Brian Nystrom

It should read:

"3) Cross the left arm over the RIGHT arm and hold the paddle parallel to and against the gunwale on the right side."

Keith and John's experience highlights the fact that when you need a radio, it MUST be right at hand. IMO, there is no valid argument for keeping a radio in and inaccessible location. I also feel very strongly that you MUST be able to operate the radio with ONE hand, as you need to hold onto your paddle (or boat) with the other. That's why I keep mine mounted on the shoulder strap of my PFD. Additionally, it puts it close to my ear, so I can hear it better over the sounds of wind and water.

If you haven't seen them already, I have pics of the mounting system I use in my Kayak Gear album on Webshots at:

http://community.webshots.com/user/brian_nystrom-reg

This system has been tested during rescues in rough water, surfing, etc. and has never let me down. BTW, ignore the HX-460 in the photos. I agree with David that it's worthless as a kayaker's radio. The one in the photos failed 5 times and is currently sitting in a box in pieces.

"1. When these radios have a little graph or icon for the state of the battery's charge, they are really reading the battery's voltage as opposed to the remaining charge/capacity of the battery. A trait, which has good and bad aspects, of NiCads is they maintain their rated voltage for a long time as the battery discharges and then they suddenly fall off at the end. So the voltage can still be good, but the capacity can be rather low which in turn means the radio's battery indicator is very imperfect measure of the status of the battery's charge status."

Perhaps more important is how many of us look at the tiny battery indicator, or can even see it, for that matter. Icom radios can be configured to display the battery voltage in large digits at power up. This works well with Lithium-ion batteries. When my radio is fully charged, it reads 8.2-8.3 volts. When it gets down to 7.2 or so (the nominal battery voltage, IIRC) I recharge it. Sometimes, it takes months for the voltage to drop that low.

"point to the need to pay attention to how and when it is used and the battery charged."

Amen to that.

Your willingness to share this experience in detail is absolutely invaluable. The report highlights the effects of choices and decision making and the benefits of experience and preparedness. It also creates a strong incentive to all of us re-evaluate our own levels of same and our typical practices when out on the water. Complacency and overconfidence are insideous, easy to slip into and potentially dangerous. I'm not suggesting that you and John were suffering from either (you were simply overwhelmed by the conditions), but I certainly may be. It's time to take a hard look in the mirror.

Again, I'm glad you made it back in one piece and thanks for sharing this experience with us.

I think you're confusing NiMH (Nickel-Metal-Hydride) batteries with Lithiun-ion batteries. The former will self-discharge over time (~10%/month), the latter will not. Lithium-ion batteries are the best of the rechargeables that are currently available. They also have the longest life for a given size battery, with many radios claiming in excess of 20 hours, though that is under much lower usage conditions than Keith and John's predicament required.

While any rescue has an element of danger for the rescuers, there't a considerable difference between climbers trudging around on unstable snow slopes and CG personnel ensconsed in boats and helicopters. From the few details we currently have, it seems doubtful that this was much more than a routine exersize for the CG crew.

Often, the difference between a "life threatening situation" and an "interesting experience" is the level of preparation. This has been demonstrated numerous times on trips where someone got into a sticky situation when pushing their limits and was quickly and safely rescued by the others in the group. The result was little more than another anecdote added to the experiences of the participants. Call it "real life training".

I'm not suggesting that we should be taking unnecessary risks just to give the Coast Guard something to do on a slow day, but your assessment of the risks they were taking seems greatly overblown.

It must have taken some pretty "interesting" conditions for two paddlers as skilled and experienced as Keith and John to end up needing to be rescued. Their story is bound to be very instructional for all of us. I'm really glad they're both OK and very interested in reading the "gory details".

One key lesson that I hope won't get lost in all the melee is that being properly prepared from a gear and clothing standpoint probably saved their lives. This highlights the fact that when skill and/or judgement fail, preparation for immersion and rescue saves lives.

On the bright side, perhaps they'll be imortalized in a chapter in the next edition of "Sea Kayaker Deep Trouble". ;-)

Glad you made it back, guys!

>...even though I'm not going to give up my EPs at all, I'm interested

> in learning to use a GP...

That's what they all say...

Resitance is futile, you WILL be assimilated!

I've been happy with my Stohlquist dry suit, but they've stopped making anything in Gore-Tex. To me, that seems like a bad sign, since Gore has very strict quality and waterproofness standards that companys must follow if they want to use Gore fabrics. Gore provides a lifetime warranty on their fabrics. I don't know that I would want to buy a garment as expensive as a dry suit without the Gore warranty. Suits made with alternative fabrics are considerably cheaper, but if they only last 2-3 years, they're no bargain. Before I bought anything other than Gore-Tex, I'd check out the manufacturer's warranty carefully.

After six seasons of considerable use, my suit seems like it might be seeping a bit here and there, but I'm not sure if it's leakage or sweat that's making me damp. Rather than sending it back, I'll just seal the seams from the outside first (using Marine GOOP thinned with toluene) to see if that takes care of the problem. I just replaced the neck seal for the second time, which is about what I would expect; they typically last 3 years.

It worked for Linda and I...

Come to think of it, a certain Mr. Godfrey has a yellow "glass slipper".

Post moved, not deleted.

...is self-regulated. They were more or less forced to do this by the fact that SCUBA has inherent dangers and risks, and procedures that must be understood fully in order to avoid them. An uneducated diver would likely become a dead diver in short order without proper training. Where you are diving only has a minor impact on the risks; the fact that you are under water and under pressure remain the same. It's important to note that the only reason that the SCUBA industry can regulate itself is that it can control access to one essential commodity, the pressurized air (or other gasses) that divers MUST have in order to dive. The equipment to do it yourself is simply way to expensive for most divers, so they must rely on dive shops and other businesses to supply them. It's possible to circumvent this restriction if you have the money to do so, but it's rather pointless to do so just to avoid training that you really need. It's also important to note that compressed gas access is the ONLY thing that's regulated in the SCUBA industry. You can buy all the gear without any training at all. If it weren't for divers' need for compressed gasses, it would be virtually impossible for the SCUBA industry to self-regulate.

Kayaking, on the other hand, is totally unregulated and is largely viewed as a non-technical activity requiring little or no training, although we may not see it that way. There is nothing inherent to kayaking that is analagous to compressed gasses for SCUBA, that lends itself to regulation. Once someone has a boat and a paddle - which they can make themselves - there is no way to stop them from going kayaking. In the case of kayaking, the genie is out of the bottle and there's no real hope of getting it back in. The best we can hope to do is to educate the public about the risks and requirements for safe kayaking.

...stay away from river mouths. Rivers are still very high and many are still at or above flood stage, due to more heavy rain in some locations yesterday. Between the the sheer volume of water, the pollution and the debris, it's too dangerous to be near them until their waters drop to normal levels, which could take weeks.

On a positive note, the waters around Cape Ann should be fine. We were off Marblehead doing Trip Leader training yesterday and there was no evidence of any problems.

If it was worth writing in the first place, it's worth leaving for posterity. Not that there haven't been some things I wish I hadn't said, but I won't delete them for the reasons you cite.

I'm tempted to make a shameless commercial plug here, but I won't. ;-)

Greenland paddles are quite different from the more common "Euro" paddles. Advantages commonly cited include:

* Low cost. You can make a GP for under twenty bucks in materials.

* Light weight, at least for the price. A typical cedar GP weighs between 24 and 32 ounces, depending on its dimensions and variation in wood density. In use they feel lighter because:

* GPs are buoyant. This makes them feel lighter when paddling. It also makes them useful as outriggers when you need a bit of stability. It makes rolling a bit easier, too.

* GPs are easier on the joints. Considering the average age of NSPN members, this is of no small consequence. Truth be told, you can make a GP that feels like a Euro paddle if you want to, but it seems somewhat pointless.

* GPs are completely symmetric. There is no top, bottom, left or right. It works any way you grab it. The design also provides excellent tactile feedback for orienting the paddle.

* A GPs longer, thicker, narrower blades are less angle sensitive than wider, thinner blades. This makes them less critical when used in sculling or sweeping motions. They also produce lots of lift. Rolling with a GP is so easy that it feels like cheating. Sculling with one is slow and relaxing.

* GPs are quiet. They were developed by seal hunting cultures for whom sealth was critical.

* GPs store easily on-deck. Many, if not most GP users carry a shorter paddle (aka, "storm paddle") on their deck as a spare, but even a full length GP is pretty easy to stow on a typical sea kayak. Even some people who prefer Euro paddles for general use carry a short GP as a spare, because it's so easy to do so. It gives you instant access to your spare paddle when you need it - no assembly required - and it takes up relatively little deck space.

* GPs are COOL! 'Nuff said.

Although there is considerable commonality in technique between GPs and Euro paddles, there are also some important differences. It will take a bit of time to develop the proper technique and a feel for the paddle, so if your initial experience seems a bit awkward, don't let that discourage you. There are a lot of "twiggers" (GP users) in the club, any one of which will probably be more than happy to let you try their paddles (you can't make just one) and assist you with technique. We're always looking to draw more unsuspecting victims into our cult. ;-)

This is an issue that everyone with a message board struggles with. I like the ability to edit posts, mainly because I hate having typos in my writing. However it does allow people to change the nature of posts or delete them. The upside is that people probably feel more free to say whatever they want, since they know they can change it. The downside is that people probably feel more free to say whatever they want, since they know they can change it. ;-)

Despite the problems that editing can cause, I prefer the current system. It also seems to me that the vast majority of participants here use it as it was intended to be used. I really don't see it as something that requires action. If others feel differently, I'm open to an unedited discussion. ;-)

1- You can't protect people from themselves. It doesn't work, never has, never will. No matter what you do, people will always find a way to hurt themselves. The problem is that we don't require people to take responsibility for themselves and their actions, and we allow them to shift the blame elsewhere. The Aranoff and Jagoda girls died because THEY made a host of bad decisions, not because of someone else's actions or a lack of regulation. They were already breaking existing laws when they set out on the water. There is no reason to believe that they would have obeyed any regulations.

2- What makes anyone think that the general public - or even the majority of kayakers - will even hear of the new law, let alone obey it? There is no requirement to inform the public, nor are there any funds appropriated for advertising or education.

3- EDUCATION is the key! I can't emphasize this strongly enough and your post points this out, too. People need to be made to understand the risks inherent in paddling (or any other activity). A good educational program would do more to promote safety than any obscure, unenforced regulation. Something as simple and inexpensive as including a safety brochure similar to the ones the NSPN created with every kayak sold would be vastly better and more effective than this legislation. More PSAs on TV and radio regarding the dangers and safety requirements of boating - or perhaps some paddling-specific PSAs - would be far more effective as well.

The bottom line is that this legislation is a bad joke. I strongly believe that the people pushing it know that, but it's the easiest, cheapest way to get grieving relatives off their back. They're counting on the kayaking community not to fight it. Massachusetts kayakers need to prove them wrong! While discussing the issue here is useful, action is what's needed.

CALL OR WRITE YOUR STATE SENATOR. DO IT TODAY!

I always wear a PFD and I believe that everyone should, but there are problems with this proposed regulation:

1- It targets ONLY kayakers. More canoeists die every year than kayakers, but there's no mention of them in the proposal. More boaters in other craft die every year than kayakers, but they get a free pass, too. More commercial fishermen die every year than kayakers, but no one seems to care about their lives. If the intent of the law is to save lives, it should be expanded to include other boater groups that routinely have higher numbers of fatalities than kayakers. This law is BLATANTLY DISCRIMINIATORY and should be rejected on that basis alone.

2 - It does not allow kayakers to use Type V PFDs, which are Coast Guard approved for use in all craft. This appears to be intentional, as it was brought up last year to the two reps who pushed these proposals and they could easily have included Type V PFDs if they were so inclined, but they didn't.

It's anyone's guess as to what their reasoning is, but it's probably just as flawed as the reasoning for the rest of the proposal. I strongly suspect that the main impetus behind these proposals is to placate misguided, grieving parents and spouses who are persistently demanding that "something be done", however worthless it is.

Unenforceable laws do nothing but breed contempt for the law. Remember the 55 mph speed limit? How effective was that?

I'm STRONGLY in favor of training and education of kayakers and ALL boaters, for that matter. If the state is serious about safetly, EDUCATION is the place to start. I think that it's pretty safe to say that most boating fatalities occur because the victims had little idea of the risks involved and were consequently unprepared for them. If people are aware of the risks, they can at least make an informed decision regarding those risks.

Saying that this is proposed regulation justified because kayaking is unregulated is missing the point. Cycling, hiking, rock/ice climbing and most other outdoor activities are unregulated, too. Does that mean that we should be passing ineffective, unenforceable regulations on all such activities? What would be the point?

Unfortunately, educating the public costs money on an ongoing basis, but passing, worthless "feel good" legislation doesn't. That makes it a pretty easy choice for legislators who are more interested in getting people off their backs than actually doing something to improve public safety. I realize that sounds extremely cynical, but I have yet to see anything to indicate that it's not the case. Both Straus and Gomes were contacted by many members of the kayaking community on these issues in the past. They could have easily engaged with us in a constructive dialog to craft meaningful legislation, but they chose not to. Instead, they ignored us and took the easy way out. The only way to get their attention is to apply enough pressure to get these proposals defeated in the Senate. If we just let them run over us, they will feel emboldened to do so again whenever it suits them. Although I'm not fond of "slippery slope" arguments, this is a situation where we put ourselves at risk of more Draconian measures in the future if we don't stand up for ourselves now.

...regardless of their level of experience or expertise. It's actually more a mater of proper dress for the conditions than anything else. Even beyond that, how many people of any experience level are going to want to wet exit in oily, polluted harbor water? It's nice that the proposal includes swimming pools as a suitable place for wet exit demos, but how many outfitters have one?

I agree that the the wet exit requirement has some merit. What I'm not sure of is whether it's going to create a net safety/health benefit or not. It will certainly impact outfitters and reduce the number of kayakers on the water. I'm not in the business, so I'm not directly affected, but we need to consider these things in deciding whether to support or oppose the proposed legislation.

Here is the text of the entire bill:

----------

AN ACT RELATIVE TO KAYAK SAFETY.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General

Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. Chapter 90B of the General Laws as appearing in

the 2002 Official Edition is hereby amended by inserting after

section 5B the following section:—

Section 5C. Any person aboard a Kayak, so-called, shall wear

at all times a Coast Guard approved personal flotation device of

Type I, II, or III. Kayaks shall also be equipped with a compass

and a whistle.

SECTION 2. Said Chapter 90B, as so appearing, is hereby

amended by inserting the following new section, after section

13A:—

Section 13B. All commercial or professional kayak instructors

shall obtain and maintain the following:

(a) Basic First Aid training;

( CPR or a higher level of first responder qualification; and

© American Canoe Association certification or equivalent

training.

All commercial or professional kayak instructors offering

training to passengers or operators for hire shall provide training

to each individual on the safety procedures appropriate to the

level of paddling difficulty. Instruction of novices shall include

actual wet exit training, so-called, or any other practice in

escaping from a kayak while submerged in a controlled water setting,

pool or otherwise, before said individuals are allowed to use

a kayak in open waters.

No form of release, oral or written, shall be valid or otherwise

effective so as to affect an instructor’s responsibility to comply

with this section. Any such release shall be null and void.

----------

The wet exit requirement alone will dramatically curtail kayak rental business, as customers are sure to balk at it. Public demo days in the spring will likely go away as well, as requiring inappropriately dressed people to wet exit in 40-50 degree water in order to test paddle kayaks is not only not going to fly with the customers, it's arguably more dangerous than letting them paddle without demonstrating a wet exit, since they'll be prone to gasping.

This is simply another ill-conceived attempt to legislate personal responsibility; it's "feel good" legislation that reps can add to their resume. It won't improve safety and both individuals and businesses will suffer.

If there is no plan to cover the rack(s), it's easy to increase the capacity of the A-frame design by using longer crossbars that extend outside the A-frame. Boats can be locked to the frame itself with cable locks. A version of the rack with the A-frames spaced closer together would hold rec boats just fine.

Apparently, the ridiculous "compass and whistle" bill that was shot down last year is still being pushed through the legislature after being combined with the mandatory PFD proposal. According to the following article, the has passed the House and is going to the Senate.

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/05-06...tate-region.htm

This is a classic case of a bad idea being tacked onto one that's difficult to oppose without looking bad. It's time to contact your state senators and voice your opposition to this bill, based on its discriminatory nature (it targets only kayakers), the ineffectiveness of the whistle and compass provision, and the fact that it's completely unenforceable. Here are links to previous discussions about this subject:

http://www.nspn.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboar...orum=DCForumID3

http://www.nspn.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboar...orum=DCForumID3

http://www.nspn.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboar...orum=DCForumID3

http://www.nspn.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboar...orum=DCForumID3

http://www.nspn.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboar...orum=DCForumID3

There are examples of letters in some of these posts, including one I wrote. Feel free to use it if you like.

...Gillian is one of the new members of the Board and she has graciously volunteered to coordinate the put-ins update project. Please help her as much as you can, as this effort benefits all club members.

...tell him to check out Eric Schade's "Mergansers" (http://www.shearwater-boats.com/) or the "Shearwater" series he did for CLC (http://www.clcboats.com).

BTW, if he happens to decide on building a Merganser 17, I have an unused set of plans I'll sell at a discount.

...that a cowboy re-entry is much more of a parlor trick than a useful skill. It's more or less impossible on anything other than dead-flat-calm water. While it can be fun to play with, it's not something that you're likely to actually use in a rescue scenario.