So You Can Go Swimming!

[JanetAnne]

Seeing as none of us have seen the risk assessments or health and safety reports for the event it is quite hard to be accurate in any assumptions being offered. For all we know the organisers have spent the entire budget on 8 miles of luminous yellow tape to be used to form a swimming lane and held in place along the river by 120 canoeists wearing pink panda costumes!

The point is we don't know what their plan is for the event. You can't put up a bloody gazebo at Beccles without a risk assessment these days. I guess that with over two hundred swims organised this year they have an inkling as to what's needed?

 

[grendel]

21 minutes ago, stumpy said:

ETA: especially in Britain's newest National Park (sorry!)

[dnks34]

It may turn out that even potential entrants fear for their safety knowing that the river wont actually be closed to boat traffic for the event meaning they dont get enough numbers to make it viable.  

It will be interesting to see how it actually pans out but part of me hopes that common sense prevails. 

[dnks34]

An interesting point of view of swimming in the Waveney. 

https://outdoorswimmer.com/blogs/diy-risk-assessment-for-open-water-swimming

 

[donnygeoff]

19 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

An interesting point of view of swimming in the Waveney. 

https://outdoorswimmer.com/blogs/diy-risk-assessment-for-open-water-swimming

 

Yes very interesting....

that was one or two swimming, not 200.....

My view is.....

Not going to be there, not bothered, none of my family or close friends will be there, so again not bothered.

If people want to take the risk, it's up to them, but as my dad used to say, if you climb that tree, fall out and break your leg, Don't come running to me crying.

[grendel]

some interesting points made about the banks being inaccessible, yes I agree two or 3 in the wider spots, not a large problem, 200 racing...

[Smoggy]

I share the view of Donnygeoff, I'm all for taking risks if you choose to do so and accept the outcome as your own doing and take what fate deals you, I also enjoy reading the darwin awards.

I don't see messing about on a medium we can't stand on, we can't breathe, and can't always survive the temperatures as being the safest of hobbies anyway but we still do it, I'm a poor swimmer but rarely wear a lifejacket even at sea, my choice/my risk/my loss when I make the wrong choice.

And from an anglers point of view after the event the river may be well ground baited, doesn't help me as I don't fish.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, donnygeoff said:

Yes very interesting....

that was one or two swimming, not 200.....

My view is.....

Not going to be there, not bothered, none of my family or close friends will be there, so again not bothered.

If people want to take the risk, it's up to them, but as my dad used to say, if you climb that tree, fall out and break your leg, Don't come running to me crying.

Oh I see so that makes everything OK then , because direct family arnt going to be affected that's fine eh , what about the hire boater ( or anyone else ) that gets caught up in this n without any fault of their own gets involved in a,serious incident .

Then again I guess that's my biggest failing/ asset ( dependent on ones opinion ) I tend to think of others as much as I think of myself .

[donnygeoff]

36 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

Oh I see so that makes everything OK then , because direct family arnt going to be affected that's fine eh , what about the hire boater ( or anyone else ) that gets caught up in this n without any fault of their own gets involved in a,serious incident .

Then again I guess that's my biggest failing/ asset ( dependent on ones opinion ) I tend to think of others as much as I think of myself .

to be VERY blunt, I don't care what you think.....

If you want to put your own slant on my posting, please feel free to do so....

BUT, please let me know by quoting what I said in my post, where I said it was OK....

 

[batrabill]

Safety is obviously paramount, but apparently it’s safe to put an idiot with no boating experience whatsoever, at the helm of a 6 ton 45 foot monster after a 10 minute “handover”  

That is “safe” is it. 

[Broads01]

17 minutes ago, batrabill said:

Safety is obviously paramount, but apparently it’s safe to put an idiot with no boating experience whatsoever, at the helm of a 6 ton 45 foot monster after a 10 minute “handover”  

That is “safe” is it. 

Yes, as long as the idiot behaves reasonably (which, despite the image of hirers, 99% do) and as long as there's not 200 barely visible swimmers in the same piece of water. 

[donnygeoff]

17 minutes ago, batrabill said:

Safety is obviously paramount, but apparently it’s safe to put an idiot with no boating experience whatsoever, at the helm of a 6 ton 45 foot monster after a 10 minute “handover”  

That is “safe” is it. 

the same as it is to put an idiot in the driving seat of a car on the motorway, with no experience  whatsoever of motorway driving, after 0 minutes handover......

Sorry, but to call every first time hirer, or even hirers who have just decided to get a bigger boat an idiot is very wrong.......

[donnygeoff]

we crossed Simon....

[batrabill]

So this swim has become the benchmark has it?

What about the 2 day paddle board event which has successfully run for a couple of years is also run by a LTD company. For Money!

Is that “safe” ???

What I am saying is that nothing in life is truly safe. Everything has a risk and many things have quite s high risk  

If you drove in a car today you took a considerable risk, much greater than any boating event here  

If the 3 rivers race were subjected to the same scrutiny this event has it would never have happened  

No one here knows what the safety plan for this event looks like. Speculation speculation Speculation  

 

[batrabill]

5 minutes ago, donnygeoff said:

the same as it is to put an idiot in the driving seat of a car on the motorway, with no experience  whatsoever of motorway driving, after 0 minutes handover......

Sorry, but to call every first time hirer, or even hirers who have just decided to get a bigger boat an idiot is very wrong.......

There will be a range of people who hire. 

Can you tell me how you know one of them isn’t an idiot? Because I’ve met lots of people and some of them are smart and some of them a blithering fools. Unless you can prove to me that the Boat yards have done special way of filtering out the fools then we can be certain that some hirers are idiots. 

Not EVERY hirer, but some. Clear?

 

[batrabill]

14 minutes ago, Broads01 said:

Yes, as long as the idiot behaves reasonably (which, despite the image of hirers, 99% do) and as long as there's not 200 barely visible swimmers in the same piece of water. 

99% ???

So 1% are a danger?

You think these are acceptable odds?

[Guest]

What if some of the swimmers are idiots?

[donnygeoff]

4 minutes ago, batrabill said:

Can you tell me how you know one of them isn’t an idiot?

Well, hopefully I can tell you of a hirer I know that is not and idiot.....

Can't think of their name at the moment but I think their initials are DG...unless you know different of course

 

[batrabill]

This debate had bean skewed by a lot of ‘what if’ ideas that no event could survive. 

What if people have a heart attack during the marathon? Cancel. 

What if someone gets hit by a golf ball? Cancel

What if someone drowns during our fun swim  Cancel

 

[batrabill]

4 minutes ago, donnygeoff said:

Well, hopefully I can tell you of a hirer I know that is not and idiot.....

Can't think of their name at the moment but I think their initials are DG...unless you know different of course

 

Of course you are a Boat handling genius DG but what about the other guy who isn’t ? I think for the safety of everyone else we should stop all of you hiring. Safety is paramount isn’t it?

Do you want people to die?

 

I am, of course, subjecting “hiring” to the same scrutiny swimming is being subjected to here. 

[Graham47]

I don’t see the comments about  banks accessability, being any different in an emergency ,whether you are a swimmer, an angler falling in, or someone falling from a boat. 

[donnygeoff]

3 minutes ago, batrabill said:

you are a genius DG

I know I am, thanks for letting the forum know

[batrabill]

1 minute ago, Graham47 said:

I don’t see the comments about  banks accessability, being any different in an emergency ,whether you are a swimmer, an angler falling in, or someone falling from a boat. 

Yes. Let’s just apply the same standards to all fun pursuits

[donnygeoff]

1 minute ago, batrabill said:

Yes. Let’s just apply the same standards to all fun pursuits

I agree, but please lets hope if it goes ahead it is safe.

It will not be one person, angler, boater, (saily person, who always fall in) it will be 200.

I for one, being an idiot hirer (sorry Bill) will not want to read in the EDP about a mishap....

To clarify, I would not touch the event with a barge pole, but you can not stop people taking risks.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, batrabill said:

This debate had bean skewed by a lot of ‘what if’ ideas that no event could survive. 

What if people have a heart attack during the marathon? Cancel. 

What if someone gets hit by a golf ball? Cancel

What if someone drowns during our fun swim  Cancel

 

That is not what a risk assement is about:

Risk a swimmer has a heart attack during the event

Possible consequences; death or physical disabilty

What can be done to reduce those consequences?:

Quickly identify that swimmer is in difficulty, make provision to extract swimmer from water, have first aid assistance on hand to asses condition, get swimmer to hospital within 1 hour.

What steps need to be taken:

Need race observer/rescuer and first aid advisor every 100m of race distance. River banks need to be suitable for extracting possible unconscious swimmer from the water. Ambulance must be able to travel to within 100m of any part of the river bank.

Then there would a section on who is responsible for each of  the above steps.