It is good that this discussion is taking place.
As someone who is never going to reach the skill level required to be a trip leader, I would like to make it clear that I would not be in the least offended if I were advised not to go on a trip because of doubts about my abilities or the suitability of my equipment.
Ireland is probably the least child friendly country in Europe and there are very poor facilities for children’s recreation and out of school education. But the ISKA is a national organisation, catering for adults. There are only about 9 meets a year with trips catering for at most 3 difficulty levels. Surely for a small organisation; and the ISKA is a very loose organisation (no laughing in the cheap seats); it is too much to expect that it should be able to accommodate children. Most certainly not 9 year old children, whatever about sturdy youths and comely maidens.
Local clubs can and do cater for younger people but the dynamics are different and organisers have time to get to know participants as they come up through the ranks of flat water, ww river trips and so on.
I can appreciate how frustrating it is for youngsters to be told they can’t take part in many activities but I feel equally discriminated against when I am not allowed into the local teenage disco - just because I am 47.
On the subject of traditional skin on frame boats and bulkheads; it would be a shame not to make a concession considering their heritage and aesthetic appeal. The larger Klepper type boats also have no bulkheads but are eminently seaworthy.
Equipment which has, I think, not been mentioned which everyone should carry are: a mobile phone in a waterproof case, reflective patches on boat and buoyancy aids, a bivvy bag and a first aid kit. These are all inexpensive and most have uses outside of kayaking.
Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Specifically re skin on frame boats and bulkheads - how about a sea sock?
From WikipediA
A sea sock is a piece of equipment used in sea kayaking. It is a large waterproof bag that is placed inside the kayak and attached tightly all around the rim of the cockpit. The paddler sits inside the sea sock.
A sea sock is different from a spraydeck, which keeps water out of the kayak while the kayaker is in the boat. If the kayak capsizes, the kayaker can exit the capsized kayak underwater. The spraydeck remains attached to the kayaker, but a sea sock remains with the kayak and prevents it from filling with water.
Pros & cons discussed at Kayak Wiki
Some detail re sea socks on Feathercraft kayaks
A quick search on the web found one for €112...
From WikipediA
A sea sock is a piece of equipment used in sea kayaking. It is a large waterproof bag that is placed inside the kayak and attached tightly all around the rim of the cockpit. The paddler sits inside the sea sock.
A sea sock is different from a spraydeck, which keeps water out of the kayak while the kayaker is in the boat. If the kayak capsizes, the kayaker can exit the capsized kayak underwater. The spraydeck remains attached to the kayaker, but a sea sock remains with the kayak and prevents it from filling with water.
Pros & cons discussed at Kayak Wiki
Some detail re sea socks on Feathercraft kayaks
A quick search on the web found one for €112...
-
michaelcheers
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Skin on frame boats represent an interesting problem regarding the recommendations on bulkheads and floatation. I have a feathercraft klondike - similar to a klepper A2 and using “back of fag packet” calculations I guessed it would contain around 900kg or litres of water when full. The internal air filled sponsoons probably displace around 300kg and would keep the boat afloat but potentially too low in the water to be bailed out in a swell when water is breaking over the cockpit coaming.
Recognising the issue I put two safety devices in place.
First I fitted the largest airbags I could buy to fill every available space fore and aft to displace as much space as possible. These ensure the boat rides much higher out of the water when on its side or upside down.
The second solution which I commend to Etienne and other homebuilders, is a device called a sea sock supplied as an optional extra by Feathercraft in Canada (can be imported by Koydart UK) These things look like a large sack with an elasticated open end. The sack goes into the cockpit and you then sit in the sack. The elasticated open end is then positioned over the cockpit coaming rim to hold it in place and the spray deck goes on top. This link shows a picture of how it works.
http://www.feathercraft.com/accessories/misc.php
In the event of a capsize, only the volume within the sea sock gets filled and everything else remains dry. Added to this it also keeps sand and dirt from the inside of the boat where it can cause damage if it rubs between frame and skin. Sea socks can also be fitted to regular kayaks but they may interfere with foot operated devices such as pumps and rudders. The downside is that they feel a bit weird to sit in as the bag sags around your legs, I got used to it and I will not use the boat without them in place.
regards
Mike
Recognising the issue I put two safety devices in place.
First I fitted the largest airbags I could buy to fill every available space fore and aft to displace as much space as possible. These ensure the boat rides much higher out of the water when on its side or upside down.
The second solution which I commend to Etienne and other homebuilders, is a device called a sea sock supplied as an optional extra by Feathercraft in Canada (can be imported by Koydart UK) These things look like a large sack with an elasticated open end. The sack goes into the cockpit and you then sit in the sack. The elasticated open end is then positioned over the cockpit coaming rim to hold it in place and the spray deck goes on top. This link shows a picture of how it works.
http://www.feathercraft.com/accessories/misc.php
In the event of a capsize, only the volume within the sea sock gets filled and everything else remains dry. Added to this it also keeps sand and dirt from the inside of the boat where it can cause damage if it rubs between frame and skin. Sea socks can also be fitted to regular kayaks but they may interfere with foot operated devices such as pumps and rudders. The downside is that they feel a bit weird to sit in as the bag sags around your legs, I got used to it and I will not use the boat without them in place.
regards
Mike
-
michaelcheers
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Sorry I repeated the point. Phoban posted the same point much more succintly before me.
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Great to see a lively debate has been stimulated. I think it’s unnecessary to say anything further about the source of the debate. However, it seems to me that we can separate all the fallout under two “banner” issues, namely the role and authority of the leader and the involvement of minors in the club. For those that don’t know me, I’m *not* an ISKA leader but I have paddled enough to see something of how the leadership operates and I have lead trips in other (different) risk/outdoor pursuit clubs. I also have 2 very young kids, neither of which I’m about to foist on ISKA 
Role and authority of the leader:
Surely the leader must have a degree of responsibility for the trip that extends beyond simply arranging a time and place of departure, routing and such like? Certainly the leaders that I’ve seen appear to take responsibility for the overall organisation and safety of the group, to the extent that it can be reasonably expected and to a level commensurate with each individual’s paddling abilities, given cooperation from its members. That said individual trip members also have responsibility for their own actions.
The safety of the group is, among other things, influenced by the number, experience, attitudes and strength of its members, the equipment used and carried by the group, the group control and teamwork. The age of group members, young *or* old, may be an indicating factor but is not in itself a measure of suitability.
If the leader is to be expected to carry this burden of responsibility in a purely voluntary capacity, with the inevitable personal risks that implies, then the final decision must rest with the leader as to the suitability of the trip for any individual and implicitly the suitability of an individual’s equipment for that trip. Whether the leader chooses to check equipment or not is a matter for their own judgement (it’s ultimately their risk), but I would agree (with Ciaran) that to check everything is unrealistic and should be unnecessary, at least with experienced paddlers.
As an organisation, ISKA ought to do what it can to assist the leader in exercising good judgement. As has already been suggested, a recommended list of equipment to be carried and specifications for same (including boats) sounds like a good thing. I *don’t* think this should be mandatory: actual equipment requirements vary for all sorts of reasons and equipment technology develops continuously. The bottom line should be that if the trip leader doesn’t think equipment is adequate, then it’s not (at least for that trip), irrespective of what’s written on some list.
In summary, the leader’s the boss. If he or she doesn’t think you or your equipment or your minors are appropriate for the trip, for whatever reason but without prejudice, their decision should be supported.
Minors:
Two things come to mind. Firstly ISKA appears to be an ageing organisation with a relative deficit of members at the bottom of the adult age range. Secondly, judging from the name if not the actions, ISKA also appears to be a national body claiming to represent the interests of, implicitly, all those involved in sea kayaking.
The exclusion of minors by ISKA might suggest that:
- their interests as regards sea kayaking are not, as far as I know, represented by any organisation in Ireland.
- a safe and controlled environment in which minors can learn sea kayaking is not available except to those whose parents are competent and willing to teach themselves or else financially well endowed.
- those who are persistent enough to bother learning are more likely to do so in an unsafe environment, possibly with inadequate equipment and instruction. (How many kids have you seen well out of their depth on sit-on kayaks and with no buoyancy aids, for example?)
- there is no ready made stream of youngsters wanting to join the adult club. By the time they’re able, they’ve probably already got involved in other more kid-friendly activities with younger and (for them) more attractive membership profiles.
I would encourage members of ISKA not to dismiss out-of-hand the involvement of minors. I would welcome a positive and reasoned debate, without prejudice as to the eventual outcome, as to *how* and to what *extent* minors could best be accommodated, what might be the benefits and difficulties and what the legal ramifications might be. I certainly don’t pretend to have all the answers and I accept that ultimately it *may* not be possible, but I’ve not yet seen a balanced debate.
I would contribute *at*least* the following minimum requirements for their involvement:
- that the enjoyment of the existing adult membership is not compromised by the involvement of minors
- that trip leaders exercise judgement based on ability, outlook and experience when involving minors in “adult” trips
- that trip leaders not wishing to accept responsibility for minors shouldn’t be expected to
- that appropriate insurance and legal protection be put in place to protect trip leaders and, if necessary, the officers of the club to the fullest extent possible.
I hope that I’ve contributed constructively to the debate and would be interested to hear the opinons of all those still reading
Role and authority of the leader:
Surely the leader must have a degree of responsibility for the trip that extends beyond simply arranging a time and place of departure, routing and such like? Certainly the leaders that I’ve seen appear to take responsibility for the overall organisation and safety of the group, to the extent that it can be reasonably expected and to a level commensurate with each individual’s paddling abilities, given cooperation from its members. That said individual trip members also have responsibility for their own actions.
The safety of the group is, among other things, influenced by the number, experience, attitudes and strength of its members, the equipment used and carried by the group, the group control and teamwork. The age of group members, young *or* old, may be an indicating factor but is not in itself a measure of suitability.
If the leader is to be expected to carry this burden of responsibility in a purely voluntary capacity, with the inevitable personal risks that implies, then the final decision must rest with the leader as to the suitability of the trip for any individual and implicitly the suitability of an individual’s equipment for that trip. Whether the leader chooses to check equipment or not is a matter for their own judgement (it’s ultimately their risk), but I would agree (with Ciaran) that to check everything is unrealistic and should be unnecessary, at least with experienced paddlers.
As an organisation, ISKA ought to do what it can to assist the leader in exercising good judgement. As has already been suggested, a recommended list of equipment to be carried and specifications for same (including boats) sounds like a good thing. I *don’t* think this should be mandatory: actual equipment requirements vary for all sorts of reasons and equipment technology develops continuously. The bottom line should be that if the trip leader doesn’t think equipment is adequate, then it’s not (at least for that trip), irrespective of what’s written on some list.
In summary, the leader’s the boss. If he or she doesn’t think you or your equipment or your minors are appropriate for the trip, for whatever reason but without prejudice, their decision should be supported.
Minors:
Two things come to mind. Firstly ISKA appears to be an ageing organisation with a relative deficit of members at the bottom of the adult age range. Secondly, judging from the name if not the actions, ISKA also appears to be a national body claiming to represent the interests of, implicitly, all those involved in sea kayaking.
The exclusion of minors by ISKA might suggest that:
- their interests as regards sea kayaking are not, as far as I know, represented by any organisation in Ireland.
- a safe and controlled environment in which minors can learn sea kayaking is not available except to those whose parents are competent and willing to teach themselves or else financially well endowed.
- those who are persistent enough to bother learning are more likely to do so in an unsafe environment, possibly with inadequate equipment and instruction. (How many kids have you seen well out of their depth on sit-on kayaks and with no buoyancy aids, for example?)
- there is no ready made stream of youngsters wanting to join the adult club. By the time they’re able, they’ve probably already got involved in other more kid-friendly activities with younger and (for them) more attractive membership profiles.
I would encourage members of ISKA not to dismiss out-of-hand the involvement of minors. I would welcome a positive and reasoned debate, without prejudice as to the eventual outcome, as to *how* and to what *extent* minors could best be accommodated, what might be the benefits and difficulties and what the legal ramifications might be. I certainly don’t pretend to have all the answers and I accept that ultimately it *may* not be possible, but I’ve not yet seen a balanced debate.
I would contribute *at*least* the following minimum requirements for their involvement:
- that the enjoyment of the existing adult membership is not compromised by the involvement of minors
- that trip leaders exercise judgement based on ability, outlook and experience when involving minors in “adult” trips
- that trip leaders not wishing to accept responsibility for minors shouldn’t be expected to
- that appropriate insurance and legal protection be put in place to protect trip leaders and, if necessary, the officers of the club to the fullest extent possible.
I hope that I’ve contributed constructively to the debate and would be interested to hear the opinons of all those still reading
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Ciaran is Right Right Right and Right but whats the point in being right as almost all seem to agree. Doing whats right is more important than agreeing whats right. I dont remember the last time I saw bulkheads or deck lines being checked much less paddle leashes or tow lines. God help the \'overzealous\' leader who might delay the group briefing and the, \'lets get into the water now\' mindset.
Mick
Mick
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Thanks to Ciaran for leading a wonderful trip from Caherdaniel:
I agree with each point you\'ve made, and will take advise from it, when there is a set policy it makes it easy for any leader, so well done for speaking up - no not offending, just being safe.
As Maurice said \"the role of a meet leader is to offer guidance, advise and to encourage safe practice\" - if that means saying no on the shore because your kit isn\'t up to standard, then that should be taken as such, encouraging safe practice.....
Some of us do bring out out kids from time to time, myself included, but I think anytime I have done so I have been responsible myself for them, so if not able to keep up or work in the conditions, well then it becomes my responsibility, and this has been agreed with the leader before hand. But I don\'t think it fair to put that responsibility on any leader, so maybe it does make it clearer to have a no children policy, then if someone does bring a child it goes without saying that they are the responsibility of the parent/guardian, not that of the leader. Although I would still like to think we can have club BBQ\'s and encourage families to take part in those sort of situations.
I agree with each point you\'ve made, and will take advise from it, when there is a set policy it makes it easy for any leader, so well done for speaking up - no not offending, just being safe.
As Maurice said \"the role of a meet leader is to offer guidance, advise and to encourage safe practice\" - if that means saying no on the shore because your kit isn\'t up to standard, then that should be taken as such, encouraging safe practice.....
Some of us do bring out out kids from time to time, myself included, but I think anytime I have done so I have been responsible myself for them, so if not able to keep up or work in the conditions, well then it becomes my responsibility, and this has been agreed with the leader before hand. But I don\'t think it fair to put that responsibility on any leader, so maybe it does make it clearer to have a no children policy, then if someone does bring a child it goes without saying that they are the responsibility of the parent/guardian, not that of the leader. Although I would still like to think we can have club BBQ\'s and encourage families to take part in those sort of situations.