Re: [Paddlewise] How Would You: Change to. . . .PFD

On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 KiAyker_at_aol.com 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


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