Having just come back from Cork, a couple of things should perhaps be considered by the wider paddling community as a whole and by trip leaders in general.
This post is not intended to be critical of the individuals or circumstances that trigger the train of thought, so please don\'t feel put upon.
1 - Boats
It\'s my opinion that boats without decklines should not go to sea. Doing any sort of a rough water rescue without decklines would be a nightmare. We did a very-smooth-water rescue at the landing on Scariff on such a boat, and it took a long time, much pumping by the hard-working paddler and others, and an eventual trip to a beach to get it empty. While fair dues to the sturdy paddler involved in paddling it for some distance with some inches of water in it, the outcome would have been a lot uglier in circumstances that were less benign.
I personally intend to refuse to take anyone on the water in a boat with no decklines in the future, regardless of the conditions, the size or stability of the boat, the length of the journey, or the paddler. I recommend others do likewise.
2 - Boats, continued
It\'s also my opinion that boats without bulkheads should not go to sea. While buoyancy bags can help to ensure that the does not actually sink (and I don\'t know if boat will ever sink, if the material it\'s made of is less dense than water), emptying a boat with no bulkheads is a nightmare. I can\'t imagine it\'s any fun to paddle one, either, with mini-waves slopping up and down the boat each time you go up or down a wave.
So - I personally intend to refuse to take anyone on the water in a boat with no bulkheads in the future, regardless of the conditions, the size or stability of the boat, the length of the journey, or the paddler. I recommend others do likewise.
3 - Towlines
Carrying and using towlines is a basic responsibility of any competent paddler. To paraphrase Dave Walsh, not carrying a tow line means you\'re prepared to be towed, but not to reciprocate, and that\'s not good enough. If you\'re a beginner, fair dues, you\'ve enough to worry about. But if you\'re on the water a year, and particularly if you own your own boat, get a townline! If you really don\'t want to drill holes in your deck, get a waist tow. Better still, get both. And a short (1.5m) tow for your front deck, to do things like pull a kayak across to a rock for someone doing a rock landing. I was unimpressed at the very small number of towlines in the large group we had out on Saturday - so get a towline, folks!
4 - Paddle leashes
Not having a paddle leash means you have one more thing to worry about when you are being rescued, or rescuing. You don\'t need that one more thing to worry about! Get 2m of strong bungee and a clip for the end. Tie the bungee to your paddle shaft. That\'s all it takes. Beginners in particular need paddle leashes, since they are more likely to need rescuing. Experienced paddlers need them, since they are more likely to be doing the rescuing. Even if you don\'t own a boat, or a paddle, you can still start small and get a paddle leash. Please.
5 - Children
It\'s my opinion that we should simply say \"no children\" on ISKA meets. Until you are strong enough to paddle a full-size kayak in a strong wind, you\'re not ready to go to sea. The sea is a big place, and it\'s not on to place excessive pressure or stress on your group and its leader. If you have kids and want to take them paddling (as I do, indeed), do it on your own time, in a sheltered bay or lake or wherever you see fit, under your own responsibility.
Personally, I intend to refuse to take any child or teenager that I don\'t know can paddle competently, on the sea. And I recommend that other leaders do the same, in order to preserve the group enjoyment and their own.
I\'d be happy to see what others have to say about this - am I being unreasonable ?
Ciaran
Safety, Boats and Age Limits
-
michaelcheers
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
These are good points.
Regarding children
God forbid it, but in the worst of circumstances someone will be sought to blame if a minor has an accident on an ISKA trip . The leader of the trip
will be called to explain himself to a judge or coroner and his or her life
will be greatly affected for ever.
With children the leaders must assume a far greater legal duty of care than with adults because as adults we participate in the activity with full acceptance and understanding of the level of risk. With children on the
other hand that risk assessment has been done on their behalf by adults
such as their parents or the trip leaders
As you suggest, for the future it must be left to the trip leader and he ALONE to make the risk assessment on behalf of minors. In doing so the parent must WILLINGLY defer this responsibility to the trip leader who ultimately will carry the can if the worst happened.
Mike Cheers
PS many thanks for your trip leading efforts on Sat.
Regarding children
God forbid it, but in the worst of circumstances someone will be sought to blame if a minor has an accident on an ISKA trip . The leader of the trip
will be called to explain himself to a judge or coroner and his or her life
will be greatly affected for ever.
With children the leaders must assume a far greater legal duty of care than with adults because as adults we participate in the activity with full acceptance and understanding of the level of risk. With children on the
other hand that risk assessment has been done on their behalf by adults
such as their parents or the trip leaders
As you suggest, for the future it must be left to the trip leader and he ALONE to make the risk assessment on behalf of minors. In doing so the parent must WILLINGLY defer this responsibility to the trip leader who ultimately will carry the can if the worst happened.
Mike Cheers
PS many thanks for your trip leading efforts on Sat.
-
michaelcheers
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Inclusive not exclusive!
One idea regarding participation of kids is that perhaps at some meets we could organise activities especially for younger groups. Perhaps, not every trip but i for one would be glad to help out with these.
MIke
One idea regarding participation of kids is that perhaps at some meets we could organise activities especially for younger groups. Perhaps, not every trip but i for one would be glad to help out with these.
MIke
-
michaelcheers
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
\"To this end, only I am responsible for my sins!!
To my mind the role of a meet leader is to offer guidace, advise and to encourage safe practice, not to be held to ransom if I, or anyone else, screw up!!!\"
This is a reasonable, pragmatic, common sense view of course. You are experienced enough to make that call. Most of us are surely.
But let give you an example to illustrate a counter argument regarding where responsibility really lies when kids are involved if only to provoke a healthy debate on this grim but important subject.
When the juniors at Royal St George YC got into difficulties last week and the media descended on the place hungry of a story, no one was asking the PARENTS \"....well why did you send you kids out with a dodgy forecast etc. etc.....\" The difficult questions were put to the race officer and the club executive i.e. the club leadership and organisers. For us that means Mary, Martin and Ciarran for example. It was quite clear to the media where the responsibility lies as it would be I would suggest, to a board of enquiry.
What I\'m trying to say is lets be clear where the responsibility lies and be careful not place this burden on someone else unintentionally.
Lets properly risk assess our activities.
Lets learn from our mistakes and the mistakes of others.
Kind regards
Mike
To my mind the role of a meet leader is to offer guidace, advise and to encourage safe practice, not to be held to ransom if I, or anyone else, screw up!!!\"
This is a reasonable, pragmatic, common sense view of course. You are experienced enough to make that call. Most of us are surely.
But let give you an example to illustrate a counter argument regarding where responsibility really lies when kids are involved if only to provoke a healthy debate on this grim but important subject.
When the juniors at Royal St George YC got into difficulties last week and the media descended on the place hungry of a story, no one was asking the PARENTS \"....well why did you send you kids out with a dodgy forecast etc. etc.....\" The difficult questions were put to the race officer and the club executive i.e. the club leadership and organisers. For us that means Mary, Martin and Ciarran for example. It was quite clear to the media where the responsibility lies as it would be I would suggest, to a board of enquiry.
What I\'m trying to say is lets be clear where the responsibility lies and be careful not place this burden on someone else unintentionally.
Lets properly risk assess our activities.
Lets learn from our mistakes and the mistakes of others.
Kind regards
Mike
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Wow. A real debate on real issues on the Bulletin Board. About time.
I have notoriously hardline views on decklines, bulkheads, towlines and even paddle-leashes. I agree with Herr Clissmann in every word he says. Not all senior Irish sea kayakers share all these views, but so be it. I have caused enough offence over the years, (contrary though that may be to my nature), to share these now with you all, during a debate that belongs to you – the members (God, I am beginning to sound like Joe Duffy).
But on the last subject, the potential fallout from the participation of children in risk activities, I am uniquely (OK, lets say well positioned) to advise on the precise legal position, as the solicitor professionally advising several risk activity organisations over the last generation or so. May I therefore pontificate (some, cruelly, would say, my favourite activity).
A child (anyone of 17 years 364 days old, or younger) who participates in a risk activity, without a parental or guardian’s consent, does so without consenting to the risk inherent in the activity. A parent or guardian may consent to the risk on their behalf. Only if the parent or guardian has consented to the child participating in the risk activity is the position between leader and child even nearly the same as between the leader and an adult beginner. Without parental consent, any mishap to the child is actionable, i.e. a damages claim. Adults, and children with parental consent, have to prove the leader was negligent. A child engaging in a risk activity without parental consent, who is injured, or worse, does not have to prove anyone was negligent, just that they were injured.
The reason teachers get consent forms signed before going to the adventure centre on a weekend away is to level that playing field. Doctors get consents before operations for the same reason. Injure someone without their consent to the risk and they do you for assault, not negligence. Fault, in its ordinary meaning, is irrelevant. Lack of consent takes away the whole concept of culpability.
I had thought ISKA had a no-children policy, but my memory may have slipped. Certainly, Feckers have one. Organisations are either into children participating in risk activities (in which case they do it properly, utterly professionally at every twist), or they stay clear. Do it right or not at all. They never ever dabble (a term which, loosely, in this context, means leaving it all to the spur-of-the-moment decision of the designated meet leader of the day, on the beach, in the teeth of those bitterly disappointed by the decision, as and when it hopefully only occasionally arises).
Children becoming members of a risk activity organisation, as opposed to merely going out on the sea with members of the organisation, is even more troubled. There are enormous implications for how the activity is conducted and inter-personal relationship, codified under the “Code of Ethics and Good Practice for Children in Sport”, a minefield.
DWalsh
I have notoriously hardline views on decklines, bulkheads, towlines and even paddle-leashes. I agree with Herr Clissmann in every word he says. Not all senior Irish sea kayakers share all these views, but so be it. I have caused enough offence over the years, (contrary though that may be to my nature), to share these now with you all, during a debate that belongs to you – the members (God, I am beginning to sound like Joe Duffy).
But on the last subject, the potential fallout from the participation of children in risk activities, I am uniquely (OK, lets say well positioned) to advise on the precise legal position, as the solicitor professionally advising several risk activity organisations over the last generation or so. May I therefore pontificate (some, cruelly, would say, my favourite activity).
A child (anyone of 17 years 364 days old, or younger) who participates in a risk activity, without a parental or guardian’s consent, does so without consenting to the risk inherent in the activity. A parent or guardian may consent to the risk on their behalf. Only if the parent or guardian has consented to the child participating in the risk activity is the position between leader and child even nearly the same as between the leader and an adult beginner. Without parental consent, any mishap to the child is actionable, i.e. a damages claim. Adults, and children with parental consent, have to prove the leader was negligent. A child engaging in a risk activity without parental consent, who is injured, or worse, does not have to prove anyone was negligent, just that they were injured.
The reason teachers get consent forms signed before going to the adventure centre on a weekend away is to level that playing field. Doctors get consents before operations for the same reason. Injure someone without their consent to the risk and they do you for assault, not negligence. Fault, in its ordinary meaning, is irrelevant. Lack of consent takes away the whole concept of culpability.
I had thought ISKA had a no-children policy, but my memory may have slipped. Certainly, Feckers have one. Organisations are either into children participating in risk activities (in which case they do it properly, utterly professionally at every twist), or they stay clear. Do it right or not at all. They never ever dabble (a term which, loosely, in this context, means leaving it all to the spur-of-the-moment decision of the designated meet leader of the day, on the beach, in the teeth of those bitterly disappointed by the decision, as and when it hopefully only occasionally arises).
Children becoming members of a risk activity organisation, as opposed to merely going out on the sea with members of the organisation, is even more troubled. There are enormous implications for how the activity is conducted and inter-personal relationship, codified under the “Code of Ethics and Good Practice for Children in Sport”, a minefield.
DWalsh
-
chrisleonard
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Hi All,
this poses a question as to what is the leaders role as there seems to be different opinions out there. In my mind they are the guardian of the group and responsible for making sure any trip is as safe as can be. This means ensuring that the group is properly equiped and that the group are proficient enough to paddle safely in the conditions they are likely to encounter on the day in question.
The second issue is not what the group can do for me but what can I do for the group. Could I potentially perform or assist with a rescue if needed. There is a certain group/individual responsibility rarther than all the responsibility being heaped on the trip leader. This can pose another question - should paddlers be more active in upskilling through the ICU sea paddling proficency levels ie should we insist only card carrying level 2,3,4 etc paddlers are allowed on ISKA trips ?
In regards to children I know from other clubs ie river paddling the involvement of children is kept quite seperate from \'adult\' trips. There is seperate training and seperate trips so that the supervision and difficulty of the trip is controlled and tailored to the ability of the juniors taking part. There are strict rules as to conduct of the leaders with juniors and all leaders sign up to this on paper. There isn\'t any cross-over between the junior and adult paddling trips. In my mind this makes sense. The physical abilities of a junior and an adult paddler are vastly different. In this context trips need to be planned so that they take into account the limitations of junior paddlers. Where this would fit into ISKA trips is another question ....
In conclusion I would agree with CC here as well.
Thats my 2 cents thrown into the debate......
this poses a question as to what is the leaders role as there seems to be different opinions out there. In my mind they are the guardian of the group and responsible for making sure any trip is as safe as can be. This means ensuring that the group is properly equiped and that the group are proficient enough to paddle safely in the conditions they are likely to encounter on the day in question.
The second issue is not what the group can do for me but what can I do for the group. Could I potentially perform or assist with a rescue if needed. There is a certain group/individual responsibility rarther than all the responsibility being heaped on the trip leader. This can pose another question - should paddlers be more active in upskilling through the ICU sea paddling proficency levels ie should we insist only card carrying level 2,3,4 etc paddlers are allowed on ISKA trips ?
In regards to children I know from other clubs ie river paddling the involvement of children is kept quite seperate from \'adult\' trips. There is seperate training and seperate trips so that the supervision and difficulty of the trip is controlled and tailored to the ability of the juniors taking part. There are strict rules as to conduct of the leaders with juniors and all leaders sign up to this on paper. There isn\'t any cross-over between the junior and adult paddling trips. In my mind this makes sense. The physical abilities of a junior and an adult paddler are vastly different. In this context trips need to be planned so that they take into account the limitations of junior paddlers. Where this would fit into ISKA trips is another question ....
In conclusion I would agree with CC here as well.
Thats my 2 cents thrown into the debate......
-
michaelcheers
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 9:37 am
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Hi All
Martin was presented with an unusual situation whereby the guardian of a minor willingly and insistently provided parental consent for the participation of a child on an ISKA trip. In doing so the guardian overruled the advice of the trip leader and in doing so \"apparently\" took responsibility for the child himself. Yet the trip leader remained in charge of the group and the trip remained under the banner of the ISKA and both parent and child remained with the trip. No disclaimers or consent documentation were exchanged and it seems to me that the safety of the child, morally and potentially legally (D.Walsh please advise) remained on the shoulders of the ISKA and its officers. If an accident had occurred without documentation that clearly absolved the ISKA and its officers from responsibility for the minor I think we would be very exposed.
So I\'d say the ISKA is at a cross roads. The status quo that allows the above situation to happen is not tenable. Two options present themselves as DWalsh points out.
1 An all out ban on minors OR
2 Properly administered and tailored activities for the under 18\'s
For option 2 an appointed Children’s Officer as mentioned by Eileen is indeed a specified requirement from the Code of Ethics and Good Practice for Children’s Sport as well as a whole bundle of other things I would guess.
link here
http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/code/h ... 0axxx_Home
If we proceed with option 2 in any form we should defer to this document and the advice of D.Walsh who is clearly a very well positioned authority.
kind regards
Mike Cheers
Martin was presented with an unusual situation whereby the guardian of a minor willingly and insistently provided parental consent for the participation of a child on an ISKA trip. In doing so the guardian overruled the advice of the trip leader and in doing so \"apparently\" took responsibility for the child himself. Yet the trip leader remained in charge of the group and the trip remained under the banner of the ISKA and both parent and child remained with the trip. No disclaimers or consent documentation were exchanged and it seems to me that the safety of the child, morally and potentially legally (D.Walsh please advise) remained on the shoulders of the ISKA and its officers. If an accident had occurred without documentation that clearly absolved the ISKA and its officers from responsibility for the minor I think we would be very exposed.
So I\'d say the ISKA is at a cross roads. The status quo that allows the above situation to happen is not tenable. Two options present themselves as DWalsh points out.
1 An all out ban on minors OR
2 Properly administered and tailored activities for the under 18\'s
For option 2 an appointed Children’s Officer as mentioned by Eileen is indeed a specified requirement from the Code of Ethics and Good Practice for Children’s Sport as well as a whole bundle of other things I would guess.
link here
http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/code/h ... 0axxx_Home
If we proceed with option 2 in any form we should defer to this document and the advice of D.Walsh who is clearly a very well positioned authority.
kind regards
Mike Cheers
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Hi Cairan
I am taking you advice on board and upgrading the boat in question. Have been meaning to do it for some time but keep starting new boats instead. A good wakeup call. A tow rope tied bertween the bow and stern loops substitutes for decklines if this situation comes up again. Thanks for a great day by the way. Etienne
I am taking you advice on board and upgrading the boat in question. Have been meaning to do it for some time but keep starting new boats instead. A good wakeup call. A tow rope tied bertween the bow and stern loops substitutes for decklines if this situation comes up again. Thanks for a great day by the way. Etienne
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
Michael did well to understand my last posting in only three reads. Most people take years to get their heads around that sort of stuff.
I didn’t know at time of last posting that the child was 9 and I didn’t know that the parent was “insistent”. 9 is too young by any standards. I was in charge of a youth canoeing group for years and I never started them before 12. The most active children’s canoeing organisation in mainstream Irish Canoe Union activities is the WWKC and they don’t start them until they’re 12. It would be an exceptional 9 year old could handle a canoe in anything other than flat calm in a sheltered bay, which isn’t really what we are about.
We should have a policy on this. It is absolutely inappropriate that a trip leader is presented with a child on the beach and asked to make a decision. That said however, the choice is not quite as stark as Michael makes out. He is correct in saying that one of our options is “properly administered and tailored activities for children”. That means children as club members etc etc. I would be dead against that personally for hundreds of reasons, but that is a political decision and one for the ISKA to make. Feckers has already made it.
On the other hand, we do not need an all-out ban on minors. We have had 15 year olds and possibly even younger along before. The surnames Keane and Pearse come to mind. A sturdy child paddling with their parent could be alright. It is just too complicated to touch unaccompanied underage children with or without consent letters, and policy should be against that. “Children with their parents or not at all” should be the motto, and then only if the parent is known to be experienced and to be making an informed choice on behalf of the child, and undertakes to look after the child on the trip. The details of our policy could be worked out and reduced to writing for clarity.
Michael is right that responsibility, both moral and legal, remained with the ISKA despite the parent’s presence. That is not the issue that I was talking about. With the parent along to give visible consent for the child to participate, ISKA would only be legally responsible if the ISKA screwed up. In other words the playing field was almost level. ISKA only had the kind of responsibility they do to anyone else who comes along and whom they lead out onto the water. However, it has to be taken on board that the standard of the duty owed to a child is greater than the duty owed to an adult, in the same way as the duty owed to somebody with a physical or mental handicap would be greater than to a fully able-bodied adult. Things are subjective in this regard and perfectly logical. The more there is an imbalance between the experience of the leader and the inexperience of the person being lead, the greater is the duty of care. The point I was making earlier is that without a consent letter, the duty is absolute. Bring them home uninjured and alive or answer in the Courts. It is as simple as that. There would be no argument about what caused the accident, whether the injured paddler had behaved stupidly, or whether it was all or partly your fault or not. If they get injured and there is no parental consent, you are responsible. Period.
Summary
• We need a clear and unambiguous policy with regard to underage participation in ISKA events.
• No underage members of ISKA, because we do not need all the trappings of a child orientated organisation.
• However, we do not need an all-out ban on minors. This clear and unambiguous policy that we work out might fall on the cautious side of barely permitting sturdy teenage children’s participation, as guests, with their parent in tow, the situation flagged beforehand and no “bouncing”?.
DWalsh
I didn’t know at time of last posting that the child was 9 and I didn’t know that the parent was “insistent”. 9 is too young by any standards. I was in charge of a youth canoeing group for years and I never started them before 12. The most active children’s canoeing organisation in mainstream Irish Canoe Union activities is the WWKC and they don’t start them until they’re 12. It would be an exceptional 9 year old could handle a canoe in anything other than flat calm in a sheltered bay, which isn’t really what we are about.
We should have a policy on this. It is absolutely inappropriate that a trip leader is presented with a child on the beach and asked to make a decision. That said however, the choice is not quite as stark as Michael makes out. He is correct in saying that one of our options is “properly administered and tailored activities for children”. That means children as club members etc etc. I would be dead against that personally for hundreds of reasons, but that is a political decision and one for the ISKA to make. Feckers has already made it.
On the other hand, we do not need an all-out ban on minors. We have had 15 year olds and possibly even younger along before. The surnames Keane and Pearse come to mind. A sturdy child paddling with their parent could be alright. It is just too complicated to touch unaccompanied underage children with or without consent letters, and policy should be against that. “Children with their parents or not at all” should be the motto, and then only if the parent is known to be experienced and to be making an informed choice on behalf of the child, and undertakes to look after the child on the trip. The details of our policy could be worked out and reduced to writing for clarity.
Michael is right that responsibility, both moral and legal, remained with the ISKA despite the parent’s presence. That is not the issue that I was talking about. With the parent along to give visible consent for the child to participate, ISKA would only be legally responsible if the ISKA screwed up. In other words the playing field was almost level. ISKA only had the kind of responsibility they do to anyone else who comes along and whom they lead out onto the water. However, it has to be taken on board that the standard of the duty owed to a child is greater than the duty owed to an adult, in the same way as the duty owed to somebody with a physical or mental handicap would be greater than to a fully able-bodied adult. Things are subjective in this regard and perfectly logical. The more there is an imbalance between the experience of the leader and the inexperience of the person being lead, the greater is the duty of care. The point I was making earlier is that without a consent letter, the duty is absolute. Bring them home uninjured and alive or answer in the Courts. It is as simple as that. There would be no argument about what caused the accident, whether the injured paddler had behaved stupidly, or whether it was all or partly your fault or not. If they get injured and there is no parental consent, you are responsible. Period.
Summary
• We need a clear and unambiguous policy with regard to underage participation in ISKA events.
• No underage members of ISKA, because we do not need all the trappings of a child orientated organisation.
• However, we do not need an all-out ban on minors. This clear and unambiguous policy that we work out might fall on the cautious side of barely permitting sturdy teenage children’s participation, as guests, with their parent in tow, the situation flagged beforehand and no “bouncing”?.
DWalsh
Re:Safety, Boats and Age Limits
P. S.
The first ever Come and Try it Weekend was myself and five teenagers, all underage, to Wexford. Out around the Saltees day one, over to Dunmore East and back day two. The same teenagers participated in the second CaTitWe to Inis Meain. Included in their number were two canoeists now regarded as top performers in their specialist field, canyon descents, often world firsts.
So, lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater (pardon the awful pun).
DWalsh
The first ever Come and Try it Weekend was myself and five teenagers, all underage, to Wexford. Out around the Saltees day one, over to Dunmore East and back day two. The same teenagers participated in the second CaTitWe to Inis Meain. Included in their number were two canoeists now regarded as top performers in their specialist field, canyon descents, often world firsts.
So, lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater (pardon the awful pun).
DWalsh