absurd hypocrisy
The state of PA thinks carrying a whistle and a light is important enough to make us pay a fine if we don’t have one with us in our kayak. And they will fine us as much as $75 for not having a PFD stashed uselessly in the hull or under the deck lines. They clearly understand that PFD’s save lives or they would not require them for children under 14. Yet they don’t require people to wear them. All this strikes me as very hypocritical. I’m pretty confident that the average recreational paddler is more apt to end up in the water (and need a PFD on them) than they are to have to blow a whistle to warn an approaching boat of their presence.
Legal mandates are FAR more effective than voluntary compliance. I worked in construction for 35 years and we were accustomed to zero-tolerance requirements for safety glasses, hard-toe boots, hard hats and anti-fall harnesses and accepted that failure to comply would result in substantial fines and increases in employer’s insurance rates. These mandates have greatly reduced injuries and deaths.
On the other hand, rescinding mandatory motorcycle helmet laws in the name of “personal freedom” as many states like PA have, has resulted in substantial jumps in fatalities and, worse for the taxpayers and insurance premium holders, nearly doubled long-term medical treatments and temporary or permanent disabilities for those who manage to survive their crania hitting the pavement.
In fact, unless they have changed the policy, when Michigan initially only suspended the requirement for wearing a helmet on a motorbike IF the rider agreed to buy a $20,000 medical insurance rider. This is legitimate. Statistics have proven that it is the state that bears most of the financial burden when bikers sustain head injuries (apparently bikers are more likely than most of the population to have no health or disability insurance.) So the state DOES have a compelling interest to protect the commonwealth and taxpayers from impacts of safety negligence.
While it may be true that you either drown or don’t drown in boating accidents (and there is far less likelihood of harming others or becoming disabled), there are still costs to municipalities involved in search and rescue and body recovery operations.
Mandated personal safety gear saves lives and livelihoods. Really, it is no more of a hassle to wear a PFD than to fasten a seatbelt. NOT mandating them sends the message (by the state) that they are not all that important. Few people wore seat belts or bought child-protective car seats until they were required.
I was paddling a couple months ago with a BCU/ACA advanced instructor. We were in a sheltered harbor and then out along the coast of one of the Great Lakes. She hailed every un-vested person we passed in a kayak and asked them why they were not wearing a PFD. (I often do that myself. ) In nearly every case, people responded that they didn’t need them because “the water’s warm” (it actually was in the low 60’s offshore) or “there’s no law that says we have to” or “it’s too uncomfortable” or “the water ain’t that deep” or “yeah, I know, whatever, but it’s not that important.”
The "seatbelt convincer"
When I was in high school, I believe it was the local sheriff’s department that had machine they called “the seatbelt convincer”. It had a frame and wheels that would coast down a short ramp, and it had a car’s seat (with seatbelt and shoulder strap) attached. It was set up to come to in instant stop at the bottom of the ramp, at a speed of something like 10 or 12 mph. It was clear to anyone who rode the thing that without seatbelts, they would have been launched right off the seat and into the car’s dashboard had there been one. The idea was that the person would think “if this is how badly you need seatbelts when going this slow, how much would you need them at normal driving speeds?”
I don’t know how well the idea worked, simply because the number of people who got to ride it or see it demonstrated was probably pretty small. I don’t think the sheriff’s department had the manpower to spend much time taking it out for demonstrations.
Wake up slushie !
I was responding to magooch's post titled "Very Simple"; NOT your post!
Magooch spoke of someone(a legislator?)who was trying to get a law passed that mandated motorcyclists wearing seatbelts.
BOB
But who would enforce the law?
As I mentioned in my other posts, laws of this sort mean nothing to most people unless they are enforced, and when it comes to the places people are most likely to go paddling, law-enforcement personnel are nonexistent, or at best, in very few places, nearly so. I think that's hard for sea kayakers to comprehend, but it's absolutely true for the rest of us.
You used the example of safety rules in construction to make your point, but actually it illustrates my point even better. On large and medium jobsites, compliance with safety rules is excellent, but small companies on small jobsites usually have very poor compliance with OSHA rules. The poor compliance of so many small companies happens for the same reason that a PFD law won't make average paddlers change their ways. Small construction outfits know that OSHA won't ever go to the trouble of checking up on them, so to a lot of those companies, following most of the rules seems like "too much of a bother" when weighed against the fact that they won't ever be caught violating rules in the first place. Of course, they aren't thinking about what could go wrong, or how badly the finding of non-compliance with safety rules would affect them in that case once there's been an accident investigation, but that's just like average paddlers who don't think about the consequences of being dead because they don't understand that's a possible result. Again it comes down to knowledge making the most difference for people making such choices.
Live and let live, or not.
Yes, the urge is there to feel superior and try to tell others how they should conduct themselves, but I have found that setting a good example is probably at least as effective and it often forgoes the negative reaction from those who probably know better, but also don’t want to be told about it.
I’ve done my share of offering advice, but in doing so, I’ve also learned that unsolicited advice is almost always resisted and can lead to less than friendly exchanges. In situations where it appears that an individual, or group is clearly ill-prepared, I try to find a subtle way to bring up the subject and then keep the comments completely non-accusatory. None of this would happen at a momentary encounter.
In SC the game wardens
enforce boating laws. They are much more active on the water than in the woods. It is much easier to see a violation, and write a money making citation on the water than in the woods.
more hypocrisy
More hypocrisy, this time in Texas. Near the end of this report on the alarming increase in kayak related drownings in Texas they reiterate that the state requires that adults have a PFD "within reach" despite the fact that I am aware of NO studies that establish that a person who capsizes a boat can retrieve and put on a life vest while struggling in the water, particularly someone with little or no swimming ability.
http://kxan.com/2016/06/29/alarming-number-of-kayak-related-deaths-reported-in-texas/
Again, the state is promoting the false impression that carrying a device on your boat is sufficient for safety when it is clearly NOT. Do we presume a motorist can grab their seatbelt and fasten it in the split second before they are in a collision?? I say either require that PFD's be worn or don't require them to be on the boat at all. But don't equivocate or peddle false security.
I await the lawsuit where somebody goes after the seller of a kayak or even the local regulatory authority for not assuring that a deceased paddler was properly equipped and/or understood the dangers of not wearing a PFD. If you think this sounds ludicrous, remember that the original parent company of Patagonia was taken down to bankruptcy in the 1980s after losing a lawsuit filed by the survivors of a climber who improperly used a device they manufactured. EMS (who sold the device) was also financially penalized in the settlement. Both corporations were found "guilty" of not fully informing the purchaser of all possible dangers inherent in use or mis-use of the device, a mechanical rope ascender. A similar lawsuit was won when the family of a man who improperly donned a climbing harness slipped out of it and fell to his death. Telling people it is always "safe" to just carry a PFD is a flat out lie and somebody should be called to account for it.
"Who would enforce?" is a cop out. Because we don't have enough traffic cops or law enforcement or building/OSHA inspectors or fire marshalls or park rangers to check that everyone is complying at all times should we just throw up our hands and not have any laws or regulations? I am damned sure that many people wear their seat belts far more out of fear of the slim chance of being pulled over for a costly ticket than any care for their personal safety. In fact I have friends and family who admit that is exactly why they use them and the same was true when motorcycle helmets were mandatory.
Your notion that small construction firms don't comply with OSHA (or even more stringent state standards -- MIOSHA in Michigan makes OSHA regs look wimpy by comparison) doesn't jive with my experience. Accidents on job sites cause automatic increases in any company's Workmen's Comp insurance costs and if a company's "experience rate" of injuries/deaths per man hour climbs above a certain number they will lose the ability to participate in projects, be hired as subs or even to qualify for bidding or to get insurance at all. I know the unions would protest if companies tried to implement what the non-union contractor I first worked for did, but it was very successful: we individual workers were responsible for paying half of any fine for our not using personal protective equipment. In fact, on one job site we were penalized as a group if ANY one person failed to wear their hard hat, work boots, fall protection, etc.. leading to a citation and fine. This lead to enormous peer pressure to remind or even insist that co-workers follow regulations. I didn't even take my hardhat and safety glasses off during my coffee and lunch breaks -- still don't when I am in the field (which is rarely now since I am retired and only get out there when I do sporadic contract work -- but the habits are deeply entrenched). Once you get used to such apparel, you really don't notice it after a while and it becomes a natural part of the experience. Same with my PFD.
Argue as much as you want but you won't convince me that giving people the legitimate option to carry but not wear a PFD is not just stupid, but it sends a dangerous message. I guarantee usage would climb steeply if it was a legal mandate AND (more importantly) people would become aware of how important it is to actually wear the things, not just stick them behind the beer cooler.
And with the prospect of collecting tasty fines to boost their coffers, many of the Fish Police (what we call the Fish and Game wardens here in my state) would be gleefully upping their patrols. It's a whole lot easier to spot paddlers sans PFD's than without current launch permits and/or whistles.
One might argue that in certain conditions and for certain people, PFD's might be safely dispensed with (shallow calm warm water, strong swimmer, experienced in boat re-entry, etc.) and perhaps even that people could pass an exam that established that they were competent to opt out of PFD use (along the lines of the Michigan proviso that buying excess medical insurance coverage would allow one to opt out of wearing a helmet.) But that places an even higher burden on regulatory authorities and inspection/enforcement.
I say, suck it up, stop making excuse and wear your damned PFD. Of all the dumb things I have to comply with to be a "good citizen" of my neighborhood, commonwealth, country and even the human race, keeping a mildly annoying chunk of foam and nylon wrapped around my torso for a few hours a week is a minor concession and does not impinge on my civil rights or pursuit of happiness. And at least this action is for my own good.
Enforcement
The only time I've seen enforcement officers close up on the water was a few weeks ago when I paddled the Chain of Lakes. Two DNR agents in a power boat. They took a long look at me, but kept going. They had no reason to stop: I was wearing my PFD, had a whistle, spare paddle, etc.
On the other hand, while I saw the USCG leaving the harbor each day on Lake Huron, never saw them near the mass of rec boats heading for Turnip Rock. Probably because the Point Aux Barques Water Trail to the rock is quite shallow.
More interesting was learning that the Huron County Parks System prohibits tandem kayaks from traveling to Turnip Rock. That's publicized on their website as well as by kayak rental places.
Your state must have more money.
The mere fact that game wardens would have something they could easily write tickets for would never even come close to paying for a greater enforcement presence on the water. Being a business person as you are, you know that the overall cost of employing someone and giving them the equipment they need for doing their job, and renewing it as needed, goes far beyond paying their hourly wage. I bet you'd even agree that law enforcement is never a money-making proposition. It always costs.
I'll concede that making a PFD law would cause more people to wear them, but since no one is on a crusade to restrict how we do a great number of other things that kill far more people, I don't see the logic of such cherry-picking.
*****
Oh, regarding your comment regarding compliance with OSHA by small companies, you clearly are in a different world entirely and did not see my meaning. It makes no sense AT ALL that these small companies would be plagued by accidents as a result of not complying with rules of their specific choosing. They aren't choosing to ignore rules that immediately cause people to get hurt. They are ignoring rules that, given a long enough time, are likely to have that result.
Here's what actually happens. Most of these little companies do just fine, with the odds on their side that nothing will go wrong and with it actually turning out that way for them, maybe for years on end. Once in a while, not for every company but for the unlucky ones, something goes wrong. For example, trench safety is the most common thing that they cut corners on. They might go for years or a lifetime and not have a trench collapse, but the first time it happens, somebody dies. Or maybe it's a case of them cutting corners on trench safety a single time, in a case where a company with established safety rules would not, and somebody dies. Either way, it's not a case of things going on that an insurance company would ever know about and which would cost the company more during day-to-day operations. Instead, it's a case of being lucky until the day they are not. You think this sort of thing isn't common among small companies, but the safety instructors I have heard from say exactly the opposite as you, and the reason they state is that these guys fly under the radar. No one is likely to check on them.
**********
Oh, I'm not sure your last paragraph was there before, but not a single person here has said anything to warrant presenting that idea as an argument related to what we've been talking about. I wear my PFD virtually all the time, and I bet Magooch does as well. Further, there's probably not a single frequent poster here who doesn't agree with you that it would be great if we could get all casual paddlers out there to put on their "damned PFD". But when you speak of hypocrisy, what could be more hypocritical than singling out an activity for legislative "protection" of those taking part when the unregulated activity is actually a whole lot safer than many other common activities for which we will not (and should not) take similar action?
Here's an actual example showing THIS kind of hypocrisy, and this is a much less blatant example than many others would be, but at least it keeps the comparison within the realm of water activities. On my own home river, far more people have drowned over the years as swimmers and waders than as paddlers, even though there are quite literally thousands of times as many paddlers on the river as swimmers (the place is a rental-boat Mecca and PFD use among those boaters is just about nil). As I see it, it makes no sense at all to put legal restrictions on paddling in the name of saving lives if we do not also do something to reduce the danger of the far more dangerous practices of swimming and wading (more dangerous strictly based on raw probability). However, I don't want that to happen, because I sure as hell don't want my own rights to go swimming in an unsupervised manner to be taken away from me as a consequence of other people's poor decision making. You would probably say that won't happen, but for it not to happen would be hypocrisy, which is something you oppose. Well, I oppose it too.
I don’t know what you PFD purists
would do or say if you were ever on the starting line of a USCA sponsored Canoe and kayak race !
Jack L
thats a different ball game
Competitions and races have their own rules and safety arrangemnts. PFD’s are not required for FreeStyle competition but they are required for instruction.
Lets keep the apples and the oranges apart.
No, it is not "apples and oranges"
someone had to come on here and say it after reading all the nonsense above.
Many of us, and yes it is many wear them when we deem it necessary and don’t when we don’t deem it necessary.
Jack L
thanks, KM
We do need to avoid logical fallacies when discussing this kind of thing.
And, you know what, the fish and game officers are ALREADY OUT THERE. It does not add to the costs to the commonwealth for them to issue tickets during their usual shifts for additional violations, especially ones that would be much easier to spot than whistles, launch permits and fire extinguishers (required on power boats.)
And don’t think they don’t have time to spare to do this. We spent over 3 hours on Memorial Day weekend 4 years ago dealing with a trio of overzealous Fish Cops who showed up when my boyfriend’s son and 29 of his friends and old college buddies arrived at the takeout after a 4 hour float trip on the Susquehanna West Branch. Had there been a mandatory PFD rule the officers could have immediately seen who was or was not wearing a vest and separated them out for a clear-cut citation.
Instead, they insisted on corralling all 21 canoes and kayaks and inventorying how many stashed PFD’s were in each boat to determine if the counts matched the occupants. Turned out that there were 30 PFD’s but one canoe had 3 paddlers and 2 PFD’s and another had 2 paddlers and 3 PFD’s. This mismatch had occurred less than a mile downriver when the group had to flee to the shore during a 15 minute thunderstorm and then re-entered the boats and one guy decided to switch to another boat. The agents did not care and slapped a $75 fine on one hapless guy who happened to be the last one to exit that particular canoe. This despite the fact that most of the paddlers were from out of state (NY, MA and NH) and we had made sure everyone had whistles, launch permits and had double-checked the PFD count. I was not happy about the group’s resistance to wearing the vests, but the river is narrow, was on average 18" deep, flow was slow and it was a very hot day so I stopped arguing with them when they launched.
The officers were actually acting like douchebags, to be honest – going on to hassling some of the paddlers who did not have ID on them. When I (who had driven a van to the takeout, running the shuttle for them) asked politely why they needed to have ID the only argument raised was that they needed their licenses to drive. The fact that none of their cars were at the takeout and I pointed out that I (a licensed driver) had arrived to transport them back to their starting point and their cars (where most of the ID’s were) only seemed to irritate the officers and they got threatening and pissy with me as well. They rangers stood around and watched our group during the entire shuttle operation, presumably to make sure we scofflaws did not violate any more laws. All this on a holiday weekend where the local dammed lake a few miles away was probably swarming with on-the-water DUI’s and unlicensed fishermen. That’s beside the point, I know, but it illustrates that these guys have plenty of free time to pursue violations, legitimate or ludicrous. Adding helmet laws in states has never, to my knowledge, required states to increase numbers of enforcers.
Side note: Within the next 2 years, 3 people drowned (sans PFD) on that section of the Susquehanna river when canoes capsized in fair to moderate conditions. If PFD’s had been the law, I would not have had to argue the point, the group would not have had the count mixup and three people might have lived.
and when you started out
you had perfect judgment?
you don’t know what you don’t know.
In this day of inflatable vests I see no point in your view.
This was a reply to what I said, so…
... here goes (well the part about there being personnel already out there to enforce boating laws could only have been in response to me).
Okay, you have wardens on the water and you see them. That's wonderful, but that's not a rebuttal that means anything to me. Here, I've seen wardens on the water three or four times in 50 years of frequent outings for boating, fishing and paddling, and if I avoided waters that are crowded mostly with motorboaters, I'd have never seen a single one in all that time. So when I say that there is virtually no law-enforcement presence here, it is true. I have two friends who are trappers, hunters and fishermen who have often needed to get in touch with the local game warden. They generally get a return call from him many hours later or the next day, and it's not because the guy is lazy. That's just how overworked he is.
By the way, one of those friends of mine HAS seen a warden issuing tickets for boating violations, but it was at a place I'd never go paddling.
You are normally too smart of a person to resort to using a single isolated incident in your own backyard to counter decades of observations by another person regarding a completely different part of the country, which I dare say you obviously don't know the first thing about. Even going so far as to describe that incident in the finest possible detail as you did does nothing to make it relevant in rebutting what I know to be true out here, hundreds of miles away.
That’s who does it here too, but…
… as I’ve been saying to Willow, just try to find one around here. You’ll probably spend the rest of your life looking.
swimming
people usually don’t swim out as far as they kayak from shore.
wore PFD
in offshore boat races in many places like Key West 90- 100* days on a canopied catamaran race boat. If something happen to his kids would he be able to help the better with a PDF or none?
Rental operations
If PDF’s were mandatory rental operations would have to inform people and supply it. As for the heat bit if you were in the dessert you would have clothes on and a hat to survive better. i wear my Kokatat hat all winter and summer. Serves for protection from heat & cold along with visibility.
Am pretty sure providing a life jacket
with each rental is required by the insurance carrier for the business. No sane person is going to operate a kayak rental business without a very good liability policy in place.
But there’s nothing that can be done should the person renting the boat take it off once they got out of sight and keep it off.
We all have the freedom to make choices that may someday kill us. No big deal if no one else is affected, but that’s never the case.