When a Paddler Dies, We are too Quick to Judge

[Tongo-Raj]

Here is an except and link to a relevant and thought provoking PaddleMag.com article that we can likely all find valuable takeaways from:

“The truth is, we are all vulnerable. The judgment we are too keen to apply to other people’s paddling accidents is an unhealthy coping tool, a way to avoid facing this truth.”

The paddling community judges accidents harshly. We are so determined to figure it out and ascribe a cause to the incident we often rush to conclusions before all the facts are available and blame the victims in the process. Instead, we ought to humbly reflect on what lessons the incident can teach us and give thanks for surviving our own near misses...

(read the full article here)

 

[JohnAbercrombie]

before all the facts are available

Yes, we should keep in mind the feelings of the 'victims' and their families and friends and not rush 'into print' with ill-found analyses. I agree 100%.
But: When are all the facts available?
When SeaKayaker magazine had the Broze/Gronseth accident analyses (collected in the 'Deep Trouble' books) we could get a good understanding of a few incidents.
Nowadays, I hardly ever see useful reporting on 'incidents'.
Police and TV reporters don't have the knowledge to ask appropriate questions, from what I see - and that should not be surprising.

Years ago, I was on a group paddle with an 'incident'- which turned out OK. I couldn't get the people involved to present 'lessons learned' at a club meeting.
People would rather 'put it in the past' and pretend that it can't happen to them, I think.
I've had more than one paddler admit that reporting incidents would result in more spousal pressure to stay home!

 

[drahcir]

I've had more than one paddler admit that reporting incidents would result in more spousal pressure to stay home!

I suspect some spouses might respond in the exact opposite way.

 

[cougarmeat]

As an example of "reporting", some time ago, there was an article in the paper about a ham radio operator who slipped and broke his leg, or ankle - something injury such that he couldn't walk out. The post went on to say he (in Oregon) was able to contact another ham in Idaho (on the 40M radio band), who then contacted a rescue team in Oregon. That team eventually arrived on the scene and aided the injured hiker out.

Eyebrow raised ... How did this person, who could hardly walk, set up a 40M antenna needed for the Idaho contact? So I wrote to the guy and he told me ... the rest of the story.

Turns out, other hikers came by. Among them was an EMT-type person. Those others, under the injured person's direction, set up the antenna. The EMT administered the injury. They agreed that the hiker had food, clothing, and shelter. Emergency Services had been contacted, and there was nothing to do but wait. So they continued their hike and would check on the person, if he were still there, on their way back.

The guy said the newspaper left out all that information because "Oregon Ham contacts Idaho for rescue team" made a better story.

I've been interviewed before. For those who haven't, it's amazing what is imparted in the interview and what makes it into print.

I have a friend who writes accident reports for the American Alpine Club. He never just uses published articles for information. He contacts the people involved and interviews them (usually over the phone). So often, the information he'd find out was missing to misstated in the newspaper article.

Evaluation is one thing, but be sure your evaluation is based on the actual event, which may or may not be what you "read in the paper".

 

[CPS]

I've been paddling in a lot of gale warnings lately. While solo. It's got me thinking about risk assessment.

There's been a few moments where I was consciously approaching the edge of my comfort zone. Not quite exceeding it, but getting to the point of talking out loud to myself as a way to hear if my choices sound reasonable going into my ears and not just coming into existence between them.

I have the training, and the gear, and most importantly the personal experience to know where I draw that line of acceptable risk. I also have the benefit of a wide open schedule; I don't HAVE to make it to a specific place by a specific time, which so often can influence decision making.

Still, this hobby is a risk adjacent pursuit. I chose to double the length of time I was on the water because the sailing conditions were just unreal (read: it was very windy). That decision had a whole bunch of considerations behind it.

Maybe as paddlers we get better at making those decisions the more we get them right. But getting them wrong is probably a faster teacher, as long as we don't pay too steep a price.

 

[Twempie]

I'm not entirely sure who the "we" the author is writing about. Most paddlers I know are not the keyboard blowhards that feast on the misfortune of others. My takeaway: The article is more of a commentary on the curse of social media, rather than just kayaking.

 

[dmon707]

That Paddling Magazine article seems to have been written decades ago. No mention whatsoever of personal locator beacons, satellite weather forecasts or dry suits. Beyond experience and confidence, these three things are indispensable for West Coast paddling expeditions. These days I wouldn't even do a day trip without a PLB. And to think we used to paddle the B.C. coast without one! (Albeit with company.)

 

[dmon707]

I've been paddling in a lot of gale warnings lately. While solo. It's got me thinking about risk assessment.

There's been a few moments where I was consciously approaching the edge of my comfort zone. Not quite exceeding it, but getting to the point of talking out loud to myself as a way to hear if my choices sound reasonable going into my ears and not just coming into existence between them.

I have the training, and the gear, and most importantly the personal experience to know where I draw that line of acceptable risk. I also have the benefit of a wide open schedule; I don't HAVE to make it to a specific place by a specific time, which so often can influence decision making.

Still, this hobby is a risk adjacent pursuit. I chose to double the length of time I was on the water because the sailing conditions were just unreal (read: it was very windy). That decision had a whole bunch of considerations behind it.

Maybe as paddlers we get better at making those decisions the more we get them right. But getting them wrong is probably a faster teacher, as long as we don't pay too steep a price.

As Reg Lake used to say, "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment."

 

[SWriverstone]

I'm seeing this thread late but could write a book about this topic, LOL. I've been doing outdoor sports considered "high risk" for decades. At 62 I've definitely backed off and slowed down a bit. I've known several people who died paddling whitewater, and witnessed a friend die in a hang gliding accident and witnessed another friend almost die. And I can say one thing without hesitation:

A high majority (I'm tempted to say 90% or more) of ALL fatal accidents are caused by human error, plain and simple. People want very much to believe in the "Act of God" explanation behind deaths, but this is pretty much never the case. (Especially in outdoor sports.) The reasons for all those deaths are far sadder, because they involve cavalier behavior, poor decisions, lack of knowledge, and (the worst of all) catastrophic, momentary lapses of judgement ("brain farts" if you will).

My other observation is how often people who have died are (in my opinion of course) guilty of extraordinarily self-centered behavior. A few people I knew who died showed almost no regard at all for partners, spouses, and children. They were hell-bent on going forward with their fateful journeys, often justifying it with comments like "This is just what I do," or "I can't ignore this challenge," etc.

What all this has taught me (and hang gliding for years in particular, because of all outdoor sports, aviation is probably the most unforgiving of mistakes) is that you MUST ALWAYS make conservative decisions and err on the side of safety...and you MUST ALWAYS make safety and risk mitigation a deeply-engrained habit—so deeply engrained that you can't avoid doing it even if you try.

Scott

 

[MoultonAvery]

Here is an except and link to a relevant and thought provoking PaddleMag.com article that we can likely all find valuable takeaways from:



The paddling community judges accidents harshly. We are so determined to figure it out and ascribe a cause to the incident we often rush to conclusions before all the facts are available and blame the victims in the process. Instead, we ought to humbly reflect on what lessons the incident can teach us and give thanks for surviving our own near misses...

(read the full article here)

I wrote an article about this subject. It's called Blaming The Victims. Published in the Early Spring Issue 58 of The Paddler Magazine. News reports often raise more questions than they answer, and also often contain factual errors. It takes time and emotional energy to research incidents, especially those that are fatal.

The safety hurdle faced by most casual recreational boaters is that they don’t have enough knowledge or experience to imagine the many things that can go wrong on even a modest outing. This places them at a huge disadvantage when trying to plan for the unexpected. What can these folks do to improve their odds? The first step is to become aware of common paddling hazards and how to avoid them. Here's a link to our section on Common Paddling Hazards.

We examine over 25 close calls and fatalities on the National Center for Cold Water Safety website, and in each case, we list major contributing factors. You can learn a lot about paddlesports safety by going there and digging deep. Also worth noting in the context of this post is our Fifth Golden Rule - Plan For The Worst That Can Happen.
Be Safe and Have Fun!
Moulton Avery

 

[MoultonAvery]

I'm seeing this thread late but could write a book about this topic, LOL. I've been doing outdoor sports considered "high risk" for decades. At 62 I've definitely backed off and slowed down a bit. I've known several people who died paddling whitewater, and witnessed a friend die in a hang gliding accident and witnessed another friend almost die. And I can say one thing without hesitation:

A high majority (I'm tempted to say 90% or more) of ALL fatal accidents are caused by human error, plain and simple. People want very much to believe in the "Act of God" explanation behind deaths, but this is pretty much never the case. (Especially in outdoor sports.) The reasons for all those deaths are far sadder, because they involve cavalier behavior, poor decisions, lack of knowledge, and (the worst of all) catastrophic, momentary lapses of judgement ("brain farts" if you will).

My other observation is how often people who have died are (in my opinion of course) guilty of extraordinarily self-centered behavior. A few people I knew who died showed almost no regard at all for partners, spouses, and children. They were hell-bent on going forward with their fateful journeys, often justifying it with comments like "This is just what I do," or "I can't ignore this challenge," etc.

What all this has taught me (and hang gliding for years in particular, because of all outdoor sports, aviation is probably the most unforgiving of mistakes) is that you MUST ALWAYS make conservative decisions and err on the side of safety...and you MUST ALWAYS make safety and risk mitigation a deeply-engrained habit—so deeply engrained that you can't avoid doing it even if you try.

Scott

Great points! In my experience, novices get into trouble because they don't know enough to even begin to recognize hazards. On the other hand, paddlers with a lot of experience tend to get complacent. They get sloppy, often cocky, and they let down their guard. Complacency is widely recognized as a major issue in risk management.

 

[SWriverstone]

Great points also @MoultonAvery, especially about people not having the experience to know what *could* go wrong (and what the consequences might be).

Sadly, this all tracks with what we're seeing as a society: we live in a world now of instant gratification and social media that sensationalizes everything. I see fewer people (especially young people—and sadly, I'd include my own teenage kids in this!) who just don't understand the concept of "practice/learn/experience over a long period." Many young people are neither resilient nor patient enough to progress gradually (e.g. over years) in a sport to acquire the needed experience. If they can't just run out and do something the first time, they move on. I think the inevitable result is that we'll continue to see more close calls/injuries/fatalities. It's Darwin at work!

The other phenomenon I saw firsthand in my years of working for the Pacific Crest Trail is that the prevalence and availability of satellite messenger devices has made accidents more common—because people view them as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, and therefore take greater risks. We saw this all the time on the PCT, as well as people pressing the SOS button because they were tired—literally! (It gives SAR teams fits.)

 

[SWriverstone]

Re: even experts getting complacent: I witnessed a friend die at a hang glider competition once. He had hundreds of hours of successful, safe flights. Then one day, at the competition, he was waiting to launch off a cliff and started chatting with someone. When it was his turn to launch, he had a lethal brain lapse: he forgot to connect himself to the glider! He ran off the cliff and fell to his death. I was stunned, but there you have it—an expert getting too casual.

More recently, a former colleague's 25-year-old daughter, who was an expert rock climber (she'd been climbing for a decade), was standing on a ledge and simply leaned back, believing she was roped in. She wasn't, and fell backwards to her death. This happens all the time. :-(

 

[dmon707]

Re: even experts getting complacent: I witnessed a friend die at a hang glider competition once. He had hundreds of hours of successful, safe flights. Then one day, at the competition, he was waiting to launch off a cliff and started chatting with someone. When it was his turn to launch, he had a lethal brain lapse: he forgot to connect himself to the glider! He ran off the cliff and fell to his death. I was stunned, but there you have it—an expert getting too casual.

More recently, a former colleague's 25-year-old daughter, who was an expert rock climber (she'd been climbing for a decade), was standing on a ledge and simply leaned back, believing she was roped in. She wasn't, and fell backwards to her death. This happens all the time. :-(

That's one reason why I love sea kayaking. Errors are less likely to be irredeemably fatal. The thought of having the leisure to reflect on your stupidity for 20 seconds while plummeting to your death has always put me off rock climbing and hang gliding. I used to go out to Fort Funston and envy the skill and avian grace of the hang gliding community-- until I noticed their friends in wheel chairs hanging out with them in the parking lot.

 

[MoultonAvery]

Great points also @MoultonAvery, especially about people not having the experience to know what *could* go wrong (and what the consequences might be).

Sadly, this all tracks with what we're seeing as a society: we live in a world now of instant gratification and social media that sensationalizes everything. I see fewer people (especially young people—and sadly, I'd include my own teenage kids in this!) who just don't understand the concept of "practice/learn/experience over a long period." Many young people are neither resilient nor patient enough to progress gradually (e.g. over years) in a sport to acquire the needed experience. If they can't just run out and do something the first time, they move on. I think the inevitable result is that we'll continue to see more close calls/injuries/fatalities. It's Darwin at work!

The other phenomenon I saw firsthand in my years of working for the Pacific Crest Trail is that the prevalence and availability of satellite messenger devices has made accidents more common—because people view them as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, and therefore take greater risks. We saw this all the time on the PCT, as well as people pressing the SOS button because they were tired—literally! (It gives SAR teams fits.)

That's a really good point about SAT messengers / alert devices. Most folks seriously overestimate the time required for a backcountry rescue. We address this in an article on our website titled "How Long Will It Take For Me To Be Rescued?" I think this false sense of security fuels both risk taking and complacency.

 

[cougarmeat]

In my day, we had a rule: You don't talk to a person when they are putting on their rock climbing harness or tying in. Also, your partner checks your work. These days, no one cares.

Once, at Smith Rocks, I saw a 100-pound girl, who wasn't paying much attention, belaying her 200-pound boyfriend. She wasn't anchored herself. I told my friend, "If that guy comes off the rock, he's going to pull her off the ground, and if she's not ready for it ... per Gary Larson, "Trouble Brew'n". He did fall, and she did go up. Fortunately, she was able to put a foot out to stop her shoulder from smacking against the rock, which might have resulted in a loose rope. Very Close...

One thing I have to remember is that just because I carry a message device, that doesn't mean I'll be able to reach it or be in a condition to use it. I think of that guy who was pinned in a crevasse, and his signaling device was in his pack, which he left on the surface.

For a long time, I carried spare batteries. But it was only when my GPS batteries ran out of juice en route that I realized I was carrying the spares in an unreachable stowed dry bag. Lithium Pros is that it gives full power until it's dead. Its Con is that it gives full power until it's dead. So the battery level can say Full, and it will be full, but maybe for only 10 more minutes.

 

[SWriverstone]

Good points @cougarmeat about not talking to anyone. Honestly, though I'm not antisocial, this is one reason why I tend to do things alone. Nobody to distract me, and I'm 100% focused on my safety at all times. And being in a group (in my experience) can often be much worse than being with a single partner...because group dynamics have gotten many people into trouble (in every outdoor sport). People are too susceptible to groupthink, and to believing they are safer because they're in a group. I disagree. I believe in the "Jeremiah Johnson" or "Grizzly Adams" school of outdoor survival! LOL

Interestingly, when I flew hang gliders (and I assume this is still true today) there was a "sacred rule" everyone repeated all the time: you are responsible for your own safety—nobody else. If you have an accident, it is 100% your fault, period.

I fully believed in this until I saw a friend launch off a cliff without being connected to his glider. (Catastrophic brain fart!) Yes, he spaced and didn't do a hang check before launching. But...there were 4 people all standing RIGHT THERE NEXT TO HIM. And (IMO) because of this "sacred rule" everyone assumed this guy had already done his hang check. If just one of those people had as much as glanced at his harness they'd have seen he wasn't connected.

I still believe in personal responsibility...but now I know that in some cases, it's inexcusable that someone else might not even *look* to see if everything is in order.

 

[chodups]

"People are too susceptible to groupthink, and to believing they are safer because they're in a group."

Agreed