Hey kayakers, Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of commentary, or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided it is strictly content related, of course)? Do kayakers generally like to read permutations of multiple safety equipment/hard skill recommendations, or an emphasis on seamanship and navigational imperatives? Not that I've done much writing lately, but with so much information out there these days and a multiplicity of instructional kayak books/manuals, and a differentiation along the lines of those who view paddling incidents as a series of objectifiable rescue skill illustrators versus those who don't roll/don't do boat-over-boat drills much, I was wondering what direction to emphasize,at the very least, some of the subjective comment in future. Thanks. Doug Lloyd *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Doug Lloyd wrote: > Hey kayakers, > > Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident > (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of > commentary, or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided > it is strictly content related, of course)? Definitely the former. Sea Kayaker has had some doozies recently, particularly the guy who tried to paddle across one of the Great lakes without adequate prior preparation. The Howe Sound incident must be forthcoming, I would expect. That will be interesting. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Doug Lloyd <douglloyd_at_shaw.ca> wrote: > Hey kayakers, > > Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident > (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of commentary, > or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided it is strictly > content related, of course)? > I think that, for me, it depends upon the incident. Some are more complicated than others. Almost all of them result from a combination of errors and would never have happened had the chain been broken at some point along the line. Lots are simply complacency whether by naivete or over-confidence. If the incident is complicated then I like to get all the info. Craig *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Doug asked: > Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident > (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of > commentary, > or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided it is > strictly > content related, of course)? > > Do kayakers generally like to read permutations of multiple safety > equipment/hard skill recommendations, or an emphasis on seamanship and > navigational imperatives? Doug, I prefer an in-depth analysis rather than a short, concise story. There are usually a number of different options that can be tried with possibly different options. It would be nice to read about them. When things go sour, it is usually not one thing, but a combination that provides all of the drama and/or tragedy. Our responses should also be a combination of things and IMHO, they should get spelled out. Just my 2 cents-----oops, I guess that should now be a quarter based on the strength of the US dollar. Steve Holtzman Southern California __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3084 (20080508) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> Hey kayakers, > > Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident > (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of commentary, > or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided it is strictly > content related, of course)? > > Do kayakers generally like to read permutations of multiple safety > equipment/hard skill recommendations, or an emphasis on seamanship and > navigational imperatives? > > Not that I've done much writing lately, but with so much information out > there these days and a multiplicity of instructional kayak books/manuals, > and a differentiation along the lines of those who view paddling incidents > as a series of objectifiable rescue skill illustrators versus those who > don't roll/don't do boat-over-boat drills much, I was wondering what > direction to emphasize,at the very least, some of the subjective comment in > future. > > Thanks. > > Doug Lloyd Well, shorter rather than too long, but then again, I like to see more details than fewer regarding what went wrong, or what went right. As someone else replied; it depends a lot on the circumstances of the incident itself. Some are pretty straightforward and not a lot of exposition is required. Others are more complex, and require more explanation.... So... some short and concise and other longer and more detailed. I think that means the ball is back in your court. <g> -- Darryl *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Second round from me on this one. I like them concise and to the point partly because I mainly want the grist. But, also, I think pungent, concise prose gets read. Blowsy overblown stuff does not. I rarely learn anything new from the articles because I've been reading them a long time, and it seems the same errors are made over and over. So while it is good to identify and illuminate those errors -- for graybeards it gets repetitive. One useful addition might be a list of references at the end of each where readers can go to learn more. The Gronseth/Broze book, Deep Trouble, should probably be listed at the end of every one. I agree with Craig that some incidents demand more depth, if the circumstances are involved. For example, Andrew Emlen did a bang-up job some five years ago on two guys who misread a chart on the lower Columbia and got stranded in the pucker brush/swamp overnight, less than two miles from their launch site, compounded their error by not understanding tides, and then tried to _walk_ out across a spruce swamp. Ugh. Last thought: the folks who need to read and heed these articles are not reading them. If we are serious about reducing deaths and near-drownings amongst new kayakers, we need to be more forceful about getting the info to new folks, at a time when it means something to them. Rentals and purchases are pretty much the best window of opportunity, exploited to highly variable degree. Later, it is paddling groups, of the real or virtual sort, which seem to have the greatest potential for extending the learning experience. Yeah, yeah, I know. Too many words. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Thanks Darryl. Length of article is one consideration. Content another, and then I guess I also chew over the cud with myself as to how useful an exercise it is when a paddler has done something obviously stupid - is this news worthy(?). What lessons can be learned from plain stupidity? You know, like don't cross to an island in the middle of a storm in your dinky rec boat kind of thing wearing only your sister's black leotards. But then, assuming most avid outdoors people aren't stupid and value life, surely there must be some insight to be gleamed that is helpful for the paddling public of differing skill levels (or readership in the case of publish-for-pay articles) -- for anytime a human passes while engaged in what is ostensibly a funtime, wholesome activity, inquiring minds want to know what happened and more importantly, why. I like to add, what could have been done to prevent further loss once bad decisions have been identified. As for those who survive such stupidity, they can tell us why in their own words. Hopefully we are gracious enough to listen respectfully while relying on editorial integrity to screen out the stories truly irrelevant. I've certainly had Chris at SK nick some of my proposals. Good on him and the editorial staff. In other cases, incidents were more minor in nature and he wanted follow-up, and I didn't respond. Those were incidents where things happened unexpectedly to reasonably good paddlers. There was probable extreme efficiency and relevance to be gleamed from something like that, and I let them go. And the ones that we truly scratch our heads a bit over, it's helpful if paddlers write in and there's a dialogue exchanged questioning and then having the editorial stance defended. I think I sometime almost learn more from those subsequent exchanges and editorial eloquence more than the original article - and I'm not adverse to writing to an editor myself once and awhile. When it comes to learning, it really is all good. Interesting reading? Can't get enough. And heck, my supervisor actually sent someone looking for me today - they thought I was having heart problems or some such thing perhaps off in the company washroom. Nope, I was "preoccupied" for another inordinate amount of time reading my latest issue of Sea Kayaker magazine. I mean, digesting Craig Jungers, reading Wendell Philips eating raw whale along with his wonderful photography, and then feces removal in the wilderness - what wonderful reading, especially in the can. :-) Doug (who had to stay late after work today for make-up time!) >> Hey kayakers, >> >> Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident >> (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of >> commentary, >> or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided it is >> strictly >> content related, of course)? >> >> Do kayakers generally like to read permutations of multiple safety >> equipment/hard skill recommendations, or an emphasis on seamanship and >> navigational imperatives? >> >> Not that I've done much writing lately, but with so much information out >> there these days and a multiplicity of instructional kayak books/manuals, >> and a differentiation along the lines of those who view paddling >> incidents >> as a series of objectifiable rescue skill illustrators versus those who >> don't roll/don't do boat-over-boat drills much, I was wondering what >> direction to emphasize,at the very least, some of the subjective comment >> in >> future. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Doug Lloyd > > Well, shorter rather than too long, but then again, I like to see > more details than fewer regarding what went wrong, or what went > right. > > As someone else replied; it depends a lot on the circumstances of the > incident itself. Some are pretty straightforward and not a lot of > exposition is required. Others are more complex, and require more > explanation.... > > So... some short and concise and other longer and more detailed. > > I think that means the ball is back in your court. <g> *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
An element not addressed explicitly in these exchanges, so far, which I feel is brought out well in the Deep Trouble analyses is the role "group psychology" plays in leading to an incident. I get the impression the current SK editor is more of a "just the facts, please" guy than John Dowd was. You can see this in some of the reader responses to accident articles. Many folks are not aware of how their feelings, approaches to paddling, and decision-making processes influence the likelihood they will suffer an accident. I feel Matt and George did a better job of bringing out those elements than is usual in current safety articles. I'm sure a piece of it has to do with avoiding excessive Monday morning quarterbacking: in the heat of battle, sometimes stuff happens. I understand that; yet, readers should see how the mind sets of paddlers affect their risk exposure. An excellent, well documented example is the analyses published in the Portland Oregonian of the climbing accident which lead to the deaths of three very skilled climbers on Mt Hood a year and a half ago I could be expecting more from these articles than is reasonable. But, I want them to punch out a bit more, and grab the reader by the lapels, when possible. Sometimes not easy to do without getting preachy. Many know I taught introductory chemistry at a community college for many years; the result is a huge catalog of observations of minor accidents (nothing major, thank god) involving folks new to a chemical lab environment. And, so many, many times a student had a spill or something go wrong from just not thinking about what he/she was doing. Becoming critical of self and one's own actions, in real time, is a teachable attitude; SK mag's safety articles could do more in that direction. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
As a former private pilot, I used to read all the accident reports I could get my hands on. It was often chilling stuff but I was constantly reminded that flying is relentlessly and irrevocably unforgiving of complacency and stupidity. Just like sea kayaking and river-running. Despite the ghoulish nature of this kind of thing, a well-written accident report works for me. Paul ......Peter wrote: Too many years writing reports I guess but I'd like a combination in say, four sections: - Short summary of the facts - Descriptive interpretation - Concise conclusions - References Another format that worked well for me was "Deep Trouble". When I read accident reports I often learn something new but most importantly I gain a reminder, an ambience, of the need for care and the danger of complacency...... *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
.......Tord wrote: In FLYING, the US magazine, they've had a series of articles called 'I learned about flying from that' where the ones involved in mishaps have written themselves about them, but also another series 'Aftermath' where official, dry, accident reports are analysed and commented on. The latter covers fatal accidents, which can't be commented on by those involved, but mainly covers when the communication and infrastructure breaks down, either between those in the cockpit, or between air and ground. I'm not a pilot (well, 'pilot' of boats and model aircraft I am!), but I have always found both types riverting stuff..... Flying accidents are usually the result of a combination of events - many of which might have been trifling - which form into a pyramid. Reaching the top of the pyramid is when the accident occurs. So, in one flying example I studied well, it went like this. 1. Company pilot (ex-South African Air Force Mirage fighter pilot) flies company executives to look at a remote construction site for the day. 2. The return flight is delayed due to the executive running late over luch and meetings on site. By the time they get back to the airport, large thunderstorms have begun building on their route home. The pilot knows this. 3. Nightfall is also a few hours off - the return flight will be mostly in the dark. 4. The pilot, although highly experienced, is new to charter work. 5. The pilot is also new to a job where his bosses are urging him to begin a flight into marginal conditions. They don't want to stay over in this horrible little town - they want to get home to their families. His concerns about the weather do not wash with them: after all, he is this highly-trained former fighter pilot. They remind him that he is a pilot among pilots, they lean on him with seniority, and he takes off into the dusk. 6. Early into the flight the conditions turn IMC (Instrument Meteorological Conditions). And it is solid clag for most of the intended route. The rest is reconstruction and conjecture. 7. The aircraft is blown off-course although it maybe the pilot is unaware of this. Radio contact is intermittent. 8. Despite flying into terrible conditions, the pilot elects to continue with the flight instead of retiring hurt but alive to the airport he has just left. Maybe he'd be unemployed, too, but alive. The plane crashed into below a peak in the highest mountain range in southern Africa, 200 miles south of its intended route, and killing all six on board. The wreck was not found for over a year and only when it was did investigators piece the puzzle together. It was a classic pyramid of event. But the pilot didn't actually reach the top until the moment he elected not to turn back. At that point disaster was inevitable. It's this kind of thing I think about when I'm kayaking now. I look at everything. And to steal a homily from flying, better to be on dry land wishing you were on the water than on the water wishing you were on dry land. Paul *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Turn over every stone and give me the details please. Sometimes we get in the most trouble when we overlook the small details. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Lloyd" <douglloyd_at_shaw.ca> > Hey kayakers, > > Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident > (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of > commentary, or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided > it is strictly content related, of course)? > > Do kayakers generally like to read permutations of multiple safety > equipment/hard skill recommendations, or an emphasis on seamanship and > navigational imperatives? *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> Doug Lloyd wrote: >> Hey kayakers, >> >> Do folks prefer _short, concise_ safety articles outlining an incident >> (either first or second hand) followed by a writer's economy of >> commentary, or more in-depth, "turn over every stone" analysis (provided >> it is strictly content related, of course)? > > Definitely the former. > > Sea Kayaker has had some doozies recently, particularly the guy who tried > to paddle across one of the Great lakes without adequate prior > preparation. > > The Howe Sound incident must be forthcoming, I would expect. That will be > interesting. > > -- > Dave Kruger > Astoria, OR Dead in the water I think Dave, now, along with my last work in progress too, which was on the Bay of Fundy incident. I spent a lot of money and time on the Bay of Fundy incident getting the exact weather details, CCG reports, long distance calls, then Explore Magazine nails the article so what was the point. I dug into the Howe Sound incident too - immediately; got the CCG stuff, spent long conversations with EC and the actual forecaster that day verifying, wave height and wind strengths too (too much exaggerating in the media). Then I just stopped. A few of my calls to principal parties were not returned. I figured something was afoot. And sure enough, what I though would happen, did. David Leach jumped all over that story. He's got way better pull and connections - and he teaches or taught non fiction writing. So, grab an issue of May's Explore Magazine. Good article. I don't agree with all the reported conditions. No problem. Story makes for an interesting read. Lots of bodies to keep track off. I also would have concentrated more on coping strategies, what paddlers should do when things do go wrong, and such. The CCG SAR coordinator had hoped that discussion would have been dealt with more. Many of David's other observations and editorial direction matched my notes almost exactly, so I take that as a complement. David has also written an entire book on the Fundy Multisport Race death, called "Fatal Tide." Just came out. Truth be known, I'd rather write about real sea kayakers in the context of touring incidents, as then I'm writing from a base of knowledge and experience and more importantly, passion. I'm glad I halted the Howe Sound article. Ever been in a talent show then followed immediately by someone so talented that that's the only performance anyone remembers - the other guy's? Not that I'd write for glory. Sea kayaking is all about friends, community, supporting good people like Sea Kayaker Magazine, trying to make a difference, and contributing something in life that allies itself with your own interests. The latter is selfish, I confess.But I should have finished the Nootka Island double tragedy and/or my Brooks solo death rather than get lost chasing elite athletes across swollen seas. At least I'll get the Brooks one done soon. Thanks for chiming in. Doug *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:49 PDT