Bikers know that if they ram their heads into the ground, they can donate their organs to folks that need them. It is their knowing choice freely made. Novice paddlers going out in shirt sleeves on cold water and without PFDs etc. are guilty of ignorance. They bought their gear or rented same and were told nothing. The unwashed American public believes that cold water is lots of fun- they have seen the polarbear swimmers doing it in the NEW YORK TIMES--- It MUST BE OK !! Standard boating courses for the Public run by Coast Guard Aux. or Power Squadrons don't ram these cold water lessons home. They don't believe it themselves. So, again, address the question. Do we who are experts give the novices our expertise? Chuck Sutherland http://www.enter.net/~skimmer *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
|Bikers know that if they ram their heads into the ground, they can |donate their organs to folks that need them. It is their knowing choice |freely made. |Novice paddlers going out in shirt sleeves on cold water and without |PFDs etc. are guilty of ignorance. They bought their gear or rented |same and were told nothing. The unwashed American public believes |that cold water is lots of fun- they have seen the polarbear swimmers |doing it in the NEW YORK TIMES--- It MUST BE OK !! <snip> |So, again, address the question. Do we who are experts give the |novices our expertise? |Chuck Sutherland Ring Ring, Chuck you get the Gold Star. I've not had a chance to get into the thread, unitl now, 8-), but you said my thoughts exactly. If you ride a bike, with or without a motor, you do know if you fall and hit your head you will have a problem. It IS intuitive. The danger of cold water is not something people are aware. They just dont know. They are ignorant. People are also ignorant of waves, tides, currents, rips, boomers, etc. I was totally ignorant of many of these things and now I'm just above ignorant because of Paddlewise. Boomers is the last ocean phenonmenon that I have learned about from this list. All these things I mention can get a paddler into a situation that will kill them. How is the average 'yakker going to now? My wife and I have read numerous books and magazines on kayaking but there is so much to be learned. Most people don't know about or have access to this list which is the best Continuing Ed class I have ever taken! 8-) So again how are they going to learn? The answer is from people sharing information and experience. A biker knows falling off is going to be bad news, a new kayker ain't got a clue that the cold water at 50 degrees is deadly. We control so much of our own environment on a daily basis that people assume that our systems and machines are always working and present. This is not true once one gets into hiking, camping, kayaking, etc. But people who are new to these activities don't have the experience and knowledge to understand the real world. Since I think TheGovernment is already to intrusive in our lives as it is, I would be the last person wanting a law requiring classes and such. Partly since the classes are not going to even come close to teaching all that needs to be learned. Lets not even get into curriculum and who decides what should be in the class in the first place. Hince it falls on the more expericenced and knowlegable kayakers to inform people who might be doing something dangerous. So how do you do this? How about just start talking to the person(s) about kayaking, where they got the boat(s), how long have they been doing this, etc. Once you start talking you can talk about BadBehaviorX. Just don't get uppity. For it as a question such as, "Have you ever heard the 50/50 rule for cold water?" Or "Do you know what a dry/wet suit is for and why you might want to wear one." The use of might instead of should makes a difference..... Back to motorcycles. I don't ride. Scared to death of the being hit by the four wheeled machines. But I don't think there should be helmet laws. If you want to ride without a helmet you have to justify this to yourself and family. Not me. Not my business. Car & Driver had an editorial piece a couple of issues back on helmet laws. It seems that the death/serious injury rates are LOWER in states that DO NOT have helmet laws. The comparisons where both by number of riders as well as the rate of riders per miles driven. Go figure. My more than 2 cents.... Dan McCarty. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Dan wrote; (SNIP) > > Back to motorcycles. I don't ride. Scared to death of the being hit by > the four wheeled machines. But I don't think there should be helmet laws. > If you want to ride without a helmet you have to justify this to yourself > and family. Not me. Not my business. Car & Driver had an editorial piece > a couple of issues back on helmet laws. It seems that the death/serious > injury rates are LOWER in states that DO NOT have helmet laws. The > comparisons where both by number of riders as well as the rate of riders > per miles driven. Go figure. > This has to do with something called risk homeostasis. Basically the theory says that each person has a comfortable level of risk. If they perceive they have greater safety they increase their level of risk until they reach their comfort level (and vice versa). Thus, if paddlers (or motorcycle drivers) perceive that a device or skill makes them safer they will increase their levels of risk thus increasing their chance of an accident and, more often than not, will increase the probable severity of an accident.. Despite all the modern safety devices on automobiles our level of safety hasn't really changed. We drive faster and more aggressively and get into more and more serious accidents. This does not mean that safety devices etc. do not save lives. they do - if you have an accident. Unfortunately they often also increase your chances of having an accident as one adjusts the comfort level to suit the increased perception of safety. One has to differentiate between reactive safety and active safety. Decorating yourself and boat with safety equipment and rescue skills and going out in scary conditions with a high risk of capsize or danger is reactive safety as it kicks in only after things go wrong. Looking at conditions and staying ashore to read a book is active safety because you have reduced the possibility of an accident. Does this mean you should not use safety devices? No. It means that the device may offer no net increase in safety unless your level of risk remains constant. In short, to increase real safety you want to increase your level of safety but decrease your perception of safety. By all means, wear your wet suit (life jacket, etc.) but stay ashore if you think you might need to use it. >From this one can see a hint at the problem with giving people "good advice". If they do not perceive an appropriate level of danger your advice falls on deaf ears. Often the perception of safety far exceeds real safety. Dr. Gerald Wilde, one of the leading researchers in this field has written a condensed version of the theory as it applies to outdoor activities that you can read at http://home.ican.net/~735769/wilde.htm . If you find it interesting you can follow the link to his web site where you will find the full text of his book "Target Risk" (I think. I have not visited it lately). Cheers, John Winters Redwing Designs Web site address, http://home.ican.net/~735769 *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
735769 (John Winters) wrote: > This has to do with something called risk homeostasis. Basically the theory > says that each person has a comfortable level of risk. If they perceive they > have greater safety they increase their level of risk until they reach their > comfort level (and vice versa). Thus, if paddlers (or motorcycle drivers) > perceive that a device or skill makes them safer they will increase their > levels of risk thus increasing their chance of an accident and, more often > than not, will increase the probable severity of an accident.. > SNIPPED > > This does not mean that safety devices etc. do not save lives. they do - if > you have an accident. Unfortunately they often also increase your chances of > having an accident as one adjusts the comfort level to suit the increased > perception of safety. One has to differentiate between reactive safety and > active safety. Decorating yourself and boat with safety equipment and rescue > skills and going out in scary conditions with a high risk of capsize or > danger is reactive safety as it kicks in only after things go wrong. Looking > at conditions and staying ashore to read a book is active safety because you > have reduced the possibility of an accident. > > Does this mean you should not use safety devices? No. It means that the > device may offer no net increase in safety unless your level of risk remains > constant. In short, to increase real safety you want to increase your level > of safety but decrease your perception of safety. By all means, wear your > wet suit (life jacket, etc.) but stay ashore if you think you might need to > use it. > > >From this one can see a hint at the problem with giving people "good > advice". If they do not perceive an appropriate level of danger your advice > falls on deaf ears. Often the perception of safety far exceeds real safety. I am glad to see John joining in on this discussion with the points he makes above. It is a note he has sounded before, only this time it seems clearer than earlier. What I get out of this is to make certain to have x number(or quality) of safety items(and direct knowledge of their use not just reading knowledge) and paddling skills(good power stroke; bracing and/or rolling) to deal with situations but allow yourself to only get into situations that are x minus some factor (with that factor being quite hefty). I think it is wrong to match up specific gear/skills with specific risks. Give yourself a very wide margin of difference between the two. And perhaps look at the gear/skills to help in risky situations that develop unexpectedly while out on the water rather than setting off into such conditions. This is all very abstract sounding. Look at it as cutting yourself a lot of slack. This is different from say the attitude or mindset among better whitewater paddlers who constantly strive to push the edges of the envelop of their skills vs. the relative difficulty/risk classification of the river. I don't want to get into a prolonged discussion of whitewater paddling but often the goal of the better whitewater paddler is to move up in the class rating of whitewater he or she paddles. As the WW paddler skills increase and he or she moves up, the margin for error gets slimmer and slimmer. Miss that line on a Class V or VI river or fail to enter that narrow eddy and your life is in peril. That is why the tendency in whitewater fatalities seems to be on the two ends of the skill level, i.e. absolute beginners (or rafters) getting into harder stuff and dying or top paddlers pushing into tougher and tougher conditions in which the line between safety and catastrophe is as thin as a hair. Not much happens in the middle, i.e. Class III paddlers in Class III waters (except for strainers). As a general rule, the deaths in seakayaking have tended to be mainly among the relative novice or completely inexperienced people and the result of ignorance and inattention. Unless I am mistaken, I do not recall any experienced, highly skilled sea kayaker dying (except one surfing accident). But all the deaths I do recall in sea kayaking involved situations such as: --A handyman working on opening up some summer place for a customer. He spots a kayak under the house. Decides to give it a try as the day is bright and sunny. Never paddled before. Goes on to 40-45 degree water with no PFD, no skill, in heavy work clothing and boots. Tips over and dies within yards of land. (I recall about 3 such incidents) --Relatively unskilled paddlers on camping trips who run into nasty weather near the end of the trip. In order to be able to catch a flight home (and not lose money on the ticket), they opt to go ahead and die on the water rather than stay in camp for another day or two. Victims of the gotta-get-there syndrome (I recall quite a few of those). --Experienced paddlers who did not pay attention to possible changes developing in sea conditions. The classic being what happened to whatshername in Greenland last year when lurking behind a point of land were very rough conditions and wind. It almost happened to JFK Jr. and his friends in their Scandanavian trip later written up by him for the NY Times Travel Section. --Situations where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, almost exclusively the domain of relative newcomers. Such is the case of the 2 or 3 who purchased a dry suit but failed to understand its proper use. Wound up, among other mistakes, leaving it open, not wearing insulation underneath. Tipped over and died. Or the fellow who felt he should tether himself to his kayak but perhaps fearing too long a tether made it only 6 inches long and latched to a fairly taut deck line running the length of the boat and thus making it impossible for him to get out of the boat when it tipped. ralph diaz -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: 735769 <735769_at_ican.net> To: <paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 4:47 AM Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Risk - was How and when > > > > This has to do with something called risk homeostasis. Basically the theory > says that each person has a comfortable level of risk. If they perceive they > have greater safety they increase their level of risk until they reach their > comfort level (and vice versa). Thus, if paddlers (or motorcycle drivers) > perceive that a device or skill makes them safer they will increase their > levels of risk thus increasing their chance of an accident and, more often > than not, will increase the probable severity of an accident.. > > Despite all the modern safety devices on automobiles our level of safety > hasn't really changed. We drive faster and more aggressively and get into > more and more serious accidents. > Actually, there has been a significant decline in the total number of deaths from motor vehicle crashes in the US over the last 20 years or so, and a much greater decline in the number of deaths per mile travelled. Granted other factors may be involved, but it does appear that safety improvements in autos and roads have made a difference. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
In a message dated 11/04/1999 8:38:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, 735769_at_ican.net writes: << Cheers, John Winters Redwing Designs >> Himself is back! Welcome! Been wondering where you and the Dr. have been hiding. Sandy Kramer Miami *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
<< Cheers, John Winters Redwing Designs >> Himself is back! Welcome! Been wondering where you and the Dr. have been hiding. Sandy Kramer Miami >> Da next tink ya know he is going to cartoon draws a nudder of dem feathered Black Birds and push it off as a kayuak or a canoey. Who Iverbodden herd of Black Birds flin' in da water? Me oh my oh me! John "Summer" *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
In a message dated 11/4/1999 11:12:53 PM Central Standard Time, << << Cheers, John Winters Redwing Designs >> Himself is back! Welcome! Been wondering where you and the Dr. have been hiding. Sandy Kramer Miami >> Of course he is back. Nuttin better 'n to do in da winter than heckle southerners (referenced by his whereabouts). All the liquid water in his neighborhood is solid or getting there. He don't live in Miami ya know! John *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Bob wrote: > > Actually, there has been a significant decline in the total number of deaths > from motor vehicle crashes in the US over the last 20 years or so, and a > much greater decline in the number of deaths per mile travelled. Granted > other factors may be involved, but it does appear that safety improvements > in autos and roads have made a difference. Actually this statistic misleads. While the death rate per mile driven has declined the death rate per head of population has not shown such desirable trend. See Chapter 5 of Wilde's Target Risk for a complete discussion of this. Safety improvements have increased the odds or survival if you have an accident. They have not reduced the odds that you will have an accident. Chuck wrote; (SNIP) It may be that as new kayakers enter the sport, the older ones acquire more experience, knowledge, and skills, thus keeping the pool of people likely to require assistance relatively constant. If John Winters' theory of risk homeostasis applied to sea kayaking, one would think that as each kayaker's level of risk stabilized, the number of incidents would increase in linear proportion to the population of sea kayakers. In the Apostles, at least, it does not appear to be true. (SNIP) First it is not "My" theory although I wish I could take credit for it. :) I see any reason why any one area's accident profile should suggest that risk homeostasis does not apply. I am certain the Apostle Islands have fewer murders than Detroit but I see no reason why one should conclude that the murder rate has declined nation wide. Perhaps Chuck (and others) may have reached hasty conclusions regarding my post. The theory of risk homeostasis has to do with perceptions of safety and responses to that perception. It shows how people typically respond to risk and perceptions but it also shows how we can modify that response. Instead of treating symptoms, it suggests treating causes. To quote from my previous post; >Does this mean you should not use safety devices? No. It means that the >device may offer no net increase in safety unless your level of risk remains >constant. In short, to increase real safety you want to increase your level >of safety but decrease your perception of safety. By all means, wear your >wet suit (life jacket, etc.) but stay ashore if you think you might need to >use it. To rephrase, one can improve ones safety by stabilizing risk at a given level and "adding" safety through improved skills etc. Perhaps this happens in the Apostle Islands. Perhaps instructors etc. emphasize a more appropriate balance between skills and equipment and risk. If so, the experience in the Apostle Islands supports risk homeostasis. Ralph provided some good examples of paddlers whose perception of safety exceeded their real safety. I like Ralph's use of the phrase "cutting yourself some slack". To me "cutting yourself some slack" means never having to use any of your safety devices or having near misses. In the final analysis, I believe the safest paddlers are those with the most pessimistic attitude toward the weather, their boats, their skills and their safety devices. To get a different feel for how skills affect risk PW readers might want to read http://home.ican.net/~735769/extra.htm David Seng wrote; I'll pass on the ARPEE, I really like paddling alone. We have some nice deaf mute ARPEE's. You won't even know they are there. Just consider them a sentient safety device. Cheers, John Winters Redwing Designs Web site address, http://home.ican.net/~735769 *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:05 PDT