very successful Atlantic
Kayak Tours here in New York that does trips and instruction and
organized that superb BCU symposium here in late July everyone is still
talking about).  I found a couple of people to pose in a single and
double folding kayak.  But suddenly I, in my narrow focus, saw this all
in polemic terms.  If people were seen wearing PFDs on the cover of the
book then it might be interpreted that folding kayaks are unsafe and
therefore you should wear a PFD when paddling one. I said let's dispense
with the PFDs.  Janice, who is usually quite mild-mannered, said a quiet
but jarringly firm "No" that brought me to my senses.  I never said I
was perfect or incapable of being stupid!  :-)

4) Speaking of being stupid and back to the German mentality.  In 1993,
when I was visiting the Klepper factory, I had the chance to try out a
then prototype model that became the Aerius 2000.  It had been designed
and made over the winter and paddled just once by the designer and no
one else down in the Mediterrean.  I was in Bavaria at the factory just
after the local lakes had unfrozen of their ice.  I was intoxicated with
the idea of being the first person in a new Klepper model (the first in
some 40 years!) on the very same waters that the first Klepper ever had
been tested back in 1907 (also quite high on a big bratwurst lunch with
plenty of beer).  We went with the prototype to the Chiemsee (a large
lake near Rosenheim).

When we were grabbing the boat from the factory, I started to search
around for a PFD.  The owner of the company, Herman Walther was
indignant.  "You will not paddle one of my boats wearing a PFD.  It
would be embarassing to me!"  What could I say?  The price of admission
was no-PFD and this was an emotional priceless opportunity for me or for
any folding kayaker.  Next, I considered the temperature of the water. 
Let's see...lake unfrozen two weeks ago.  What could the temperature be
now?  It had to be cold, real cold.  Oh well I will just paddle it next
to shore and inside the closed-for-the-season marina at the lake.

We got there and I paddled around next to shore.  Got some fotos taken. 
Then Herman insisted that I paddle about a mile or so across the lake to
a fabled island.

There I was.  No PFD, no sprayskirt, no pump, no bailer, no paddlefloat,
no cold water clothing (I had on borrowed raingear and some polypro plus
plastic beach slippers), no signaling device not even a whistle.  Name
any safety device you can and I did _not_ have it!  What did I do? 
Didn't I say earlier that I can be pretty stupid?  I paddled across like
an idiot!

ralph diaz




From: [Ralph C. Hoehn]
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 12:21:04 EDT
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs

NEWTOT wrote:

> Even more irritating than ads showing people being "unsafe" are the
> SUV and 4-wheeler ads showing their vehicles destroying the environment
> - they always drive through a creek at a high rate of speed.  This is
> ILLEGAL due to the sediment stirring up and choking the stream.  In my
> mind, there is nothing worse than romanticizing such destruction and 
> encouraging customers to attempt such things!
>
> Tim
> Boat'n in the Ozarks

We don't have to go as far as SUVs to witness destructive behavior. Here's a
(positive) excerpt from "A Primer for Folding Kayak Builders". The text 
describes first that one of the original European white water greats, Franz
von Alber, was indeed deservedly considered thus (no sissy paddler this guy)
and secondly how careful he was of his paddling environment:

-QUOTE-

...
E. Wallecek, who was himself a fearless white water paddler, in one of his 
accounts mentions that Alber Franzl [Bavarian way of turning surname and given
name around] was not shy of taking high risks if there was an exhilarating run
at hand. He entered the Salzachöfen [the most difficult passage at that time]
at a time of an unusually high water level and found himself turned upside down
nine times before the exit. Each time he brought his kayak back onto an even
keel and brought the run to a successful conclusion, mightily impressed, but
under his own power.

...

I first came face-to-face with Franz von Alber in 1953. We agreed on a meeting
on the river Möll. I was completely fascinated by his Kayak: The deck was white,
set off against the burgundy hull by a deep blue detail stripe along the seam.
The stem ends were equipped with small wooden balls (Herbert Slanar’s
hallmark, as I was to find out later), just as the Greenland kayaks had been
with equipped with similar devices made from walrus tusk.

I was fascinated also by the way in which Franz von Alber handled his boat. I
am not merely referring to the fact that he meticulously chose the softest 
grass area on the rocky river bank, but to the way in which he melded into
a single entity with the boat, once he had wriggled into the tiny manhole and
had snapped his hips into position beneath the tight fitting carlings on either
side. The form of his sinewy, muscular torso flowed smoothly into the shape of
the lean kayak. Calm paddle stroke guided the boat past rocks, braced it
effortlessly over smaller waves and nonchalantly shouldered the foamy crowns of
larger standing waves. I was speechless: I had never before met a fifty year
old like this! I was to be amazed yet again by his touring speed after the
[wild] Möll had released us into the [calmer] Drau.

[Mr. Mayr, the author of the German original text, to whom the first person
singular refers in the excerpt above, recently referred to this memory in a
conversation we had and again reiterated how Franz von Alber never allowed his
boat to touch the ground or shore while entering or exiting and certainly never
when under way. It was not that he was afraid for his boat, but that this was
just the right way to conduct oneself on the river.]

-UNQUOTE-

Ralph C. Hoehn
htp://www.PouchBoats.com




Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 11:08:21 -0600
From: "Shawn W. Baker" 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety--my bad rescue practice experience.

ralph diaz wrote:

> There I was.  No PFD, no sprayskirt, no pump, no bailer, no paddlefloat,
> no cold water clothing (I had on borrowed raingear and some polypro plus
> plastic beach slippers), no signaling device not even a whistle.  Name
> any safety device you can and I did _not_ have it!  What did I do? 
> Didn't I say earlier that I can be pretty stupid?  I paddled across like
> an idiot!

I had a somewhat similar experience on Sunday at the demo days.  The day
after my big fun surfing the big waves, I took out several boat models
that I had not been in before.  I only had the PFD, skirt, clothing, and
whistle, but that wasn't enough.

My mother-in-law loaned us her video camera so I could get a tape of
myself paddling and rolling for some video critique; I had my buddy Ryan
set up on a dock, film rolling.

I took out the little CD Squall (condensed version of the Storm, which
is the plastic version of the Solstice GT), got some film taken of me
(trying) do do some good torso rotation, and then figured I'd do a few
rolls.

Something went wrong.  Part of it was the unfamiliar boat.  Part of it
was having paddled with many layers under my drytop the night before and
not re-tightening my PFD.  I capsized, the PFD rode up, and I got
completely disoriented.  I was going for my offside roll, and couldn't
feel at all where "up" was.  I tried to relax, but my lungs were
screaming "OXYGEN!" so I grabbed for the sprayskirt loop.  Somewhere in
this process, I ended up on my side, head out of water, inadvertently
doing a balance brace.  I caught a few quick breaths, and got ready to
roll again, but in my panic (big mistake!) I dropped my paddle.  Tried a
handroll, but the boat didn't fit me closely enough to come up.

If I'd have had my own boat, I probably wouldn't have had the no-rolling
problem in the first place, since I know it so well.  If I'd had my own
boat, I would have had my spare on the aft deck to grab and roll up with
one paddle half.

I pulled the grab loop and swam up next to the boat.  I re-tightened my
PFD while floating (and realized how hard it would be to actually don it
while swimming) and emptied and righted the boat.

I tried a cowboy scramble re-entry.  The cockpit was way too small to
accommodate my 38" inseam legs, and I tipped over.  Empty boat and try
again.

Now, the camera is still rolling (I still haven't viewed it yet, but I
will tonight), and I again tip over.  Empty the boat and try the paddle
outrigger rescue.  This boat is so damn tippy, I just bury the paddle
blade in the water.  If I'd had my own boat, I would have grabbed the
paddlefloat that I never leave shore without (in my own boat!) and I
would have been done with it.  I tried 2 more times and was getting
tired.

I need to insert a comment here that at no time was I in actual danger. 
I was a mere 30 yards from shore, and I could have swam with the boat to
shore.  There were also 8 people on shore watching my struggles, and if
I had shouted or whistled for help, I could have had assistance in less
than a minute.  I was in no risk of drowning--the PFD was keeping my
head well out of water.  I wasn't too cold either, as the lake has
warmed to over 65*F and I was wearing neoprene.  It was just so damned
frustrating that I couldn't get back in the boat.  It was the first
rescue "practice" session I've ever had when I couldn't do anything
right.

I briefly considered doing a re-enter and roll, but I didn't have a pump
either.  It would have been a short paddle back to shore, but this was a
new and borrowed boat, and I didn't want to scratch the flooded boat on
the shallow bottom when I went in.

A lady was paddling around in another demo boat, so I asked her if she
wanted to learn how to do an assisted rescue.  She said sure.  I told
her, from the water, how to pull my boat across hers and drain my
cockpit, and then help me right it.  I wiggled up across the decks of
our boats and got in, with a big thanks to her.  She said,"Thank you, I
always wondered myself how you'd get back in the boat if you were out in
the middle of the lake."

Sobering to think that people cross lakes (and play in the ocean)
without these skills.  Still, a lot of good having those skills did me
before she paddled up!

I refastened my sprayskirt and paddled back to shore.

While I was never in serious danger, my experience was sobering.  I
carry sufficient safety gear in my own boat, but what if I had decided
to strike out a bit further?  I would have been in pretty sorry shape.

I'm glad that I have a bit better feeling for the "edge of my envelope"
now, and I won't take a demo out without a paddlefloat!!  I'd like to
say I'd take a spare paddle, too, but you don't really want to scratch
the deck of a new boat (that you don't intend to buy) with a spare
paddle.

Oh, and I think small cockpits suck when you have long legs!  The Squall
might be a great boat for a small paddler, but it struck me as having a
very high deck for as little beam as it has.  I had a hard time even
lying prone on the deck without tipping over.

Maybe I was feeling a bit cocky about the previous day's WW kayaker
rescue, and karma put me back in my place--it was definitely good to see
both sides of the rescue scenario.  All my previous rescue experiences
(except helping with a brief/easy assisted rescue of a classmate in my
Deception Pass class 2 weeks ago) have been practice--actually doing the
rescues when I wasn't as calm or prepared were a fantastic experience.

Flame me if you like (I'm not afraid!) but I was in close enough
proximity to shore that I wasn't sticking my neck out there.  All
comments are appreciated, though.  Squall owners?

Shawn
-- 
Shawn W. Baker          0                                    46°53'N
© 2000            ____©/______                              114°06'W
~~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^\  ,/      /~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
baker                0        http://www.geocities.com/shawnkayak/




From: NEWTOT
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:54:23 -0500
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety--my bad rescue practice experience.

As a Squall owner with time on my hands, I'll respond:

Yes the boat feels tippy due to the narrow and tall V shaped hull.  I'm 6'1"
with a 30" waist, so I went for a small narrow boat - the Storm was too big.  I
like the security of the small cockpit - this is one of the smallest on the
market, but re-entry is a bit more difficult, going "feet first" rather than
"butt first".   The Squall requires a special "small" cockpit skirt to get a
tight fit.

The high deck does make a cowboy rescue difficult!  The paddle float rescue
works best, but you must keep yourself flush with the back deck by lying on it
on your stomach and sliding your lower torso in feet first.  In rough
conditions, I'd go with re-entry and roll , although I hate taking the time
while underwater to push the foot pedals back down - I need to fix a bungie to
them like Dagger does.   Too much hip snap and you'll go over again.

My other boat, a Looksha IV, is the opposite - flat and wider, the cowboy jig
and other rescues are easier.  But the seat back extends above the coaming which
is a nuisance.

I'd say that the high deck, small cockpit,  your long legs and lack of
confidence in an unfamiliar boat contributed to your demise!

PS  Boat Demos typically cater to first time paddlers and I believe the
sponsor's have a bit of responsibility for your safety, even if it is just
telling you "Don't go beyond that buoy".

Tim
Boat'n in the Ozarks




Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 13:22:11 -0700
From: Doug Lloyd
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine (add

Scott said:

> Doug said:
>
>> I don't want to stir up any trouble with the PFD debate, especially
>> in my Codeine induced brain-deadness this week, but I would like to 
>> say that any water sports person who doesn't wear a PFD the majority
>> of times out on the water is a bloody idiot. 
>
> Ah, you've got to love broad unqualified sweeping statements such as
> these. As I tried to post a week or so back, but was apparently
> censored, the last time I went surfing here in Southern California 
> there were probably a couple of hundred people in the water, mostly
> board surfers, but around twenty or so kayak and waveski surfers as
> well, and I did not see a single pfd on the water! I guess every surfer
> in California is "a bloody idiot".

Scott, you are missing the point. It was _meant_ to be a broad
unqualified sweeping statement. Unless one is an extremely good swimmer
or near the beach on a lee shore, maintaining buoyancy (especially in
choppy, cold water) is very difficult and one tires extremely quickly in
this situation. It is not long before every fiber in your body cries out
for support as it becomes increasingly difficult not to gulp in water.
While I admit wearing a PFD can simply prolong the agony of pending
death and even restrict swimming to safety where it is not too far away,
generally, the longer you have in the water, the more chance there is of
a passing vessel or plan spotting you (this is assuming a worst case
scenario where your vessel cannot be reborded, etc.)

Yes, there are certain activities where PFD's are not commonly worn,
like board surfing. Generally, the board is you life preserver and the
shoreline your sanctuary. It would also be difficult to dive under a
wave with a PFD on. In colder water, a wet suite provides a good degree
of buoyancy. In the case of a Tofino surfer taken out to sea by strong
undercurrents, he spent the night on some kelp before being rescued.
There are also regional differences in people's views towards PFD's, as
ralph has so eloquently pointed out recently. However, in Pakistan where
I lived, people bathed in the same water they used as a toilet. That
doesn't mean I'm going to do the same thing. Pakistan poor people also
have a high rate of dysentery.

As to why you were censored on PW, I have no idea. I do know you can be
very negative on this list at times, and I don't know why you have such
a big chip on your shoulder that implicates itself on many of you
infrequent posts and replies. I though you So Cal dudes hung loose down
there. What's up, man? I know I may have appeared negative too, but my
use of the term "bloody idiot" wasn't meant in the pejorative slang
connotation. Here in BC, we are very bullish against drinking drivers,
and many of us sport bumper stickers that read, "If you drink and drive,
you are a bloody idiot". That was the vein I meant my statement in. The
hazards of waterborne travel are such that many feel those who paddle
without PFD's (indeed most recreational water users) are "foolish",
which perhaps is a more acceptable term in your part of the world,
though you may feel that the plethora of kayak surfers in So Cal without
PFD's are not foolish.

Obviously, kayak surfers are not dying en masse down your way. I was
thinking more in context of the original post which suggested as the
rejoiners came through that not wearing a PFD was a poor example,
especially for newbies who stand a greater chance of falling victim to
drowning. I'm sure the vast majority of PW'ers and even most competent
boaters of various stripes will never need the back-up protection that a
PFD gives.

As far as every surfer in California being a "bloody idiot", I didn't
say that, though through misinterpretation and misapplication and
twisting of my term "water sports person" you have indeed made me look
like a bloody idiot, which I rather think you seem to enjoy doing. This
is sad, as I have nothing against you, Scott (or So Cal).

I will, however, maintain that wearing a PFD in most cases, is the
prudent, responsible thing to do. I'm not a member of the self-appointed
safety police. It is just common sense too me. And at the last surf
kayak event I was at, everyone was wearing a PFD. Of course, we don't
get fried the same way as you do on the water with your southern
latitude heat rays. Oh, So Cal's beautiful weather! I'm jealous of you.
Maybe I do hate you :-)

BC'in Ya
Doug Lloyd.




From: "Peter Treby"
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:36:03 +1000

Richard writes:

> "the enforcement of "victimless-crime laws" is patently harassment;"

I don't think a law requiring a PFD to be worn is necessarily victimless.
The victims of a breach may be the water police and rescue personnel who
have to pull bodies from the water. Post traumatic stress among rescuers is
real.
I recall that non-PFD boaters are disproportionately represented in boating
fatality statistics.
Wearing a PFD should be a considered choice, but a community has a
collective right to say you must choose to wear one, via its laws. I don't
mind seat-belt laws, or vehicle safety standards. What's the difference
here?
Regards,
Peter Treby
37º 42' S  145º 08' E




From: "Todd Miller"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: (No, or invalid, date.)

As it happens, I was one of the two individuals who received citations in
this particular incident.  If I've ever seen harassment, this was it.  In
this situation, we were floating in the lake approximately 40 ft. from short
and about 200 ft down the lakeshore, in water as calm and smooth as glass,
simply enjoying the setting sun.  Then from out of nowhere, the water patrol
zooms up, first berates us for paddling after dark, and then proceeds to issue
citations for operating without PFDs.  Had we been swimming at this exact
location, we would probably have been sent back to the so-called "swimming
area", but would not have been fined.

I deeply resent the fact that state government (and this officer in particular)
apparently believes I am not fit to make judgements concerning my own welfare.
I am a fairly experienced whitewater and touring paddler, and am well aware of
my own limits.  Sitting quietly on a still lake at sunset falls well within my
abilities, I believe.  While I recognize that my experience was not known to
this officer, it was also painfully apparent that we were in no danger.  Thus,
the appropriate response (at least in my opinion) would have been to instruct
us to get off the water immediately and not to put back on until we were able
to comply with the law. 

At present, it is my intention to pay the fine, rig my boat for night paddling
and buy a crappy little PFD that I can stick in one of my hatches.  Maybe.
It might just be my current frame of mind, but I agree with what Richard says
below.  Especially the part about Charles Barkley...

--------------
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 14:48:18 -0500
From: "Richard Kemmer"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs

> $75 and harrassment is another good reason to wear/carry a PFD!

Good reason?

IMHO, the enforcement of "victimless-crime laws" is patently harassment;
one's only moral obligation is to resist prudently so as not to get caught.
Moreover, whatever the merits of PFDs, forbidding pictures of people without
them goes MUCH too far.  I believe that magazines should depict things as
they are, not function as vehicles for puritans, moralizers, and
sanctimonious "role models."

People should wear a PFD when they think it protects them, not to be  role
models.  Wearing one should be a considered choice, not a Pavlovian response
to modeled behavior. . .or fear of police dogs.

Having thus expostulated, I almost always wear a PFD;  but, like Charles
Barkley, I sure as hell am no role model.

Rick




Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 12:46:45 +0200
From: Reinhold Werner Weber
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine 

On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, ralph diaz wrote:

> Germans were (are) loath to wear PFDs
 
There was a discussion on wearing PFDs on Faltboot.de recently and it ran
on similar lines as on PW: You should wear one! Even the rare excuses were
the same: a PFD is not always necessary on small and calm inland waterways.

It seems difficult to enforce security rules, in kayaking as elsewhere. I 
often accompany my son Erik to kayak competitions here in France. The French
Kayak Federation has enacted strict security measures for these rapid racing
boats: Helmet, PFD, flotation, foot-brace, etc. And they always do sample
controls at the regional and national competitions and they regularly disqualify
kayakers not respecting these rules. This negligence is astonishing, as these
skilfull kayakers sometimes run on class III-IV WW. The comparison with car
safety comes to mind.

At this years Championats de France on the Isere river the federation toughened
its controls: After the official trial run *every* boat was inspected. My son
luckily passed, but his friend had to buy a new PFD within 24 h (old foam,
inadequate buoancy, was a thread on PW). Good business for the dealers present
selling PFDs...

I think it is nearly a crosscultural phenomenon that people think (in kayaking
and elsewhere) that they have the situation completely under their control and
that those nasty accidents only happen to other people. We know what we should
do and we don't do it!

Reinhold Weber




From: "Sailboat Restorations, Inc."
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 08:35:49 -0400

> No difference between belt laws and PFD laws.  The difference is that we
> disagree as to whether commumities have collective rights over such
> properly personal decisions.  I reject that premise, whether for seat
> belts, motor cycle helmets, or PFDs.  The irony is that refusal to comply,
> while heroic, can be suicidal under the wrong circumstances.
> Rick

I mostly agree, but I do think it's a bit more complex.  I don't like people
coming up to me and trying to tell me how I ought to conduct myself in
connection with my recreational activities.  Just bugs me.  Being a bit
testy at times, I'm likely to give them an earful.  But I do recognize the
difference in a collective social decision adopted in the form of
legislation, and a governmental body charged with enforcing that
legislation, and I do think there has to be *some* right in the "body
politic" to enact laws that do govern these "personal decisions."

The primary reason is that the "suicidal" (or worse, almost suicidal)
results *can* become a large burden on society (health costs, judicial
resources, supporting families of victims, etc.).  This is the argument
usually advanced in the motorcycle helmet debate, and I've yet to hear a
really sound rebuttal.  I'm very much a libertarian on these things (and
most others), and I cherish my personal freedom.  But I think it is foolish
of us not to recognize that there is a valid basis for a contrary view -- if
for no other reason, to work on a rebuttal to that view.

Mark




From: Rick Sylvia
Subject: [Paddlewise] FW: Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 08:45:06 -0400 

>  "victimless-crime laws"
 
Rick, I respect your opinion.  No flames intended, but I'd like to share my
opinion on some of your comments, just for consideration.  It's a
"victimless" crime until someone drowns, and that's what the law is trying
to avoid - some people need to be protected from themselves, unfortunately.
Very few drownings were intentional, most were accidents that could have
been avoided.  Additionally, don't forget the other victims - their
children, spouses, family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc.  They are
being protected as well, by these "victimless" crime laws.  I do agree,
however, that some laws seem completely victimless, and seem designed with
the intention of raising revenues.    I SURE HATE THOSE!



> people should wear a PFD when they think it protects them, not to be
> role models.
 
That's the funny thing about accidents.  It's hard to predict WHEN an
accident will happen, and therefore WHEN to put it on.  Sure, there are
obvious situations where accidents are more likely than others, but if you
want to stake your life on it, and the well-being of those other
"victimless" victims, it certainly is your perogative.  I look at my two
children, and suddenly I'm not willing to take the chance.  



> Having thus expostulated, I almost always wear a PFD;  but, like Charles
> Barkley, I sure as hell am no role model.
 
Glad to hear you almost always wear one.   About the role model...    IMHO,
everyone is, by default, a role model to someone who is on the same path,
but a few steps behind.  They can be modeling both good and bad behavior
(agh!  I hope I don't start a morality debate here!)  The question is really
whether or not they accept that fact and act accordingly, and secondly, what
behavior are they modeling.  If you don't want to be a role model, someone
will still watch your actions and to some degree emulate them.  There's no
way possible to prevent that.  Mass murderers don't have the ambition of
being a role model, but they are one to all the "copy cat" killers who
follow in their foot steps. Using Barkley as the example, do you  think that
kids across the country close their eyes when they see him play or turn down
the volume when he's interviewed?  He can say he's not a role model, but
what he means is that he doesn't "want" to be a role model, or he's not a
"good" role model....but in the end, he is still "a" role model. He just may
or may not be the one you want "your" kids to emulate.  But, I respect your
opinions and choices nontheless.  That's what makes the world so
interesting!

The other Rick




From: [John Winters]
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine 
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 08:57:25 -0400

I never realized how dangerous paddling was until I started paddling sea
kayaks and reading Paddlewise.

You can tell how dangerous it is because people always (almost)  wear life
jackets, have boats festooned with paddle floats, sponsons, Back-Ups, rescue
lines, throw bags, whistles, paddle tethers, GPS's, fog horns, flares, and
knives to cut their way free from all that stuff if they capsize. That ain't
enough either. Kayakers practice rolls in cold and hot water until their
sinuses cry out in pain. A dangerous sport? You bet.

Makes you wonder how the Inuit survived as a race. They didn't have this
stuff ( many still don't use it)  and they had to go hunting in their boats
that weren't even made of Kevlar or Polyethylene and didn't have bulkheads
or flotation much less SAR. You would think the whole damned lot of "stupid"
"idiots" would have slowly drowned away to extinction leaving the women
ashore to make out as best they could with European whalers who also didn't
have these things but did have boats big enough to walk around on (when they
weren't sailing around the Pacific in open rowboats like Captain Bligh -
also a "stupid" "idiot".

Just suppose Moses hadn't had on his life jacket. Where would be without the
Ten Commandments to tell us what bad buggers we are. He wasn't wearing one?
Oh. Stupid, idiot mother.

Of course, we know better now.

A lot of people don't understand the danger of a sea kayak. They see people
swimming without life jackets and assume they don't need one if they are
paddling around in  large buoyant body. They don't realize that sea kayaks
are the problem. I have seen swimmers swimming along beside sea kayaks and
the dumb ass swimmers don't know how close to drowning they are. If the
kayaker decided to rescue them and got them on the kayak they would be up
the creek without a life jacket and prime candidates for drowning unless
they jumped off to go swimming again.

Surfers are a smarter bunch. They see a sea kayak in the surf and they chase
them  away. They know that, if by some chance they end up on or in one they
will be put in danger since the won't have life jacket.

I went to a kayak symposium in a large indoor swimming pool. They knew all
about the dangers of kayaks. They chased the life jacketless children out of
the pool and made the kayakers wear lifejackets. A little boy asked me,
"Don't they know how to swim?" I told him they did but it was the kayak that
was dangerous. If they were swimming they would not need the lifejackets. He
nodded but clearly did not understand the logic. You just can't tell kids
some things.

I saw this guy standing in his kayak once fly casting and he didn't have on
a life jacket. I told him to put on his life jacket and he laughed, stepped
off his boat and walked over to tell me where to shove my lifejacket and
walked back. OK, the water was only a foot or so deep but a rule is a rule.
I guess you just can't reason with some people when you tell them to "always
wear your life jacket".

The real puzzle to me is that anyone would participate in such a dangerous
sport. If you want to avoid drowning stay away from the water, dummy. People
drown in bathtubs, swimming pools, glasses of water, in their sorrows. OK,
maybe a life jacket won't keep you from drowning in your sorrows but you
might not get hurt so badly when you jump. "Let him jump, Danno. he has on
his lifejacket."

Wait! Could it be that everyone has a level of risk that they find comfy?
Maybe sea kayakers paddle sea kayaks because they enjoy a little risk.
Possible?  Is this why sea kayakers draped in safety gear aren't "stupid" or
"idiots" and are just daring adventurers?

Could it be that some people might even want more risk? Could it be that
just like we don't want a universal standard of instruction we don't really
want a universal standard of safety? Or maybe we do want a universal
standard of safety and we should get a person suffering severe aquaphobia to
create it.  NO? Maybe such a person would insist that you not paddle a kayak
at all because it was "dangerous" and people who do are "stupid" and
"idiots".

Hold that thought. Just writing about this has got me all scared and
rattled. I think I will put on my lifejacket, drive out to the desert, sit
in my kayak and get my head straight. Never know when a flash flood will pop
up.


All Smiles and Chuckles.

John Winters




From: "Ulli Hoeger"
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:20:47 -0300
Subject: [Paddlewise] RE  Not wearing pfd and harassment  was: something else

It was written:

>> "the enforcement of "victimless-crime laws" is patently harassment;"
SNIP
> Wearing a PFD should be a considered choice, but a community
> has a collective right to say you must choose to wear one, via its 
> laws. I don't mind seat-belt laws, or vehicle safety standards.
> What's the difference here? Regards, Peter Treby 37º 42' S 145º 08' E

In the initial story the people were not fined for not wearing PFD's, 
they were fined for not having them at all.  There are rules, we all 
know them (or at least should know them), and if we don't play by 
these rules we have to accept the consequences.  Harassment 
would be if they stop kayakers for no obvious reason (people not 
wearing pfd's is an obvious reason to check this out -at least I 
wouldn't feel harassed and show the friendly officiers my pfd if I 
wouldn't wear it for an unlikely reason) and start searching for 
reasons to hand out tickets. Fictional scene somewhere on the 
coast, lake, or river: " Were is your PFD?  You have one! Whistle? 
OK, were is your bailer?  Under the bungees? Yeah, now I see it.  
Were is your floating 15 feet long heaving line?  That's it?  Lets 
see.  Hm, only 14.5 feet.  To bad. Sorry but I have to give you a 
ticket. How I hate to do that, but you need 15 feet. Here is your 
ticket.  Have a nice day."  That would be harassment!  Note, this 
was a fictional scene. I made it up, it never happened to me or 
anybody I know.  No coast guard or lake/river patrol would act so 
mean -maybe also a fictional assumption.
Here, north of the US border, the Coast Guard regulations require 
that you carry a fitting PFD for each person on board -and some 
other stuff mentioned in the friendly officer above.  You are not 
required to wear it or to use it.  It is YOUR choice!  The PFD under 
the deck bungees is legal, even if I personally consider it a bad 
practice.  One of our paddlers, a PFD hater, found last year a 
solution for himself which makes him, the coast guard, and his 
family happy.  He bought and wears a inflatable one (finally there 
are models with official approval), comfortable, not restricting, no 
over-heating (in NS not much of a problem anyway), and in case 
shit happens it provides more floatation and support than any of the 
regular kayaking pfd's.   

Ulli, who always wears his PFD, a wetsuit, carries a paddle float 
and spare paddle, and of course all the required stuff.  Did I 
mentioned first aid kit, flares, spare clothing, compass, repair kit?




Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 12:36:25 -0400
From: Steve Cramer 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine

[John Winters] wrote:
 
> I never realized how dangerous paddling was until I started paddling
> sea kayaks and reading Paddlewise.
 
To paraphrase Woody Allen...

"Is kayaking dangerous?"
"Only if you do it right."

Steve



From: Nancy Heyen 
Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] FW: Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 11:48:15 -0700 

Mark,

While I agree that the government needs to butt out of a lot of issues, at
the same time I believe that individuals who indulge themselves with risky
behaviors should reimburse the tax payers when they have to be rescued.

In effect, when the Forest Service has to pluck a mountain climber off of a
mountain or the Coast Guard gets called out to come to the aid of paddlers
who knowingly assume risk, those individuals should pay for that service.

Nancy




From: "Bill Hansen"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 14:36:30 -0400

> We disagree as to whether commumities have collective rights over 
> such properly personal decisions.  I reject that premise, whether 
> for seat belts, motor cycle helmets, or PFDs. 

The problem with this argument, and it's a very big problem, is that once an
accident or injury occurs due to someone's wilfully careless behavior, the
injured person immediately (and rightfully) expects someone else to come to
his/her rescue - and in the case of helmetless motorcycle riders (for
example), to foot the bill too. Several studies have shown that the majority
of helmetless injuries to motorcycle riders occur to people who have no
insurance. But I can tell you from personal experience that they want at
least as much care as anyone else.

Does this detract from care available to anyone else? You bet it does.

Now go ahead guys and gals - tell me that having insurance should be
voluntary. I won't buy that one either.
Bill Hansen
Ithaca NY




From: "Allan McLane"
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:50:58 -0400
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] FW: Safety, Ads, & PFDs

Let's suppose, for the sake of this argument, that you don't quite die
as the result of your injuries but are rendered incapacitated to the extent
that you can no longer care for yourself. Who else, besides the "Government,"
is going to look after you and provide your care? These days we don't often
drag the unfit out back and just leave 'em there to fend for themselves...

I suppose that the rules/regs that we are talking about here could be seen
as being place so that the government/society/greater-good doesn't have to
bear the consequences of the one individual's mistake.

--allan




Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 15:46:16 -0700
From: ralph diaz
Subject: [Paddlewise] Some PFD related questions

Out of curiousity:

--is there any instructional outfit or any sanctioning instructional
group that allows those who are being instructed not to wear a PFD while
on the water (unless related to some specific exercise)?

--is there any sea kayaking symposium or dealer demo day that doesn't
insist that participants wear PFDs?

--is there any waterborne law enforcement body anywhere such as the US
Coast Guard that does not require its crews to wear PFDs?

--is there any club or paddling association that runs club-sanctioned
trips in which wearing a PFD is optional?

The answer is "No" at least for such situations in the US and Canada as
well as in many other places as well.

1) What are such groups and bodies saying with such policies? 

2) If such bodies, with vast experience, want people to wear PFDs, even
in relatively safe, benign situations such as a demo beach or in closely
watched instruction sessions what does that say about what an individual
away from such restrictions might want to do when deciding whether to
wear a PFD or not?

You have every right in most jurisdictions not to wear a PFD if you
don't wish to (except in the examples above).  But keep such examples in
mind and the statistics on general boating accidents and the high
incident of deaths related to not wearing PFDs.]

ralph 




From: "Michael Daly"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine 
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 21:23:31 -0400

From: [John Winters]

> I never realized how dangerous paddling was until I started paddling sea
> kayaks and reading Paddlewise.
> 
> Makes you wonder how the Inuit survived as a race. They didn't have this
> stuff ( many still don't use it)  and they had to go hunting in their boats
> that weren't even made of Kevlar or Polyethylene and didn't have bulkheads
> or flotation much less SAR. You would think the whole damned lot of "stupid"
> "idiots" would have slowly drowned away to extinction leaving the women
> ashore to make out as best they could with European whalers who also didn't
> have these things but did have boats big enough to walk around on (when they
> weren't sailing around the Pacific in open rowboats like Captain Bligh -
> also a "stupid" "idiot".

A few points.  

1) Estimates I've seen were that anywhere from 30% to 50% of
   Inuit and Aleut kayakers died at sea.
2) They did use flotation aids (sp*ns*ns) made of seal skins,
   bladders etc.  In rough conditions they tied them to the
   sides of the kayaks.  In good conditions they tied them to 
   the harpoon lines.
3) They knew how to roll.
4) The Aleuts wore breathable, waterproof drytops.  (Not Gore-Tex,
   stinky whale intestines).

Mike




Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:56:15 -0400
From: Rich Kulawiec 
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] FW: Safety, Ads, & PFDs

> people should wear a PFD when they think it protects them, not to be
> role models.

Hmmm.

I think my PFD *always* protects me.  Now, it's not the only thing: I have
a reliable combat roll and a decent hand roll (if I lose the paddle);
I wear a helmet; I don't paddle rivers when I think conditions are beyond
my ability; I don't paddle whitewater alone; I've worked hard to
develop solid strokes and knowledge of how to read water; and so on.

Most of these could fail me without notice.

But it seems pretty likely that the PFD and helmet will stay with me.
(They have done so through some moderately gnarly excursions with
and without the boat.  I have every reason to believe that they
fit properly and are adjusted properly to stay put under all but
the most extreme conditions.  And I don't paddle in the most extreme
conditions.)

So I think I'm doing exactly that (wearing it when I think it protects me)
by always wearing a PFD and a helmet.


Now let's turn to the "role model" issue.  I'm teaching a clinic
on Saturday at a local beginner-level slalom race, in the middle
of a city park that's heavily trafficked by joggers, bikers, families,
etc.  The creek has 54 CFS going through it right now.  It's no more
than 2 feet deep at its deepest point.  A good long jumper could get
across it without getting wet.  I'm perfectly capable of teaching
the clinic and paddling the course with only a tiny chance of flipping
and an even smaller chance that I'll leave my boat.

But I will be wearing the helmet and the PFD (a) because of the
reasoning I outlined above and (b) because a lot of the people I'll
be teaching or who will stop to watch will recognize that I'm
[supposedly!] one of the better paddlers there.  They will also
notice that -- just like the beginners -- I am wearing a PFD
and a helmet.  Perhaps they will make the connection that *everyone*
wears these and that they do so for a reason...maybe they'll think
to themselves, "hey, look, even the instructor is wearing a PFD
and a helmet...and he looks pretty good...hmmm..."

I know this happens because I've been asked about it by passers-by
in previous years.  Whether I like it or not, whether I volunteered
or not, I *am* a role model.  It would be foolish for me to think that
I could abdicate that role simply by saying "I'm not a role model".

And as long as I'm being a role model, I might as well be one that
communicates (verbally and nonverbally as well) that I think that
wearing a PFD and a helmet is an awfully, awfully good idea.

Will this have any impact?  I don't know.  There may be no way
to know.  But my hope is that it will contribute a tiny bit to
public awareness and that maybe -- just maybe -- some of those
folks who pass by will consider wearing a PFD the next time they
take a float trip in a canoe down a local stream.  Maybe it'll
come in handy if they do.

And this is not entirely altruistic, either: I certainly don't
want people drowning in my rivers and creeks because that's bad
for them.  But it's also bad for *me* because it tends to cause
over-reaction on the part of local authorities who have difficulty
distinguishing between non-PFD-wearing-Johnny-six-pack-in-a-rental-canoe
and regularly-training-experienced-paddler-in-a-racing-kayak...
and who, because they think it's their job, or perhaps it *is*
their job, will curtail the paddling opportunities available to
me because someone else did something exceedingly stupid.

I think it's easier to try to deal with this up front...and if that
means I have to accept that I'm a role model and act accordingly, okay,
I can do that.  Obviously, this doesn't provide any guarantees --
there may be only a small chance that Johnny-six-pack will catch
on to what I'm doing and why.

But if I don't do it, there's no chance at all.

---Rsk
Rich Kulawiec




From: "Sailboat Restorations, Inc."
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:39:23 -0400

> The problem with this argument, and it's a very big problem, is that once
> an accident or injury occurs due to someone's wilfully careless behavior,
> the injured person immediately (and rightfully) expects someone else to
> come to his/her rescue

I had attempted to factor out the cost to others in my hypothetical.  Maybe
that's just not possible, in a real world sense.  But I was trying to get to
the bottom of the question.  Someone said that there are people who just
need to be protected from themselves.  I disagree that this is a legitimate
*government* (as opposed to family, insurance company, whatever) interest.
So I asked: what if my risky behavior could not result in any financial
consequences to *anyone* else?  Suppose: I kayak without a PFD, but I pay a
motor yacht with full rescue crew and gear to stay within 100 yards of me.
I have no dependents.  I have plenty of money to pay for any consequence of
my conduct.  Does the government then have the right to tell me that I can't
do something because *I might injurre or kill myself*?  To me, that's just
not a legitimate role of government.

I acknowledged in an earlier post -- I mentioned the motorcycle helmet
debate -- that I know of no good argument against the "social cost
rationale" for regulating risky behavior.  It's an issue, and a serious one,
IMO.  The only argument I know of to counter it -- and I think it needs to
be taken very seriously -- is the "slippery slope" argument: once we let
government control our behavior on the basis that it might end up imposing a
social cost, then almost anything is subject to regulation or restriction or
elimination.  Eating red meat is more riskyt than eating vegetables, no?
Kayaking may just be too risky even to be allowed at all.  Motorcycles
should just be banned (if you think this is a silly point, ask yourself:
when was the last time you saw one of those three-wheel ORV things? ).  Etc
etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

To me, a safe but sanitized society is not what I want.  Hell, I didn't even
like it when Giuliani (Mayor of NYC) "cleaned up" Times Square.  I never
indulged the seediness of the place, but somehow I took comfort in it being
there, just knowing that in this country people have the freedom to be seedy
if they like.  But I digress.  Again: is the issue *just* one of social
costs?  Is that really the only valid basis for regulating risky conduct?
Or is there a "higher" interest, residing with the government, in
"protecting people from their own stupidity"?  That's the question I was
posing, so as to try to get to the real heart of this.

Mark




From: "John Winters"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine 
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 06:58:50 -0400

Michael wrote:

> 1) Estimates I've seen were that anywhere from 30% to 50% of
>    Inuit and Aleut kayakers died at sea.

All estimates based upon written records kept by the Inuit Society For
Safety at Sea.

> 2) They did use flotation aids (sp*ns*ns) made of seal skins,
>    bladders etc.  In rough conditions they tied them to the
>    sides of the kayaks.  In good conditions they tied them to
>    the harpoon lines.

The widespread use of sea condoms by the Inuit exists largely in the mind of
their promoter. On the other hand, you will find lots of references to the
use of primitive versions of Genuine Canadian Ballast Rocks (TM) to prevent
capsize.

> 3) They knew how to roll.

Actually rolling was not widespread and many groups never attempted rolls so
"They" should read "Some" . "He who lives by pedantry dies by pedantry".

> 4) The Aleuts wore breathable, waterproof drytops.  (Not Gore-Tex,
>    stinky whale intestines).

Yes, and we should legislate that all paddlers use them. Post the
announcement in the Greenpeace News group.

Smiles and Chuckles

John Winters




From: "SRI"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] FW: Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:17:39 -0000

> some people need to be protected from themselves, unfortunately.


I can't resist asking: why?  Apart from the issue of the family and
dependents of such a person (which I have already acknowledged *is* a legit
issue, IMO), why does the government have a valid interest in protecting me
from myself?  Why is that the government's business?

Let's say I don't have any children or dependents.  I don't have any debt
that's not covered by my current assets.  No one will suffer financial loss
at my death.  Why is it anyone's business other than mine if I want to take
personal risks, like kayaking, rock climbing, hang gliding, etc.?  Even if I
decide to do these things in novel ways, that only I like, and that are more
risky (say, without a PFD)?  (The issue of the interest of an insurance
company, BTW, apart from not being a valid *government* interest, is easily
dealt with by providing that certain things invalidate the coverage -- like
paddling a kayak without a PFD.)  I truly have a hard time understanding
what reasoning it is that leads to the conclusion that the government has a
legitimate right to protect people from themselves (as opposed to protecting
*other* people).

Mark




From: Rick Sylvia
Subject: [Paddlewise] FW: FW: Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 14:22:27 -0400 

Well, Mark, you make a valid  point. I was looking at it from a little bit
of a different angle, though.  The laws are there to protect everyone, not
just "experienced" Kayakers (or other water sports) making calculated
decisions.  Some folks just flat out don't know any better.  For example,
last year, the teenage daughter of a friend of mine and her boyfriend went
to one of the Sounds in North Carolina to visit his uncle for the weekend.
The uncle had a 2 person kayak that he "fiddled" with.  The two teens took
it out for a ride.  

Tide came in - water turned rough - they were over a mile from shore - not
even a PFD in the boat (in fact, they carried nothing but two paddles). They
capsized, and had no clue how to get back in.  Eventually, he drowned (took
almost a week to find his body).  She survived.  She managed to get to a
duck blind and stayed there for two days until she was rescued.   My wife
and I prayed with her parents for three days, not knowing if she were dead
or alive.   

Here it comes...... I SURE WISH A MARINE SAFETY OFFICER HAD OF SEMI
"HARRASSED" THEM AND ESCORTED THEM BACK TO SHORE OR SCARED THEM TO THE POINT
THAT THEY WENT BACK THEMSELVES.  My point is that many, many, many people
don't fully understand the risks and don't comprehend the choice that they
are making. It's those people who need protection from themselves, not you
or I who understand the risks (well, I'm still a rookie, so I'm still
studying the risks) , and carefully make our decisions based on many, many
factors - the thrill of danger included.

But, in your scenario, I can't argue your points.  But in my scenario, I'll
debate all day long.  Guess that means that it's scenario dependant, which
really makes writing the law difficult....ie: how do you identify the
"dummies" who need protection, and wouldn't that be discriminatory?  I think
they found an answer when they settled on having to have a PFD on board, but
left it to you whether or not you decide to put it on.  Glad I'm not a
politician trying to rewrite that law.  :-)

Rick
(the one from Va.)




From: "Bill Hansen"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 14:21:30 -0400

> whatever the merits of PFDs, forbidding pictures of people without
> them goes MUCH too far.  I believe that magazines should depict things as
> they are, not function as vehicles for puritans, moralizers, and
> sanctimonious "role models.

I couldn't disagree more. The wording of Richard's note seems, to me, to be
moralizing and puritanical. I won't go so far as to say it's
"sanctimonious", but some people might.

Societies are built on systems of values, standards, and morals. There
should be some flexibility in all of those - but That flexibility, that
freedom, comes from an ability to accept most of the society's standards,
most of the time. People who get their kicks from embracing anarchy and a
lack of any standard of safe behavior risk losing the very freedom they
claim to value. Conversely, people who know the dangers really do have an
obligation to act as role models for those who are ignorant.

In my opinion ignorance *can* occasionally be a valid excuse for stupid
and/or dangerous behavior. An adolescent insistence that everyone else
adhere to one's own uninformed view of acceptable behavior is not such an
excuse.

Bill Hansen
Ithaca NY




From: Blankibr
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 15:04:32 EDT
Subject: [Paddlewise] Moses' life jacket

John Winters writes

> Just suppose Moses hadn't had on his life jacket. Where would be without 
> the Ten Commandments to tell us what bad buggers we are. He wasn't wearing
> one?
> Oh. Stupid, idiot mother.

Moses is one of few people who could get away without a PFD since he could do 
a "part the waters rescue."

Brian




From: "Richard Kemmer"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:23:28 -0500

Mark wrote:

> The only argument I know of to counter it -- and I think it needs to
> be taken very seriously -- is the "slippery slope" argument: once we let
> government control our behavior on the basis that it might end up imposing
> a social cost, then almost anything is subject to regulation or restriction
> or elimination.  Eating red meat is more riskyt than eating vegetables, no?
> Kayaking may just be too risky even to be allowed at all.

Mark, I agree with your post 100%.  We have only to look at the
Guiliani-imposed police state, the "gang rape" of the tobacco companies, and
the havoc wrought by the nefarious "War on Drugs" to see where the
"social-cost" argument leads.    Eventually, kayaking will be forbidden as
too risky and equipment suppliers regulated and then fined because they
"should have known" their products could cause deaths.  Those who think this
could never happen should consider that  regulations almost always increase
in number and harshness; they are seldom relaxed.  (This stems from the
autocatalytic nature of systems development.)

However, IMO there is little point in continuing this thread, because no one
is convincing anyone else.  You nailed the underlying disagreement with your
statement about not wanting a sanitized society.  The question is what
relative value one puts on pesonal freedom versus order.  If freedom is your
highest value, you are willing to sacrifice order and take the consequences.
If you value order, you will sacrifice individual freedom to the "good of
society."  You may respect, understand, and appreciate the opposing
arguments, but you will dismiss them because you don't value the kind of
society to which they lead.

Whether one labels PFD enforcement "harassment" or "legitimate police
enforcement" depends on much deeper values and assumptions that ultimately
will carry us far off topic.

Rick




From: dmccarty
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:01:53 -0400
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety, Ads, & PFDs

Richard said....

> we disagree as to whether commumities have collective rights over such
> properly personal decisions.  I reject that premise, whether for seat 
> belts, motor cycle helmets, or PFDs.

Bill said....

> The problem with this argument, and it's a very big problem, is that once
> an |accident or injury occurs due to someone's wilfully careless behavior,
> the injured person immediately (and rightfully) expects someone else to come
> to his/her rescue - and in the case of helmetless motorcycle riders (for
> example), to foot the bill too. Several studies have shown that the
> majority of helmetless injuries to motorcycle riders occur to people who
> have no insurance. But I can tell you from personal experience that they
> want at least as much care as anyone else.

There have also been studies that show that the states that DO NOT have
motorcycle helmet laws have less accidents than the states that do.  The
states that had the lower accident rates had the highest number of riders
and miles driven without helmet laws.

The problem with the collective rights argument is when does The Collective
stop intruding into the individuals life?

Since The Collective pays for the health care costs of people who don't
have health insurance, and even with health insurance, The Collective still
pays via premiums, does The Collective still have the right to tell the
Individual to stop a behavior?  If an Individual is partaking in risking
sexual behavior and contracts an STD should The Collective pay for the
person's health care?  Why should The Collective pay for this when the
Individual KNEW what they were doing was dangerous?  Even if the Individual
has insurance The Collective will pay in higher rates.  What if our Risking
Individual contracts HIV or full blown AIDS.  Should The Collective refuse
to help pay for the very expensive cost of the healthcare for our Risky
Sick Individual?  And of course if the Collective DOES pay for our Risky
Sick Individual, does that also mean that The Collective can pass and
enforce laws to make sure that no more Individual's partake in risking
behavour?  Now that would be Harassment.....

Hmmmm?

Food for Thought..... Stir Stir Stir....

8-)
DanDCook McCarty




Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 13:22:17 -0700
From: Doug Lloyd
Subject: [Paddlewise] PFD Debate (was other things)

Bruce posted:

Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 06:38:19 EDT
From: Outfit3029
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Safety and "Canoe & Kayak"  Magazine

In a message dated 9/7/00 6:17:07 AM !!!First Boot!!!, Strosaker
writes:

> I think that like me, his tone is sometimes
> misinterpreted on this list.
>
> Mr. Duane, always the voice of reason.
>
> Bruce McC
> WEO

And I too apologize to Scott of So Cal. It was only after reading some
more unopened PW digests that it became apparent to me that Scott
represented an ongoing "different" voice in the PFD debate. My "bloody
idiot" post must have seemed like a pointed jab directly at him, which
it wasn't.

In fact, Scott brings up some good points in the PFD debate, including
the fact that often paddlers think they are safer for wearing a PFD,
when intrinsically, that is not the case. There are also times when not
wearing one isn't a great sin, but it all comes down to personal
judgment. And I believe that is what Scott is advocating for.

It is much easier in Canada, as Uliei (spelling, sorry) pointed out. We
don't have to wear them, just have them available. I often take mine off
on a calm, hot day, and have set up extra recessed deck fittings to hold
the PFD in place, where I can reach it pronto when needed.

On group trips with a small number of experienced open coast paddlers,
we have often pulled up beside each other and made a group decision to
remove PFD's when conditions warrant it on the smooth, glassy swell.
While one should have the freedom to make one's own mind up, the group
decision policy is a better way, fostering communication, compliance
with a general safety attitudes, and gives opportunity for hesitant egos
to bounce ideas off the group.

As far as kayak surfers, it would be interesting to see what would
happen if a ticket-issuing officer were to be at the beach where all the
kayak surfers were congregated. Would the obsequious individual issue
citations for the whole lot.

Anyway, I've back channeled with some folks in question on the PFD
issue, and all is well. Thanks Duane; I too enjoy your voice of reason
and your other talents displayed on PW this past year. Keeps me going on
this list.

One thing folks might want to keep in mind is that even simple outings
can turn awry. An incident happened to me a few years ago that was very
scary. It happened to a fellow Paddlewiser recently too, who e-mailed me
privately with his personal embarrassment. It involves involuntary
benign vertigo, with the onset usually coming from a slight feeling of
"unwellness", combined with a lot of multi-directional boat wake.

I'll use John Winters as an example to illustrate the phenomenon. One
usually leaves the beach feeling fairly well, but may have had something
to eat or drink that was supplementary to the normal regime. In John's
scenario here, perhaps it was a bit too much wine before dinner,
followed by re-heated, leftover pizza with anchovies. He heads out for a
small, romantic evening paddle with his  wife. Unknown to John, a major
fishing derby is just closing down, and returning fisherman zoom down
the channel to the marina, anxious to record their weigh-ins. Boat wake,
clapotis, and a generally confused sea state leave the kayak rocking
wildly (ralph may know what this is like from the area he paddles in,
all the time). John, who imbibed much more wine than his wife to summon
up creative juices for a recent PW post, starts to feel a bit green. It
is not long before he is feeling completely useless, unable to paddle,
and having to hunker down, deep in the cockpit. A sheepish plea for help
goes out to his wife, who has to tow John ignobly home.

Now, in my little story above, I changed the names and the causative
reasons, but the outcome was similar to what actually transpired for my
friend. But what if John had unfettered himself from restriction of PFD
usage for philosophical reasons, and actually not worn one. What if he
had capsized and actually become a very big burden for his wife. In the
real incident with my friend, a PFD was worn, and there were other
paddlers along to help. In my incident a few years back, I was at the
mercy of my narrow Nordkapp. That was one of the reasons I started to
carry a Sea Seat in the back of my PFD, so I could have a source of
stability if I needed it. I also have acquired a Back Up device
recently, but hate to mention theses devices, as they become the butt of
so many jokes from the eastern part of Canada :-)

Well, I've enjoyed the PFD debate -- anything but bland, though I'm sure
many have deleted. I will continue to wear mine most of the time, will
continue to try and be part of a responsibly equipped boating public,
and unfortunately, will not feel too terribly bad watching the RCMP cite
individuals headed out without proper compliance as soon as the
legislation is in place for the local law enforcement. In a relatively
free society, I have a right to my opinion and views too. I know
Americans in particular value their essential liberties, and I respect
the core arguments against mandated PFD usage. I do however, find the
statement "Give me liberty, or give me death", especially suitable to
the PFD debate :-) I also think it is far too easy for individuals to
sit back in their Ivory Towers (or at least behind their computer
towers) and rant away about freedom from puritanical government
legislation. Of course, it is also easy to pluck away at the keyboard
pontificating about safety and doing so with a smug, moralizing
attitude.

PFD Pros:
Helps keep the in-water person buoyant
Provides insulation in colder climes
Provides a place for emergency and convenience items
Can lend visibility
Further attachment point for knife and strobe
Integrated tow system capable
Provided a protective cushion from torso injury
Sets a good example
Maintains local compliance with regulations
Provides tender hearts with a "security blanket"
Can make you more buoyant for reboarding
Gives other paddlers a place to grab you to pull you up
Makes sculling easier
Makes a good head rest (I never sit on mine)
Looks "cool"
If separated from boat, may contain emerg gear

PFD Cons:
Can make one overheat
Cost
Can add to chafing
Bunches up your paddling jacket
Can be hard to get one to fit correctly
Can get snagged on a deck fixture on exit
Can make rolling back up difficult in shallows
One more item to leave at beach
May create a false sense of security
Will impede rapid swimming
Can snag on coaming during reentry
Can make re-entry and roll difficult
Can make it harder to secure spray deck

BC'in Ya
Doug Lloyd




Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 17:14:26 -0700
From: ralph diaz
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] PFD Debate (was other things)

Doug Lloyd wrote:

> It is much easier in Canada, as Uliei (spelling, sorry) pointed out.
> We don't have to wear them, just have them available. 

We don't _have_ to wear them in the States either.  While the US Coast
Guard goes through great pains in its annual reports to stress that it
is smart to wear one all the time, there is no regulation that says you
have to.

A case in point.  A few years two kayakers were paddling off the Upper
West Side of Manhattan on the Hudson.  A USCG small patrol boat pulled
over to them and one of the Coasties insisted that one fellow actually
put on his PFD.

About a month later one of the fellows (the one with the PFD already on)
and I were visiting the Coast Guard Station on some other matter and
related the incident to the lieutenant in charge of enforcement.  He
went almost ballistic wanting us to give him the date, time and place so
that he could reprimand that crew!  He apologized to us for their action
even though we weren't the affected party.  They had exceeded their
authority, i.e. the reg says only you need to have your PFD handy,
nothing more.  We didn't recall the precise time and even if we had we
didn't feel like getting some young Coasties in trouble.  The lieutenant
said he would post a notice about the incident in a general way as a
general reminder to the crews on what the regs actually require.

In the dead of winter, we have had some of kayakers pulled over by USCG
crews asking if they were wearing wet suits.  I suppose if the kayakers
hadn't been cold-water clothed in some fashion, the crew could force
them to leave the water because the paddler was "operating a boat in an
unsafe manner" a kind of blanket or umbrella authority covering lots of
things.

But wearing a PFD is such a specifically spelled out reg (i.e. you need
one handy but are not required to have it on) that they could not force
you off the water on that umbrella authority on account of not wearing
one.

In a similar vein on the cold-water theme, a few years ago, there was a
mid-winter paddling trip put on for a morning TV news show.  The fellows
left from Governors Island (that lets you know how long ago this was; it
closed in 1996) into real cold air temperatures (single digit) and high
winds.  The Coast Guard hovered nearby in a patrol boat.  At one point,
one of the paddlers capsized.  He was immediately rescued by the other
kayakers but the Coast Guard felt enough was enough and, citing the bad
conditions, ordered them all off the water and to return to the put-in.

ralph diaz




Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:53:19 -0500
From: "David J. MacDonald"
Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] PaddleWise V1 #1264

Certainly a PFD is a good thing, but the idea that it and a helmet ought be
worn universally needs some greater consideration.  Think about the sort of
kayaking we do in Illinois.  No surf here, and other than one run, no white
water either.  Rather generally quiet water rivers, seldom more than four
feet deep or a hundred feet wide.  Sumer temperatures run in the 90s with
high humidity.  You are more likely to drown after passing out from excess
heat in your PFD than from the force of the water itself.  I keep my PFD
handy in a kayak with a very, very large cockpit--along with a paddle float
and a throw bag.  In three years I have not yet had occasion to use any of
them--but I will always keep them handy.  Still, somehow, when moving down
the middle of the Spoon river in three feet of quiet water under a leafy
canopy and watching deer drink on the bank thirty feet away, I just find it
hard to imagine that I would be significantly safer with the PFD on my back
rather than under my legs--in a very large cockpit.

Mac




Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 20:28:31 -0400
From: Michael Edelman 
Subject: [Paddlewise] PFDs, helmets, etc...

My libertarian intuition makes me suspect of laws compelling one to wear
a helmet, PFD, galoshes, whatever. And indeed, repeated statistics show
that compelling the use of saftey equipment (helmets, safety belts)
often *increases* the frequency of accidents and doesn't overall affect
the injury rate, as people adjust to the perceived increase in
protection and take further chances..

But that doesn't mean I'm going to flaunt the laws to prove a point. I
always wear a bicycle helmet, seat belt and PFD, and I've benefited in
each instance by doing so. I also believe in compelling *minors* to do
so, and I've been known to advise parents biking helmetless with their
kids how hard it is to raise kids with a closed head injury.

And one reason I do wear a helmet on a bike is to show kids that the guy
with the coolest bike in the neighborhood thinks it's cool to wear a
helmet.  (Unfortunately the kayakers who see me in a boat don't get
quite the same impression, but I'm working on that.)

Some of the more sheltered places I paddle are full of novices in Pungos
and similar boats, with no PFD, no flotation, no skirt, no clue. I ran
into such a couple in the middle of a 1.5-mile wide lake a few weeks
ago, and I wondered how they'd deal with the swim three quarters of a
mile to shore, dodging all the ski boats and lake lice on the way.
Assuming they *could* swim.

-- mike




From: MCLAURY
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:16:48 EDT
Subject: [Paddlewise] Fwd: PFD Debate (was other things)

Oops, sent this reply to Dan instead of the list .....

In a message dated 09/10/2000 2:34:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
dmccarty

" Lake Lice operators"

ROFL.  Love it Dan.

Re: the great PFD debate.

My rules:  when paddling alone ALWAYS wear my PFD, always !!!!  No exceptions.

When paddling with a group, wear my PFD 99% of the time.

When paddling with a group, early Sunday morning, on a lake, where the water 
is smooth as glass and we are paddling within 100 feet of shore on a 
beautiful day, tuck PFD behind seat - very accessible.

When paddling with a group in open water (sound, bay, creeks, etc.)(ie 
non-lake) always wear PFD, always. 

As Dan knows, the place I most frequently paddle (Jordan Lake in central NC) 
is a very large lake with, unfortunately, lots of jet skiers.  Luckily, there 
are large parts of the lake where you can get away from them and have a nice 
quiet paddle.  But anytime there are jet skiers around I figure I need my 
PFD.  'Nuf said on that subject.

Susan

To subscribe to PaddleWise, send email to PaddleWise-request@paddlewise.net
To send email to members of PaddleWise, send email to PaddleWise@paddlewise.net
For questions or comments, please send email to owner@paddlewise.net