So You Can Go Swimming!

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, 40something said:

Didn't we come to the conclusion further back that the BA cant actually stop it going ahead even if they wanted to?

So I guess the outstanding questions are?

Do they need permission from the BA?

If so:

Do they have permission BA?

[Guest]

Well unless the organiser is lying (highly doubtful) BA already gave their blessing months ago, and it was they who suggested the location.

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, 40something said:

Well unless the organiser is lying (highly doubtful) BA already gave their blessing months ago, and it was they who suggested the location.

 

Wow!

BA has certainly taken on a responsibility there then.

[JennyMorgan]

38 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

So I guess the outstanding questions are?

Do they need permission from the BA?

If so:

Do they have permission BA?

In truth I don't suppose the Authority actually has the power to stop people from swimming. What I find sad is that they did not actually discourage nor distance themselves from the event. I have a dread that there will be an accident and the consequences of that will inevitably involve the BA because they have unwisely, in my opinion, sanctioned it.

My concerns about ear plugs might read as rather silly but since I have taken to pool swimming it has surprised me just how many of the keen types wear them. So, as an angler, a boater & now a swimmer I do have my reservations. As an angler I might want to call out and warn a swimmer that my lines are out and that he/she is swimming into them, I do now wonder what likelyhood there is of a swimmer hearing my warning.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

In truth I don't suppose the Authority actually has the power to stop people from swimming. What I find sad is that they did not actually discourage nor distance themselves from the event. I have a dread that there will be an accident and the consequences of that will inevitably involve the BA because they have unwisely, in my opinion, sanctioned it.

My concerns about ear plugs might read as rather silly but since I have taken to pool swimming it has surprised me just how many of the keen types wear them. So, as an angler, a boater & now a swimmer I do have my reservations. As an angler I might want to call out and warn a swimmer that my lines are out and that he/she is swimming into them, I do now wonder what likelyhood there is of a swimmer hearing my warning.

Earplugs, another excellent point that has been dismissed as insignificant and ignored.

[JennyMorgan]

I have since passed my latest concerns to the relevant officer at the BA. I note that a 100 people have paid their entrance fee, I wonder if that is sufficient to cover the what must be considerable costs?

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

I have since passed my latest concerns to the relevant officer at the BA. I note that a 100 people have paid their entrance fee, I wonder if that is sufficient to cover the what must be considerable costs?

A couple of weeks back I spoke to the head of ranger services and I asked her a few questions regarding this event , I got told the organisers had done a very good risk assessment and that only 30 had signed up but that's no doubt increased since then , my thoughts have not changed at all , I still think is insane and BA sanctioning it is a very foolish mistake , I hope if it does take place that all goes well and there are no accidents etc   if that were the case then I recon BA might well regret saying yes to this event .

[JennyMorgan]

In fairness to the BA, Ricardo, I'm not sure that the BA could have said 'no' but I do think they might well regret condoning the event as they appear to have done. The foolish mistake, I think, is that the event has actually been organised, good risk assessment or not. I do wonder who, at the BA, is in any way qualified to judge whether the risk assessment on a swimming event is very good or otherwise? I have no doubt that if there is an accident then the BA will be seen as at least partly responsible and so they should.

 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

In fairness to the BA, Ricardo, I'm not sure that the BA could have said 'no' but I do think they might well regret condoning the event as they appear to have done. The foolish mistake, I think, is that the event has actually been organised, good risk assessment or not. I do wonder who, at the BA, is in any way qualified to judge whether the risk assessment on a swimming event is very good or otherwise? I have no doubt that if there is an accident then the BA will be seen as at least partly responsible and so they should.

 

Absolutely agree   it was the way that HRS stated the risk assessment that lead me to believe its was a formality and had been passed , the problem is if there is an accident it could easily have implications for others not just those involved .

[vanessan]

I think they have a water quality test coming up shortly and, if that’s ok, the event will go ahead. Bearing in mind the initial test was done during the winter months (I think), I wonder if the quality has changed much now that the river is in constant use. I still think it is not a good area for a swim, many better locations have been suggested. 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

Absolutely agree   it was the way that HRS stated the risk assessment that lead me to believe its was a formality and had been passed , the problem is if there is an accident it could easily have implications for others not just those involved .

As I have written before a risk assessment does not automatically conclude with a "Pass or fail" It is the responsibility of those so empowered to review the risks and preventative measures detailed therein and decide if the event/task etc. is an acceptable safety risk. It is however usually followed by a signature or signatures of those agreeing that safety risk is acceptable. Does anyone know who signed off on the risk assessment?   

[grendel]

So is this still going ahead, its all gone very quiet, has the water testing happened, as it is now less than a month from the event I would hope everything has been finalised.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, grendel said:

So is this still going ahead, its all gone very quiet, has the water testing happened, as it is now less than a month from the event I would hope everything has been finalised.

Goodness knows , iv just come up that stretch an hr ago n the water looks fine though might not be , as anyone who has traveled the length of river knows its extremely difficult to get out of the water both sides  and that's my major issue with this , my other concern's are that in spite of the fact BA gave up public mooring space and yet disallowed a safety boat at acle to reserve a mooring for the 3 rivers race because all boats should be allow to moor a any time of day ! , something isn't right I think .

[MauriceMynah]

Risk assessment done by each and every swimmer involved is the answer. As long as they are all aware that boats with dangerous propellers will be about, and as long as they are each aware that the banks are not easy routes out of trouble, and of course as long as they are aware of weils disease and associated sewerage along with other hygiene issues, I see no problem.

Let 'em swim!

[Maxwellian]

When we went through Beccles on the BH week end of May there was two swimmers with air floats practising. They started on one side went to the middle  we had to almost stop they then took up half of the river between them before moving over. That was just two of them. I am not against it but if that is the awareness and consideration that just two demonstrate, then stay well away if it does go ahead. We did take photos. 

[grendel]

45 minutes ago, Maxwellian said:

When we went through Beccles on the BH week end of May there was two swimmers with air floats practising. They started on one side went to the middle  we had to almost stop they then took up half of the river between them before moving over. That was just two of them. I am not against it but if that is the awareness and consideration that just two demonstrate, then stay well away if it does go ahead. We did take photos. 

might be worth sending the photos to the BA to say that 2 swimmers were obstructing the river making it unsafe for boats to proceed.

[dnks34]

Stay well away is what I will be doing. 

Accidents do happen even with all best laid plans and theres no way Im getting myself into the situation that my prop could severley injure even kill someone however neglible the risk might be. 

Im not being liabel for it I dont care who has carried out the risk assessment, and I still think the BA are crackers for not putting the brakes on it. 

So even though I have paid my Toll that part of the river will effectively be out of bounds for me for the day!

[Maxwellian]

Plenty more left.

[Chelsea14Ian]

I have made my views very clear,all I will say is I will add comments if and when this goes ahead.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Stay well away is what I will be doing. 

Accidents do happen even with all best laid plans and theres no way Im getting myself into the situation that my prop could severley injure even kill someone however neglible the risk might be. 

Im not being liabel for it I dont care who has carried out the risk assessment, and I still think the BA are crackers for not putting the brakes on it. 

So even though I have paid my Toll that part of the river will effectively be out of bounds for me for the day!

A review of my personal risk assessment in respect of cruising those waters during the swim concludes that I should avoid the area during the event due to the risk of my boat having contact with a swimmer/swimmers and the subsequent risk of injury to swimmers and individual trauma to myself and others on my boat, 

[grendel]

Well looking at the organisers page - https://broadsswimming.co.uk/about/ it would appear to still be going ahead, with 3 waves of 30 swimmers, well lower numbers of swimmers will make life a bit easier.

[MauriceMynah]

46 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Stay well away is what I will be doing. 

Accidents do happen even with all best laid plans and theres no way Im getting myself into the situation that my prop could severley injure even kill someone however neglible the risk might be. 

Im not being liabel for it I dont care who has carried out the risk assessment, and I still think the BA are crackers for not putting the brakes on it. 

So even though I have paid my Toll that part of the river will effectively be out of bounds for me for the day!

with you 100% there Dnks34. If I were to injure or worse, a swimmer it would stay with me the rest of my days. I'm out of it BA sanctioned or not.

[grendel]

I still feel sorry for any hirers who may never have heard of this and suddenly encounter 90 people in the water, who may have little experience to know how to react in the situation. I know that when I was at the wheel of Janet 3 from Martham boats I found it very difficult to hear anything people were shouting to me from other boats, so I hope the safety boats are able to make the situation clear to any boats approaching the swimmers.

[vanessan]

It’s still the day boats that concern me more than anything else. The way some of them belt up and down has to be seen to be believed. As the 1 July is a Sunday, there are going to be lots around. I wouldn’t mind betting that the safety boats will try and hold other river traffic back and I think that will just cause trouble. Just my thoughts, I hope I’m wrong. 

[dnks34]

I was obstructed by a “safety boat” from the Sailing Club on Oulton Broad a few years ago. Admittedly I had made an error but if he hadn't obstructed me I’d have been well clear by the time the boats had turned and come back, and it did cause trouble!!