[Paddlewise] Backers of kayak bill may be paddling upstream - Framingham,...

From: Ralph Hoehn <FoldingBoats_at_aol.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:34:33 -0400
> Goffma_at_aol.com wrote:
>> Does the wet-exit demonstration requirement apply to guided  
>> groups?   It would be a real burden here in Maine if you had to  
>> have the entire group  wet-exit into the frigid waters before you  
>> could guide them around the  lovely scenery.   Nobody wants to  
>> start the day out cold and  wet.  [big snip]

On Jun 8, 2007, at 1:11 AM, Dave Kruger wrote:
> I agree it is not customer friendly to start them out wet.  OTOH, they 
> should understand and appreciate the nature of the boat/system they 
> are about to use for transport.

On June 08, 2007 9:07 AM Nick Schade wrote:
I think the prospect of swimming in less than 55 degree water would dissuade
most people from signing up for the trip even if they were promised instant
teleportation to a sauna. Many of these people don't even want to get their
feet wet while getting into their boats - full submersion is out of the
question. This is not to say that it wouldn't be beneficial and improve
safety, but it is pretty tough as a business model: We will bring you out to
see beautiful things, but we first want to attempt to drown you and bring
you to the verge of hypothermia. The people who are willing to sign up
despite the requirement of a dunking are probably at the lowest risk of
panic in a capsize, and in least need of the actual dunking.

I suspect that businesses would instantly lose a significant percentage of
their customers and as a result go out of business.

So, the question becomes: is the opportunity to experience beautiful places
worth the risk of a very small number of people dying in the attempt? I
think that is up to a fully informed customer to decide.

On June 15 Ralph Hoehn writes:
That brings up an excellent point: in a business situation can the business
be expected to take on all responsibility or does the ultimate
responsibility for safety remain with the client? And to what extent is the
client even able to assess the risks?

A few days ago we met up with a gentleman who is planning to paddle the full
length of the Mississippi in up to 90 days, starting some time in July ...
after his scheduled prostrate biopsy, whatever the outcome of that. The
fully decked folding boat that he intends to use is so stable that he thinks
it highly unlikely to capsize during the entire trip. However, he readily
agreed that it would be wise to test his self-rescue equipment in any case.
There was a bit of a breeze out on the lake, so the testing even had a
slight element of realism ...

After receiving a brief explanation of how his deckbag-cum-paddlefloat is
best deployed, he held his nose and, with some difficulty, rolled the boat
over. He seemed to experience very little disorientation after his head
popped back up, kept his paddle between himself and the boat while
unbuckling one side of the deck bag, which he then flipped over with the
other side still buckled so that he could insert one paddle blade into the
bag's underside pouch. He then attached the other blade to the aft deck and
scrambled back into the boat. 

Since he is very light and the boat fairly big, he did not at first realize
that scrambling around on top of the deck as if on dry land raises even his
light centre of gravity to a point where the total stability of the
paddler-plus-boat is compromised. On the first go around he got away with
it. The second time he did pitch over the other side -- should have put some
binoculars, water, etc. in that deckbag to act as a counterweight, I guess
-- that taught him a valuable lesson! He scrambled right back up though and
then went over a fourth time for a final confidence booster.

The water was not all that cold, but I was glad that I was wearing my
neoprene farmer john! By the time we got back into the car, our friend, in
light shirt and shorts, was shivering quite badly from the combined chilling
effect of the immersion and the subsequent drying in the breeze. I wonder
whether he would have been "fully informed" other than through this
experience -- mere words might not have got the message across.

I'm no friend of restrictive legislation, certainly not when it concerns
personal safety -- in general that's best left to personal responsibility in
my view. However, I wonder whether it is a good business model, whatever the
short term profit motive, to take paying clients "to experience beautiful
places" if those clients were to display a singular lack of personal
responsibility by being put off the proposed trip by going through an
exercise that is quite necessary to increase their safety and that of
would-be rescuers if things do go wrong?

Ralph Hoehn
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
Received on Fri Jun 15 2007 - 05:35:04 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:31:24 PDT