So You Can Go Swimming!

[Bound2Please]

7 hours ago, Ricardo said:

There was a very good suggestion from Vaughan of using whitlingham country park great broad

Yes safe from all boaters novice or experienced, but my guess as to why they wont use this BA owned? facility is the Limited Company will then make far far less ££££ and they would deem it not worth doing.

Never before have I heard of an Official organisation saying here you go use our facilities, we will probably have to shut it for the day to those that pay our wages, you go make ££££ for yourselves, oh and while your at use all the volentry services FOC.... My opinion of the BA has now gone below rock bottom.

Just my own honest take on this

[ExMemberBobdog]

7 minutes ago, Bound2Please said:

Never before have I heard of an Official organisation saying here you go use our facilities, we will probably have to shut it for the day to those that pay our wages, you go make ££££ for yourselves, oh and while your at use all the volentry services FOC.... 

It has been made abundantly clear by Mel Holland that there will not be any closure of the river.  She also made clear that the RNLI charge a commercial fee for providing support cover to events such as this, a fee which will be paid out of receipts.  I’m all for reasoned argument, and I accept that others have safety concerns which I don’t share, or at least that I think are overplayed, but at least deal with the facts.

 

[Bound2Please]

16 minutes ago, Bobdog said:

It has been made abundantly clear by Mel Holland that there will not be any closure of the river.

Not by her LTD Company no but by the BA to cover their backs when they realise 200 swimmers and boats arnt going to mix YES they will.

 

18 minutes ago, Bobdog said:

She also made clear that the RNLI charge a commercial fee for providing support cover to events such as this

Strange that the RNLI when I was one of the organisers of the autumn dinghy fishing competition at Clacton on Sea provided 2 inshore "D" class inshore boats to act as rescue/support boats at no invoiced cost. But it was fact that 33% of all entry fees went to the RNLI. They provided this cover for two reasons (1) many taking part were from far afield, and didnt know the waters, (2) things can always go wrong with 100 - 150 small boats in a small area.  Nothing ever did thankfully, but backs were well covered.

[grendel]

at its narrowest, the river is about 22m wide (measured on google earth). allowing 8m width (2 boat widths) for river traffic in each direction (not an unreasonable allowance for boats passing each other), this leaves a 6m wide lane for the swimmers and safety craft - assuming that the safety craft will not obstruct the normal river traffic - is this really enough space for the safety craft to safely control and oversee the swimmers. 

I have estimated the above clearances, an 8m lane for the boats only allows 2m either side, 4m (or a boat width) when passing oncoming boats - or overtaking, and this allows a 2m clearance from the swimmers. ok, this is at the narrowest, but it shows that at places the space available for the swimmers will almost restrict them to single file, two abreast at most.

[smellyloo]

I was determined not to make any more contributions on this thread but given the continued hysteria and unfounded speculation that is continually being regurgitated here I feel compelled to speak just one more time.

The broads doesn't belong to any one interest group and no group can claim more rights than any other. Back in early 1900 s regattas were a time for the whole community to enjoy the waterside, regular swimming, fishing, sailing and the emerging motor boaters all  existed quite amicably .... Indeed much swimming took place from moored boats.

For the first time in ages we have a swimming event on the calendar. This demonstrates that the water quality is now considered clean enough for swimming ... This we should celebrate.

After consultation with the authorities the health and safety kill joys have been silenced and the event given the green light .... This we should celebrate.

The nbn then announce judgement claiming the majority don't want it to happen for reasons which have been continually repeated on this thread .... mainly health and safety with a touch of why should boaters be inconvenienced.

This I cannot celebrate ..... Most of the safety concerns stated here could be applied to canoeists, sail boats, row boats, crew on moored boats, mud weighting etc etc. Should we ban all activity on the broads? This surely would lead to the inevitable dreaded new branding.

 

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, Bobdog said:

It has been made abundantly clear by Mel Holland that there will not be any closure of the river.  She also made clear that the RNLI charge a commercial fee for providing support cover to events such as this, a fee which will be paid out of receipts.  I’m all for reasoned argument, and I accept that others have safety concerns which I don’t share, or at least that I think are overplayed, but at least deal with the facts.

 

Bobadog Mel Holland isn't the person who would be decided to close the river  for that's BA's position , now I know that you can't see the same safety issues that many can but even you must realise the whitlingham is a much safer place to hold the event and much much better for spectator's and yet you don't even mention it .

As for the RNLI why shouldn't they charge for their services and as Bound to Please point's out they if they were an involved charity for the event then might well have done it at no cost , clearly the organiser's believed that the RNLI charging for their services would eat into the money's and decided not to bother with them .

There's no denying that a certain amount of BA moorings are going to be given up for this either and given the length of the moorings that probably means all of them they aren't that  big and are now the only 2 BA Mooring's on the stretch intended for this event .

The event given why the organiser's have said will take all day and further time if they do decide to sweep the river with diver's and no way will boats be allowed down there with a dive team are down you can guarantee that .

Anyone can be flippant about safety but in this culture of sue the backsides of anyone at fault only fool threats it with contempt .

Iv yet to see anyone on here saying that it shouldn't take place at all , but iv seen a heck of a lot saying that stretch of river is not a safe place to do it .

Boats and people in the water do not mix that's a fact , and the closer anyone is to a boat the risk is so much higher , a prop will suck a log under a boat and it will a swimmers too and the end result is not good and could prove fatal , the organisers have also stated that swimmers bump into boats occasionally , so by their own admittance they are in a dangerous area if a boat is actually moving and given the river is open anyone with zero experience can be on it that day , that my friend is dangerous and beyond stupid .

[rightsaidfred]

58 minutes ago, grendel said:

at its narrowest, the river is about 22m wide (measured on google earth). allowing 8m width (2 boat widths) for river traffic in each direction (not an unreasonable allowance for boats passing each other), this leaves a 6m wide lane for the swimmers and safety craft - assuming that the safety craft will not obstruct the normal river traffic - is this really enough space for the safety craft to safely control and oversee the swimmers. 

I have estimated the above clearances, an 8m lane for the boats only allows 2m either side, 4m (or a boat width) when passing oncoming boats - or overtaking, and this allows a 2m clearance from the swimmers. ok, this is at the narrowest, but it shows that at places the space available for the swimmers will almost restrict them to single file, two abreast at most.

I assume that is a bank to bank measurement In which case allowing for overhanging vegetation and lily beds etc the usable width will be even less.

Fred

[vanessan]

If the BA had announced on its website, Broadsheet or whatever, that the River Waveney would be closed to all boats on Sunday 1st July between 8.30am and 1.30pm, what do people think the general response would have been?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I was determined not to make any more contributions on this thread but given the continued hysteria and unfounded speculation that is continually being regurgitated here I feel compelled to speak just one more time.

The broads doesn't belong to any one interest group and no group can claim more rights than any other. Back in early 1900 s regattas were a time for the whole community to enjoy the waterside, regular swimming, fishing, sailing and the emerging motor boaters all  existed quite amicably .... Indeed much swimming took place from moored boats.

For the first time in ages we have a swimming event on the calendar. This demonstrates that the water quality is now considered clean enough for swimming ... This we should celebrate.

After consultation with the authorities the health and safety kill joys have been silenced and the event given the green light .... This we should celebrate.

The nbn then announce judgement claiming the majority don't want it to happen for reasons which have been continually repeated on this thread .... mainly health and safety with a touch of why should boaters be inconvenienced.

This I cannot celebrate ..... Most of the safety concerns stated here could be applied to canoeists, sail boats, row boats, crew on moored boats, mud weighting etc etc. Should we ban all activity on the broads? This surely would lead to the inevitable dreaded new branding.

 

As spoken by someone whos mostly never seen the result of a person injured by a moving boat , the guy most his entre arm if that's anymore help and it not too long ago since it happened on the broads .

Please feel free to promote what most see as insane , and no one has said ban it , just move it to a sensible area .

Boating no matter what the boat is is dangerous but those dangers can minimal if your safety conscious .

There is nothing safe about people swimming on a narrow twisting river with moving boats around sailed by people who may not have the experience to cope , that is something NOT to celebrate because that is beyond stupid .

[Chelsea14Ian]

9 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I was determined not to make any more contributions on this thread but given the continued hysteria and unfounded speculation that is continually being regurgitated here I feel compelled to speak just one more time.

The broads doesn't belong to any one interest group and no group can claim more rights than any other. Back in early 1900 s regattas were a time for the whole community to enjoy the waterside, regular swimming, fishing, sailing and the emerging motor boaters all  existed quite amicably .... Indeed much swimming took place from moored boats.

For the first time in ages we have a swimming event on the calendar. This demonstrates that the water quality is now considered clean enough for swimming ... This we should celebrate.

After consultation with the authorities the health and safety kill joys have been silenced and the event given the green light .... This we should celebrate.

The nbn then announce judgement claiming the majority don't want it to happen for reasons which have been continually repeated on this thread .... mainly health and safety with a touch of why should boaters be inconvenienced.

This I cannot celebrate ..... Most of the safety concerns stated here could be applied to canoeists, sail boats, row boats, crew on moored boats, mud weighting etc etc. Should we ban all activity on the broads? This surely would lead to the inevitable dreaded new branding.

 

Just one question  would you be happy to drive a boat when 50 plus people are in the water.I wouldn't am I a kill joy no.To mix swimmers and boats in such a confined space is I would suggest wrong. I think this has been forced on us.Perhaps all  concerned  should have been consulted much earlier. Do we have some rights to the water no.We do share the water with many.I for one am happy to do so,but this idea I feel is poorly thought out.

[JennyMorgan]

The Waveney is wide, compared to the Ant, but in practical terms I'd  suggest that there are parts when the usable width is somewhat less than 22m. Regarding space for swimmers, of course there won't be a continuous stream of boats but where there are a two abreast maximum is probably about right. How this fits in with the concept of a race I'm not so sure. Restricting swimmers to just one side of the river might be an answer.

[JennyMorgan]

11 minutes ago, vanessan said:

If the BA had announced on its website, Broadsheet or whatever, that the River Waveney would be closed to all boats on Sunday 1st July between 8.30am and 1.30pm, what do people think the general response would have been?

Sod off!

A number of us lobbied in Parliament to ensure that that could never happen and Parliament supported us.

[grendel]

I would be happy to see the event on the broads, but in an area where the river was wider and with more bankside access for emergency vehicles, and where a lane could be buoyed off to separate the swimmers and boats, or on one of the broads, but that section of river with little bankside access and the narrower width, seems to me ill advised at best. 

[rightsaidfred]

2 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I was determined not to make any more contributions on this thread but given the continued hysteria and unfounded speculation that is continually being regurgitated here I feel compelled to speak just one more time.

The broads doesn't belong to any one interest group and no group can claim more rights than any other. Back in early 1900 s regattas were a time for the whole community to enjoy the waterside, regular swimming, fishing, sailing and the emerging motor boaters all  existed quite amicably .... Indeed much swimming took place from moored boats.

For the first time in ages we have a swimming event on the calendar. This demonstrates that the water quality is now considered clean enough for swimming ... This we should celebrate.

After consultation with the authorities the health and safety kill joys have been silenced and the event given the green light .... This we should celebrate.

The nbn then announce judgement claiming the majority don't want it to happen for reasons which have been continually repeated on this thread .... mainly health and safety with a touch of why should boaters be inconvenienced.

This I cannot celebrate ..... Most of the safety concerns stated here could be applied to canoeists, sail boats, row boats, crew on moored boats, mud weighting etc etc. Should we ban all activity on the broads? This surely would lead to the inevitable dreaded new branding.

 

As one of those so called kill joys let me make this quite clear, I have no personal interest in this in as much as I will not be in the slightest bit inconvenienced, if I am afloat that weekend it will be on the Northern rivers I am also not unduly concerned that there will be no financial payment to the tolls account.

I have no objection to people enjoying themselves be it as individuals or an organised group, the simple issue here is two fold on one hand the BA discourage swimming yet are happy for this event to take place in what is secondly one of the most inappropriate stretches of water under its control, I have no problem with an organised swim where  the venue is suitable, in this case not only is  it a narrow stretch of water there is very limited bank access making it totally unsuitable for an event of this nature,  I don't think anyone wants to ban the event just for the organisers to apply a bit of common sense and move it to a more suitable location.

Looking at the organisers own stated profile  she is obviously a risk taker, that is fine when and if she involves no one else but not when putting others at risk and not just the other swimmers she is asking to sign a disclaimer.

Fred

[Wussername]

2 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Sod off!

Two years ago it was closed for a duck race for a couple of hours, may be longer . Boats were not allowed to go down river from the yacht basin.

Andrew

[Guest]

 

 

10 minutes ago, grendel said:

I would be happy to see the event on the broads, but in an area where the river was wider and with more bankside access for emergency vehicles, and where a lane could be buoyed off to separate the swimmers and boats, or on one of the broads, but that section of river with little bankside access and the narrower width, seems to me ill advised at best. 

That's exactly how the majority feel about this event and yt for having the interests of others safety at heart we are labeled Killjoy's !! 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Wussername said:

Two years ago it was closed for a duck race for a couple of hours, may be longer . Boats were not allowed to go down river from the yacht basin.

Andrew

And yet the intention is to keep it open with humans in the water , mind blowing stupid logic .

[grendel]

Another point I have not yet seen considered, we have considered boats and swimmers mixing (both private hire and safety boats) but we have not seen considered a collision between the river traffic and the safety craft, the impact of this is twofold, not only that the crew on the safety boat might sustain injury, but also then the swimmers lose a substantial amount of their safety provision (with little assistance available at bank side locations. 

every way you look at this it comes up as the wrong location.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, grendel said:

at its narrowest, the river is about 22m wide (measured on google earth). allowing 8m width (2 boat widths) for river traffic in each direction (not an unreasonable allowance for boats passing each other), this leaves a 6m wide lane for the swimmers and safety craft - assuming that the safety craft will not obstruct the normal river traffic - is this really enough space for the safety craft to safely control and oversee the swimmers. 

I have estimated the above clearances, an 8m lane for the boats only allows 2m either side, 4m (or a boat width) when passing oncoming boats - or overtaking, and this allows a 2m clearance from the swimmers. ok, this is at the narrowest, but it shows that at places the space available for the swimmers will almost restrict them to single file, two abreast at most.

To be effective the lane would need to be marked with bouys. To "bouy off" 11.5Km or river with bouys at 25m intervals would require some 460 bouys; if each required 3m of rope that would require 1.3Km of rope and if each had to be weighted with a 2Kg weight that would require almost a ton of weights. Any chance of making a profit has now really gone.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, grendel said:

Another point I have not yet seen considered, we have considered boats and swimmers mixing (both private hire and safety boats) but we have not seen considered a collision between the river traffic and the safety craft, the impact of this is twofold, not only that the crew on the safety boat might sustain injury, but also then the swimmers lose a substantial amount of their safety provision (with little assistance available at bank side locations. 

every way you look at this it comes up as the wrong location.

The risk assessment is getting longer. I wonder who will review the audit; will be the event organisers or will it be independently audited?

[Bound2Please]

1 minute ago, Philosophical said:

To be effective the lane would need to be marked with bouys. To "bouy off" 11.5Km or river with bouys at 25m intervals would require some 460 bouys; if each required 3m of rope that would require 1.3Km of rope and if each had to be weighted with a 2Kg weight that would require almost a ton of weights. Any chance of making a profit has now really gone.

How much disruption in the day leading upto the 1st July and after, for the placing and removal of all these buoys ropes etc??????

[Guest]

Just now, Bound2Please said:

How much disruption in the day leading upto the 1st July and after, for the placing and removal of all these buoys ropes etc??????

Add the risk of this to the risk assement

[grendel]

I have found a typical picture of such an event - on the Thames,  ie on a much wider river, this would be using over half of the available width of the river, leaving barely room for boats to pass (1m at each side and 1m between boats)

[Vaughan]

1 minute ago, grendel said:

I have found a typical picture of such an event - on the Thames,  ie on a much wider river, this would be using over half of the available width of the river, leaving barely room for boats to pass (1m at each side and 1m between boats)

Notice also the full length tow path where any swimmer in trouble can simply be hauled out of the water by many willing hands.

That looks like Bourne End by the way but I am also mindful of the regatta course at Henley, where the reach is divided in half by posts and chains, so that rowing takes place in safety on the tow path side but the other half remains open to the heavy holiday river traffic.

The Thames, however, is a very different animal to the Waveney!

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, grendel said:

I have found a typical picture of such an event - on the Thames,  ie on a much wider river, this would be using over half of the available width of the river, leaving barely room for boats to pass (1m at each side and 1m between boats)

I think this picture sums up the dangers very well, if those who still think it is safe to have 200 swimmers and motor  boats in the same section of narrow river, now imagine this picture with a couple of motor boats passing through. Don't imagine too hard though.