So You Can Go Swimming!

[JennyMorgan]

20 minutes ago, smellyloo said:

I never thought I would read such a statement here on the nbn.

There are usually two sides to every debate, both have merit and deserve equal respect, assuming that is you want to maintain nbn as an open, welcoming, friendly forum.

 

Loo, I tend to agree with your line of thinking on most topics but on this one my support is with Grendel.

Re safety at this event, lifted from a BA safety leaflet:

The Broads is unsuitable for swimming.

Not sure that that is entirely true but that is their stance and should surely have some bearing on the topic.

[batrabill]

What JohnK said. 

[JohnK]

Re safety at this event, lifted from a BA safety leaflet:
The Broads is unsuitable for swimming.
Not sure that that is entirely true but that is their stance and should surely have some bearing on the topic.

No no no no no, you of all people can’t quote the BA and say their stance should have some bearing on the topic unless you’re going to accept ......

[marshman]

Doesn't feel like ganging up to me!

I am far too decrepit and thick skinned to notice it as I have heard it all before, but I am not surprised by the reaction particularly from where I would expect.

I personally commend those who have proposed this event and I really do  hope it gets off the ground - the rivers are NOT just for toll payers but for everyone's pleasure. However being a rather tight old Norfolk git, I feel the entry costs, rather than the exceptionally dangerous nature of the event, may prove a bar to some!

[dnks34]

I look at this in 2 ways, from a safety point of view and as a Toll payer.  

Others may not see it from the same position but if its clear we are not going to agree as is always going to be the case whats to be gained from getting all het up about it. 

Those of us inclined will make our views known directly to the BA and they will do what they will do. 

Whatever argument is put forward this type of event is not part of the Broads Tapestry and in my own opinion it has no place becoming so. 

 

[Maxwellian]

Please discuss not throw dummies! 

[Cockatoo]

26 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Loo, I tend to agree with your line of thinking on most topics but on this one my support is with Grendel.

Re safety at this event, lifted from a BA safety leaflet:

The Broads is unsuitable for swimming.

Not sure that that is entirely true but that is their stance and should surely have some bearing on the topic.

Maybe it should read 

 

The Broads is unsuitable for swimming. (unless there is money in it)

[Smoggy]

23 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

The Broads is unsuitable for swimming.

For someone just going in for a dip from their hire boat at the side of the yare that is probably very true, an organised event in the right place with safety supervision water checks and properly risk assessed  I would say it's perfectly suitable for swimming, it's got water what more do you need?

Wether it is in the right place or time I'm not getting involved in as I can't be bothered with the tit for tat barneys.

[dnks34]

5 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

Maybe it should read 

 

The Broads is unsuitable for swimming. (unless there is money in it)

Doesnt sound like the BA are getting anything out of it?

I imagine if the group did use the likes of whitlingham for the event they may well have to pay for the privelage. 

But please correct if wrong

[ChrisB]

At one time "The Canoe Man"  was offering wild swimming on The Bure. I think it was around Lamas. Now that is ideal. Deep clear waters perfect for swimming and canoeing and not a hire cruiser in sight. 

[Vaughan]

Actually, Peter has only quoted half of it. From the BA website on safety matters :

"Don't swim - no matter how hot it is the water in the rivers and broads is always cold and shock from cold can kill. Also, you will not be seen by boaters."

Not saying I actually agree with that but is is a clear, published statement which hardly lines up with the thought of 200 people swimming 11 km up the Waveney!

So if we are to follow Batrabill's train of thought, where our (experienced) concerns for safety are to be dismissed as arguing for the sake of it and the BA has already officially advised against swimming in the river, what would he suggest would be an acceptable rate of attrition for this still to be considered a great event?  In other words, how many casualties would be considered acceptable, before our grave concerns for the safety of this commercial enterprise might be considered justified?

 

[dnks34]

Its the same as Batrabill making my opinion out as invalid because its “negative” or whatever it was. 

Thats what people who cant see sense do when people wont agree with them all the time. 

[grendel]

OK enough already.

with my moderator hat on - we have got to the point where we are starting to make personal accusations again, keep things nice folks or we will have to lock the thread again.

I know lots of you have different opinions, we are all concerned about the safety aspects, some may have more knowledge of the measures put in place, but unless we discuss the matter calmly and avoid attacking each other or making things personal again we will have to take action.

please try and discuss this in a civilised manner.

Thank you.

[Bound2Please]

B;oody hell I nip out for half an hour or so and they get going again.

[Guest]

I may be wrong here but I did not think a Risk Assessment is concluded with a  OK to proceed, pass or fail, or safe unsafe etc. 

My understanding is that it was a list of possible hazards, identification of who or what is at risk, the potential consequences of that risk and ways to mitigate that risk. It was then down to those empowered as a result of evaluating the Risk Assessment to decide whether or not to continue with the activity or perhaps consider how the method could be changed to reduce the risk.

[dnks34]

Appologies for that on my part but I do feel some folk are always out to force the devisive, I didnt intend anything personal. 

 

[Lastdraft]

Oooops sorry, I was looking for the nbn..........

[JanetAnne]

1 hour ago, ChrisB said:

Potter to West Somerton would have less boat traffic or vikki versa. Or across Hickling if calm.

I think the idea is to swim rather than walk 

[Londonlad1985]

Purely from an event point of view it does sound fun and will be a good spectacle to witness. Anything that gets people off their sofa and out doing exercise has to be a good thing, it would also be a unique way to enjoy the broads. There has been some good advice on this thread I hope it is taken by the event organisers and the event is a success. 

[batrabill]

Just now, Londonlad1985 said:

Purely from an event point of view it does sound fun and will be a good spectacle to witness. Anything that gets people off their sofa and out doing exercise has to be a good thing, it would also be a unique way to enjoy the broads. There has been some good advice on this thread I hope it is taken by the event organisers and the event is a success. 

 

Not a popular view that, I've discovered.

[ExMemberBobdog]

2 minutes ago, batrabill said:

 

Not a popular view that, I've discovered.

Don’t worry.  The idea that the Earth is round was unpopular once.

[socrates]

Given that there are pearls of wisdom on here from the many riparian sages, perhaps the event organisers will re-consider their event? 

If I were the event organiser, thankfully I am not, I would seriously consider what is said on this forum by experienced people. To ignore the advice is tantamount to a head in the sand mentality or (seasonally speaking) Pilates meaningless hand washing.

 

[Labrador]

5 minutes ago, socrates said:

Given that there are pearls of wisdom on here from the riparian sages.

 

Perfect.

[grendel]

1 hour ago, Lastdraft said:

Oooops sorry, I was looking for the nbn..........

 

[Wyndham]

I actually think the idea is a really good one and has the potential to become a looked forward to annual event, if it's done correctly. I've witnessed the Maldon Mud Race and the swim across the harbour at Padstow, both really good.

However, there is something that nags me.

People are free to do whatever they want, all kinds of dangerous sports, they know the risk and take the risk. I even done it myself for years. I know with my former sport (and I'm guessing with others) that safety of the participants was the top priority, it was rigorous. Of course that still didn't stop any individual being stupid but I took part in the knowledge that behind the scenes people were constantly collecting information, having safety meetings, changing procedures etc.

Now given that Mel has said this is a commercial venture and she'll be lucky to break even, can the people taking part do so, confident that all the necessary safety measures have been taken. They will be taking part assuming so, it would be a shame if that were not the case as there is no money left.