Beccles Bound..

[vanessan]

2 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

The likes of thee and me have long been educated by experience and can judge for ourselves, and long may that be the case. However, even such as ourselves can and do fall in, even drowning, Alec Hampton of Hampton Boats immediately springs to mind. 

However, being in possession of wisdom and experience can not be assumed for very many of our visitors and guests. 

And in recent years, two other Broads people. One, a PH pilot and the other a young liveaboard from the southern rivers. Both in possession of wisdom and experience but caught out at the time. 

[floydraser]

22 minutes ago, YnysMon said:

Personally, I’m comfortable with much of the ‘Nanny Statedness’.  ‘Elf and Safety lark gets a bad press, but every life (and limb) has a value. If I recall correctly, there were a lot of calls about nanny state before the seatbelt regulations came in, but we don’t even consider putting a seatbelt on an imposition any longer.

Similarly, safety footwear, hi-vis vests, hard etc in the workplace. Amazing how we adapt.

[RealWindmill]

16 minutes ago, YnysMon said:

Personally, I’m comfortable with much of the ‘Nanny Statedness’.  ‘Elf and Safety lark gets a bad press, but every life (and limb) has a value. If I recall correctly, there were a lot of calls about nanny state before the seatbelt regulations came in, but we don’t even consider putting a seatbelt on an imposition any longer.

I recall when I was first involved in offshore working it was about the time when the oil companies and larger contractors were beginning to take Health and Safety seriously. Prior to that it was not uncommon to come across guys with fingers missing, one eye missing, people not returning home on leave to their loved ones - you get my drift.

So while it may be an uncomfortable experience to have to wear lifejackets, hard hats, thick gloves, harnesses and the like there can be no disputing that there are a lot less guys around now with missing body parts thanks to H and S regs.

The sea (or rivers) can be an unforgiving playground.

[750XL]

I think many people don't understand the actual benefits of a life jacket. I certainly didn't, until I did my Offshore Survival Training during my Officer Of The Watch course.

They aren't just there to keep you 'afloat', if fitted properly and you should go unconcious in the water they'll protect your airways, keep your head above water, prevent water ingress (assuming there's not a big swell) and also help enormously when someone tries to drag you out of the river.

Ever tried to drag a lifeless lump of a man out of the water without a firm handle to grab onto? It's very difficult. Even with a lifejacket on.

 

That being said, whilst working away on a 12,000GT ship in East Asia, all of the ships crew (myself included) would still dice death without lifejackets on trying to get on/off rickety old pilot boats to take us ashore for refreshements. The same ordeal would happen again when we returned at 5am, 12 pints later.

How none of us ended up in the drink I'll have no idea. 

[Hylander]

10 hours ago, 750XL said:

That being said, whilst working away on a 12,000GT ship in East Asia, all of the ships crew (myself included) would still dice death without lifejackets on trying to get on/off rickety old pilot boats to take us ashore for refreshements. The same ordeal would happen again when we returned at 5am, 12 pints later.

How none of us ended up in the drink I'll have no idea. 

In those circumstances you were probably safer after 12 pints as not so wary of the rickety old pilot boat and its pilot.

[MauriceMynah]

Advise people to wear LJs, yeah no problem.

Advertise the advantages of doing so and the risks of not... again, no problem

BUT... If you are going to make it law, enjoy the unintended and unforeseen consequences.

And you had better add some other laws that can follow.

It should be an offence to...

Travel in a boat where the ropes are not cheesed down. (trip hazard)

To travel in a boat where the fenders are on the deck. (trip hazard)

To travel in a boat with the fenders deployed. (Poor seamanship)

To travel in a boat when under the influence of drugs or alcohol. (it's rarely the skipper who falls off)

To fish from a boat. (Fishing uses both hands so you can't be holding on).

To deploy or retrieve a mudweight unless by electric winch. (also uses both hands so you can't be holding on).

There will be others that follow because of an inescapable fact.

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE THE THING THAT KILLS MORE PEOPLE THAN ANYTHING ELSE WHEN BEING NEAR WATER.

So good people, just how far do you want this nanny state to go. Perhaps making it an offence to be within 2 metres of water and banning all leisure activities? Up to you! 

[floydraser]

58 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Advise people to wear LJs, yeah no problem.

Advertise the advantages of doing so and the risks of not... again, no problem

BUT... If you are going to make it law, enjoy the unintended and unforeseen consequences.

And you had better add some other laws that can follow.

It should be an offence to...

Travel in a boat where the ropes are not cheesed down. (trip hazard)

To travel in a boat where the fenders are on the deck. (trip hazard)

To travel in a boat with the fenders deployed. (Poor seamanship)

To travel in a boat when under the influence of drugs or alcohol. (it's rarely the skipper who falls off)

To fish from a boat. (Fishing uses both hands so you can't be holding on).

To deploy or retrieve a mudweight unless by electric winch. (also uses both hands so you can't be holding on).

There will be others that follow because of an inescapable fact.

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE THE THING THAT KILLS MORE PEOPLE THAN ANYTHING ELSE WHEN BEING NEAR WATER.

So good people, just how far do you want this nanny state to go. Perhaps making it an offence to be within 2 metres of water and banning all leisure activities? Up to you! 

Make a law against poor seamanship? Funny argument that.

If we were hearing more and more about people tripping over fenders then yes, do something about it, but we don't. We do hear about people falling in when getting on and off the boat though.

 

[grendel]

I am sure someone recently told me they had researched the statistics and more people drowned cycling to and from the pub, than did falling off a boat, thus we should make lifejackets compulsory for cyclists too, in fact lets go one step further and make every single person spend their life in one of those zorb bubbles, as that achieves social distancing too.

[grendel]

if you want to read through the annual reports here - https://www.nationalwatersafety.org.uk/waid/reports-and-data/

there are all the figures, but it would seem apparent that being male aged 20-24 gives you the highest risk of drowning, with a much reduced risk if you are female or over the age of 65

[floydraser]

4 minutes ago, grendel said:

if you want to read through the annual reports here - https://www.nationalwatersafety.org.uk/waid/reports-and-data/

there are all the figures, but it would seem apparent that being male aged 20-24 gives you the highest risk of drowning, with a much reduced risk if you are female or over the age of 65

One import statistic: loads of accidents = poor public image = people stay away = you end up with the Broads to yourself = but it will be expensive!

[grendel]

last year only 9 drownings were while motorboating, while 87 were while running or walking, swimming was the next highest category at 44

Granted 9 deaths while motorboating is still too high, but amongst the 223 drownings in 2019 it would appear that far more deaths are attributable to being near water or swimming in water, than being aboard a boat.

when you compare to such causes as deaths from not wearing seatbelts that caused their compulsory use, the numbers are negligible. In fact the numbers from swimming bear out the claims for the dangers of that sport.

[Vaughan]

17 minutes ago, floydraser said:

We do hear about people falling in when getting on and off the boat though.

Depends who you are listening to. BBC Look East, when reporting on the recent tragedy in GYYS, said that this was the first death on the Broads from a boating accident in the last 4 years. I don't know how accurate that is or what was their source, but that is what they said.

 

3 minutes ago, floydraser said:

One import statistic: loads of accidents = poor public image = people stay away = you end up with the Broads to yourself = but it will be expensive!

Exactly!  And that sort of bad press has caused this effect before, on the Broads.

[grendel]

if you look at the 2019 figures for england, by county Norfolk had 2 drownings, Suffolk had 3, compared to the combined total of Devon and Cornwall of 31.

the broads is a relatively safe place according to the statistics

[Smoggy]

And of course then you have to ban the wearing of lifejackets inside cabin areas of boats as they hinder your escape route in case of fire or sinking.

I will often use my lifejacket in coastal harbour areas but never when cruising along the broads or in the saloon or cabin at sea, I know I'm a poor swimmer and cold water shock will probably make my third breath my last but I still make my own decisions and accept responsibility for them.

[floydraser]

8 minutes ago, grendel said:

if you look at the 2019 figures for england, by county Norfolk had 2 drownings, Suffolk had 3, compared to the combined total of Devon and Cornwall of 31.

the broads is a relatively safe place according to the statistics

Would that be the inland rivers of Devon and Cornwall, or the sea? Don't answer.

One drowning is one too many!

And why does there have to be a drowning for it to be considered a statistic? Safety is about the potential danger; someone falling and getting out again ok is still an accident with the potential for much worse.

[grendel]

1 minute ago, floydraser said:

Would that be the inland rivers of Devon and Cornwall, or the sea? Don't answer.

One drowning is one too many!

agreed one is one too many, and the figures dont state the differentiation, the ones for Norfolk probably include the sea too.

safety is a relative thing, quoting from the report was just to provide some degree of balance to the discussion, there are many things out there that have a possibility of a fatal outcome, the risks need to be balanced for all decisions in life.

[snunn]

Living here in Padstow just this past May bank holiday there were 3 deaths from drowning all in this small area and a 4th. suffered life changing injuries

[Poppy]

I am simply amazed at the reluctance of people on here ( who I thought should know better)  to be so against the appropriate  wearing of life jackets, and the lengths to which they will appear to go to justify their position.

As I said earlier,  I guess you can't account for plain stupid !

[Vaughan]

16 minutes ago, Poppy said:

I am simply amazed at the reluctance of people on here ( who I thought should know better)  to be so against the appropriate  wearing of life jackets, and the lengths to which they will appear to go to justify their position.

As I said earlier,  I guess you can't account for plain stupid !

I hope that (in particular your last line) does not refer to me?  In which case I suggest you read my posts on this thread again.

Anyway, this is a forum, where we all respect and have the right, to our own opinions. So what is yours? Are you saying that anyone on a boat from now on, should be obliged to wear a lifejacket?  By Law?

And does that include a photo we have seen posted on another thread today, of a paddle board being towed across Salhouse Broad behind a large (and obviously private)  open launch, with one man at the helm and another man standing on the board? Where neither of the two appear to be wearing anything but swimming trunks?

 

[Poppy]

I am certainly not calling for legislation. However, I strongly believe that LJs should be used in circumstances such as mooring, leaving the bank etc. and that the BA Rangers should be 'having a word' when they see this not happening, especially in the parts of the network subject to strong tidal currents.

Yachts are another issue entirely, and I feel that they should be in use at all times the vessel is under way , not a view I know which is popular with most members of the River Cruiser Class !  

[vanessan]

10 minutes ago, Poppy said:

I am certainly not calling for legislation. However, I strongly believe that LJs should be used in circumstances such as mooring, leaving the bank etc. and that the BA Rangers should be 'having a word' when they see this not happening, especially in the parts of the network subject to strong tidal currents.

My thoughts entirely. I wonder how often BA rangers do actually talk to people about wearing LJs. I think there could be big signs at the lower reaches of the Yare, Waveney and Bure warning of strong currents etc and telling people to wear their LJs when on deck. I would be interested to know what is included in the Skippers’ manuals re LJs on board hire boats and what guidance the boatyards give on handover. 

[MauriceMynah]

4 hours ago, floydraser said:

Make a law against poor seamanship? Funny argument that.

If we were hearing more and more about people tripping over fenders then yes, do something about it, but we don't. We do hear about people falling in when getting on and off the boat though.

 

Yes, the "poor seamanship" was tongue in cheek and aimed at a particular member who will, no doubt, raise the appropriate number of fingers.

I do however disagree with your second statement. People don't just "fall in" there is a reason. They either tripped, slipped, lost balance or perhaps misjudged the distance to the bank, but we rarely are given that information.

2 hours ago, Poppy said:

I am simply amazed at the reluctance of people on here ( who I thought should know better)  to be so against the appropriate  wearing of life jackets, and the lengths to which they will appear to go to justify their position.

As I said earlier,  I guess you can't account for plain stupid !

I don't believe there can be many who are against the appropriate wearing of life jackets. My objection is having legislation telling me that I have to wear it.

I almost always wear one when south of Acle, but that's MY decision, nobody else's. 

[floydraser]

And with that I think we've exhausted the thread drift and argument.

[Mouldy]

4 hours ago, floydraser said:

Would that be the inland rivers of Devon and Cornwall, or the sea? Don't answer.

One drowning is one too many!

And why does there have to be a drowning for it to be considered a statistic? Safety is about the potential danger; someone falling and getting out again ok is still an accident with the potential for much worse.

I’ve been keeping out of this discussion , but can’t contain myself any longer.  One death on the roads is also one death too many, but we still keep driving and still keep having accidents.  There are all sorts of laws to encourage us not to speed, but we do, to drive carefully, which we clearly don’t, to follow the legislation written in The Highway Code, but how many of us have read one recently?

How ever many ‘Nanny State’ laws there are we cannot mitigate against every eventuality.  Do we really need legislation to force us to wear life jackets?  Are we going to make people who bathe off the beaches around the country wear them, too, in case they get into difficulty and drown.

It is a leisure activity, as is skiing, skydiving, rock climbing, mountaineering, motor cycling.  There will be deaths - people will die on their way to holiday on The Broads sadly, but that is life.  
 

The death last week was a tragedy, but let’s not get hysterical about it.  There’s more chance of dying of Corona bloody virus.  One death on The Broads in four years, especially when we consider some of the idiotic antics that have been reported on here and various FB groups recently is hardly the reason for more  knee jerk, draconian legislation, is it?

[Mouldy]

1 hour ago, floydraser said:

And with that I think we've exhausted the thread drift and argument.

Sorry, just spotted that!!

Back to Beccles Bound, then . . . . . .