Who's in charge???
News
An issue arose recently at my old Uni club. A guy has joined this year who
is a Level 2 (or something or other) BCU Coach.
He is convinced that if he goes on a club trip then he is liable should any
disasters befall, even though he is not actually leading the group.
From the aspect of other people in the club this is annoying as he therefore
thinks he has to be in charge all the time, even though he is not actually
as strong a paddler as many of the people there.
From his own point of view I imagine it is also irritating as he feels that
he cannot go on trips where he is not allowed to be in charge in case he
finds himself in court.
Is he being remarkably pompous (spell??) or has he got a point?
Ed. Hopper
Mark Rainsley
News <x@x> wrote in message
news:948473843.8854.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> From the aspect of other people in the club this is annoying as he
therefore
> thinks he has to be in charge all the time, even though he is not actually
> as strong a paddler as many of the people there.
Seems worth noting that being 'in charge' isn't the same thing as being the
strongest paddler there. Although even so, we used to run our Uni trips
(sorry, 'epics') on the basis that whoever was still remainig in his/ her
boat last...was in charge.
Mark Rainsley
www.guidebook.free-online.co.uk
Dave Cooke
Region Coaching Officer, so the guy has some backing) we were told that if
you are the most senior qualified on the trip, you take responsibility in
the eyes of the law.
However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree that
they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be covered.
Of course, as a level 2 coach he is only permitted to lead a group on grade
1 water, a level 3 coach is required to lead on moving (grade 2) water.
Dave C
BCU SW
News wrote in message
<948473843.8854.0...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>Dear Newsgroup denizens,
>
>An issue arose recently at my old Uni club. A guy has joined this year who
>is a Level 2 (or something or other) BCU Coach.
>
>He is convinced that if he goes on a club trip then he is liable should any
>disasters befall, even though he is not actually leading the group.
>
>From the aspect of other people in the club this is annoying as he
therefore
>thinks he has to be in charge all the time, even though he is not actually
>as strong a paddler as many of the people there.
>
Jerry Murland
responsibility in
the eyes of the law...............
sounds to me like a good reason not to get qualified!!
Jerry Murland
--
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
'He realised the danger of the solo undertaking, but reassured himself that
having a companion along would not have helped his chances of survival.'
Never Turn Back - Walt Blackadar's solo run of the Alesek
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
....
Dave Cooke <da...@dccs.co.uk> wrote in message news:86agqk$m4t$1...@gxsn.com...
Nigel Murray
Why do I get this sinking feeling that it in't going to matter a right lot
what you or anyone else tells him?
He can always ask the Coaching service at BCU if he's that bothered to
clarify things and he'll probably relax and enjoy himself more if he does.
In the interim, reassure him that it seems to be a fairly common syndrome
amongst Coaches of all grades. Its usually inversely proportional to the
length of time they've held the qualification so chances are he'll recover.
Sadly for some it seems to become a progressive condition - a sort of
deterioration from Chronic Coachitis, characterised by frequently thinking
they know best and a desire to correct everybody so they paddle in 'the one
right way', whilst worrying about everyone and anything, to full blown
Jobs-Worth Disease characterised by invariably knowing they know best,
worrying about nothing because they can't make mistakes, an insistence on
correcting everybody about everything, and typically displaying selective
attention deficits including both profound deafness and total blindness
whenever anyone who actually knows what's going on explains anything. As
the condition advances sufferers show an increasing inability to match words
and demonstration on anything bigger than grade 2 water. Extreme cases may
show a strong aversion to actually going on water at all, linked to complex
but reflex vocalisations about how thoroughly they were looking forward to
showing that shower how it should be done and the unfairness of being
smitten with a war wound /athlete's knob/old paddling injury which
precludes their participating today.
On a more legalistic note:
Despite knowing little more about the law than knowing enough to say I'm no
legal expert so rely on this at your peril, the way I see it there are quite
few ways to come at this. Depending on the circumstances outcomes range
from he is obviously not in charge and has no liability (at least in the UK,
may not hold in other places), to he will be deemed to be the responsible
person and carry a lot, maybe all, liability for whatever happens.
Does he have a particular 'duty of care' to the others in the group is one
key issue.
Ethically you might argue we're all responsible for each other or conversely
no-one is responsible for anyone else. But ethics isn't the law so note
that bit and then shove it over to the side for the moment - Its down to
what you can evidence.
3 more or less key points are:
* Can he be properly regarded as having the greatest expertise? And was he
acting within his limits of competence? (Overlaps with negligence question).
* Has he stated or can it be implied by his actions or by other means that
he is 'leading' the group?
* Is he acting with due diligence (or to put it the other way round, is he
not being negligent)?
Courts like having someone to blame. Its tidy and it keeps things simple
for pontificating about how to prevent reoccurrences even if they know
twat-all about the subject. Re-read the posting from the guys who were out
with the Paddler who drowned (on East Lym(?)) a couple of months ago. What
did the Police spend a lot of their time doing? Trying to establish who was
in charge. The sense that came over was that if they couldn't have someone
completely in charge then please could they have someone who was a bit in
charge. Wisely and no doubt quite properly nobody was. They were all
individually responsible for themselves. So no one was charged of sued
(yet) so far as I know.
If all the paddlers in your group are also individually responsible for
themselves your coach is in the clear ...... At least so long as he keeps
his gob shut and doesn't imply he has assumed control. (Problem with that
is when something goes wrong that's maybe when he's least likely to keep it
shut).
To be unambiguous you could use written confirmation on the lines of "I
(name) affirm I am wholly responsible for my own conduct and safety on the
water. I am not under the direction of anybody else - although I may choose
to comply with suggestions and/or advice offered by others - and no other
person shall be regarded as legally liable for ensuring my safety. In the
event of this disclaimer being held to be void or invalid then I indemnify
any member of the group I am with against any damages which may be awarded
to me or to my estate and undertake to reimburse the full amount of any such
award this undertaking being binding upon my estate in the event of my
death". Cynics might like to add a word or two to the effect 'unless there
is sound reason to believe the cause was malicious or intentional' ('In
which case please hang the **** responsible for drowning/maiming me')
Avoid making specific reference to the Coach who's bleating on and you
should be able to cover each others arses collectively. Now put the things
somewhere safe.
You'll probably find someone who objects, but then you don't have to include
them in the group who go paddling do you?
The biggest limitation to this approach I can think of is that its worth
Jack S*** so far as people under 18 are concerned. Even the parents can NOT
disclaim their child's rights in quite the same way. But you can change the
'indemnity clause' to state that the indemnity is against the child's
received award in the first place but failing that the parent undertakes to
reimburse any loss/award. Mind you, do they have the capital ?
So far as I know (but don't rely on it) we are not quite yet in such a
sorry state that the law says its better to do nothing and let your mate
drown because if you try and rescue him and fail you could find yourself
having to prove that you were not negligent and acted to professional
standards. I think in the UK we're still in the stage where if you are
doing the best you can be expected to given your skills & the circumstances
of the event you'll be OK ....... but you might get shoved through the mill
having to prove that's what your actions were - the best of your ability
given your skill and knowledge in the circumstances.
Any truly legally expert folk reading this please advise on the shortfalls
in the and a better way of doing it!
PLF
Nidge
_____________
News <x@x> wrote in message
news:948473843.8854.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Phil Todd
Having just discovered this newsgroup, thought I'd chuck my two EMUs into
the ring on this one. (Hope the emus don't squawk too loudly!)
There was a good answer to this question in CoDe (& Canoe Focus??) in the
article that contained the rports on the fatalities on the Barle & Dart last
year. As these involved neighbouring clubs to mine, this issue's a bit close
to heart.
As I remember, the guist of the article is that the most highly qualified
has a duty of care to step in if things are obviously going wrong (not quite
the same as being in charge, in my opinion). This can be a problem if you
have acoaching qualification and the rest of the group are a bunch of
plonkers, but should you be paddling with them in the first case?
Pragmatically, my view is join the BCU and hope that the oppposing lawyer
doesn't win more that £5!
Phil
Nigel Murray <nigel...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:Oj6i4.9920$UL1.2...@nnrp4.clara.net...
Lots cut out to save on your (and my) phone bill!!
Jim Wallis
>
> .............if you are the most senior qualified on the trip, you take
> responsibility in
> the eyes of the law...............
>
> sounds to me like a good reason not to get qualified!!
>
> Jerry Murland
I seem to have missed a lot of this thread also!
I think we had a similar discussion a few months back, but it's worth
considering that if no-one is qualified then the most experienced
paddler will take the wrap.
JIM
Steve Balcombe
>I recently did my level 3 training. On the course (run by the South West
>Region Coaching Officer, so the guy has some backing) we were told that if
>the eyes of the law.
It's not as simple as that. Are you sure Gordon (I assume it was he) said
that?
>However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree that
>they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be covered.
You often hear this kind of thing suggested, but does anyone ever actually
have such a discussion before getting on the water? It kind of happens
tacitly amongst our group, i.e. nobody ever adopts the mantle of 'leader'
on those 'peer group' trips.
BTW - 'if everyone is competent' - who exactly is qualified (sic) to
make that judgement??
>Of course, as a level 2 coach he is only permitted to lead a group on grade
>1 water, a level 3 coach is required to lead on moving (grade 2) water.
Not 'required' - no coaching qualification is 'required' to lead on
any grade of water. As per a discussion on this subject a while back,
a coaching qualification is not a licence.
Steve B.
Steve Balcombe
>Ed
>
>Why do I get this sinking feeling that it in't going to matter a right lot
>what you or anyone else tells him?
S'funny, I read it that way as well :-)
...
>In the interim, reassure him that it seems to be a fairly common syndrome
>amongst Coaches of all grades. Its usually inversely proportional to the
>length of time they've held the qualification so chances are he'll recover.
.
.
.
>showing that shower how it should be done and the unfairness of being
>smitten with a war wound /athlete's knob/old paddling injury which
>precludes their participating today.
Excellent summary. You forgot to mention 'listing your qualifications
at the end of every paragraph' - usually used to justify your opinions
because they don't make enough sense to be self justifying.
>On a more legalistic note:
[snipped generally good advice although a bit OTT on the disclaimer
bit IMHO]
>Any truly legally expert folk reading this please advise on the shortfalls
>in the and a better way of doing it!
No more qualified than you unfortunately; however...
US - if you try your damnedest to save someone at great personal risk
to yourself, but fail, you could potentially face a very expensive lawsuit.
Safest thing is to do nothing.
France - the exact opposite. If you do nothing and someone learns that
you've been trained / are qualified, prepare yourself for a long court
case. Sometimes known as the 'Good Samaritan' law.
UK - You can and will be held responsible if you are negligent, which
can mean by your actions *or* by omission. However just being there
doesn't necessarily make you responsible, it could depend on your role
within the group. The relevance of qualifications is that if you have
one, and you fail to act according to your training, you may be considered
negligent - but someone who has no qualification can't know what to do
and therefore might not be held to have been negligent. English law, btw,
doesn't necessarily seek to apply the blame to a single person, so the
fact that there's someone more qualified, experienced or skilled in the
group doesn't mean you are immune from culpability. The law is more
demanding wrt minors, and/or if you are operating in a commercial context.
Steve B.
Jez Kent
> Of course, as a level 2 coach he is only permitted to lead a group on
grade
> 1 water, a level 3 coach is required to lead on moving (grade 2)
water.
I disagree. A level 3 coach is required to 'coach' on grade 2 water.
Wouldn't it be useful if someone could clarify EXACTLY what the
recommendations are; commercial/private/club/university against
coaching levels/star tests etc.
At the end of the day none of this (unless you are commercial) is a
legal requirement. It's all down to what you can defend in court,
should you be called to do so, and unless you are negligent you
shouldn't worry.
It seems to confuse most of us at one time or another, leads to long
discussions and generally makes me reluctant to do anything other than
private peer group trips. Which is a shame.
--
Jez Kent - Reading, UK
"Life is like a wild tiger, you can either lie down and let
it lay its paw on your head or sit on its back and ride it!"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Andrew Burns
I went to a BCU Uni clubs symposium thing a couple of years back, where
the basic answer to that was yes, the most qualified paddler is
responsible in the eyes of the law.
Of course, that's insane. Most uni clubs have some experience of some 3*
level whatever coach joining, despite never having been on white water,
and so technicly being in charge over unqualified paddlers who've got
shedloads of experience.
Sadly, experience is, while perhaps more accurate, less convenient for
the law than a piece of paper.
Also, with reference to signing a piece of paper to declare that you're
responsible for your own paddling - I'm not sure how useful that would
be. From what little law I've been taught, I believe that you can NEVER
sign away your right to legal action in the event of negligence. Which
makes all those pieces of paper saying 'I won't sue in the event of
negligence' that you sign when you go paintballing/bungee jumping/etc.
worthless. Of course, if you declare that you're paddling by yourself
then that might be avoided, by I'm not sure what counts as a group in
the eyes of the law. And it is difficult to achieve when there may be
club kit, etc. in use.
This is a very sad state of affairs, as it means that if you become
qualified, you're just making yourself a target for being sued. Another
reason not to gain qualifications...
Andy
G R Ashcroft
: Hi Ed,
: I went to a BCU Uni clubs symposium thing a couple of years back, where
: the basic answer to that was yes, the most qualified paddler is
: responsible in the eyes of the law.
: Of course, that's insane. Most uni clubs have some experience of some 3*
: level whatever coach joining, despite never having been on white water,
: and so technicly being in charge over unqualified paddlers who've got
: shedloads of experience.
Now, being sued is only worthwile, if you have some money to pay damages.
Most students (including me) are penniless/ in debt. So sueing our
arses would not be worthwile. Therefore, sueing the sports
union/University (for 'allowing' the trip in the first place) would be the
next course of action.
If this were to happen, then AU's all over the country would suddenly find
lists of qualifications that we would need before even looking at a boat.
We clearly do not want this to happen, so please dont have accidents!!
Gwyn
Chris Sladden
writes
>Dave Cooke wrote in message <86agqk$m4t$1...@gxsn.com>...
>>I recently did my level 3 training. On the course (run by the South West
>>Region Coaching Officer, so the guy has some backing) we were told that if
>>the eyes of the law.
>
don't happen, but that instead there is usually some kind of blame to be
apportioned.
It certainly crossed my mind as to what the aftermath may have been, if
the chap who I was paddling with on the Wnion and who took a bruising
swim , had instead fared a little worse. We were paddling as a group of
2 friends on the river and nothing more. However, with the above and
many similar situations if there were an accident it would obviously
come out that: there were only 2 of us (less than 3 there should never
be), I was the most experienced and after all shouldn't I know the river
and its possible dangers like the back of my hand due to it firstly
being my local river and secondly having written the guidebook to it.
Furthermore, I could understand why someone's partner (or even ex-
partner) might want compensation in such a situation - either for greed
reasons or more genuine ones of now being short of money to bring up
dependants. Hence the need to find blame and thus negligence.
Sadly, my experience of blame and negligence cases may reflect how
persuasive, polished and plausible the arguments of the people involved
in the legal system are, and not necessarily how lay people may view the
actual facts. It is interesting that expert witnesses can be found to
give often completely opposing "expert views" depending by which side
they are being paid. I'm sure this could be the case in a canoeing or
kayaking accident as surely as it might be in a medical case. Look at
the different views expressed by the members of our newsgroup over
different matters. Often these views are opposing but still thought out
by experienced paddlers using sensible reasoning.
I can imagine the day coming when a negligence case might be brought
when an accident has occurred on a local river within a group of friends
out paddling. I wonder how the good the argument of "we were all
paddling as a group of friends", would actually hold up in the cold
light of day in court, facing a vindictive but very good barrister who
makes their professional living out of ridiculing people.
Blame and negligence are key words today. Look at the companies who
advertise for business on TV these days- it is good money!
Unfortunately, our society is moving more and more in this direction.
>It's not as simple as that. Are you sure Gordon (I assume it was he) said
>that?
>
>>However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree that
>>they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be covered.
>
>You often hear this kind of thing suggested, but does anyone ever actually
>have such a discussion before getting on the water? It kind of happens
>tacitly amongst our group, i.e. nobody ever adopts the mantle of 'leader'
>on those 'peer group' trips.
>
>BTW - 'if everyone is competent' - who exactly is qualified (sic) to
>make that judgement??
>
>>Of course, as a level 2 coach he is only permitted to lead a group on grade
>>1 water, a level 3 coach is required to lead on moving (grade 2) water.
>
>
>Not 'required' - no coaching qualification is 'required' to lead on
>any grade of water. As per a discussion on this subject a while back,
>a coaching qualification is not a licence.
>
>Steve B.
>
>
--
Chris Sladden
Chris Sladden
<G.R.As...@durham.ac.uk> writes
>Andrew Burns (shu...@rdg.ac.uk) wrote:
>: Hi Ed,
>
>: I went to a BCU Uni clubs symposium thing a couple of years back, where
>: the basic answer to that was yes, the most qualified paddler is
>: responsible in the eyes of the law.
>
>: Of course, that's insane. Most uni clubs have some experience of some 3*
>: level whatever coach joining, despite never having been on white water,
>: and so technicly being in charge over unqualified paddlers who've got
>: shedloads of experience.
>
>Now, being sued is only worthwile, if you have some money to pay damages.
>Most students (including me) are penniless/ in debt.
I have yet to experience being on the receiving or sharp end of being
sued though no doubt if I keep practising medicine this will happen.
However, I know various colleagues plus one or two in the outdoors
world who unfortunately have been. All of them have had their lives
completely changed and in a few cases pretty well ruined by the "court
experience".
The money is only one thing that might be lost in a legal case!
Chris
> So sueing our
>arses would not be worthwile. Therefore, sueing the sports
>union/University (for 'allowing' the trip in the first place) would be the
>next course of action.
>If this were to happen, then AU's all over the country would suddenly find
>lists of qualifications that we would need before even looking at a boat.
>We clearly do not want this to happen, so please dont have accidents!!
>
>
>Gwyn
--
Chris Sladden
Steve Balcombe
>Hi Ed,
>
>I went to a BCU Uni clubs symposium thing a couple of years back, where
>the basic answer to that was yes, the most qualified paddler is
>responsible in the eyes of the law.
This is now the second post to make this assertion, quoting the BCU
as the authoritative source. I think it's time we sorted this out
properly, so who can tell me (a) which law it is that states that
the most qualified person is 'responsible' - and, btw, how do you
define 'most qualified' - and (b) whether there has ever been a
test case, not just in paddlesports but in any sport whatsoever,
as I have never heard of one. Remember, to prove the point you
need a case where the 'most qualified' person _wasn't_ acting in
the role of group leader, but was found liable simply because s/he
was the most qualified.
[snip]
>Also, with reference to signing a piece of paper to declare that you're
>responsible for your own paddling - I'm not sure how useful that would
>be. From what little law I've been taught, I believe that you can NEVER
>sign away your right to legal action in the event of negligence.
There is a legal concept of 'volenti non fit injuria' (think I've got
that right) which means that if an *adult* gives informed consent to
take part in a hazardous activity, and they suffer injury or loss, they
must take responsibility for their own actions. I can't speak with
authority on this, but I suspect that fact alone is enough to solve the
problem of the 'most qualified' but 'least experienced' person seeming
to be legally in charge. All the 'more experienced' people have given
their informed consent and take responsibility for their own decision
to paddle.
Note that in various commercial and employment situations other law
is applicable, and also that the above does not apply to minors.
Note also that it does *not* automatically absolve a group leader (or
indeed any other member of the group) from any responsibility - s/he
could still act negligently and would then face the consequences.
With regard to the piece of paper, that may be useful to demonstrate
that consent was given; verbal or even tacit consent is enough in
theory, but people have a habit of changing their minds after something
has gone wrong - the consent form prevents that.
Here's one for you to argue about - two people work for an outdoor
centre and co-lead a trip. One is senior in rank, the other has a
higher NGB qualification. Who is legally 'responsible'?
Here's another - I'm a L2 coach and I paddle with a L3 coach. However,
he's let his first aid certificate expire. Who is 'most qualified'?
And another - I'm a L2 coach and I assist a very experienced and able
L3 coach who I have paddled with many times and admire greatly. But
unknown to me the L3 coach has forgotten to pay his BCU subs. Who is
'responsible'?
Steve B.
News
It's good to see that this is the kind of article which can lead to a decent
debate. I didn't realise I had it in me. No one has even got slightly rude
yet. I must say I especially liked the stuff about Coachitus from Nigel
Murray. How true.
Anyway, I think that I can only disagree really with one thing mentioned in
the thread and that was the assumption that the "Coach" could paddle as an
individual in the group until something went wrong when he could swoop to
the rescue to save the poor unfortunates who have got into bother.
In my experience of "Young" BCU Coaches (as opposed to the entirely
different "Old" BCU Coaches) at University most of them learn to paddle
rivers BEFORE they get their coaching qualifications. This means that if
they are on a river there is a good possibility that they will be amongst
the lowest skilled paddlers there. This makes it unlikely that they will be
in a position to "save" anyone.
The rest of the thread would appear, however, to underline my thought that
as an individual one should not get qualifications so the blame isn't
apportioned to you. Perhaps this is something the BCU should look into,
perhaps consult a legal expert?
Does anyone know if you can "get rid" of your qualifications? Would this
help, or are you branded for life?
Ed. Hopper
Guy Austin
> I have yet to experience being on the receiving or sharp end of being
> sued though no doubt if I keep practising medicine this will happen.
> However, I know various colleagues plus one or two in the outdoors
> world who unfortunately have been. All of them have had their lives
> completely changed and in a few cases pretty well ruined by the "court
> experience".
>
> The money is only one thing that might be lost in a legal case!
>
> Chris
as this seems a very lucrative source of income }-)
Jonathan Smith
sittuations!!!!
Pies
News wrote in message
<948473843.8854.0...@news.demon.co.uk>...
Dave Cooke
>that?
No, I made it up...
I think I can remember the course and what was said on it, Steve.
>>However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree
that
>>they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be
covered.
>
>You often hear this kind of thing suggested, but does anyone ever actually
>have such a discussion before getting on the water? It kind of happens
>tacitly amongst our group, i.e. nobody ever adopts the mantle of 'leader'
>on those 'peer group' trips.
Actually, this argument was used successfully in the inquiry into the Barle
tradgedy, I still have a copy of Adams report if you want to read it.
>>Of course, as a level 2 coach he is only permitted to lead a group on
grade
>>1 water, a level 3 coach is required to lead on moving (grade 2) water.
>
>
>Not 'required' - no coaching qualification is 'required' to lead on
>any grade of water. As per a discussion on this subject a while back,
>a coaching qualification is not a licence.
Where does 'licence' come into anything? I thought the point was to
demonstrate a level of training and ability to satisfy parents, etc that you
will take all reasonable care on the water. The Coaching Service Handbook
States: Level 3 Coach Assessment - 'The purpose of the award is to provide a
minimum qualification for a person to be in charge of canoeing activities at
a Centre, School or a Club, which includes journeying and/or white water
grade II, or equivalent sea conditions (as appropriate).' Perhaps I'm
interpreting it in a different way to you...
Dave C
Dave Cooke
Agreed, but when was the last time you took a group of 'youngsters' (say
13-15 year olds) down white water just for the hell of it? The implication
is that provided I keep my mouth shut I'm ok, as soon as I open it to say
something like 'try it this way...' I'm in the proverbial. Where you paddle
with your mates you can reasonably argue that you're not coaching. I doubt
the same could be said in the majority of cases.
Dave C
Chris Sladden
<guy.a...@unn.ac.uk> writes
writer or suing one would be a lucrative source of income. I haven't yet
dared to add up the costs of producing "The Welsh Rivers", but.... with
the actual printing costs, time off work (not working as a GP) computer
costs, buying Adobe Page maker, petrol/diesel and trashed cars with lots
of mileage, and various other bits the former of these isn't that
lucrative. Maybe if it keeps selling for 20 years.......
Happy paddling
Chris
--
Chris Sladden
S.W. Cooper
At our club, we've had several paddlers turn up with lvl2 coach awards
(I did) with very little moving water experience. In general, they can
handle a boat well, and know in theory how to rescue, stay out of
trouble, pick lines, and various other useful things. Consequently they
learn to be good river paddlers after a year or so, hence they can
swiftly become some of the best paddlers on the river (probably not
myself usually).
You can easily 'lose' your qualifications simply by not paying your BCU
membership. This means I am theoretically unqualified, I presume.
Great for legal responsibility purposes. Even better for the purpose of
avoiding the BCUs untenable retest, have a first aid certificate, paddle
a barge or fail policy. (Some guy failed his Instructor award when I
took mine, basically for turning up in a spud, despite being able to
competently rescue with it. No doubt some of you here will express
their horror at this...) Only reason I would have for the award is for
getting summer work while at university. Done that, got a real job now,
no further benefits.
News wrote:
>
>
> In my experience of "Young" BCU Coaches (as opposed to the entirely
> different "Old" BCU Coaches) at University most of them learn to paddle
> rivers BEFORE they get their coaching qualifications. This means that if
> they are on a river there is a good possibility that they will be amongst
> the lowest skilled paddlers there. This makes it unlikely that they will be
> in a position to "save" anyone.
>
--
Castrate me to reply.
S.W. Cooper
to win their clear cut case. That'll hopefully take the wind out their
sails.
Chris Sladden wrote:
>
> In article <86hepg$quf$1...@sirius.dur.ac.uk>, G R Ashcroft
> <G.R.As...@durham.ac.uk> writes
> >Andrew Burns (shu...@rdg.ac.uk) wrote:
> >: Hi Ed,
> >
> >: I went to a BCU Uni clubs symposium thing a couple of years back, where
> >: the basic answer to that was yes, the most qualified paddler is
> >: responsible in the eyes of the law.
> >
> >: Of course, that's insane. Most uni clubs have some experience of some 3*
> >: level whatever coach joining, despite never having been on white water,
> >: and so technicly being in charge over unqualified paddlers who've got
> >: shedloads of experience.
> >
> >Now, being sued is only worthwile, if you have some money to pay damages.
> >Most students (including me) are penniless/ in debt.
>
> I have yet to experience being on the receiving or sharp end of being
> sued though no doubt if I keep practising medicine this will happen.
> However, I know various colleagues plus one or two in the outdoors
> world who unfortunately have been. All of them have had their lives
> completely changed and in a few cases pretty well ruined by the "court
> experience".
>
> The money is only one thing that might be lost in a legal case!
>
> Chris
>
> > So sueing our
> >arses would not be worthwile. Therefore, sueing the sports
> >union/University (for 'allowing' the trip in the first place) would be the
> >next course of action.
> >If this were to happen, then AU's all over the country would suddenly find
> >lists of qualifications that we would need before even looking at a boat.
> >We clearly do not want this to happen, so please dont have accidents!!
> >
> >
> >Gwyn
>
> --
> Chris Sladden
--
Castrate me to reply.
Steve Balcombe
>>It's not as simple as that. Are you sure Gordon (I assume it was he) said
>>that?
>
>No, I made it up...
>
>I think I can remember the course and what was said on it, Steve.
I didn't mean to cause offence, Dave, when I want to do that I get
*really* objectionable.
Let me clarify. I disagree with what you claim Gordon said. Either
Gordon is wrong, or you're misquoting him, or I'm wrong. If you're
ruling out the middle one, it's down to Gordon and me. I think we're
both man enough to cope with that.
>>>However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree
>that
>>>they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be
>covered.
>>
>>You often hear this kind of thing suggested, but does anyone ever actually
>>have such a discussion before getting on the water? It kind of happens
>>tacitly amongst our group, i.e. nobody ever adopts the mantle of 'leader'
>>on those 'peer group' trips.
>
>Actually, this argument was used successfully in the inquiry into the Barle
>tradgedy, I still have a copy of Adams report if you want to read it.
I have read it several times, thank you. Neither the enquiries made by the
police at the time, nor the Coroner's verdict of accidental death, depended
in any way on whether anyone in the group happened to have a coaching
qualification. It could, however, have depended on the nature of the
relationship between Mr Brittain and his paddling partners. Which kind of
proves my point, anecdotally at least.
>>[short snip]
>>As per a discussion on this subject a while back,
>>a coaching qualification is not a licence.
>
>Where does 'licence' come into anything?
Simply that a licence is something you are *required* to have to carry out
an activity - such as a fishing licence or a driving licence. You are not
*required* to have a coaching qualification to legally lead a river trip,
either in an informal group of friends or on a formal 'club trip'.
This is not just a matter of being pedantic - people with a wealth of skills
and experience are being put off leading simple beginners trips, because
ill-informed people tell them they can't do it without a BCU qualification.
>The Coaching Service Handbook
>States: Level 3 Coach Assessment - 'The purpose of the award is to provide
a
>minimum qualification for a person to be in charge of canoeing activities
at
>a Centre, School or a Club, which includes journeying and/or white water
>grade II, or equivalent sea conditions (as appropriate).' Perhaps I'm
>interpreting it in a different way to you...
Only slightly. I'm saying a L3 coach has received the BCU's approval to
work within those terms of reference. Fine - in circumstances where an NGB
qualification is needed, such as for employment or to run school trips, it's
clear what a L3 coach can do. In many situations, *including club trips*, an
NGB qualification is not required.
Hope I've been less ambiguous this time :-)
Steve Balcombe.
Nigel Crompton
<ch...@boatman.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>No, thankfully not. I'm not sure whether you mean being a guide book
>writer or suing one would be a lucrative source of income. I haven't yet
>dared to add up the costs of producing "The Welsh Rivers", but.... with
>the actual printing costs, time off work (not working as a GP) computer
>costs, buying Adobe Page maker, petrol/diesel and trashed cars with lots
>of mileage, and various other bits the former of these isn't that
>lucrative. Maybe if it keeps selling for 20 years.......
Yes, yes, but you ENJOYED it didn't you ??
CU
Jim Wallis
It is the very paranoia about what may happen in a test case that has
led to the various opinions given so far. It seems clear that a lawyer
wishing to get a result will look for responsibility wherever he can
find it. Usually the most qualified person present would be the ideal
target, but there are probably more exceptions to this rule in the way
paddlesport happens. Thus far the only real test case was an unfortunate
incident with a university fellwalking club a few years ago. In that
case it was neither the most qualified nor the most experienced person
present that was lined up to take the wrap, it was in fact the Athletic
Union president. This is why Universities have been nervous about
assumed risk sports for a few years now, but it also has implications in
the commercial world where a company director could be targetted (as
being worth suing and responsible for the instructors actions).
I agree with Steve in that there has not yet to my knowledge been a case
in British law where members of private groups have been in such a
situation. However it is something to think about, and until a case is
brought we are al going to be unsure, but the least you need to pay
attention to is what your insurance requires, because if you invalidate
it you will be really screwed!
Which brings me to the real point, Other than for coaches to be
operating within their frame of reference what does the BCU's insurer
consider appropriate conduct, and when would you invalidate that cover?
JIM
Chris Sladden
<ni...@crompton.org.uk> writes
Chris
--
Chris Sladden
Dave Cooke
>Gordon is wrong, or you're misquoting him, or I'm wrong. If you're
>ruling out the middle one, it's down to Gordon and me. I think we're
>both man enough to cope with that.
I had a long chat with Gordon this evening (he actually phoned to request
that I put info regarding the Coaches Forum at the end of March on the web
site). He confirmed what he'd said, which came from higher within the BCU
coaching scheme. As I understand him, the current interpretation is that the
most highly qualified or experienced person will take the fall. Where these
are different people (experience/qualified) it would be down to the courts
to decide.
>>>>However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree
>>that
>>>>they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be
>>covered.
>>>
>>>You often hear this kind of thing suggested, but does anyone ever
actually
>>>have such a discussion before getting on the water? It kind of happens
>>>tacitly amongst our group, i.e. nobody ever adopts the mantle of 'leader'
>>>on those 'peer group' trips.
>>
>>Actually, this argument was used successfully in the inquiry into the
Barle
>>tradgedy, I still have a copy of Adams report if you want to read it.
>
>I have read it several times, thank you. Neither the enquiries made by the
>police at the time, nor the Coroner's verdict of accidental death, depended
>in any way on whether anyone in the group happened to have a coaching
>qualification. It could, however, have depended on the nature of the
>relationship between Mr Brittain and his paddling partners. Which kind of
>proves my point, anecdotally at least.
>
This extract comes from Adams report:
'The remaining six experienced members of the group individually made their
decisions to paddle the river, having first agreed that they were each
responsible for their own safety and that no one person would be considered
to be the group leader. Two paddlers who had the BCU ‘Senior Instructor’
qualification were included amongst the six.'
>This is not just a matter of being pedantic - people with a wealth of
skills
>and experience are being put off leading simple beginners trips, because
>ill-informed people tell them they can't do it without a BCU qualification.
I've just deleted the rest of my responses, otherwise this will just turn
into a slanging match. However, I for one want to feel suitably experienced
AND qualified to take groups (including under 18s) down the Barle or Exe,
which means going for my level 3 Coaching qualification. If anyone else
feels that they can demonstrate an equal 'Duty of Care' outside of the
coaching scheme, good luck to them, I wouldn't want to put them off.
Dave C
Gordon Miller
cannot contribute from a knowledgeable legal point of view I can add to it
from my own experience as one of the Coach Level 3 's in the group that
paddled the Barle that day. It so happens that we - the two SI's - were also
the most experienced in the group.
(As an aside and just to clarify a point to avoid any comments - neither of
us were/are 'flat water instructors' - we are both 5 Star qualified with
current experience leading groups on grade 3 & 4+ rivers.)
The following extracts are the relevant parts of previous postings - my
additons are in line .....
[snip][snip][snip]
> >>>>However, if everyone is competent for the water and all paddlers agree
> >>that
> >>>>they are paddling independently and at their own risk he should be
> >>covered.
> >>>
> >>>You often hear this kind of thing suggested, but does anyone ever
> actually
> >>>have such a discussion before getting on the water? It kind of happens
> >>>tacitly amongst our group, i.e. nobody ever adopts the mantle of
'leader'
> >>>on those 'peer group' trips.
Yes, we did have a discussion of this nature. The trip had been planned as
an outing with juniors (<18) and adults - some with limited experience. The
conditions on the day resulted in both SI's independently deciding that they
were not prepared to lead a group on the river. The following is an extract
of the incident report that we (as a club) sent to the BCU .......
......."The two SIs, based on inspecting the nearby River Exe during the
drive in, the River Barle at Dulverton (the planned get-out point) and at
Tarr Steps (the planned get-in point) and also taking into consideration the
weather at the time (strong winds and heavy rain) and forecast (rain to ease
off early afternoon, winds to continue) independently decided that the
conditions were totally inappropriate for the junior and inexperienced
members of the club. The SIs conferred and agreed that they were both
unwilling to be responsible for a group of canoeists, under their care, in
the prevailing conditions. In addition, they both agreed that the water
level was high, would be likely to rise further before it started to fall
and that there would be the hazard of low hanging tree branches and possible
tree-strainers along the wooded sections of the river. Notwithstanding these
possible hazards, they felt that the prevailing and anticipated river
conditions would not constitute an unacceptable level of risk for
experienced paddlers who had paddled more seriously graded rivers in similar
or worse conditions.
These decisions were announced to the other members of the club and after
discussions, six of the experienced paddlers agreed that they would conduct
the river trip from Tarr Steps to Dulverton.".........
> >>Actually, this argument was used successfully in the inquiry into the
> Barle
> >>tradgedy, I still have a copy of Adams report if you want to read it.
> >
> >I have read it several times, thank you. Neither the enquiries made by
the
> >police at the time, nor the Coroner's verdict of accidental death,
depended
> >in any way on whether anyone in the group happened to have a coaching
> >qualification. It could, however, have depended on the nature of the
> >relationship between Mr Brittain and his paddling partners. Which kind of
> >proves my point, anecdotally at least.
> >
Whilst the initial (local - Dulverton) police questioning into the incident
centred on establishing the facts as to what had happened, two CID officers
(from Taunton as far as I remember) broadened the questioning approach.
Quoting again from the club report........
..........."The police interviewed and took statements from the paddlers,
individually, that had been on the river with DB and also a non-paddling
club member who had been at the roadside in the vicinity of the weir when
the incident happened.
The initial direction of the police questioning, as well as determining the
course of events leading to the drowning of DB, centred around the status of
the club and the organisation of the trip with regards to the legal
obligations of the instructors/leaders in the group.
At this stage two CID officers were involved in the questioning process.
However, once they had satisfied themselves that: the club was a voluntary
organisation; the instructors did not receive payment for their services;
and those concerned had individually made the decision to paddle the river
as a group, they stated they were satisfied that there was no legal
culpability to be investigated. The CID officers did state that they had to
consider the situation in the light of the Lyme Bay incident of several
years before.
From this point the 'local' police officers continued the questioning with
the aim of establishing the truth of the events" ..............
The line of questioning adopted by the CID officers was very much concerned
with the role and status of the two coaches within the group that day and
also within the club in general. As far as I can recollect of the actual
questioning, the two points they were establishing were: firstly, if the
coaches received any form of payment (including expenses) for their coaching
service; and secondly, had the members of the group made individual
decisions to paddle the river. Once they were satisfied that there was no
payment involved, that the club was a voluntary members organisation (as
opposed to a commercial outdoor centre) and that the decision to paddle was
an individual one with no one person being responsible for the others in the
group they appeared to be satisfied that there was no legal culpability to
be investigated.
As far as I recollect the Coroner's enquiry did not pursue the 'legal
responsibility' aspect but concentrated on determining and recording the
facts of the events leading to the incident.
Draw your own conclusions from these events. As a club we are now extremely
careful to ensure that anyone involved in a paddling trip is quite clear as
to the leadership status of the trip.
I do acknowledge, however, that even though I am not leading a group I still
have an individual responsibility to do whatever is within my capabilities
to 'rescue' another paddler should the situation demand it.
--
Gordon
"A-chasing the wild deer and following the roe -
My heart's in the Highlands, wherever I go!"
Jez Kent
Yeah, I was implying that when I mentioned the lack of clarity with
club/uni/peer etc.
Where minors are involved there is an obvious greater emphasis on
handholding and I would stick to the BCU guidelines. But with adults,
the way I see it is you have to be clear at the outset whether you are
actively coaching or not on the trip. We identify the difference in
trips in the club newsletter.
I can see a strong argument for not getting involved in coaching and
I'm currently wondering whether I should bother with my assessment,
after all it won't stop me helping with other coaches, if I feel like
it.
Jez Kent
> Only reason I would have for the award is for
> getting summer work while at university. Done that, got a real job
now,
> no further benefits.
Except to those, especially minors, that wish to learn! Presumably like
you or I did.
Surely the point of the coaching scheme is that it develops the next
batch of paddlers which, given the crowding we sometimes witness, is
more of an altruistic gesture.
Andrew Burns
> This is now the second post to make this assertion, quoting the BCU
> as the authoritative source. I think it's time we sorted this out
> properly, so who can tell me (a) which law it is that states that
> the most qualified person is 'responsible' - and, btw, how do you
> define 'most qualified'
<snip>
Don't know the law that states that, or the case that established that
precident - I suspect that you might need a lawyer to find that out. As
to who is most qualified, that is defined by the qualifications of the
national governing body. (As I understand it - which could be wrong...)
Would it be worth posting this to the uk.legal newsgroup asking?
> There is a legal concept of 'volenti non fit injuria'
<snip>
Yep, That's how I've been led to understand the situation. The only
thing I wonder about is the ...
> problem of the 'most qualified' but 'least experienced' person seeming
> to be legally in charge. All the 'more experienced' people have given
> their informed consent and take responsibility for their own decision
> to paddle.
What about when you have various levels of qualifications and
experience? It's not necessarily 'most qualified but least experienced'
- it could be less experienced, with even less experienced paddlers
there too. Can they give their informed consent? Or, in an incident, can
they either a) take action against the experienced paddlers for letting
a less experienced person lead, or b) take action against the most
qualified paddler for letting less qualified paddlers lead.
> Note that in various commercial and employment situations other law
> is applicable, and also that the above does not apply to minors.
Yes, which is why Scottish students can be a real pain...
> Here's one for you to argue about - two people work for an outdoor
> centre and co-lead a trip. One is senior in rank, the other has a
> higher NGB qualification. Who is legally 'responsible'?
Surely the one with the higher NGB qualification? Just because your boss
is your boss doesn't mean he knows anything (Or to quote the Dilbert
principle, the stupid get promoted to the place where they can do least
damage - Management)
> Here's another - I'm a L2 coach and I paddle with a L3 coach. However,
> he's let his first aid certificate expire. Who is 'most qualified'?
Erm, _at_a_guess_, he is to lead, rescue, etc., but you are for the
first aid?
> And another - I'm a L2 coach and I assist a very experienced and able
> L3 coach who I have paddled with many times and admire greatly. But
> unknown to me the L3 coach has forgotten to pay his BCU subs. Who is
> 'responsible'?
As far as I knew, the BCU awards were independant of being a member. I'd
had some for some time before I actually joined...
Andy
G R Ashcroft
: "S.W. Cooper" <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote:
: Surely the point of the coaching scheme is that it develops the next
: batch of paddlers which, given the crowding we sometimes witness, is
: more of an altruistic gesture.
Yes, but I have no need of the coaching scheme to teach. I have yet to
find anyone willing to aknowledge C1 as a discipline in the coaching
service. Mind you, teaching someone to paddle kayak is not exactly a
mystic art is it? (lean and edge downstream when you break in! etc ).
And as far as I can tell, CoDe exists so that L5 (or whatever) beard
strokers have somewhere to get their study articles published.
Gwyn
Andrew Burns
> > L3 coach who I have paddled with many times and admire greatly. But
> > unknown to me the L3 coach has forgotten to pay his BCU subs. Who is
> > 'responsible'?
>
> As far as I knew, the BCU awards were independant of being a member. I'd
> had some for some time before I actually joined...
Ignore that - getting mixed up between qualifications now...
What happens if everyone has equal (or no) coaching qualifications? None
of the actual students within our club have any (largely due to our
Athletics Union asserting that if we had any sort of coaching
qualifications, we could not paddle beyond our remit, thus leading on
some of the rivers we do, whereas if we had no qualifications, we could.
Crazy, right?)
So who would be responsible then? Down to star awards? I know that
they're personal, but it would be the only sort of grading...
Andy
Dave Cooke
speculating on what was or wasn't said, which is perhaps why they often get
so heated.
I think I'd be correct in concluding that the conditions made the decision
to paddle each individuals theirs alone to make, and the questioning by the
officers quite clearly DID take into account the qualifications of those on
the trip.
At the very start of the discussion the question was raised as to whether
BCU qualifications were likely to be taken into account should the worst
happen. The answer has to be yes and quite clearly leadership must be
considered to be an important issue before any trip begins.
Dave C
Dave Cooke
>I'm currently wondering whether I should bother with my assessment,
>after all it won't stop me helping with other coaches, if I feel like
>it.
>
>Jez Kent - Reading, UK
Do the assessment, your country needs you :)
Steve Balcombe
>I'm not going to quote steve because his was a long post but:
>Which brings me to the real point, Other than for coaches to be
>operating within their frame of reference what does the BCU's insurer
>consider appropriate conduct, and when would you invalidate that cover?
The answer to this one comes from the BCU leaflet on insurance.
I don't have it to hand but the gist of it is:
1) You don't have to be qualified to be insured. Therefore you
don't in fact need to operate within any terms of reference.
2) The validity of your insurance doesn't depend on your conduct
- in fact unless you are negligent (or accused of it) there will
be no basis for a claim.
The one crucial exception - coaching for a fee - has recently been
changed, so that the BCU insurance covers this PROVIDED you are
acting as an individual and not uder a business name. It's no longer
necessary to have the additional insurance some of us used to get by
joining the National Coaching Federation.
If you do run a business, and this includes individuals if you
operate under a business name, you need a whole new class of
insurance.
For more info, contact the BCU.
Steve B.
Jez Kent
> What happens if everyone has equal (or no) coaching qualifications?
None
> of the actual students within our club have any (largely due to our
> Athletics Union asserting that if we had any sort of coaching
> qualifications, we could not paddle beyond our remit, thus leading on
> some of the rivers we do, whereas if we had no qualifications, we
could.
> Crazy, right?)
Andy, I'll buy you a beer sometime and you can try explaining the ins
and outs of uni paddling to me. Then I'll buy you another while you
explain it in plain English, then I'll probably walk off completely
mixed up.
Does it mean your klingons can only paddle grade II water with the
club? Really confused over this one.
BTW, what level of coach do you need to be to coach on grade V if L4 is
a coach on grade III?
--
Jez Kent - Reading, UK
"Life is like a wild tiger, you can either lie down and let
S.W. Cooper
spent my weekend shepherding a bunch of spooners down the Aberglaslyn!
The qualification really has absolutely no further use to anyone other
than someone trying to pin blame onto me.
Jez Kent wrote:
>
> "S.W. Cooper" <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Only reason I would have for the award is for
> > getting summer work while at university. Done that, got a real job
> now,
> > no further benefits.
>
> Except to those, especially minors, that wish to learn! Presumably like
> you or I did.
>
> Surely the point of the coaching scheme is that it develops the next
> batch of paddlers which, given the crowding we sometimes witness, is
> more of an altruistic gesture.
>
> --
> Jez Kent - Reading, UK
>
> "Life is like a wild tiger, you can either lie down and let
> it lay its paw on your head or sit on its back and ride it!"
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Castrate me to reply.
Steve Balcombe
>I had a long chat with Gordon this evening ...
>...As I understand him, the current interpretation is that the
>most highly qualified or experienced person will take the fall.
a) this is not what you originally said - you have added 'or experienced'
- the difference is crucial, as the 'most qualified' is no longer
automatically responsible.
b) in any case, you demonstrate another possibility below:
>This extract [re the Barle fatality] comes from Adams report:
>'The remaining six experienced members of the group individually made their
>decisions to paddle the river, having first agreed that they were each
>responsible for their own safety and that no one person would be considered
>to be the group leader. Two paddlers who had the BCU ‘Senior Instructor’
>qualification were included amongst the six.'
... and since we also know that the two SIs were not held responsible in
this particular case, we have shown that another possibility is that
no-one will be held responsible, even where two highly qualified
individuals are present in the group.
Most important of all, it opens up the possibility that our actions,
rather than our paper qualifications or even our skills/experience,
will be taken into account in determining liability. This is of
course natural justice, as well as being the point I was trying to
make.
>I've just deleted the rest of my responses, otherwise this will just turn
>into a slanging match.
No it won't. If it turns into a slanging match I will be equally
quick to get out of it. However I reserve the right to disagree, and
sometimes it's hard to do that 'nicely' in ascii. Sorry if I have done
anything to offend. I may do it again :-)
Steve B.
Steve Balcombe
to see us bickering over this when you were one of those involved.
However I hope you understand that it is because we also feel very much
involved, as paddlers, as coaches and/or group leaders, and as people
who fear the prospect of finding ourselves in a similar situation.
Steve Balcombe.
Gordon Miller wrote in message <388d0...@news2.vip.uk.com>...
>I've been watching this thread with much personal interest
[snip]
Mark Rainsley
S.W. Cooper <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:388DAF3A...@balls.hotmail.com...
> Well, obviously, I'm now no longer fit to teach people, and haven't just
> spent my weekend shepherding a bunch of spooners down the Aberglaslyn!
> The qualification really has absolutely no further use to anyone other
> than someone trying to pin blame onto me.
Patronising, narrow-minded and arrogant...and I don't even know specifically
what 'spooners' are.
Are your paddling/ coaching skills and experience so amazing and complete
that you couldn't possibly LEARN anything from the qualification process?
I did the L3 bit some years ago, and yes, there was some beardy nonsense
(eg. the fellow who spent 15 mins telling me why he'd proved ferrygliding
with one blade was more efficient), but there was also plenty that was
useful; not least a chance to see what other paddlers do, and a chance to
share ideas.
Noone is pretending the Coaching System is perfect; eg. to progress to L4
Coach will cost me about £300 in courses and has already cost me £100. I'd
rather risk all sorts of liability doing the usual unpaid coaching than fork
this money out. Not to mention renewing BCU membership for the rest of my
life. But the suggestion that it's just some kind of embuggerance to stop
you paddling is plain childish.
Oh yeah, and your signature ('castrate me to reply, I'm dead hard I am')
really winds me up.
Mark Rainsley
(crap day at work)
www.guidebook.free-online.co.uk
Chris Walters
coaching qualifications lapse with membership... and it gets worse: you
have to repay back dues for a time without membershipt o regain your
qualifications (even if you've had your lpogbook inspected recently and
attended the lifting course!)
Cheers,
Chris (wondering whether it's really worth the bother maintaining my
L3 - maybe we'll ship the whole club off to PYB and let them do the hard
work)
--
_____________________________________________________
Chris Walters e-mail: ch...@haze.demon.co.uk
Hungerford, UK web: http://www.haze.demon.co.uk/
_____________________________________________________
Andrew Burns <shu...@rdg.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:388D7D55...@rdg.ac.uk...
> > And another - I'm a L2 coach and I assist a very experienced and
able
> > L3 coach who I have paddled with many times and admire greatly. But
> > unknown to me the L3 coach has forgotten to pay his BCU subs. Who is
> > 'responsible'?
>
> As far as I knew, the BCU awards were independant of being a member.
I'd
> had some for some time before I actually joined...
>
> Andy
Jim Wallis
>
> Well, obviously, I'm now no longer fit to teach people, and haven't just
> spent my weekend shepherding a bunch of spooners down the Aberglaslyn!
> The qualification really has absolutely no further use to anyone other
> than someone trying to pin blame onto me.
>
> >
> > "S.W. Cooper" <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Only reason I would have for the award is for
> > > getting summer work while at university. Done that, got a real job
> > now,
> > > no further benefits.
> >
> > Except to those, especially minors, that wish to learn! Presumably like
> > you or I did.
> >
> > Surely the point of the coaching scheme is that it develops the next
> > batch of paddlers which, given the crowding we sometimes witness, is
> > more of an altruistic gesture.
> >
Hmm, I see where you're coming from Jez, but I tend to agree with Steve
here. I've done several years of coaching with the Scouts, my first
canoe club, and my University canoe club. I am currently a member of 3
canoe clubs (The Poly, Glasgow kayak Club and Scottish Kayak Club) and I
find that I rarely come into contact with complete beginners anymore. If
I went to the GKC pool sessions I might, but I'm sick of pool sessions
(literally my sinuses can't take anymore) and prefer to spend my time
paddling. I do still take out intermediate paddlers, and I do feel some
sort of duty to GKC to help train the intermediates (mainly because the
majority of the members don't seem to give a toss), but I am a member of
the other 2 clubs because the members tend to paddle with others of a
similar level. We learn and impart knowledge in the way that you always
will, everyone paddles a bit differently and you continually learn from
each other but don't require any formal coaching.
To say I would happily turn my back on coaching altogether is a bit
extreme, but I volunteer less and less, and paddle what I want to and
improve my own paddling more and more. Coaching just isn't what I do
now, it was a phase and I'm beyond it for now.
JIM
Aled
If I went out solo paddling, just me and my BCU badges, and blew it big
time, called out the Lifeboat and all that, could I sue the people who
qualified me in the first place (and maybe the BCU)? Could I argue a case
that I'm not deserving of the award and they lacked judgement in awarding me
my badges and so have lead me into a false sense of security which has
endangered my life???
If so, I know of an accident waiting to happen!!!!
Aled (who wants to be a millionaire anyway?)
...just in case: this message should not be taken seriously, and please
don't sue me ...
Gordon Miller
From Dave's posting......
Yes, it was an individual decision to paddle - as a result of the conditions
on the day.
As far as the questioning by the police was concerned - they were keen to
establish the status of the 'instructors' within the club from the point of
view "did they receive financial reward for their services". I believe the
police were equating 'instructor' with 'leader' which, as has been discussed
elsewhere in this thread, may or may not be the situation. So by implication
they were taking into account the qualifications of the people on the water.
From Steve's posting......
I don't see it as 'bickering'. These issues need to be sorted out - everyone
has a varied point of view and if they feel strongly they will argue for
it - and that should lead to healthy discussion as long as the arguments
don't get personal.
Yes, I do understand and (I think I speak for the rest of the club) we all
do. We have gone through a similar series of discussions in the aftermath of
the incident with the aim of reviewing how we organise and conduct our trips
and where do we draw the line with regard to club/leader/instructor
responsibility - especially as we have a strong contingent of juniors.
Further points (for discussion?)....
Putting aside the commercial aspect and assuming that we are all unpaid
volunteers giving willingly of our time and effort....
Most of the discussions in this thread have been about 'who is in charge?'
and by implication attempting to define the one individual who may have to
take the rap should anything go wrong. Could it not be the case that more
than one person in the group could be deemed to be 'responsible' in the eyes
of the law? If there is a nominated leader (possibly a qualified coach) and
a more experienced paddler could they not both be held responsible - if it
was proven that they both could have done something to prevent the incident?
Another point.....
The discussions have all been centred on coaching awards and 'more
experienced paddlers' but no one has raised the issue of someone holding the
5 Star award - which is a river leadership award. Hypothetical scenario -
club trip, grade two river journey, L3 coach and experienced paddler holding
5 Star. Where does the responsibility lie. I feel it lies with both and as
such they both have a 'duty of care' for the less experienced paddlers. I am
sure that in a court of law this arguement could be extended to experienced
paddlers who do not hold an award but could be proven to have equivalent
experience and capability.
Last point (it's getting late).....
The issue of different laws in different countries. Being an exiled jock I
know that English law is different to Scottish law in many aspects - not
sure about this particular subject, mind you. Many of us based south of the
border make at least one pilgrimage per year to the land of plenty water and
big rivers - but do we consider the possibility of the different laws:
probably not. Let's take this further afield: into Europe - Germany, France,
Austria; and even further - Asia and America. What about "responsibility"
and "duty of care" in these places? I wouldn't like to guess.
In conclusion......
Several postings have suggested that the BCU should get involved in this
topic area and let us know where we all stand. To a certain extent I agree
but I also sympathise with the 'mere mortals like you and me' that are the
BCU national governing body. Even a highly qualified lawyer will not commit
himself in law unless there has been a precedent set in a previous case.
Novel cases have to be argued out in a court in front of a judge (and
possibly a jury) - and many of these cases go to appeal in higher courts and
sometimes to the supreme court in the land - the House of Lords. So how can
we expect the national governing body of our sport - which is populated by
paddlers, not lawyers and judges, to clarify an issue that is complex (there
are no accidents: someone is responsible) and is only recently starting to
pervade our sport and our country.
Having said all that (in the last paragraph) perhaps if we bombard the BCU
with loads and loads of e-mail queries about possible situations and
concerns etc. on the subject they might do something about it!
--
Hope you all had a good Burn's night
Guy Austin
>
> I can see a strong argument for not getting involved in coaching and
> I'm currently wondering whether I should bother with my assessment,
> after all it won't stop me helping with other coaches, if I feel like
> it.
>
> Jez Kent - Reading, UK
>
learn something.
Anyway, if your not negligent it's not your fault. If you are negligent
then it is your fault.
S.W. Cooper
Mark Rainsley wrote:
>
> S.W. Cooper <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:388DAF3A...@balls.hotmail.com...
> > Well, obviously, I'm now no longer fit to teach people, and haven't just
> > spent my weekend shepherding a bunch of spooners down the Aberglaslyn!
> > The qualification really has absolutely no further use to anyone other
> > than someone trying to pin blame onto me.
>
My alter-ego.
'The qualification' purely refers to my own certificate, not the scheme.
> and I don't even know specifically what 'spooners' are.
Any other word for novice paddles. Admittedly, they were pretty good as
compared with other years.
> Are your paddling/ coaching skills and experience so amazing and complete
> that you couldn't possibly LEARN anything from the qualification process?
I have been throught the qualification process as far as level 3.
Wouldn't mind doing one of the white water rescue courses. What I'm
saying is, by allowing my BCU membership to expire, along with my
coaching qualifications, I have done absolutely nothing to my personal
competence in this area. The BCU line is that those not in the BCU are
missing the 'continuous updating' of skills/knowledge that their
magazine and CoDe provide. I feel the feedback provided by this group
is generally much deeper, and of significantly more content.
>
> Noone is pretending the Coaching System is perfect; eg. to progress to L4
> Coach will cost me about £300 in courses and has already cost me £100. I'd
> rather risk all sorts of liability doing the usual unpaid coaching than fork
> this money out. Not to mention renewing BCU membership for the rest of my
> life.
> Mark Rainsley
> (crap day at work)
I've worked in a school in a nice part of london, and I even got to
shelter in the lab technicians room all day rather than have to face the
kids. Pleased with my lot there, and no intention of going back.
So I hope not to wind you up any further, you have my sympathy.
Steve Balcombe
answer to this. If the BCU were responsible for the bad advice you
received, even if indirectly, then yes they could face action (which
may or may not succeed of course). However since the BCU's advice
is never to paddle alone you wouldn't get very far!
SB.
Aled wrote in message ...
Steve Balcombe
>...by implication
>they were taking into account the qualifications of the people on the
water.
Yes, which prompts me to clarify something as I suspect I have appeared
to be very dogmatic and one-sided about this. Yes the police look to the
senior (maybe more qualified, maybe more experienced) paddlers as those
who took (or should have taken) the lead - no dispute about that. Yes
the same is very likely to apply in a civil case. But my grouse(*) is
and always has been with the suggestion that the most qualified person on
the trip *automatically* shoulders the responsibility for everything
and everybody on the river. Qualified coaches/river leaders have a
considerable responsibility (and surely we all accept that?) but it's
a hell of a leap to say that we and we alone automatically 'take the rap'
if something goes wrong. English law, and maybe even more importantly
the judgement of your peers, takes circumstances into account.
(*) plus, separately, that you *must* be qualified to take charge on a
river. It is entirely possible that an unqualified leader could shoulder
the responsibility in the event of an incident, and all those who talk
of allowing their qualifications to expire as a way of somehow reducing
their responsibility are sadly misinformed. As well as having a poor
attitude IMV.
[snip]
>The discussions have all been centred on coaching awards and 'more
>experienced paddlers' but no one has raised the issue of someone holding
the
>5 Star award - which is a river leadership award. Hypothetical scenario -
>club trip, grade two river journey, L3 coach and experienced paddler
holding
>5 Star. Where does the responsibility lie.
Well, I did raise this but nobody took the point. I asked in an earlier
post "how do you define 'most qualified' ", and the only response was from
someone who said "highest NGB qualification" which of course misses the
point entirely. So - L3 coach? 5 star award holder? Someone who has
attended WW Safety & Rescue? (which goes way beyond L3 stuff so could
be said to be a higher level of training) Someone with a foreign
qualification? Depending on the incident, it could be someone with
wilderness first aid who has the highest *relevant* qualification.
>I feel it lies with both and as
>such they both have a 'duty of care' for the less experienced paddlers. I
am
>sure that in a court of law this arguement could be extended to experienced
>paddlers who do not hold an award but could be proven to have equivalent
>experience and capability.
Agree absolutely.
[snip]
>So how can
>we expect the national governing body of our sport - which is populated by
>paddlers, not lawyers and judges, to clarify an issue that is complex
(there
>are no accidents: someone is responsible) and is only recently starting to
>pervade our sport and our country.
This is the one point where I would have to disagree.
If we cannot ask the BCU for advice regarding the legal issues pertaining
to our sport, then who can we turn to? Our national governing body is
precisely who we should be able to approach for advice and guidance, and
if that means they have to pay for legal advice in order to inform us
accurately, then that is what they must do.
BTW, in response to 'there are no accidents' - from a legal standpoint
there are. The only case I know of is where a lorry driver had a heart
attack and drove into the front of a house. Neither he, his employer
nor their insurance company were held liable, as it was 'Act of God'.
Granted, there are not very many accidents.
Steve Balcombe.
Adrian J Pullin
"S.W. Cooper" wrote:
>
<snip>
> Even better for the purpose of
> avoiding the BCUs untenable retest, have a first aid certificate, paddle
> a barge or fail policy. (Some guy failed his Instructor award when I
> took mine, basically for turning up in a spud, despite being able to
> competently rescue with it. No doubt some of you here will express
> their horror at this...)
You contradict yourself. The reason that the BCU are doing coach update
(what you call "untenable retest") is to ensure that standards are being
correctly maintained. (BTW: This is just the same as First Aid, Life
Saving etc.) In particular, one effect will be to bring all coach
assessors up to date, and eliminate as far as possible the anomalies you
mention.
--
Adrian J Pullin (3K, 3S, 2CN A3K)
Club Coach
Peninsula Canoe Club
Wirral
Adrian J Pullin
come to mind.
1) A lot of people are starting with "I'm no expert..." or similar.
Are there any experts out there who could give us some facts, rather
than bar room lawyers giving uninformed opinion?
2) As with any discussion like this, the BCU, and the coaching scheme
in particular, has come in for some kicking. What people forget is that
the BCU is a membership organisation. If you don't like what it does,
then as a member you can infulance it.
3) What you do get from the BCU is insurance. If you are operating
within your remit (and level 3 inland kayak remit does include "leading"
on grade 2 water, not just coaching) then you have the backing of the
BCU should anything happen.
4) The BCU is also better than the alternative. Following Lime Bay, if
there had been no governing body, the government's knee jerk would have
put in place some regulatory body on paddlesport, which would not have
been at all democratic and would have effectively shut us down.
5) One of the coach update sessions being offered in NW region is on
"Legal responsibilities". Maybe a couple of us should go!
--
Adrian J Pullin
Adrian J Pullin
We can get a bit paranoid about this. The vast majority of trips go off
with no problem at all. (And don't forget that the most dangerous part
of any trip is the drive to and from the river, closely followed, in
injury terms, by loading the boats on the roof rack).
S.W. Cooper
Adrian J Pullin wrote:rmed opinion?
>
> 2) As with any discussion like this, the BCU, and the coaching scheme
> in particular, has come in for some kicking. What people forget is that
> the BCU is a membership organisation. If you don't like what it does,
> then as a member you can infulance it.
>
Yes, to some degree, but have you not felt in the past six or so years,
that the focus of the coaching schemes has been less and less for the
kind of casual paddlers that the majority of us are, and more and more
centred on those pursuing NVQs, and with a view to working commercially
as an instructor, with all the associated (legal) baggage that entails.
On the other hand, the BCU faces a right slating in the courts,
potentially, if it as seen as taking a 'lax' approach, i.e. without any
kind of reassessment.
I guess that's the way the world is going - look at the medical
profession, there's all this talk of reassessing GPs on a regular
basis. I bet you're really keen on that plan, Dr Sladden (although I'm
sure you've nothing to fear from such a plan).
Want to comment on OFSTED, anyone?
Perhaps they (we) should examine the possibility of more 'group
leadership' qualifications, which don't expire so rapidly, and aren't
endoresed by the BCU for commercial activities?
I feel pretty miffed really, that my instructing awards, such as they
are, have suddenly acquired use by dates on them. I have no desire to
spend any more money reacquiring them.
> 3) What you do get from the BCU is insurance. If you are operating
> within your remit (and level 3 inland kayak remit does include "leading"
> on grade 2 water, not just coaching) then you have the backing of the
> BCU should anything happen.
>
> 4) The BCU is also better than the alternative. Following Lime Bay, if
> there had been no governing body, the government's knee jerk would have
> put in place some regulatory body on paddlesport, which would not have
> been at all democratic and would have effectively shut us down.
>
Fair enough.
Mark Rainsley
>
> Mark Rainsley wrote:
> >
> > S.W. Cooper <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:388DAF3A...@balls.hotmail.com...
> I have been throught the qualification process as far as level 3.
> Wouldn't mind doing one of the white water rescue courses. What I'm
> saying is, by allowing my BCU membership to expire, along with my
> coaching qualifications, I have done absolutely nothing to my personal
> competence in this area. The BCU line is that those not in the BCU are
> missing the 'continuous updating' of skills/knowledge that their
> magazine and CoDe provide. I feel the feedback provided by this group
> is generally much deeper, and of significantly more content.
You have my apologies, I completely misunderstood your comments as a whine
against the whole coaching system than a reflection upon your own situation
of lapsed qualifications. Still a bit hard on your group of 'spooners'
though.
> I've worked in a school in a nice part of london, and I even got to
> shelter in the lab technicians room all day rather than have to face the
> kids. Pleased with my lot there, and no intention of going back.
> So I hope not to wind you up any further, you have my sympathy.
I have no problems with teaching for a living at all...the girls are always
a laugh (as long as you don't try to teach them anything), loads of holidays
and well, here I am home from work at 4 pm.
It gets even better, the boss has let me take an eight month sabbatical for
our 'world tour'...I wish. So I've got to hand my notice in shortly. Shame,
I really like my job there and I'll probably return next Easter and wind up
in a really grim school...
Mark Rainsley
www.guidebook.free-online.co.uk
S.W. Cooper
Mark Rainsley wrote:
>
> S.W. Cooper <s_w_c...@balls.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:388EC9E4...@balls.hotmail.com...
> >
> > Mark Rainsley wrote:
> >
> You have my apologies, I completely misunderstood your comments as a whine
> against the whole coaching system than a reflection upon your own situation
> of lapsed qualifications. Still a bit hard on your group of 'spooners'
> though.
Doesn't neccessarily imply anything derogatory. Define it as paddlers
requiring (or wanting) supervision or a line to follow on a section of
river. Everyone starts there. Admittedly, some stay there rather
longer than others.
> I have no problems with teaching for a living at all...the girls are always
> a laugh (as long as you don't try to teach them anything), loads of holidays
> and well, here I am home from work at 4 pm.
I better go home. It's getting late. Although it takes me a whole 3
minutes to get home..
>
> Mark Rainsley
> www.guidebook.free-online.co.uk
Gordon Miller
[snip]
> >So how can
> >we expect the national governing body of our sport - which is populated
by
> >paddlers, not lawyers and judges, to clarify an issue that is complex
> (there
> >are no accidents: someone is responsible) and is only recently starting
to
> >pervade our sport and our country.
>
> If we cannot ask the BCU for advice regarding the legal issues pertaining
> to our sport, then who can we turn to? Our national governing body is
> precisely who we should be able to approach for advice and guidance, and
> if that means they have to pay for legal advice in order to inform us
> accurately, then that is what they must do.
>
Probably didn't say what I meant to in a clear and succint manner.
Yes, I agree with you that the BCU should provide advice and guidance. But
can we expect the BCU (or its legal advisers) to clarify the legal issues
and specify the exact points of law when they probably haven't been
determined in a court of law?
If a precedent has already been set then there shouldn't be a problem in
telling us where we all stand.
Gordon
Dave Cooke
>minutes to get home..
I walk from my office to my living room in under 3 seconds :)
Mind you, some weeks I just eat bread...
Dave C
Steve Balcombe
>But
>can we expect the BCU (or its legal advisers) to clarify the legal issues
>and specify the exact points of law when they probably haven't been
>determined in a court of law?
Yes! There are basically two questions - what is the applicable law?
- no problem for a qualified person to answer that, obviously - and
how will the courts interpret the law? - this is open to debate
but solicitors will queue up to sell you their qualified opinion.
SB.
Nigel Murray
qualified' or 'I'd better let my qualifications lapse' then I won't be
liable.
Liability doesn't work like that.
So far as being sued succesfully goes the person claiming against you has to
show you were negligent.
That rests on at least two preconditions.
First point, you have to have some sort of duty of care toward the person.
In the UK that's got to be 'actively' set I think - You don't necessarily
have a legal reponsibility to do something just 'cos you happened to be
there. (As Steve Balcome pointed out the law's different in France and
maybe other places too. There you are obliged to help or you are
automatically negilgent). You might have the duty of care because you are
in charge 'by office' eg you are the paid coach. Or you might have it
because you assert you are taking charge. This is dodgy ground. By
attempting to help you are probably deemed to be assuming a duty of care /
accepting you are responsible.
Second point is, once you get involved you have to act in accordance with
your level of skill. The more highly skilled /trained you are, the more you
can reasonably be expected to perform to a higher, more 'professional'
standard, so the more you have to deliver.
How does this hang together?
You are a first aider. Someone collapses in the street, totally unrelated
to you. You can choose to stand quietly, watch and do nothing and in the
UK you can't be sued successfully because you have no responsibility for
them.
But if you pitch in you have to behave in line with your level of skill and
training.
If you forget to clear their airway and they choke on their tongue that's
negligence. You are liable because as a qualified first aider you should
have sufficient knowledge & skill to prevent that. On the other hand if
their face has been mashed and the only way to get an airway is to do an
emergency tracheotomy, well, that's outside your trained skill as a first
aider and you would not be negligent for not attempting to do one. (In fact
you are more likely to be held negligent if you tried and screwed up because
you should have known you didn't know enough to succeed).
If you are in the same situation and untrained you probably can't be
expected to know someone could choke on their tongue so you are not
negligent if you fail to prevent it. At the other end of the scale, If you
are an A&E doctor carrying full kit in your bag and you don't go for the
tracheotomy and get it right you are likely to be held to be negligent.
Essentially the same principles apply to paddling. The more highly
qualified or competent you are the more it is reasonable to expect ou to do
or not do. You may have no formal qualifiactions but a provable mass of
experience (maybe you were a guide in Nepal - no certificate but loads of
expertise) and the Court may well conclude you ought to know what to do to
rescue someone in pin in grade 5 water. At the opposite end, if you are a
flat water L1 coach you won't be negligent for not knowing how to rescue the
guy pinned in the grade 5 gorge. (Only for leading him there in the first
place).
PLF
Nidge
Steve Balcombe
[snip]
>Liability doesn't work like that.
Thanks - excellent summary.
SB.
Andrew Burns
> Andy, I'll buy you a beer sometime and you can try explaining the ins
> and outs of uni paddling to me. Then I'll buy you another while you
> explain it in plain English, then I'll probably walk off completely
> mixed up.
Sounds Fair. But couldn't I try binary?
> Does it mean your klingons can only paddle grade II water with the
> club? Really confused over this one.
Sort of, yes. They can't lead us, which is one reason why a number of
our better paddlers tend to go off by themselves more than when I
joined. Although an aspect of that is their improvement beyond the point
where we can offer much as students, beyond beer and company. They do
sometimes still happen to be on the same river at the same time kind of
thing...
Of course, as far as we could tell, provided you didn't have any
coaching qualifications, the Students Union were cool about it.
Insane.
Andy
Wilko
>
> > Does it mean your klingons can only paddle grade II water with the
> > club? Really confused over this one.
>
> Sort of, yes. They can't lead us, which is one reason why a number of
> our better paddlers tend to go off by themselves more than when I
> joined. Although an aspect of that is their improvement beyond the
point
> where we can offer much as students, beyond beer and company. They do
> sometimes still happen to be on the same river at the same time kind
> of thing...
We had a similar thing happening when I was in our University paddling
club. The best paddlers both got tired of doing easy stuff with flipping
and swimming newbies, and they got their own little group that went out
paddling quite frequently. That meant that it was difficult fo the
newbies to advance to their level, as often the better paddlers left the
club when they left school, keeping the general level of coaches low.
We resorted to paying for paddling instruction during paddling weeks in
the Alps that were organised by outdoor companies (that often employed
our best paddlers as paid instructors... ). I guess that with a larger
club, you wouldn't have that problem as much as we did.
> Of course, as far as we could tell, provided you didn't have any
> coaching qualifications, the Students Union were cool about it.
:-)
Don't you just love rules and regulations? The lawyers don't seem to
have this sueing stuff figured out over here (yet :-)), and I'm
really glad about that.
--
Wilko van den Bergh - Quibus(at)europe(dot)com
Eindhoven - The Netherlands - Europe
--- "Look Mum: No sense!" ---
Jerry Murland
this debate!!
Jerry Murland
--
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
'He realised the danger of the solo undertaking, but reassured himself that
having a companion along would not have helped his chances of survival.'
Never Turn Back - Walt Blackadar's solo run of the Alesek
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
....
Steve Balcombe <st...@accuset.co.uk> wrote in message
news:86rtbj$rah$1...@gxsn.com...
alan...@my-deja.com
I'm sure there's a better point for this to be added into the thread,
which may also have come to an end anyway but...
I came upon the "Safety Code of American Whitewater" at
http://www.awa.org/awa/safety/safety.html which make interesting
reading.
What this document espouses is a "mutually supportive group structure"
though does higlight the different responsibilites when
on "Instructional or Commercially Guided Trips". There is no mention
of the legal situation though which seems curious given all we know
about "Those Litigious Yanks".
Whether following the principles in the document changes the legal
situation that would be encountered by the "most experienced/qualified"
paddle, should something go wrong I don't know. I does seem that
having all people follow these principles would increase overall safety
though.
Alan
In article <948473843.8854.0...@news.demon.co.uk>,
"News" <x@x> wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup denizens,
>
> An issue arose recently at my old Uni club. A guy has joined this
year who
> is a Level 2 (or something or other) BCU Coach.
>
> He is convinced that if he goes on a club trip then he is liable
should any
[cut]
Nigel Murray
....... Ed said "We've a Level 2 Coach who is trying to control what
everyone else is doing 'cos he's worried if it all turns to Rat Droppings
he'll be held liable for everything from the Titanic's Iceberg to wearing
the wrong coloured cag." (I simplify slightly, there was a side issue about
wetboot deign. No, tell a lie, it was about .....).
Back to the plot:
3 overlapping threads evolved.
One was about the responsibilities and liabilities of people holding
qualifications & were/are they automatically in charge of a group in the
eyes of the law.
Another was trying to clarify what legal liability is.
And the third covered people's experiences and police responses where
serious & fatal incidents had occurred.
So far we have nailed the Iceberg problem (Yes, it really was Ed's L2 Coach
who did it) but the jury's out on the Cag. OK?
Nidge
(Or was it the other way round)?
Jerry Murland <mur...@clara.net> wrote in message
news:VuBk4.26008$lN.5...@nnrp3.clara.net...
Andrew Burns
> We had a similar thing happening when I was in our University paddling
> club. The best paddlers both got tired of doing easy stuff with
> flipping and swimming newbies, and they got their own little group
> that went out paddling quite frequently. That meant that it was
> difficult fo the newbies to advance to their level, as often the
> better paddlers left the club when they left school, keeping the
> general level of coaches low.
Thanks, it's nice to know that similar things happen elsewhere. It makes
sense really, and I'm really glad that they all taught me what they did.
I just feel that they were pushed away by our students union, and I now
feel stuck. I'm one of the oldest actual student members of the club,
and I have trouble getting away on trips to challenge me. What our old
boys do now is probably beyond me, and what the students do is largely
no challenge (Although I still can't bloody stern squirt).
Worst is that while there are paddlers of my ability around, they don't
seem to be paddling much anymore. My skills are suffering by not pushing
the limits of my paddling, and I don't really know what to do. I'm
actually finding myself feeling paddling is a bit boring, and keep
having to remind myself of how fun places like the Alps can be. Any
ideas what I can do? I've considered other local clubs, but no transport
means I can't get to them. It also means I have difficulty getting away.
> We resorted to paying for paddling instruction during paddling weeks in
> the Alps that were organised by outdoor companies (that often employed
> our best paddlers as paid instructors... ). I guess that with a larger
> club, you wouldn't have that problem as much as we did.
Don't know - how big was your club? Estimates on ours vary, but I reckon
30ish, going by the numbers of kayaks we have to cart about on trailers
and cars.
Some of us have considered trying to get paid instruction, as many other
student clubs at the University get budgetted money for coaching, but as
we're really quite well funded as it is, it is probably unlikely to
happen.
We're also a bit reticent, 'cos our old boys are really rather good, and
we don't want to offend they by seeming to suggest otherwise, but at the
same time we're not sure that coaching should fall to them all the time.
That runs the risk of them not paddling for themselves anymore.
How good is paid-for coaching? Is it worth it? I have wondered about
trying to get some official coaching like that to kick-start my learning
again. (And to stern squirt.)
> Don't you just love rules and regulations? The lawyers don't seem to
> have this sueing stuff figured out over here (yet :-)), and I'm
> really glad about that.
I don't know, our Union seems to come up with some interesting rules. It
gives us a laugh while we try and figure out what they were on when they
came up with them. The "Your best paddlers can't lead because they
aren't qualified enough, but your unqualified paddlers can lead" was a
right laugh. No, honestly.
Andy
Kayaking - Easy as falling off a log.
Wilko
>
> > We had a similar thing happening when I was in our University paddling
> > club. The best paddlers both got tired of doing easy stuff with
> > flipping and swimming newbies, and they got their own little group
> > that went out paddling quite frequently. That meant that it was
> > difficult fo the newbies to advance to their level, as often the
> > better paddlers left the club when they left school, keeping the
> > general level of coaches low.
>
> Thanks, it's nice to know that similar things happen elsewhere.
I don't think it is that nice, but it sure happens in more places... :-)
>It makes
> sense really, and I'm really glad that they all taught me what they did.
> I just feel that they were pushed away by our students union, and I now
> feel stuck. I'm one of the oldest actual student members of the club,
> and I have trouble getting away on trips to challenge me. What our old
> boys do now is probably beyond me, and what the students do is > largely no challenge (Although I still can't bloody stern squirt).
I was one of the oldest members of our club too, but I just started
training the newbies so that they reached a level where we could paddle
what I liked... unfortunately the Dutch student clubs started losing
members as our study time was decreased, so finally our student club
died out about a year ago.
> Worst is that while there are paddlers of my ability around, they don't
> seem to be paddling much anymore. My skills are suffering by not pushing
> the limits of my paddling, and I don't really know what to do. I'm
> actually finding myself feeling paddling is a bit boring, and keep
> having to remind myself of how fun places like the Alps can be. Any
> ideas what I can do? I've considered other local clubs, but no transport
> means I can't get to them. It also means I have difficulty getting away.
I was lucky enough to join another paddling club as well. As I started
getting to know people there, I started "collecting" a group of paddlers
around me with which I could go out on trips then. I have also started
to train my fellow paddlers so that they could handle harder stuff.
> > We resorted to paying for paddling instruction during paddling weeks in
> > the Alps that were organised by outdoor companies (that often employed
> > our best paddlers as paid instructors... ). I guess that with a larger
> > club, you wouldn't have that problem as much as we did.
>
> Don't know - how big was your club? Estimates on ours vary, but I reckon
> 30ish, going by the numbers of kayaks we have to cart about on > trailers and cars.
We started out at about 30, but the last year that we actually paddled
on a weekly basis, there were less than a dozen members...
> Some of us have considered trying to get paid instruction, as many other
> student clubs at the University get budgetted money for coaching, but as
> we're really quite well funded as it is, it is probably unlikely to
> happen.
We had difficulty finding qualified coaches, which meant that the more
experienced members (i.e. my buddy Steven and me) just started
organising weekly slalom training. It wasn't much, quality wise, but it
did help.
> We're also a bit reticent, 'cos our old boys are really rather good, and
> we don't want to offend they by seeming to suggest otherwise, but at the
> same time we're not sure that coaching should fall to them all the time.
> That runs the risk of them not paddling for themselves anymore.
Try finding a good balance, and point out the effect of the experienced
paddlers not transferring their skills: the club level drops and finally
has little to offer any more.
> How good is paid-for coaching? Is it worth it? I have wondered about
> trying to get some official coaching like that to kick-start my
> learning again. (And to stern squirt.)
We went to paid summer paddling weeks, in which I learned more than in
the entire year before that.
> > Don't you just love rules and regulations? The lawyers don't seem to
> > have this sueing stuff figured out over here (yet :-)), and I'm
> > really glad about that.
>
> I don't know, our Union seems to come up with some interesting rules. It
> gives us a laugh while we try and figure out what they were on when they
> came up with them. The "Your best paddlers can't lead because they
> aren't qualified enough, but your unqualified paddlers can lead" was > a right laugh. No, honestly.
One word: bullocks. :-)
Have fun, and try to keep it safe. IMNSHO that's what matters.
--
Wilko van den Bergh quibus(at)europe(dot)com
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Look Mum: No sense!"
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Wallis
>
> Just had a thought....
> If I went out solo paddling, just me and my BCU badges, and blew it big
> time, called out the Lifeboat and all that, could I sue the people who
> qualified me in the first place (and maybe the BCU)? Could I argue a case
> that I'm not deserving of the award and they lacked judgement in awarding me
> my badges and so have lead me into a false sense of security which has
> endangered my life???
>
>
> Aled (who wants to be a millionaire anyway?)
>
> ...just in case: this message should not be taken seriously, and please
> don't sue me ...
Beats me, after all the BCU do say "less than 3 there never should be"
(yuk), which mostly is true.
I reckon if you fuck up solo there's so little chance of surviving to
sue anyone it's almost a rhetorical question, lets hope so (I think)
JIM
Jez Kent
admit it to yourself. I think what many of your members suffer from is
too much flat water, caused by a lack of transport (this is a major
factor).
Paddling up to Blakes Lock isn't going to do much for skills, you/they
need WW, they need to get to Hurley more often (an excellent resource
on the doorstep) and NOT just sit in the eddy. Yeah, they'll swim,
they'll get wet and cold, but they'll also learn an enourmous amount.
I feel many need more self motivation and the pushiness to get
experience; don't wait to be told how to do something, given a safe
spot like Hurley you can experiment! Get rolling! Get a good roll at
the pool or wherever and then learning is much faster as the fear of
swimming is removed. Do you have access to a pool now and then? A few
sessions in there should get everyone a roll.
Maybe there is too much of a sheep mentality sometimes? But transport
is still your route problem.
--
Jez Kent - Reading, UK
"Life is like a wild tiger, you can either lie down and let
it lay its paw on your head or sit on its back and ride it!"
Jez Kent
I'm going off on one now Andy but when I've been out with you et al
before no one seems to practice skills. It seems to just be a bimble up
the river, which is boring and unproductive, when you could all be
pairing up and improving supports, rolls, draws, experimenting etc etc.
Everyone can bow rescue can't they? All they need to do is be spotted
in case needed. Throw in some polo, whatever, just do more than paddle
up the river. It just appears that most of the group are content to
stay at the level they have reached unless someone else officially
arranges training. When was the last time anyone tried, for example, a
handroll?
Gemma Louise ODonnell
gem
Andrew Burns
> Andy, you're perfectly capable of paddling with the klingons...
That line will look great to anyone who doesn't know us...
> I think what many of your members suffer from is
> too much flat water, caused by a lack of transport (this is a major
> factor).
You get agreement from me. I've been trying not to buy a car for 8
months now, and I STILL want to.
> Paddling up to Blakes Lock isn't going to do much for skills, you/they
> need WW, they need to get to Hurley more often (an excellent resource
> on the doorstep) and NOT just sit in the eddy. Yeah, they'll swim,
> they'll get wet and cold, but they'll also learn an enourmous amount.
Yep, agreed again. It's sad that I live in Reading, and in, wow, three
and a half years I've paddled there, oh, four times!
Unfortunately, the whole motivation and removing the sheep mentality
thing is tricky. I mean, what does a club do? Turn round and tell people
to get lost because they aren't trying hard enough? Discourage them by
throwing them in the deep end, and then keeping the survivors (as I've
heard happens in some places)? And what of the, well, less keen people
if the guys and gals who do want to push their ability spend all their
time away doing things that they can not?
Frankly, yes, I agree, but how do you convince people to accept that
getting cold and wet is part of the game? How do you get people trying
things? If we could do that it would be a start.
And while yes, we have pool sessions, it takes a long time for people to
be able to transfer those skills to an outdoors, let alone whitewater
environment. I mean, I was regarded as being fairly quick at learning to
roll on whitewater, and it took me 6 months to do it in anger.
I don't know, perhaps this shouldn't be done in public, but I'd love to
know if anyone's found any good way of encouraging people accept the
wet, or at least improve until they can look after themselves...
Andy
Andrew Burns
> Try finding a good balance, and point out the effect of the experienced
> paddlers not transferring their skills: the club level drops and finally
> has little to offer any more.
Hmm, that's not entirely fair perhaps. They've given us the skills
necessary to look after ourselves, and enough knowledge for us to train
up newbies to some standard. Just it seems that between the Students
Union effectively encouraging us not to become qualified coaches, and a
high drop out rate for paddlers who're now at the top of the age range,
there is little of that training going on. It isn't really fair to ask
our old boys to try to build a base to take over from the basic training
for them again.
> We went to paid summer paddling weeks...
Might look into doing something similar then. The little 'offical'
coaching that I've had has been very good, and impressed me.
Andy
Wilko
Andrew Burns wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, the whole motivation and removing the sheep mentality
> thing is tricky. I mean, what does a club do?
<snip>
> Frankly, yes, I agree, but how do you convince people to accept that
> getting cold and wet is part of the game? How do you get people > trying things? If we could do that it would be a start.
Try by getting the really motivated people together and organise
something on a regular basis. The two of us got together and decided
that we would organise slalom sessions every monday, no matter what.
Sometimes we were the only two there, but we persevered, and slowly
started getting a small group of people that came out every week.
It helps to keep in touch with ex-members too, and ask to go out on
trips with them. They may not always like to take a newbie in tow, but
if you get out every week, you'll get better pretty quick. They'll
notice your progress and will probably start enjoying the trips with
you, since you don't always swim, and sometimes even get their sorry
butts out of the water as well. :-)
>
>and while yes, we have pool sessions, it takes a long time for people to
> be able to transfer those skills to an outdoors, let alone whitewater
> environment. I mean, I was regarded as being fairly quick at learning > to roll on whitewater, and it took me 6 months to do it in anger.
Get a "ten rolls a trip" group together: some of the paddlers of the
"Violet's Lock-group" on RBP improved their rolls tremendously when they
got together each week, and did ten rolls each trip. Some swam at first,
but most have got their roll down now.
> I don't know, perhaps this shouldn't be done in public, but I'd love to
> know if anyone's found any good way of encouraging people accept the
> wet, or at least improve until they can look after themselves...
Lead by example, preferably with some others that have a similar outlook
and motivation. Don't worry about your level, take it easy, but do
paddle on a regular basis. Games of canoe polo, setting up little
courses on the river and do races against one another, go paddle at
Hurley, just get used to flipping, rolling up and playing on moving
water (no need to become a rodeo champion, just do enough to have fun
and not get too scared).
As Michiel says: HTH :-)
Wilko
>
> > Try finding a good balance, and point out the effect of the experienced
> > paddlers not transferring their skills: the club level drops and finally
> > has little to offer any more.
>
> Hmm, that's not entirely fair perhaps. They've given us the skills
> necessary to look after ourselves, and enough knowledge for us to > train up newbies to some standard. Just it seems that between the
> Students Union effectively encouraging us not to become qualified coaches, and a
> high drop out rate for paddlers who're now at the top of the age > range, there is little of that training going on.
Well, I guess you guys have a different approach to us, but with us, it
was always the old paddlers that took a couple of newbies under their
care and who taught them the skills. Each new generation was taught
their skills like that, so why shouldn't they in turn help teach the
newbies... I have learned a lot from some of those, and I have done my
best to transfer that to other new or less experienced paddlers.
Granted, you're stuck between a rock and a hard place with that Students
Union, but you don't need to be officially "qualified" to be able to
transfer your knowledge and skills to others.
> It isn't really fair to ask
> our old boys to try to build a base to take over from the basic
> training for them again.
Maybe, but who else can do that?
> > We went to paid summer paddling weeks...
>
> Might look into doing something similar then. The little 'offical'
> coaching that I've had has been very good, and impressed me.
I have learned a lot doing that, which got me to a level that I could do
some exploring on my own from. I'm no autodidact, but instead learn by
experience and the school of hard knocks, having good coaches (with lots
of patience :-) ) sure makes a big difference then.
Kris Waring
Andrew Burns <shu...@rdg.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3897083E...@rdg.ac.uk...
SNIP
> I don't know, perhaps this shouldn't be done in public, but I'd love to
> know if anyone's found any good way of encouraging people accept the
> wet, or at least improve until they can look after themselves...
>
Take them on holiday somewhere warmer!
But seriously, it is a very common problem, especially in the winter when
the rivers are near frozen and the air temp is very cold.
The first thing to remember here, is that everyone will develop at their own
speed and with an individual idea of where they want their paddling
experience to take them.
For many people, heading to Hurley and plunging in at the deep end is fine,
although I would imagine that it would be quite an intimidating place for a
near beginner. However, I know many paddlers who would not react at all well
to this philosophy. If you are not of the macho 'i'll try anything' make up,
plunging into a hole or onto a wave in front of twenty cartwheeling paddlers
can be an experience which would put some people off for life.
Uni clubs are a bit of a strange phenomenon because of the rapid turnover of
students and this means that there will always be a high ratio of beginners
to experienced paddlers willing to give up their paddling time. Also many
students head off around the country or world during the summer months which
is unfortunate as this is often the best time to really develop your skills.
When I learned to paddle, I did so in the pool during the winter with only a
couple of river trips and then from about April to October I paddled at
least once a week on our local equivalent of Hurley. The warm weather and
warm water had a hugely encouraging influence and river skills quickly
developed. Also, during summer, water levels are generally low and therefore
the more experienced paddlers may not be as objectionable to giving up their
time.
Kris
Nigel Murray
Is there an emoticon for an embarrassed cough? ;- P ? .............
because ............
When its dead cold and I'm going to play on the Jets (well 'til before
something went stuffed in my ear about 5 weeks ago) I shove a 85% full hot
water bottle in my boat (85% 'cos I'm superstitious that if I don't leave an
air gap for floatation so I can retrieve it I'll bog-up and wind up
swimming).
It makes a noticeable difference.
If its seriously dead cold I also wear the heavy black latex(?) 'industrial'
rubber gloves (same stuff as dry suit cuffs are made off) with the white
cotton undergloves. Not only are they much better than Poggies for
efficiency and control, newbies feel confident they can pull their deck if
they have to - which they don't feel with Poggies. They're not standard
kayak shop kit - yet - but you can get 'em from a builders' merchant.
(Having said that I think I got mine off Andi at Dam Watersports) Anyway so
far mine have lasted 3 years and they're cheaper than Poggies).
PLF
Nidge
> Frankly, yes, I agree, but how do you convince people to accept that
> getting cold and wet is part of the game? How do you get people trying
> things? If we could do that it would be a start.
>
> And while yes, we have pool sessions, it takes a long time for people to
> be able to transfer those skills to an outdoors, let alone whitewater
> environment. I mean, I was regarded as being fairly quick at learning to
> roll on whitewater, and it took me 6 months to do it in anger.
>
> I don't know, perhaps this shouldn't be done in public, but I'd love to
> know if anyone's found any good way of encouraging people accept the
> wet, or at least improve until they can look after themselves...
>
> Andy
Nigel Murray
Jim Wallis
Glasgow Kayak Club suffer from lack of Dynamicism, and it is possibly
mainly due to lack of transport. I don't have any transport myself so I
tend to ring round people that do, and usually they only go paddling
good rivers, i.e. beyond beginner level. Everyone in the club has
everyone else's number so anyone could ring me to go paddling (once they
have transport organised) but they never do.
Short of learning to drive and buying a car, anyone got any good
suggestions for how I can get the club more motivated?
JIM
Jez Kent
> Frankly, yes, I agree, but how do you convince people to accept that
> getting cold and wet is part of the game? How do you get people trying
> things? If we could do that it would be a start.
Cold shouldn't be part of it if you have the right gear on.
If they want to try things they will. If they're not trying new things
they have obviously reached a level they are happy with. This is all
supposed to be fun and you can only help people who demonstrate the
willingness to learn. We have a similar situation. We take people
through the first few levels of star tests, after which it's up to them
to want to learn more. There are plenty of people willing to offer help
and advice if asked and happy to spot people, but they're not going
around enforcing it on others.
I'm more than happy to help people with their skills and encourage the
keen paddlers, but I don't give a toss if they don't want to know. It's
their choice.
Simply, Andy, you may be surrounded by paddlers with different
ambitions to yours, but they are just as valid.
People have even been know to pick their job according to the proximity
to water resources and clubs :-) Think about that next year.
Jez Kent
> Get a "ten rolls a trip" group together: some of the paddlers of the
> "Violet's Lock-group" on RBP improved their rolls tremendously when
they
> got together each week, and did ten rolls each trip. Some swam at
first,
> but most have got their roll down now.
They were self motivated. Without it progress is impossible.
> As Michiel says: HTH :-)
I'm still wondering what this is!
Conor O'Neill
<Jim.W...@cableinet.co.uk> writes
Pick a date and arrange a trip on a 'beginner-friendly' river (these are
less likely to be rain-dependent, so are easier to arrange in advance).
Arrange a meeting point, and hope that enough cars turn up on the day...
--
Conor O'Neill, at home in Bristol, UK
Bristol Canoe Club Web Page: http://www.bristolcanoeclub.org.uk
Conor O'Neill
<jerem...@covance.com> writes
>> Frankly, yes, I agree, but how do you convince people to accept that
>> getting cold and wet is part of the game? How do you get people trying
>> things? If we could do that it would be a start.
>
>Cold shouldn't be part of it if you have the right gear on.
But beginners _don't_ have the right gear. They only bother spending
money on the right gear once they've caught the bug...
Michiel Verhoef
HTH means Hope This Helps ...
(And I assume you know what :-) means ;-)
Happy paddling,
Michiel
Andy Evans
> Frankly, yes, I agree, but how do you convince people to accept that
> getting cold and wet is part of the game? How do you get people trying
> things? If we could do that it would be a start.
Your own enthusiasm is the key. If you are actively enjoying what you do
and people with you can see that, then they either will want to join you and
put in the effort. Or they wont and will walk away. The difficult part is
spotting those who really do want to learn which then requires encouragement
and skills teaching on your part to give a few pointers. Others, as
mentioned pick it all up sharpish and only need helpful comments along the
way, some need more.
Does any of that make sense ? Enthusiasm, obvious enjoyment, stories of
memorable times, photos of things you have done, things you cant do and why
you want to be able to do them, aspirations. These are all things that help
to get people keen to learn. You have to be able to show that "anyone can
do this" if they want to and that you are prepared to help them along the
way.
>
> And while yes, we have pool sessions, it takes a long time for people to
> be able to transfer those skills to an outdoors, let alone whitewater
> environment. I mean, I was regarded as being fairly quick at learning to
> roll on whitewater, and it took me 6 months to do it in anger.
>
Some people are happy just to stay in the pool environment. We used to have
a group of six or so who used to attend weekly pool sessions and could do
all manner of stunts in the pool but were really only there for the social
side and the free sauna. I think we got them on the river once, but they
still got what they wanted out of canoeing.
Rolling in anger. I read somewhere that to be able to roll is a sign of
skill, but to have to roll is a sign of failure. To have to hand roll eight
times cos you got your paddles stuck in a tree just above the crux rapid
defies description ! I'm fairly sure I was much longer than that perfecting
my "river roll". Keep smilin'
have fun
roo
--
????????????????????????????????????????????????
Roo
Nottingham, UK
http://www.madasafish.com/littlebloke/kayak.html
????????????????????????????????????????????????
Steve Balcombe
...
>If they want to try things they will. If they're not trying new things
>they have obviously reached a level they are happy with. This is all
>supposed to be fun and you can only help people who demonstrate the
>willingness to learn.
The difference between a good teacher and a *really* good teacher
is how successful s/he is with the less motivated ones. Anyone can
teach elementary skills to enthusiastic people, but getting someone
who is maybe a bit anxious to try out more demanding stuff can be
trickier. The thing is, sometimes they really want to do it, but
they are scared (why not? - we can all get scared when paddling near
our limit), they are too cold (beginners often have crappy kit; they
also often spend too much time sitting still), they are tired
(beginners, especially the less fit ones, haven't built up the stamina
that we have, and they also paddle much less efficiently). Whatever,
not every beginner is fighting to get to the front of the queue (which
reminds me of another point - they feel low in the pecking order)
but that doesn't necessarily mean they are beyond help.
A good coach will often look out for the quiet one and give him/her a
bit of discreet extra encouragement.
Steve.
Jez Kent
> But beginners _don't_ have the right gear. They only bother spending
> money on the right gear once they've caught the bug...
Absolutely, but the people Andy was talking about are not beginners. I
think by the time they have their own boats/paddles etc they could be
considered to have the bug.
Mark Rainsley
news:0J+1XIAbuBm4Ew$D...@puddle.demon.co.uk...
> Pick a date and arrange a trip on a 'beginner-friendly' river (these are
> less likely to be rain-dependent, so are easier to arrange in advance).
> Arrange a meeting point, and hope that enough cars turn up on the day...
> --
> Conor O'Neill, at home in Bristol, UK
> Bristol Canoe Club Web Page: http://www.bristolcanoeclub.org.uk
...and then if they've heard it might rain, noone will turn up for fear of
high water. If it doesn't, they won't show up for lack of water. Noone will
give any form of commitment up to and including that moment of truth in the
carpark.
If you've booked accommodation for twelve, four will show up. If you've
booked for four, fifteen will show up. Either way, one will sleep in the car
and refuse to pay up.
....and next time you have a club meeting, people will moan that noone ever
organises anything.
If this sounds unduly cynical, I'm afraid that's just how it is hereabouts.
--
Mark Rainsley
The UK Rivers Guidebook
www.guidebook.free-online.co.uk
Jim Wallis
>
> Your own enthusiasm is the key. If you are actively enjoying what you do
> and people with you can see that, then they either will want to join you and
> put in the effort. Or they wont and will walk away. The difficult part is
> spotting those who really do want to learn which then requires encouragement
> and skills teaching on your part to give a few pointers. Others, as
> mentioned pick it all up sharpish and only need helpful comments along the
> way, some need more.
>
> Does any of that make sense ? Enthusiasm, obvious enjoyment, stories of
> memorable times, photos of things you have done, things you cant do and why
> you want to be able to do them, aspirations. These are all things that help
> to get people keen to learn. You have to be able to show that "anyone can
> do this" if they want to and that you are prepared to help them along the
> way.
Want to see some slides??
doesn't really work does it?
>
> Rolling in anger. I read somewhere that to be able to roll is a sign of
> skill, but to have to roll is a sign of failure. To have to hand roll eight
> times cos you got your paddles stuck in a tree just above the crux rapid
> defies description ! I'm fairly sure I was much longer than that perfecting
> my "river roll". Keep smilin'
Couldn't agree more (although I ran Easan Dubh at the weekend pretty
much expecting to roll, and I did). My roll took me about 3 or 4 years
to learn (on a lake with the scouts), but I got it sorted with just a
few sessions on the Thames weirs. Of course it needs to be reasonably
good before you go to the weirs otherwise you'll be to scared to do
anything!
JIM
Jim Wallis
>
> Conor O'Neill <Co...@puddle.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:0J+1XIAbuBm4Ew$D...@puddle.demon.co.uk...
>
> > Pick a date and arrange a trip on a 'beginner-friendly' river (these are
> > less likely to be rain-dependent, so are easier to arrange in advance).
> > Arrange a meeting point, and hope that enough cars turn up on the day...
Do you really think we don't do this?
I can rarely get a bunch of people to turn up on something booked months
in advance (there were 3 of us for the Tyne Tour and one of those had to
travel from Dover due to his work having relocated him from Glasgow!)
However I am still trying - trying to organise a beginners trip this
weekend, already I have been told not to go to Stanley because there's a
whitewater race on. I htink I have 2 definates so I will get something
done. In the meantime its going to rain and hopefully I'll get away on
Saturday!
> > --
> > Conor O'Neill, at home in Bristol, UK
> > Bristol Canoe Club Web Page: http://www.bristolcanoeclub.org.uk
>
> ...and then if they've heard it might rain, noone will turn up for fear of
> high water. If it doesn't, they won't show up for lack of water. Noone will
> give any form of commitment up to and including that moment of truth in the
> carpark.
>
> If you've booked accommodation for twelve, four will show up. If you've
> booked for four, fifteen will show up. Either way, one will sleep in the car
> and refuse to pay up.
>
> ....and next time you have a club meeting, people will moan that noone ever
> organises anything.
>
> If this sounds unduly cynical, I'm afraid that's just how it is hereabouts.
>
Perhaps it is the diversity of the club that is a problem. When
organising a calender it sounds very full until you realise that it is
made up of more sea kayaking and social events than easy river trips!
And Mark's damn right about the crap excuses for not going on the day,
or just before. The accomodation is less often a problem because Glasgow
is close enough to most rivers to get day trips in, and if we do go away
we drive around until we find somewhere with spaces (knowing we can
always go home if need be - or crash with a friend!)
JIM
Alan Adams
"Mark Rainsley" <ma...@guidebook.free-online.co.uk> wrote:
> Conor O'Neill <Co...@puddle.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:0J+1XIAbuBm4Ew$D...@puddle.demon.co.uk...
>
> > Pick a date and arrange a trip on a 'beginner-friendly' river (these are
> > less likely to be rain-dependent, so are easier to arrange in advance).
> > Arrange a meeting point, and hope that enough cars turn up on the day...
> > --
> > Conor O'Neill, at home in Bristol, UK
> > Bristol Canoe Club Web Page: http://www.bristolcanoeclub.org.uk
>
> ...and then if they've heard it might rain, noone will turn up for fear of
> high water. If it doesn't, they won't show up for lack of water. Noone will
> give any form of commitment up to and including that moment of truth in the
> carpark.
>
> If you've booked accommodation for twelve, four will show up. If you've
> booked for four, fifteen will show up. Either way, one will sleep in the car
> and refuse to pay up.
>
> ....and next time you have a club meeting, people will moan that noone ever
> organises anything.
>
> If this sounds unduly cynical, I'm afraid that's just how it is hereabouts.
I hadn't realised you were a member of our club Mark...
--
Alan Adams
alan....@orchard-way.freeserve.co.uk
http://www.nckc.freeserve.co.uk/
Andy Evans
> > Rolling in anger. I read somewhere that to be able to roll is a sign > of skill, but to have to roll is a sign of failure.
>
> Hmmm Roo, I'm not so sure about that. When you play a lot, a roll can be
> the difference between having to swim to shore, emptying your boat and
> sinuses, and getting back in again every couple of minutes, or having
> fun, and only getting your upper body wet when you overdid that playing
> a tad. Also, it's a great boost for your self confidence, making it
> easier to steepen your learning curve, which in itself can be very
> motivating for many people.
Yes I agree with what you have said here. With no-rolling, learning becomes a lot harder. Once you have mastered your
playboating move you'll notice that rolling is no longer needed. I guess "failure" is too harsh a word to use. Being able to
roll is vital to further white water skills development.
The only rodeo move that requires you to be able to roll is the "Wa-thunck" !! I guess kick-flips (or whatever they are called)
need rolling ability to some degree.
James
On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Wilko wrote:
>
> Andrew Burns wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, the whole motivation and removing the sheep mentality
> > thing is tricky. I mean, what does a club do?
>
> Try by getting the really motivated people together and organise
> something on a regular basis. The two of us got together and decided
> that we would organise slalom sessions every monday, no matter what.
The trouble is that if we did this then some of the less confidant
paddlers(more sheeplike?) would end up getting scared off and we'd lose
people who are perfectly good paddlers but need to be led into things more
gently cos if they bollox it up or take a swim then it knocks away all the
confidence in their own paddling abilities that they've built up. That
is, IMHO, somewhat counterproductive. Having said that I'm from the same
club as Andy, we joined at the same time, and we're about the same level,
although he's a better river runner, but sometimes paddling with the club
is so frustrating, because everything has to be based around the abilities
of the newbies, on river trips, so everyone else is paddling at or beneath
their limits, and you can't mess around so much cos you got muppets to
look after. the best paddlers of our peer group are the ones who started
paddling "selfishly" but if you don't have transport this is difficult, I
don't have a car either, and besides i feel that i have to put something
back into the club but am at a loss as to quite what as coaching is
definitely not my forte. It is tempting to just bugger off and do your own
thing totally, and i did in the summer going to hurley lots and some other
places witha friend, with transport, and it helped my paddling immensly.
James K
A Bit Wafflely But I think it's fairly coherent!
Andy Evans
> Andy Evans wrote:
> > Does any of that make sense ? Enthusiasm, obvious enjoyment, stories of
> > memorable times, photos of things you have done, things you cant do and why
> > you want to be able to do them, aspirations. These are all things that help
> > to get people keen to learn. You have to be able to show that "anyone can
> > do this" if they want to and that you are prepared to help them along the
> > way.
>
> Want to see some slides??
> doesn't really work does it?
I dunno Jim....... weren't you inspired by Mr Manby's talk, or what about Whit
Deschners slide show ?
Or the slides that were shown at the freshers introduction at the Belle Grove in
93 ? What do people want to see more of on web-sites ? Answer: Piccies.
I know of one or two people who started canoeing (and have said so) because they
listened to me, Martin W and yourself (for example) jibbering on in an excited
manner about all sorts of boating related stuff.
However, I also know of people who have joined in because they fancied the club
president, poor old Charlie M, didn't know what to do! Granted they dont actually
paddle anymore.....but still......
Andrew Burns
<snip>
> The difference between a good teacher and a *really* good teacher
> is how successful s/he is with the less motivated ones.
Yeah, agree with that, and it is a failing of mine. I just don't know
what to do with people who aren't motivated. If someone wants to learn,
then great, but I have no idea what to do with those who don't.
> A good coach will often look out for the quiet one and give him/her a
> bit of discreet extra encouragement.
Yeah, but how? So often they don't seem to believe me if I tell them
that they did something well (although they usually have).
And what of those who turn up and don't do anything? I can't say 'Yep,
you're doing a really good job of sitting in that eddy'. And if I try to
convince them to try something this 'It's okay for you, you can do it'
attitude kind of comes out. Pointing out that I had to learn (and was
worse to begin with than most) doesn't have any effect.
I guess I just don't know how to give that boost to people's self
confidence.
Andy
Andrew Burns
<snip>
> Simply, Andy, you may be surrounded by paddlers with different
> ambitions to yours, but they are just as valid.
I guess I'd never really thought about this. What do people get out of
just bimbling about though? I mean, I can understand the flatwater, or
slalom, or polo paddlers with all their training, despite them being
things I'm not interested in because there is a drive to self
improvement. But what do people get when there isn't that? I don't
understand.
Should I come with a mission statement? How about 'I proactively
negotiate parallel infrastructures to allow us to dramatically engineer
effective paddling skills to set me apart from the competition'? Or
maybe just 'I want to paddle big things, like the Grand Canyon, and
survive'?
> People have even been know to pick their job according to the proximity
> to water resources and clubs :-) Think about that next year.
Already have. Hoping to get to New Zealand for a year. Best get my
paddling up to speed...
Andy
Steve Balcombe
>> > Pick a date and arrange a trip on a 'beginner-friendly' river (these
are
>> > less likely to be rain-dependent, so are easier to arrange in advance).
>> > Arrange a meeting point, and hope that enough cars turn up on the
day...
>
>I can rarely get a bunch of people to turn up on something booked months
>in advance
Reading this sort of stuff makes me realise how lucky we are at our club
(Wellington Kayak Club).
Wellington is a small country town, population 14,000 including surrounding
villages. Nearby Taunton is three or four times bigger, but doesn't really
add much to our 'catchment area' because it has its own canoe club. So we
have quite a small population to draw from.
We have a paid up membership of somewhere in the region of 70/80 I think,
of whom more than half are juniors. We have a pool session every Friday
evening; attendance is about 30-40 most weeks, a bit less in the summer.
We focus almost entirely on recreational white water paddling, with surf
in the summer/autumn of course (all year round for some!). Pool sessions
are used to introduce beginners, for rolling/rescue practice etc., and
for polo. A few never venture outside the pool, but most do and it's not
unusual to have fifteen or more on our easier river trips. I think 22 was
our record last year. We run flat water 1/2/3 star trips in the warmer
months if there is enough demand.
Some of our 'senior' members are BCU qualified coaches, some have Pool
Lifeguard, some choose not to get involved in the paper chase but are
first class river leaders. One is a qualified raft guide, one has
safety boated in Nepal several times. Most of us have at the very least
some Alpine paddling experience. Some may never be river leaders
but help in various other ways, and we have one or two non-paddling
parents who also muck in. Most of the work involved in running pool
sessions, river trips and the longer trips away is done by a 'hard core'
of something like four or five people, but here are quite a few others
who help out from time to time.
Very importantly, most of our better paddlers are willing to help out
on the (sometimes tedious) beginners' trips. Maybe that's partly
because we're not all river gods - if you're 'only' an intermediate
paddler yourself, it can be quite rewarding to get involved in coaching
the beginners, or assisting on a grade 2.
The range of paddling done by the club in recent years reads like a
Gazetteer of white water paddling, from introducing beginners on the
nearby Tone, through grade 2 on the Barle and the Exe, grade 3 on the
middle Dart, 3/4 on the Erme, 4(5) on the upper Dart, 4/5 on the Lyn.
Further afield we've had numerous trips to North Wales and Scotland,
several to Augsburg, the Austrian Alps and French Alps. And last year
three went to Nepal. For surfing we use Woollacombe, Putsborough,
Saunton, Widemouth, Bigbury and others.
We have another Scotland trip planned for April - we already have
around 15 'definites' (i.e. they have paid for their accommodation!)
and several 'maybes'.
Ok so that's enough bragging; the point is *why* does it work so well?
Truth is I don't really know, but I can point to several things:
- In the early years, one enthusiastic individual who virtually ran the
club single handed.
- More recently, a good group of people who share the workload and who
are willing to divide their time between helping others and paddling for
themselves.
- A good collection of equipment which helps to get the beginners
started at minimum cost and commitment. This has taken *years* to
acquire. It also includes some very handy stuff for higher grade
trips, such as split paddles, emergency sleeping bag, 'bothy', and
so on. Oh, and a trailer! Last but certainly not least, a store to
keep it all in.
- A good relationship with our local authority. They have helped us
financially and in other ways; we provide a resource by way of
qualified coaches (sometimes paid, sometimes free) and equipment for
very low cost hire.
- The pool sessions. We are lucky enough to have the use of the local
sports centre pool every Friday evening. This means that anyone can
turn up when they want to, there's nothing to organise. Some come
every week without fail, others just occasionally to keep in touch.
A fair number of us roll into the bar afterwards. This provides a
social element (again without having to organise anything) and no
doubt endears us to the Sports Centre management! The Friday nights
provide the ideal opportunity to disseminate information about
forthcoming trips, talk to parents, collect money, get to know newer
members, and so on.
>Perhaps it is the diversity of the club that is a problem. When
>organising a calender it sounds very full until you realise that it is
>made up of more sea kayaking and social events than easy river trips!
Maybe diversity is a problem - at WKC we're all white water paddlers, so
apart from a very wide range of ability we're all interested in the same
thing. I'm sure that helps. I can see the other side of this particular
coin, though; it narrows our appeal, and limits what we have to offer.
We don't arrange social events. When you attend 30 or 40 pool sessions,
almost as many river trips, summer days at the surf beaches, a week in
Scotland, a week in the Alps, a couple of weekends in N Wales, all with
the same people in the last year or so, the last thing you need is a
'social event'!! That doesn't mean we are unsociable, far from it, we
just don't need to organise a barn dance to get people together!
Steve Balcombe
Jim Wallis
> Maybe diversity is a problem - at WKC we're all white water paddlers, so
> apart from a very wide range of ability we're all interested in the same
> thing. I'm sure that helps. I can see the other side of this particular
> coin, though; it narrows our appeal, and limits what we have to offer.
>
> We don't arrange social events. When you attend 30 or 40 pool sessions,
> almost as many river trips, summer days at the surf beaches, a week in
> Scotland, a week in the Alps, a couple of weekends in N Wales, all with
> the same people in the last year or so, the last thing you need is a
> 'social event'!! That doesn't mean we are unsociable, far from it, we
> just don't need to organise a barn dance to get people together!
>
> Steve Balcombe
Of course our pool sessions are the biggest problem, the only pool we
can get is in a school and is only big enough for 5 boats. The
attendance at the Pub is always much better than at the pool (in fact it
doesn't pay for itself anymore). Still it gives us plenty to discuss at
the AGM next week!
JIM
Jim Wallis
>
> Jim Wallis wrote:
>
> > Andy Evans wrote:
>
> > > Does any of that make sense ? Enthusiasm, obvious enjoyment, stories of
> > > memorable times, photos of things you have done, things you cant do and why
> > > you want to be able to do them, aspirations. These are all things that help
> > > to get people keen to learn. You have to be able to show that "anyone can
> > > do this" if they want to and that you are prepared to help them along the
> > > way.
> >
> > Want to see some slides??
> > doesn't really work does it?
>
> I dunno Jim....... weren't you inspired by Mr Manby's talk, or what about Whit
> Deschners slide show ?
>
> Or the slides that were shown at the freshers introduction at the Belle Grove in
> 93 ? What do people want to see more of on web-sites ? Answer: Piccies.
Yeah Yeah, my previous reply wasn't totally serious, but when it comes
to slides it is mostly those already bitten that go along. I've been to
slide shows by Whit Deschner, Dave Manby, The Scottish Kayak Club, and
will be going to one at our AGM next week (Robin Cole on why things go
wrong, and Billy's holiday snaps!) That'll be 4 slide shows within a
year, very few faces will have been to all 4 with me.
Frazer is giving a slide show tonight which looks really interesting
(but I have to work tommorrow and it's in Newcastle), and I've seen
MArtin Lambs Alaska slides, all superb but I know that most beginners
wouldn't want to sit down and look at all those slides, although maybe
they change their minds when they do! I think it's an attitude towards
slide shows rather than content!
Piccies handed round in the pub are never quite as interesting as the
ones you were present for (if not actually in), which is a shame because
there are some cracking pics out there.
>
> I know of one or two people who started canoeing (and have said so) because they
> listened to me, Martin W and yourself (for example) jibbering on in an excited
> manner about all sorts of boating related stuff.
>
> However, I also know of people who have joined in because they fancied the club
> president, poor old Charlie M, didn't know what to do! Granted they dont actually
> paddle anymore.....but still......
>
Of course you've missed Charlies hidden ability - he is always soo
happeee when he's paddling. It doesn't matter whether theres water, or
its freezing or there is gale force blizzard going down, charlie is out
there giggling away oozing enthusiasm, and all the girlies fancy him!