Re: [Paddlewise] Risk Homeowhatsis

Joan wrote:
>    I know I'm REALLY new to kayaking, like about 8 months, but I'm
getting a bit
>lost in the logic. I did read the piece and I didn't see where it gave enough
>details to come to a lot of the conclusions I'm reading.

Joan, et al:

Lost in the logic, or is that lost in the *lack* of logic? Maybe it is just
the way I explain things. As far as conclusions from the details we were
provided with, you are correct. Subjective opinions rendered on the
incident are assumptive at best. I was hoping Dr Sutherland might get back
to me about calling the fellow up who spent the night on the bellbouy, so
we could find out the details that the media weren't interested in (type of
kayak, type of paddling normally done, etc), but Chuck seems to have flown
the coupe.    

> I'm not suggesting that
>he didn't make mistakes that could have been avoided but why are you
calling him,
>" a loose cannon in a sport where we all take aim at certain activities
and levels
>of risk?" For me, part of being new is not knowing all the questions and not
>knowing all the factors when they look you in the face. What am I missing
here? I
>still don't know exactly why he couldn't get back in his boat. For someone
with
>his exposure to the sport this seems exceptionally weird. Was it a lack of
skills
>or was he hurt or what? I agree he made a number of mistakes but the one that
>seems to be picked on most is that he went out at all. Am I misreading this?

Yes. You are misreading this from my point of view. He can go out, no
problemo. But, don't you think given the conditions present and what the
consequences could be of coming out of the kayak, he should have been with
another paddler or better prepared or better equipped. The Coast Guard,
universally, don't usually mind going out to help mariners in distress -
that is what they get paid to do, and that is what they are there for, and
they know that going out on the ocean is always a calculated risk where
misscalculations are made . But, again, universally, the Coast Guard very
much dislike evening and night searches. It puts there men more at risk,
and when the object of their search has no way of signaling the
authorities, it is very frustrating.
 
>    The longer this thread runs the more confused I am. I am gaining no
clarity on
>the issue thought I am seeing a lot of opinions. It could be I'm making
this issue
>more complicated than it is but it looks REAL complicated from my
computer. I've
>read the SK article on risk assessment and all the postings here. I still
don't
>get why some of you are so harsh in you evaluation. It may be justified
but so far
>I have not heard a logical argument for saying, "This guy was way over the
edge
>for normal. "
>    In real simple, short thoughts, can someone explain this to me, please?

I suggest you go to the recent thread with Ralph (he writes with more
clarity than anyone on this list, I'd say). The issue came up about
acceptable behavior, if I can use that term. We have a helmet law here in
BC, for both bicycles and motor bikes. I work in the medical field -
government funded medicare - and I think it is the best thing that ever
happened (sorry James). When I see a bicyclist go by at night, without a
helmet, without a light, I call them loose cannons. When I see a roller
bladder without protective equipment threading through traffic, the same
response is invoked. And when I hear of a paddler out alone is nasty
condition without the normal requisite gear, experience, training, and
immediate assistance of fellow paddlers, the same response is invoked. If
you "don't get it" fine, you don't have to. But please try and understand
my point of view, as I don't just post off the top of my head. 

I'm not sure what your level of understanding is with the various kayak
pursuits. In river kayaking, we are not loaded down with self sufficient
rescue equipment. There is a car at the put-in and the take-out. You have
friends along with you. If you bail in average conditions, you get to shore
and get back in - no paddle floats, no re-enter and rolls, no VHF radios
calling for help. Surfing, same thing. Minimum gear, lee shore beach
waiting for you. Now switch to an  estuarian river mouth. Current flowing
out to sea, waves and wind present, paddler has no reliable re-entry, no
back-up equipment, no buddies, and no distress equipment. What is he? A
minimalist river paddler out over his head? A sea kayaker under-equipped
and undertrained, and unaware of how dangerous and predisposed to disaster
the situation was? I don't have the all the answers, Joan. But something
doesn't jive with the situation, that's all. Am I permitted to say that? If
not, I will shut-up. I'm happy to have a dialogue with myself. And maybe I
will even switch the term "loose cannon" to "an unknown paddler profile"
that to me doesn't fit into an "acceptable" acceptable risk category. That
ain't confusing to me, anyway.

BC'in Ya
Doug Lloyd
     

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not
to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************