sea kayaking safety guidelines/VHF stories

[gyork]

Stumbled upon this web site. Seems a good general reference for paddlers of all abilities. http://www.marinerkayaks.com/mkhtml/Kyksaftw.html

A few anecdotal experience in support of VHF radios on ALL outings:

Seven of us were paddling in benign sea conditions in York, ME. We were suddenly aware that two of the group had disappeared. We naturally focused our attention to the shoreline, believing one or both needed a "pit stop". I summoned the 2 kayakers on my VHF (we had all agreed to monitor channel 72 at the initial launch). Their "come back" was seaward, as they had scurried out to try to identify the source of intermittent blasts from an air horn.

Two "new" paddlers decided to take the inland route around an island off Cape Porpoise, and were lost to sight after others in the group took the seaward leg. We spotted them 1/2 hour later, closer to shore, but it would have been preferable to have made radio contact when first rounding the island.

Four paddlers paddling into a 15-20 knot headwind separated into 2 groups of 2. I think all had radios, but had neglected (oops!)to monitor each other.

Two of our group of six broke off to return to our lake island base camp, with slight trepidation. They borrowed a radio, and were in contact until they made it safely back.

Any other stories to add?

Gary

[Pintail]

Gary, I'm totally confused:

"Seven of us were paddling..."; "Four paddlers...separated into two groups of two..." and, finally, "Two of our group of six broke off..." Are you certain that everyone returned home?

[Guest _rick]

Oh boy? This could be a problem huh?

[ccarlson]

I believe each paragraph describes a different anecdotal story ;-)

[gyork]

Sorry! Should read experienceS. Yes, Carl is right that these are all separate outings!

Gary

[bob budd]

I'm all for VHF radios. However, some of the circumstances you define should have been handled by verbal communication, i.e. noone should leave the group unless others know they did, etc.

[gyork]

>noone should leave the group unless others know they

>did, etc.

Exactly right Bob. And when (if) they realized they had neglected to tell anyone, a quick call might set things right.

Gary

[jonsprag1]

Good idea to have vhf radios--but their reliabilty is not all that good---I have one that works(I test it frequently) but I don't know how many times I've used it and not been able to make contact with the party I'm calling---either the other person doesn't have it on, or is not listening or has it on but turned the volume down---best not to rely on it to keep you out of trouble but have it for a backup.

[gyork]

>but I don't know how many times I've used it and not been

>able to make contact with the party I'm calling---either the

>other person doesn't have it on, or is not listening or has

>it on but turned the volume down---

I think we are all frustrated by this, and are often guilty ourselves of "tuning out". I guess the point I'd like to stress is that radios can facillitate group communication/safety if everybody is "on the same channel", and this is best accomplished if we remember to do a radio check before each launch, including after rest stops.

Gary

[EEL]

>Good idea to have vhf radios--but their reliabilty is not

>all that good---

When you are at best a couple of feet off the water, you cannot expect reliable communication with someone else only a couple of feet off the water and also using a handheld unit which by definition has a poor antenna beyond a relatively short distance unhindered by land masses. I think it wise to have a healthy distrust for what a VHF radio can do for you when in modestly remote locations. For example, I have heard the CG have difficulty getting a response from anyone in upper Casco Bay when they were attempting to verify the condition of a vessel that had run aground on a ledge and they could no longer raise by radio.

I tend not to think of radios and such as safety devices in that they do not make you safe, they only have the potential to mitigate the consequences of a bad situation. To assume such devices or other "safety skills" will enable you to easily and without danger prevail when it hits the fan is not rational. To me safety is more a function of exercising judgment to avoid getting into bad situations than having the means to extricate yourself (valuable though they are).

Ed Lawson

[djlewis]

>I tend not to think of radios and such as safety devices in

>that they do not make you safe, they only have the potential

>to mitigate the consequences of a bad situation.

That could be said of any device, skill, decision or element of judgment or training. No one thing can guarantee safety; and generally no one thing gets you in trouble. It's all about margin -- some things increase your margin, some decrease it. You strive to do more of the former than the latter and, you hope, end the day with at least zero margin, that is, alive and healthy.

As for VHF radios, I thinks it's plausible that two local, expert paddlers owe their lives to having carried them -- that June day in Plum Island Sound.

--David.

[EEL]

>

>That could be said of any device, skill, decision or element

>of judgment or training.

I agree overall with your comments. The point I was trying to make is that I make a distinction between those things that prevent an incident and those things which may enable one to mitigate the consequences of an incident. To me it is a distinction of some importance.

Ed Lawson