Front page of the Greenville News Metro section. Participants in the Saluda River Rally, an annual event. No environmental hazards except water. It was yesterday, so apparently no one drowned.
Seems like a liability for the event organizers… The kids do not thankfully look that young but I hope there were no strainers…
Found the photo. Per the info under it, there’s one adult and two kids. Adult is the mom of the boy wearing the PFD. She isn’t wearing one, nor is the 13-year old. Hard to tell if mom and the teen are carrying PFDs.
The sponsors of the rally would have done a public service by requiring all paddlers wear a life jacket, or at least making sure South Carolina life jacket laws are followed: a PFD must be carried, be in good condition, proper size, and readily accessible.
On a positive note, most paddlers pictured were wearing one. 
My objection is the message, intentional or not, that kids don’t need PFD. But you knew that.
Assuming it is one of these events where there are always lots of people around on a relatively limited course in flat water, the actual risk there of not wearing a PFD is minimal. But of course it does pass on a bad message.
I think in CA, you only are required to wear a PFD if you are under 13. But coast guard does require that you have one that is the right size and accessible for each person on the vessel.
We are coming into the time of year for a lot of just-for-fun river events up this way soon. There is a thing on a small river in southern VT where people go out in home made anything that floats, probably lots of others as the spring melt wears off and smaller rivers climb above 50 in their temperatures…
In many states the law only requires PFD’s be worn by someone 12 or under past Memorial Day, and outside of Coast Guard turf the requirement to have something on board for everyone only applies to motorized craft. In the above example it is possible they were entirely legal with only a PFD for the kid under 13.
I personally disagree and the Coast Guard has been lobbying states for years to tighten this up. But that has not succeeded. While some of these events set their own rules about PFD’s, others conform to their state’s laws under which adults and older minors can go out w/o PFD’s. Obviously they cannot assess swimming ability in this situation either.
IMO any event organizer that does not require PFD’sd on the body for everyone is playing with fire, especially with unassessed swimming ability. But it happens and they are legal.
SC requires a PFD on every boat for every one on board even paddle craft.
Two little kids (they weren’t in school), and two big adults. Not a PFD in sight! Air temp last night was 33F. Water temp is maybe 50. Chilly windy day. The one boat stayed relatively close to shore; the other was half a mile offshore. Sometimes I wish I was deputized.
@Celia said:
We are coming into the time of year for a lot of just-for-fun river events up this way soon. There is a thing on a small river in southern VT where people go out in home made anything that floats, probably lots of others as the spring melt wears off and smaller rivers climb above 50 in their temperatures…In many states the law only requires PFD’s be worn by someone 12 or under past Memorial Day, and outside of Coast Guard turf the requirement to have something on board for everyone only applies to motorized craft. In the above example it is possible they were entirely legal with only a PFD for the kid under 13.
I personally disagree and the Coast Guard has been lobbying states for years to tighten this up. But that has not succeeded. While some of these events set their own rules about PFD’s, others conform to their state’s laws under which adults and older minors can go out w/o PFD’s. Obviously they cannot assess swimming ability in this situation either.
IMO any event organizer that does not require PFD’sd on the body for everyone is playing with fire, especially with unassessed swimming ability. But it happens and they are legal.
“IMO any event organizer that does not require PFD’sd on the body for everyone is playing with fire, especially with unassessed swimming ability. But it happens and they are legal.”
You evidently Have never been to a USCA sponsered Race, where it is up to the race director if PFD’s must be worn, and normally unless there is bad weather forcast, they leave it up to the individual, which is the way it should be.
Years ago, I stopped my subscription to the ACA just because of their attitude that every one must wear a PFD.
There is a bit of difference between USCA races and family fun paddle days… The former is closely vetted. We do not require PFDs for ACA Freestyle Competitions… There are multiple safety boats at hand per one competitor. We do require PFDs to be worn at ACA FreeStyle classes where there is only one instructor for five students.
Celia if you put it out there you have to expect feedback… Such is the nature of idea exchange.
There are those in the field of journalism who feel that any time a photo is posted with a story about an on-water activity that the people in the photo should be wearing PFDs/Life Jackets. There are so many tourism visitor guides that promote their water sports opportunities that show people in boats without PFDs on; there are numerous articles in papers and magazines that print photos of people engaged in water sports without life jackets. Regardless of one’s personal view on wearing them, any use of images in the media should require life jackets being worn - it conveys a subliminal message, good or bad.
@Celia said:
@JackL
Chill out. You are wrong.
The context of my post was one of those informal kids-involved just for fun events.
If I was talking about USCA sponsored races, OR sculling meets OR canoe races on small ponds- all of which I HAVE attended and for HS sculling have helped at… I would have said so.
My niece and a couple of adult friends have competed in sculls and others in canoes.I find it interesting that among a number of people above who argued for the folks in the OP wearing PFD’s, I am the only post that you extracted for disagreement.
I don’t need to chill out !
I took exception to your last sentence (about event organizers making all participants wear PFD"s) and I still do
Celia I really don’t care… I helped run a river event and we required PFDs as we had all levels of paddlers as there seems to be in this event… Also Freestyle competition where they are not required… FS events did not not have people who had never capsized before. Sometimes new capsizees panic… ( happened to me guiding in Maine).
If you wish to turn P net into a debate forum with winners and losers that is entirely up to you but I will not participate… Have a good summer.
I always thought a moderators job was to quell kerfuffles and not continue to incite them
Prepare for some blasphemy…
There is too much emphasis put on PFDs.
All this talk of PFDs takes away from the importance of judgement, skill, and experience. A PFD may save your life, but without the other three things just mentioned (plus many that weren’t) it’s putting a lot of eggs in one basket - then suspending the ancient beat-up thing with the rotted out bottom by a thin thread over the edge of an active volcano during a hurricane, and hoping there aren’t any earthquakes.
I just removed my post to which JackL objected as well as my reply to kayamedic. Overall it appears that there is mostly agreement that requiring PFDs in a mixed level paddling event is a good idea.
@Wavetamer said:
There are those in the field of journalism who feel that any time a photo is posted with a story about an on-water activity that the people in the photo should be wearing PFDs/Life Jackets. There are so many tourism visitor guides that promote their water sports opportunities that show people in boats without PFDs on; there are numerous articles in papers and magazines that print photos of people engaged in water sports without life jackets. Regardless of one’s personal view on wearing them, any use of images in the media should require life jackets being worn - it conveys a subliminal message, good or bad.
I was one of these. I was the editor for California Kayaker Magazine while it was alive (all published issues are still online at http://calkayakermag.com/magazine.html), and it was a policy that any photo I ran showing a paddler would require that they have a PFD on. The only exception (and I did think hard about it) that I can remember was when an advertiser sent in ad art and their paddler didn’t have a PFD on. Guess I bent my ow rules for money…
Some cruise line did a photo shoot where l rent in Maine some years ago. They used the Cove and the woods to get advertisement shots for adventure cruises to Alaska, Nova Scotia and l think the UP. They very carefully set up the paddling shots with no Pfds on the actors, but dressed decently and with a guide 6 inches out of camera range beside them. Both actresses were in single boats.
Which did not represent how they would actually take their customers out…
@Sparky961 said:
Prepare for some blasphemy…There is too much emphasis put on PFDs.
All this talk of PFDs takes away from the importance of judgement, skill, and experience. A PFD may save your life, but without the other three things just mentioned (plus many that weren’t) it’s putting a lot of eggs in one basket - then suspending the ancient beat-up thing with the rotted out bottom by a thin thread over the edge of an active volcano during a hurricane, and hoping there aren’t any earthquakes.
Yes, there is too much emphasis on life jackets ALONE as a safety measure. But, often times, without a life jacket as a part of the whole, people die. So, to post unsafe images in a forum promoting kayaking seems irresponsible. No one can really tell about a person’s skills, experience or judgement from a photo; but you can see the lack of a life jacket.
Unsafe images?
Sparky961
I believe the stuff that Wavetamer and Peter-CA were talking about. See above posts.