Page 4. Back to last page, Chapter 4. Recognition by All Major Authors of The Simple Facts of Human Life Saving and Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterfour.html)

Canoe and Kayak Criminal Rescue Safety Scam: 1500 Canadian and American Adults and Children Die Agonizing Deaths Since 1993

Tim Ingram

Copyright 2006, Tim Ingram
All rights reserved.
No part of this book shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without written permission from the author.

Index:
Preface http://www.canoekayaksafety.com
 Introduction http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/introduction.html
Chapter 1: Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety Scandal, US Governmental Affairs (http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterone.html)
Chapter 2: Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety Scandal, Canadian Governmental Affairs
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chaptertwo.html)
Chapter 3: Fundamental Lifesaving Error in Rescue Safety of Canoes and Kayaks, No Level Flotation Standard: Responsible for Thousands of Deaths Since 1978
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterthree.html)
 Chapter 4. Recognition by All Major Authors of The Simple Facts of Human Life Saving and Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterfour.html)
Chapter 5: Criminal Fraud in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterfive.html)
Chapter 6: Blaming Victims for Their Own Deaths Through Degrading Propaganda
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chaptersix.html)
Chapter 7: The Milgram Studies and Criminal Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterseven.html)
Chapter 8: Legal Developments in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chaptereight.html)
Chapter 9: Ongoing Reckless Endangerment and Death in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. The Intent.
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapternine.html)
Conclusion
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/conclusion.html)
Appendix: Ongoing Police and Homeland Security Investigations in Canada and the United States, Regarding Criminal Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. Canada:
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/appendix.html)
Appendix2: Ongoing Police and Homeland Security Investigations in Canada and the United States, Regarding Criminal Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. America:
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/appendix2.html)
Appendix3: OPP Supplementary Index: Ongoing Ontario Government Milgram Experiments
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/appendix3.html)

RCMP Zaccardelli File
http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/appendix4.html

New Book:
The Minnesota Canoe Murders
http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/TheMinnesotaCanoeMurders.html
 

Chapter 5: Criminal Fraud in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapterfive.html)




One curious aspect of this fraud is its' obvious nature: "There are many solo rescues available to kayakers, the Eskimo roll being the most famous and effective. It's also the hardest." Canoe and Kayak Magazine, Kayak Touring, 2001, p.53. This statement is intrinsically contradictory in reference to any concept of rescue. And of course this stupid statement is contradicted below, by all of the many rescues that are needed as well, because of the failure-prone nature of the Eskimo roll. (At the annual Rolling Championships in Greenland, the World Champs need a rescue powerboat or they die, since they fail to save themselves so often! (Sea Kayaker Magazine,  Feb. 2001, p.41) Of course, after rolling once, the expert is merely in the same capsizing conditions again. How intelligent is that?

"A capsized paddler who Eskimo rolls is still in the same conditions that capsized him or her in the first place, and with each roll he or she will take on more water, lessening the kayak's stability." (Matt Broze, Deep Trouble, p.91)

" In this book I would like to emphasize rescue techniques other than the Eskimo roll because a backup technique is mandatory...given that relatively few sea kayakers will ever roll successfully and because workable alternative techniques are too often neglected...The great advantage of the Sea Wing (sponsons) is that it leaves the paddler in a more stable position than before the capsize." (John Dowd, Sea Kayaking, 3rd edition, 1997, pp.90-95)

The most "effective" rescue is the one that saves lives. It cannot be "hardest", hard, difficult or failure-prone in any way. Like CO2 sponsons that are manufactured identically to Coast Guard approved CO2 inflatable PFDs! That create a Level Flotation Standard rescue platform for all canoes and kayaks. (A rescue platform that can be paddled to rescue numerable victims from the water. Some Coast Guard and rescue organizations in the world use short, "recreational" kayaks with sponsons, carried aboard fast Zodiac powercraft that are vulnerable close to rocky coastlines. The short sponsoned kayak is paddled among the rocks, cockpit fully flooded for maximum water ballast, to quickly clip the victims to fore and aft decks. Then it is paddled back to the Zodiac. (This superior rescue craft, that is excellent for tricky, broken ice rescues too, costs about $500 US.)

Very good examples of the evidence for criminal fraud are found on pages 117-132 of "Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1000 Americans: US Coast Guard Studies Device to Save Victims".

"We can start this chapter by examining a recent sea kayaking book that is conspicuous for having absolutely no references to sponsons, despite this book acknowledging many dangerous situations for which almost all other authors have suggested sponsons! This person, according to the American Canoe Association's magazine "Paddler", was responsible for some of the ACA's ideas about sea kayaking.

John Lull, Sea Kayaking Safety and Rescue, 2001:

"If you capsize and can't perform an Eskimo roll or fail to execute your roll, your only recourse...is to exit the kayak and then reenter. Because a partly swamped kayak is highly unstable...With the aid of another boater, the process of emptying water from the boat and reentering is relatively easy." (p.47.) Bait.

"Don't let go until the rescued paddler...is ready to go. I've seen a paddler immediately capsize again after being rescued...The rescue had to be performed all over again, and the swimmer was very cold by the time it was over." (p.57) Switch.

In capsizing conditions, what determines that the "rescued paddler...is ready to go"? (It has taken ten pages of this book, as you see, to arrive at this: from "relatively easy" as Bait to "immediately capsize again" as Switch.)


$25 C02 Sponsons inflate in a second, with no training or previous experience, to get out of deadly waters and stay out!

What prevents re-capsize in the same conditions, a situation that has killed hundreds since 1993? (See Sea Kayaker Magazine article below.)  Ready to avoid another life-threatening capsize. How does anyone determine this realistically? The victim is already wet and more tired than before. But above all, the victim is not in a more stable, secure or safe condition than before capsize. There is no stabilizing life raft. Why not?

If human life were valued, then a canoe or kayak CO2 life raft to paddle to shore, (and pick up other victims), no matter what, entirely flooded or not, would be necessary.

This is what killed the 4 schoolchidren in the UK, as well as hundreds of others. No means of stabilizing sea kayaks (or canoes) in emergencies!  The assisted rescues above, in this book, are criticized for many reasons: The kayak is too heavy to lift over another one, these rescues must be practised a lot for any chance at working, these rescues that might appear to "work" in swimming pools are not reliable in waves and cold waters of the real world, etc.

Bait (assisted rescue), and Switch (everthing must work perfectly for success): So the victim is blamed for the failure, and any deaths.

Runaway Kayak:




"Have the swimmer climb onto your rear deck and lie prone,...Don't use this method unless you have good bracing skills and a solid roll, otherwise you may end up in the water too." (p.63)

(See Death of Jim Heil, Grand Rapids Press, Sept 14, 2002). And the posthumous award by Canada's Governor General to another victim of this, Mark Seltzer of Toronto, Ontario. See the Death at the Apostle Islands, Sea Kayaker, August, 2005, p.50, for a Wisconsin family. The Father tried to save his son on the rear deck. But we know this is no way to save a human life! They capsized and of course hypothermia eventually killed another victim, who was deliberately denied a means to escape the water. This idea has killed hundreds of Canadians and Americans who have taken intruction since 1993! Think about the 23 girls, ages 9-11, children in 2005, nearly dead, at the Apostle Islands in 2005, (mentioned below, from the Professional Paddlesports Association, same home address as the American Canoe Association. These People know that they are murdering innocent citizens, even children!)

This instruction idea has killed many people.

"This is a marginal solution...It might be a reasonable choice if you are close enough to shore that you can carry the swimmer to safety should you fail to catch up to the runaway kayak." (pp. 63-64)

(Why not stabilize the rescuer's kayak so that it becomes capable of rescuing the victim?)

Obviously as the author says, the runaway kayak is unlikely to be caught, and some type of emergency sponsons to enable both victim and rescuer to paddle to shore would be commonsense, avoiding deaths. But the author unrealistically contradicts himself with a Bait (more practice) and Switch ("swimmer and kayak need to be reunited to avoid serious consequences...Capsizing at sea can be a traumatic experience..." p.64)

So why no built-in 5 second life raft capable of getting rescuer and at least one swimmer to shore?

Apparently there is an endless list of Switches to go with the "rescue" Bait: "If you discover a technique that works well for you, use it. Just make sure it works in wind and rough water." (p.66)

The world is waiting to find out what this "rescue" would be, since Mr. Lull has no suggestion in an entire book! Bait and Switch canoe and kayak rescues are very deadly. Instead of standard, built-in, uniform safety that is not dependent on hundreds of different variables: including conditions, fitness, and practice, to mention only three.

(These ideas constitute criminal negligence by deliberately depriving both rescuer and victim of a simple means to stabilize the rescuer's kayak to get both rescuer and victim to shore safely.)

Self-Rescues:

"The ability to perform a self-recue is an essential safety skill for all sea kayakers...A partly swamped kayak is unstable; it is difficult to climb back into the cockpit without some way to stabilize the boat. The best solution is to climb in underwater and roll up...Of course this will only work if you can perform an Eskimo roll...Another option...However, due to it's (sic) greater complexity, the paddlefloat rescue is not as practical in wind and rough water as a reentry roll." (p.69)

Of course the paddlefloat rescue originally was supposed to be a back-up for failed Eskimo rolls. The question here to be asked: How does the paddler not re-capsize after a reenty roll when the kayak is obviously partly swamped and unstable, as the author said above: "Because a partly swamped kayak is highly unstable..." (p.47)

You need to go to p.82 before you find the Switch on the reentry roll Bait: "The kayak will be unstable until most of the water is pumped out, so be ready to brace or roll again."

(Note that it has already been documented in Sea Kayaker Magazine and elsewhere, that a pump and sprayskirt do not permit you to pump out the water!)

This is called a "rescue" (Bait), but as we see on p.82, it is actually a dangerous Switch, reported by the author to be safer than a paddlefloat rescue. Actually the kayak is full of water, unstable, and likely to re-capsize! So this instruction is actually deadly and misleading compared to a CO2 sponson Life raft that two girls, 7 and 10 can operate without any previous experience!

A final note: "Once you know how to roll, learn the reentry roll and make it your primary rescue." (p.86) This book is sold to the public. It is no wonder that one thousand US deaths have occurred. This book at least recognizes that the paddlefloat is not a realistic rescue, just as Canoe and Kayak Magazine, and Sea Kayaker Magazine printed in 1993!

Mr. Lull's book not only does not mention sponsons, his position in this book is as dangerous as the ACA instruction: Leaving victims in the water to die with no means of escape.

Let's go to Sea Kayaking, by John Dowd, 1997. Mr. Dowd has much more open ocean experience than other authors. He started both the Trade Association of Sea Kayaking in 1989, and Sea Kayaker Magazine before that. I last saw him at the US Military Kayakers symposium in 1994, where he recommended sponsons, just as the military kayakers had done in their evaluation. He is very familiar with the folding kayaks used by miltary forces. As well as the use of these kayaks far from land, unlike narrower kayaks that would be extremely risky in view of capsize or other problems arising. Most folding kayaks have built-in sponsons, that give them a degree of seaworthiness that is impossible to achieve with narrower kayaks.

Mr. Dowd understands that wider kayaks are more stable.

First quote:

"The re-entry and roll is another of those techniques that are good training and work fine in warmed pools or for skilled paddlers who have been careless, but it is really a step beyond competence at rolling and highlights the paradox that if you can do it, you will almost certainly have precluded yourself from the necessity to do so. Furthermore, the conditions that caused the capsize in the first place will still be there when you come up, and the chances are that the cockpit will have scooped up a tubful of water that destabilizes the boat." (p.91)

Mr. Dowd, unlike Mr. Lull does not do a Bait (re-entry and roll), then a Switch, leaving the paddler in a more unstable boat than before capsize, as Mr. Lull says above: "The kayak will be unstable until most of the water is pumped out, so be ready to brace or roll again." p.82.

It is difficult to comprehend how an author like Mr. Lull can publish a book entitled "Sea Kayaking Safety and Rescue", in which his recommended rescue leaves a victim worse off than before capsize, unless one is aware of the deliberate ACA Bait and Switch Fraud techniques, that leave the public with no means of escaping death in the water.

In contrast, Mr. Dowd in Sea Kayaking, 1997, states:

"Remember, the self-rescue method that you rely on should get you out of the water fast and leave you in a more stable position than you were in when you capsized." (pp. 91-92)

It should be noted that these books were written before built-in CO2 gas sponsons were widely advised. The concept of the life raft is obviously far superior than any kayak or canoe rescue ideas described. The canoe and kayak sponson life raft is able to be paddled to shore with victms, and also rescued swimmers hanging on top of decks or inside canoes.

In this sense the canoe or kayak becomes an effective rescue craft in its' own right. Not just an ordinary canoe or kayak.

Imagine if the canoe and kayak industry wanted to sell more boats than the current US market. Sell canoes and kayaks as not only much safer, with a built-in life raft, but also as a rescue boat, capable of rescuing other swimmers in the water and saving lives! Canoes and kayaks could be seen as a positive watersafety resource everywhere, instead of the deadliest boats in the world!

And this costs only $25 each CO2 sponson, built-in at the factory, on each boat. It makes all of the Bait and Switch rescues murderous in comparison. And makes contemporary ACA instruction a means of deliberate murder. Just ask any judge or jury in a swimming pool to compare!

Mr. Lull had some help with his book from Matt Broze, co-author of  "Deep Trouble", a book that uses stories from Sea Kayaker Magazine to show how deadly canoes and kayaks are, with no means of emergency stability (the sponson Life Raft). No wonder well over one thousand US canoe and kayak deaths occur.

This is taken from the website owned by Mr. Broze, with my comments in brackets throughout, so no-one can complain about anything "taken out of context":

"We recommend you learn to Eskimo roll your kayak. This skill is potentially more valuable to sea kayakers than river kayakers because the distance to shore can be so much greater. (Indeed. Whitewater deaths are not only a small fraction of all canoe and kayak deaths because the shore is close by, but also there are almost no whitewater deaths by hypothermia. In contrast, almost all canoe and kayak deaths are due to hypothermia because victims cannot get out of the water.) Because capsizes are so rare while sea kayaking the value of learning to roll is not nearly as obvious as it is to a whitewater paddler. You will probably need expert instruction. Contact a club or kayak shop to find classes. Incidentally, it is easier to roll most gear laden sea kayaks than it is to roll an empty river kayak. (Rolls are not easier. In fact this statement is contradicted by almost all other authors, including Mr. Broze in this very piece! Read the following qualifications next.) At least if the gear can’t seriously shift to one side, side support at the seat keeps you from shifting to the side, and adequate knee braces are present. The additional weight acts as ballast and helps finish the roll. Although the motion is slower getting started--it is more like a thigh pull than a hip snap--once the rotating motion is present the momentum can pull you up out of the water like a punching dummy. Please quit using that sorry old "heavy gear laden kayak" excuse I hear so often for not learning to roll. Learn to roll the kayak you will actually be using both with and without a gear load." (Another statement of the Bait and Switch technique. The potential victim must practice a great deal, using various loads to be a success, even though the Greenland Champions must use a rescue boat since they fail to roll so frequently, despite constant practice.)

"Practice other rescues to back up your ability to Eskimo roll. (If the roll is such a good idea, why so much focus on the other Bait and Switch back-up "rescues"?) Even the best rescues are marginal if they haven't been practiced. (Even back-ups are so unreliable that they must be practised also: Why are they called back-ups, if they are so failure-prone?)  Rescue practice in a pool can be very valuable, but you should understand that a rescue which works in a heated pool with empty kayaks can give one a false sense of security. Wind, waves, cold water and 150 pounds of gear create a far more difficult situation. (Indeed. Rolls, and all Bait and Switch "rescues" obviously cannot be trusted with human life. The only rescue is the world maritime safety standard: The Life Raft, created in seconds by CO2 Sponsons.) There is a wide variety of rescue techniques described in kayaking books, and it is nice to be aware of them; however, many work only under ideal conditions. Rescues that require the lifting of one kayak and rocking it over another to empty it of water risk serious damage to many kayaks and become nearly impossible with a gear load."

"The best rescues require little or no help and do not require lifting and dumping the kayak. They get you out of the water quickly to minimize your exposure to hypothermia and allow you to aid in the pumping or bailing of your kayak. They should also be simple and easy to execute with a minimum of extra gear if any. The best rescues are still a poor second to Eskimo rolling..." (So all of these rescues are indeed inferior to the Eskimo roll, that is so unreliable that it cannot be trusted by the World Champions in Greenland, and requires other "back up" rescues that in turn are stated to be not as "safe" as the Eskimo roll!)

"Every serious kayaker should learn the Eskimo Roll. It is by far the quickest, most reliable method of rescue (Obviously this statement is untrue, as contradicted above, by the need for back-up rescues, that in turn are not reliable.).... Its only disadvantage is that some find it difficult to learn.... Until you find the blade’s glide angle all attempts to complete a roll will fail and you may pick up several habits that might need to be laboriously broken before you will be able to succeed... Once you master the Eskimo roll make sure you can do it with the equipment you will actually be using. (Why do the Greenland Champs require a rescue boat? Who can trust an Eskimo roll with their life, if the World Champs are failure-prone.) When you get a new boat, paddle, PFD, drysuit or anything else that might affect your roll you should practice rolling with it. It's not enough to be a pool roller, you must also be capable of rolling the kayak as you would be paddling it. That is with a gear load, bag on the back deck, your life jacket on, etc. You need to be successful in whatever conditions (cold water, waves, turbulence, etc.) you may find yourself. " (This recommendation for the Eskimo roll is so qualified and demanding of special considerations, that it cannot be trusted with human lives. It is a "show off" trick.) (www.MarinerKayaks.com)

Obviously the the Eskimo roll is a profitable Bait and Switch technique in itself. There is no end of reasons for failure, for which the victim is blamed. It is always the victim's fault, while being denied the only recognized means world-wide to get human bodies out of the water: A Life Raft.

Mr.Broze, Mr. Lull and the ACA have been denying the public any form of  Sponsons for over a decade. One thousand, five hundred (1,500) dead canoe and kayak victims since 1993 in North America.

Murder: Adults, children, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, friends, family friends, friends' friends. When we speak of murdered children, there are more grave, emotional, and motivational considerations. However, the murder of many hundreds of adults, through defrauding them of true canoe and kayak safety is also sickening.

One interesting aspect of US Canoe and Kayak Murders is that almost everyone either knows about someone dying in a canoe or kayak directly, or they are only a few people away from knowing someone who was murdered in a canoe or kayak. Therefore in a jury there will not only be the 1000 deaths and thousands of loved ones; some of the jury are not far removed from knowing people who died, first hand. Put them in a swimming pool with any of the "rescues", compared to the 2 little girls rescuing themselves plus any other swimmers in the water (half of the jury). The jury will find the "rescues" impossible, and the girls' sponsons easy, plus the ability to rescue many more in the water than just the paddlers.

The jury, and anyone else quickly asks: "Why would the canoe and kayak industry not try to sell using safety and "user friendly" ideas?" As I have said before, some instructors are bullies, and they want either money for instruction, or gratification of their ego as "superior" in some way, or both. And some are sadistic. This results in the highest death rate scandal in history. Far higher than any US vehicle scandals, like Firestone/Ford.

US canoe and kayak murders are unique in that the 1500 dead victims are so often blamed for their own deaths, although they have no means to escape death in the water. Even experts with years of experience would die without a powerboat to rescue them, like the World rolling champs in Greenland. Anyone who cannot get out of the water in time will die, wearing a PFD or not.

Victims are blamed for not wearing a PFD. However, about 30 % of the dead US victims in year 2000 were wearing a PFD (USCG BARD). Wearing a PFD cannot magically get people out of the water to save their lives. What we see is that more of the dead wear PFDs. The dead needed a simple means to get out of the water and stay out: A simple Life Raft. Almost all of the dead remained on the surface of the water long enough to grab the canoe or kayak, and get out of the water if they had a 5 second, built-in life raft for $50 US, with a boarding platform like FAA airliner life rafts. Pretty simple. Not wearing a PFD does not mean these people deserve death. On a hot day lots of experts don't wear them either.

Some people don't wear seatbelts either, but that is no excuse to make cars less safe. Ironically, this is exactly the argument for canoes and kayaks: Make them as dangerous as possible (to try to sell dangerous instruction and expensive paraphernalia that have no means to save lives; since there is no way provided to get bodies out of the water.)

"The National Transportation Safety Board continues to have recreational boating safety on its “10 Most Wanted List” for safety improvements. Recreational boating fatalities are still second only to highway fatalities."
(National Association of State Boating Law Administrators, release May 17, 2002.)

And of these recreational boating fatalities, canoes and kayaks are the most dangerous by far: "Canoes and kayaks have the highest fatality rate of all boat types ñ double the rate of personal watercraft and 4 times higher than open motorboats." (US Congressional Testimony). The US Coast Guard Release No:071-01 "Canoes and kayaks have by far the highest fatality rates per million hours of exposure (.42) as any other boat type."

Let's keep it simple: Referring only to two popular kayaking books. Making canoes and kayaks as dangerous as possible, and blaming the victim too:

Kent Ford, Kayaking, 1995: "There are zillions of rescues that work,...Each rescue is designed to get you back into the safety of your boat so you can paddle away in a comfortable, stable manner...Self-rescues are much harder than assisted rescues. Getting water out of a capsized boat and getting back into the boat by yourself are tricky...Paddle Float...This works reliably in calm water without outside assistance, but paddlers debate its effectiveness in rough conditions. (pp.83-85)

Why would there be "zillions of rescues" if there was a simple way  of saving your life in a canoe or kayak? Apparently there are also "zillions of rescues" that don't work if you just read a little further, as in any "Bait And Switch" Fraud!

Jonathan Hanson, Complete Sea Kayak Touring, 1998: "Even if you are an accomplished Eskimo roller, any number of circumstances could prevent you from rolling up successfully in bad conditions, a paddlefloat could mean the difference in regaining the cockpit quickly" (p.36) "The biggest danger of the paddlefloat is the false sense of security it engenders among fools." (p.86)

Now you would think that the canoe and kayak industry, not having any reliable means to saves lives, (no means in sea kayaks above) and no open canoe rescues, would embrace the built-in CO2 sponsons. No. Apparently they want to continue to kill as many victims as possible, in the US and other countries. The means of killing is the Bait and Switch fraud technique used by Enron and other corporations. But at least these corporations do not deliberately kill (i.e. murder) so many innocent victims.

This practice of denying any reasonable means of saving human lives in canoes and kayaks is criminally negligent.
 
 

More Stable Kayaks Misrepresented as Less Stable:

There is an endless list of possible fraudulent "safety" techniques in this Bait and Switch business model. You may be surprised to hear that some authors actually contend that narrower kayaks are more stable in waves. They actually state that sponsons, in fact any kind of sponsons, make a kayak less stable. Let's look at one publisher's problems, Mcgraw-Hill. The following is an email sent to suzanne_telsey@mcgraw-hill.com, general counsel, Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:30 PM:

Dear Mcgraw-Hill:

RE: Mcgraw-Hill Canoe and Kayak Murders

Mcgraw-Hill has now helped murder about 200 US citizens through 2 books: Knapp's "Optimum Kayak" (that I warned you about, in Dec. 2000), and now Hanson's "Complete Sea Kayak Touring."

Mcgraw-Hill has a consistent message in these books: "Make kayaks (or canoes) as deadly as possible to leave innocent citizens, including children, to die in the water (where body warmth is sucked out at a rate 25 times faster than air.)" Instead of a simple CO2 sponson Life Raft, deployed by pulling a tab, like any life raft or inflatable PFD, in 5seconds. (These sponsons are contained in sleekly mounted containers Marked "Emergency-Rescue", so anyone, even a novice, can easily get out of the killing water, and even paddle to safety.)

These are factory installed, $50 US, for each canoe or kayak. They are manufactured identically to US Coast Guard approved Inflatable PFDs, that can be inflated by mouth as well as a gas cartridge. These sponsons have about 80 lbs. of buoyancy.

Just go to the US Patent Office website and put # 6,343,562 into the SEARCH box. These sponsons are much more powerful and effective, especially when canoes and kayaks are flooded. And canoes and kayaks are especially vulnerable to flooding. Mcgraw-Hill is effectively murdering US citizens by denying them even inexpensive, built-in sponsons. Your books are misleading and deadly regarding canoe and kayak safety.

My May 2001 letter to the Attorney-General of Florida documents the ludicrous: "...the Eskimo roll being the most famous and effective. It's also the hardest...An outrigger rescue with a paddlefloat..." (Canoe and Kayak Magazine, Kayak Touring 2001, p.53) How can the "hardest" rescue be the "most famous and effective"? The World Champs in Greenland require a rescue boat at their Annual Rolling championships (Sea Kayaker Magazine, Feb. 2001, p.41).

Even worse however, these rolling lies put true safety and rescue beyond the reach of everyone using a canoe or kayak. This is a deliberate murder scam to sell expensive instruction. Your books do this!

Of course any CO2 Gas Sponson kayak or canoe can rescue at least 2 swimmers, having much greater stability and propelling power than the award-winning windsurfer who rescued 2 capsized fishermen with just a board and no effective paddle. Canoes and kayaks can be quickly transformed from being the most deadly and vulnerable watercraft in the world (US Congress and USCG reports), into a stable emergency rescue craft. Why not sell canoes and kayaks with safety? Advertise their safety and rescue potential! Gain respect for canoes and kayaks, instead of the usual: "There goes another accident just waiting." Why murder so many people deliberately, with cruel, even sadistic, and extremely deadly instruction? This is against the law and creates much cost to society, apart from pain and suffering. It is a poor way to sell a sport.

Over 2 years ago I diplomatically asked Mcgraw-Hill to stop deliberately misleading and deadly publications, that also misrepresent my patented sponsons.You acted in an arrogant manner. I now warn you to make suitable reparation to myself and all of the berieved US families you have harmed.

It is in the interests of Mcgraw-Hill to behave in a socially responsible manner toward US citizens, especially in the face of legal actions against Mcgraw-Hill.

References:

1. U.S. Congressional Testimony: "Canoes and kayaks have the highest fatality rate of all boat types ñ double the rate of personal watercraft and 4 times higher than open motorboats.". Also USCG Release No:071-01 "Canoes and kayaks have by far the highest fatality rates per million hours of exposure (.42) as any other boat type."

2. I told Mcgraw-Hill to stop murdering people using their publications in year 2000. You will recall the email to Suzanne, General Counsel, Mcgraw-Hill:

"Referring to the entire sentence in the book, that you quoted in the FAX: "In steep or breaking seas, the extra width created by the sponsons may actually be destabilizing if the kayak broaches to the waves." This statement is untrue. The sponsoned kayak is less likely to be destabilized if the kayak broaches to the waves, than any kayak without sponsons."

3. The US Military Kayakers, (10th Airbourne, Special Forces) 1994, recommended sponsons over any other safety device, in heavy breaking seas or dangerous surf landings. In fact any emergency requiring much greater stability in waves!

4. Mcgraw-Hill publishes at least 2 books, despite all warnings, that contradict the Law of Gravity! Both Knapp and Hanson argue that wider kayaks are less stable in waves in your books! In order for this to work, the Law of Gravity would need to be repealed for narrower kayaks in waves!

5. Hanson (referring to my sponsons, p.89): "Care must be exercised with such systems, however, as they effectively add up to a foot to the beam of the kayak, with a resulting loss of responsiveness in steep waves. If a float-equipped kayak did capsize, righting it would be troublesome."

Hanson is terribly stupid. Overturned canoes and kayaks are difficult to turn upright since they are slippery and have no easy means to grasp the hull unless they have sponsons on! Any child can easily right a kayak merely by putting body weight on top of a sponson, sinking it, since all sponsons have no greater buoyancy than 80 lbs. Hanson's type of sponson actually has about half that buoyancy force!

6. Now why would Mcgraw-Hill try to murder US citizens? To make money from these stupid books! Why would Hanson and Knapp try to kill people with these books? To make money.

7. In fact Mcgraw-Hill not only murders US citizens with the wide variety of unworkable rescues advertised in these books, (just try a judge and jury with any of them in a swimming pool); but also denies them the obvious necessity for life: A Simple, Inexpensive Life Raft to get bodies out of the water. For example a simple CO2 sponson Life Raft, deployed by pulling a tab, like any life raft or inflatable PFD, in 5 seconds. (These sponsons are contained in sleekly mounted containers Marked "Emergency-Rescue", so anyone, even a novice, can easily get out of the killing water, and even paddle to safety.)

Yours truly,

Tim Ingram 231 Gordon Drive, Penetanguishene, Ontario L9M 1Y2, phone 705-549-3722
 
 

Considerations:

Why would so many authors write books describing rescues that obviously leave victims in unstable kayaks (and canoes), instead of making them more stable, rather easily (especially with CO2 sponsons built-in at the factory)?
And why would they not promote canoes and kayaks as safe craft, with a built-in stabilizing life raft, to function as a lifesaving boat, capable of rescuing swimmers in trouble on any waters of the world?

I suggest that these authors worry that they have nothing to write about, despite the fact that they are now writing about leaving people in canoe and kayak emergencies, to die in the water. (There is an endless list of topics to be taught regarding the enjoyment of kayaks and canoes. It appears that canoes and kayaks are being deliberately made as dangerous as possible to sell instruction that does not work.)

The ACA letter above (that was written about 200 US deaths ago, with more deaths in Canada and other countries), obviously was against the only idea that could save these victims: the sponson life raft.. A life raft concept is rather obvious. Just as rolls and reentry rolls obviously fail, although advertised as superior to paddle floats. The re-entry roll in fact, obviously leaves people with a kayak full of water, with no way to become stable, let alone more stable in a capsizing emergency. This is an obvious and deadly fraud among other "bait and switch" rescue fraud techniques, that are prevalent throughout the canoe and kayak industry. Enron took no lives directly.

This fact is just one reason for this book. If these people wish to clear their names from any connection to fraud and 1500 US canoe and kayak deaths, they can start to endorse real canoe and kayak safety. If they do not attempt to rectify their "mistakes", and continue to make canoes and kayaks as dangerous as possible, then they will suffer serious consequences.

Criminal negligence causing death is a serious offense! There are also grounds here for murder in the second degree: reckless disregard for the safety and value of human life.

I receive complaints on a fairly regular basis, from many athletic, would-be paddlers who complain of no real "rescues" being taught. One call from an Australian marathon runner and triathalon athlete told me he was "almost drowned" in a class that taught the "re-entry roll". He said he would have preferred instruction with a paddle float instead; although he was aware, as almost all books state, that the paddlefloat was a very poor rescue idea, requiring balance, calm water and good luck, due to the very precarious proceedures in the paddle float "rescue", that leave a victim less stable than before capsize!
 
 

More Bait and Switch Canoe and Kayak Techniques:

Just in case you thought only one author advocates that the re-entry roll is the safest idea (despite the fact that the victim is in more danger, is colder, and is much less stable than before capsize):

Reentry and Roll:

"For paddlers with good rolling skills, this is the quickest way to recover from a wet exit. You can be back in the boat and rolled up within a minute." (Jonathan Hanson, Complete Sea Kayak Touring, 1998, p.85)

(You will also have a boat full of water obviously! And no way to stabilize it while trying to pump it out. Pumping requires at least one hand, holding a paddle at least one hand, and the sprayskirt is generally at least a one hand operation. In Fact: It is impossible to pump out the flooded kayak through an opening between the sprayskirt and the cockpit rim. "...It has two fairly serious shortcomings: You can't seal the sprayskirt, and you can't keep both hands on the paddle while pumping." Sea Kayaker Magazine, February 2003, p.29

This is why the reentry roll is so deadly, even if anyone could easily do it. Just another trick with which to endanger human life to make money.)

Good note in the above book on the paddle float:

" The only danger to a rigid outrigger setup is the extra stress on the paddle... (i.e. Breakage)...one key to a successful paddle-float reentry is doing it quickly...then get in fast...Look for a lull in the waves to let go of the paddle and secure your sprayskirt...while pumping...(p. 88)
 
 

The Deadly Pumping Out of Kayaks Using the Popular Hand-Held Pump and A Sprayskirt:




It has generally been recognized for many years that kayaks are impossible to pump out through a sprayskirt, even in small waves. You need hands for the paddle, pump and sprayskirt, but you still can't seal the sprayskirt, so water comes back in. This has been openly acknowledged: "...It has two fairly serious shortcomings: You can't seal the sprayskirt, and you can't keep both hands on the paddle while pumping." (Sea Kayaker Magazine, February 2003, p.29)

Almost all kayaks lack either a foot pump or an electric pump. Few sprayskirts fit well enough to be "not fiddly" or leaky. So the flooding of kayaks is a major safety concern. Another idea is to shove the pump down the top of the sprayskirt. But this seems to require unzipping the PFD, since the tops of sprayskirts normally extend some distance underneath the PFD.

Reference: Matt Broze, "Pumping Out after Paddle Float Rescue", Paddlewise, Wed, 20 Jun 2001 02:36:43 -0700: "...obviously there are going to be certain combinations of clothing and spraydecks that don't allow a pump down the front. Please try it and report back (if you don't knock yourself out and drown after hitting your chin)."

Mr. Broze and his associate George Gronseth continue to mislead American and Canadian victims to their deaths in SEA Kayaker Magazine, lying about pumping out kayaks in 2006!:

"The most effective way of using a handheld bilge pump in rough seas is to lift the bottom of your PFD up and shove the pump down between the spray skirt and your belly. This way is slow and awkward, but you can pump with the spray skirt completely sealed. Practice it." (p.27, SEA KAYAKER MAGAZINE, June 2006.) This obvious lie is one of the most egregious and deadly lies ever printed in an American Magazine! See for yourself how the PFD must be unfastened to even allow access to the top of a spray skirt, as Broze admits just above in JUNE 2001! Over 500 dead Americans, and over 125 dead Canadians in canoes and kayaks later.

Canoes and kayaks must be stable when fully flooded, allowing even 10 year old girls without expensive and fraudulent instruction to immediately rescue themselves and others with $25 CO2 airbag sponsons.

It is difficult to find more contempt anywhere for the value of human life: Obviously flooded kayaks quickly re-capsize to leave the victim to die a terror-filled and agonizing death in the water.

Mr. Broze has been "playing God" for many years: ""A capsized paddler who Eskimo rolls is still in the same conditions that capsized him or her in the first place, and with each roll he or she will take on more water, lessening the kayak's stability." Matt Broze, Deep Trouble, p.91. You will note his focus on "Eskimo Rolls" in this book and other publications.

His website (March 2000) pleads with those paddlers who tell him they can't roll their loaded kayaks, to do it! But reviewers in Sea Kayaker Magazine Feb. 2000 can't roll a kayak only slightly different from their own (which they can't roll loaded either.) A Personal Statement, p. 84, in "Deep Trouble", by Matt Broze admits: "In the effort to encourage the use of this rescue as a backup to rolling, perhaps we have unintentionally..." Matt is referring to David Kelley's death, using a paddlefloat designed by Matt. Paddlefloats are deceptively deadly.

Now why would Mr. Broze not read "Sea Wings to the Rescue", below, printed in Sea Kayaker Magazine, Winter 1993 by his co-author of "Deep Trouble" Chris Cunningham (in the pictures). Broze does not want true rescue safety. He likes "playing God".

These killers are still at it 5 years later, and over 600 American and Canadian deaths in canoes and kayaks (USCG and Canadian Red Cross databases.) These killers are both American and Canadian. After 5 years it is rather obvious that this "safety" problem is more of a badge of membership, than a source of great grief to many American and Canadian families. Any law-abiding citizen realizes these killers are best paddling Guantanamo Bay. They have  murdered far more than Al Qaeda (about 600) in these 5 years since Sept.11, 2001. Considering how tiny these groups are, these killers are far more deadly than Al Qaeda:

"All national paddlesports organizations combined comprise just one percent of committed users and a tenth-percent of the total user group...To represent paddlers to regulatory agencies with legitimacy, an organization should represent at least 10 percent of the sport's committed users...The ACA is the paddlesport organization best placed ...to protect paddlers from paddlecraft registration, required education and mandated PFD use...protecting our sport from needless government regulation." (Paddler, Sept./Oct., 2003, p.84)

From: "mike dziobak" <mdziobak@mtu.edu>
To: PaddleWise@PaddleWise.net
Reply-To: mdziobak@mtu.edu
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 02:13:33  mike daly wrote:

>The use of air switches and buttons eliminates the home-made wiring
>problem.  All wiring you do is internal to the waterproof case and
>can be as bulletproof as any factory wiring job.

How robust is that air switch? I tend to jam a lot of stuff in back of the
seat and the seat back sometimes puts a lot of pressure on things back
there.

>> The hole through the spray skirt system might be the best option but I
>> dread cutting a hole in a $100.00 plus shirt. And it still requires
>> one hand to operate the hand pump.

>Two hands.  You still have to stabilize the pump with one hand while
>pumping with the other.  If you want a one hand solution, use a deck
>mounted pump.

I thought it might be possible to hold the pump between my legs while
pumping with one hand and bracing enough with my knees against the inside
of the cockpi coaming.

>You can use a standard pump without the hole in the skirt by
>releasing the skirt on one side and slipping the pump down between
>the skirt and the coaming.

Does this really work in very rough water? Whenever I pratice this in just
moderately rough conditons, a lot of water comes in through the partly
open skirt and my skirt wants to come off entirely. I have a very tight
rubber randed skirt which does not seem to work well with this method.
Even in calm water there is still a lot of water left in the cockpit. I
just don't really like it.

After reviewing the comments so far and the ones on the other thread about
the surprise capsize, I am leaning more an more toward an electric pump.
But are there any fans out there of deck mounted pumps? I heard the stern
mount ones are slow and hard to use and the ones in front of the cockpit
tend to bang up the knees and shins.
-mike
The hole through the spray skirt system might be the best option but I
> >> dread cutting a hole in a $100.00 plus shirt. And it still requires
> >> one hand to operate the hand pump.
>
> >Two hands.  You still have to stabilize the pump with one hand while
> >pumping with the other.  If you want a one hand solution, use a deck
> >mounted pump.
>
> I thought it might be possible to hold the pump between my legs while
> pumping with one hand and bracing enough with my knees against the inside
> of the cockpi coaming.
>

All the hand pumps I have seen use the up stroke to draw water out of
the boat and out the pump exhaust. So you need one hand to work the
pump and one hand to hold it *down* on those up strokes.

I wish there was a hand pump that worked on the down stroke, like a
bicycle pump. There's two reasons for this: I have much stronger
muscles for pushing down than I do for pulling up, and pushing down
would let me rest the pump on the bottom of the boat and give me the
possibility of having one hand free.

--
  Darryl
The re-enter and roll from the inverted position, was I believe, originally
intended to be done so that the skirt was reattached while you were
underwater, thereby mitigating the amount of water entering the kayak when
rolling back up (cmpared to doing so without a skirt on or than with the
side-entry re-enter and roll which might scoop water in far too readily).

I've had direct experience with both foredeck mounted pumps versus rear-deck
mounted pumps in real-world emergencies in heavy, rebounding and breaking
seas. The front mounted pump is sufficient, while a rear mounted pump is
effectively usable only by another paddler (IMHO). The foot mounted/bulkhead
mounted pump works the best of the three locations, but can cause some leg
cramping. They work best with a kayak of sufficient volume in and around the
foot/tibia/knee area. The pump rate on hand held pumps move a lot of water,
but can be very tiring to use in big volumed cockpits. There is no perfect
solution, though an electric pump doing its thing is a marvel to behold by a
frightened, wet, cold paddler.

I prefer simply staying in my boat these days. Once I get my new aortic
valve, I should be able to hold my breath for at least three roll attempts.
If I need more than that, I deserve to be sushi. I'm currently staying out
of storms for now.

For those contemplating a real-life paddlefloat rescue in rough water, best
be forewarned that a strong paddle shaft is invaluable.

And as for those like Dave Kruger who don't roll yet have logged miles and
miles safely on the BC/Washington/Oregon coasts, you truly epitomize what
mature, prudent paddling is all about.

Doug Lloyd

> Does this really work in very rough water? Whenever I pratice this in just
> moderately rough conditons, a lot of water comes in through the partly
> open skirt and my skirt wants to come off entirely. I have a very tight
> rubber randed skirt which does not seem to work well with this method.
> Even in calm water there is still a lot of water left in the cockpit. I
> just don't really like it.
>
> After reviewing the comments so far and the ones on the other thread about
> the surprise capsize, I am leaning more an more toward an electric pump.
> But are there any fans out there of deck mounted pumps? I heard the stern
> mount ones are slow and hard to use and the ones in front of the cockpit
> tend to bang up the knees and shins.
> -mike
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise@PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request@PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
The big advantage of putting your spray skirt on while you are upside down
(not that I have succeeded very often) is that you don't have to mess with
it once you are upright. My skirt requires two hands to put on. Add in
pumping the foot pump with one foot and bracing with my other two hands,
and it gets to be a bit much....

I wonder if a short bulkhead or, more properly, ridge down the center of
the cockpit, about 2-3 inches high, would mitigate the free-surface effect
and help to stabilize the kayak after a reenty?

Chuck Holst
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise@PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request@PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************

More Reasonable Paddlers

Most of the normal population in both countries is reasonable, with only a few misunderstandings, regarding physics and naval architecture applied to canoes and kayaks. I invented them in 1987, based on my knowledge of physics and naval architecture. Note that these persons usually don't realize that a flooded canoe or kayak is much more stable than unflooded, Due to massive neutral buoyancy ballast coupled with sponson buoyancy. This is why 2 ten year old girls without any experience or instruction can rescue themselves and large adult victims, in rough water or calm. The US Military Special Forces Kayakers, 10th Airborne, Fort Devens, MA invited me and famous author John Dowd to their large Symposium, open to the Military Kayaking Teams from NATO countries in 1994. See a brief description of their findings in the preface to this book:

Sea Kayaks Techniques Bulletin Board

Re: Safety and sponsons - Talking to Tim Ingram

Posted By: David
Date: Sunday, 7 July 2002, at 8:21 a.m.

In Response To: Saftey and sponsons (Tim Mattson)

I had a long talk with Tim Ingram yesterday, asking him all about sponsons. He is very nice on the phone, speaks quite calmly, listens well. I rather enjoyed our conversation. He certainly doesn't strike me as someone who flies off the handle, at least in person.

He invented them in 1992, based on his studies of military flotation devices, he is a walking encyclopedia on this subject. Most military ops used sponsons for entry onto surf beaches, but then again, according to Tim, military use of kayaks is down, they are too easily detected with modern technology. I don't agree with everything he says, his impression is that the paddlesport industry is rejecting sponsons because they are so effective that they would eliminate most of the need for instruction. He definitely believes in instruction, but feels most instructor's time could be better spent teaching how to interpret charts, plan routes, assess sea conditions, etc. He is definintely pushing for legal action against the ACA, there is alot of discussion of conspiracy so that ACA can protect its own market and interests. This is where I just didn't bother arguing, I disagree that sponsons are the be and end all of safety. When I asked about compromises in secondary stability he pointed out the fact that the life raft does not tip in most conditions and that the combination of enhanced flotation and ballast is still a time-honored way to save lives at sea. He does have a point here, and I think we get too caught up in the secondary stability argument, the UBC research tank results showed that narrow kayaks tip easier, they were no more stable than wide boats, so I am even beginning to doubt the hype about secondary stability and kayaks. Face it, a wide boat is a stable boat. Not much fun for 3D paddling of Jeds, not so easy to get onto edge, but more stable in big waves. Not sure, I have read hundreds of papers on secondary stability, but there is little evidence to back up these claims that somehow a narrow boat will ride waves more securely than a wide beam boat. I think that the hype surrounding narrow yaks (for touring) is worse and probably more misleading than Tim's sponson comments. Narrow boats, with very rounded hulls, providing enhanced secondary stability, to me, are just capsizes waiting to happen in all but the most skilled hands.

He is certainly pro-paddlefloat rescue, but believes that sponsons stabilize the boat after re-entry, so in combination with paddlefloat put the paddler in a more secure position, to get to shore. His new model has both a regular inflation valve, and a gas cartridge, he is designing longer sponsons which can be deployed with gas cartridge and provide a substantial increase in flotation over older models. He has only sold about a dozen sets from MEC here in Canada, so his market penetration is really low. You have no fears of these things becoming dominant anytime soon.

Although I disagree strongly with this legal action of his, it was an interesting and pleasant conversation. He sees sponsons like a climber sees a safety harness, you wear it as insurance. And whereas some of you might still choose to rappel with a dulfersitz, the modern harness is much more effective, that's his take on sponsons. He also describes their use by aboriginal cultures of the Aleutians all the way to Greenland.

I think his best comments concern White Squall, which is, even ahead of our operation, the biggest and most successful kayak rental and instruction outfit in Ontario. They have been using sponsons, according to Tim, for years, although I have rented from White Squall and didn't find any of them on my boat. White Squall, John Dowd and other leaders in the field have endorsed them.

Anyhow, I paddled for 20 years without them, and haven't even had them out of the duffle bag for 2 years; but, I still think he has an idea, that with further refinement, are a worthy addition to rental kayaks, at least. We have all had enough of this topic, and thought I would follow up by talking directly to the designer, to clarify my own position further.

: With all our talk about sponsons and saftey, I just couldn't resist sharing
: this with you all.

: I am on all sorts of paddlesports mailing lists. I just got a catelog from
: Wyoming river Raiders. On page 6, they advertise Seawing sponsons --
: normally $150 but now on sale for $106. Is this for real? Is that really
: what they cost? That is outrageous!

: It gets better. You look at the picture that goes with the sponson add. It
: shows a picture of a studly, hair chested kayaker with aweful technique
: (all push pull with a paddle only 2/3 submerged in the water) paddling
: along in flat water with sponsons on his kayak. He is not wearing a PFD or
: a spray skirt. There isn't even a PFD on the deck of the kayak (though
: there is a pump and what looks like soem sort of sailing rig).

: What a great saftey message this sends. If you use sponsons, you're so safe
: you don't need a spray skirt of PFD. So you see, since you save all that
: money on a PFD and spray skirt, the $106 bucks you pay for the sponsons is
: a real bargin.

: --Tim

: P.S. ... and yes I am aware that Sponson-Tim did not necessarily endorse this
: add. The stupid way his product is displayed does not reflect on him or
: any sponson advocates out there. It's really the catelog company I'm
: picking on -- not the sponsons.

To Repeat: it is difficult to find more contempt anywhere for the value of human life: Obviously flooded kayaks quickly re-capsize to leave  victim to die a terror-filled and agonizing death in the water.

Sprayskirts and pumps are so problematic that human lives are endangered. Airbag Sponsons make sprayskirts and pumps irrelevant, since sponsons permit paddling to safety fully flooded. And even allow other victims in the water to be rescued and paddled to shore.

Some of the above persons are part of a solid group of less than one-dozen, who are refugees of my application of social psychology principles against the original "Wavelength" list, resulting in its' collapse; as most contributors realized finally: their cruel and anti-social behavior toward dead victims. The ACA too, is well aware of this Sea Kayaker Magazine article (and the other, shorter article, in the largest U. S. publication "Canoe and Kayak Magazine." The SK editor prudently used a New York writer instead of a Seattle author, who would have been vilified. To say nothing of magazine advertising deficits. Boycott has been used effectively to punish otherwise ethical publications, who otherwise believe the public deserves "the truth."



Sea Kayak Rescue, 2001, R. Schumann and J.Shriner, p.45: "The Paddlefloat Self-Rescue is a great first rescue for someone getting started. It requires some extra gear and lots of practice to stay sharp..."

(Obviously this is a highly unreliable rescue, as most authors state, at least between the lines. Author's Italics.)

And:
"The reenter and roll is potentially the fastest solo reentry in this book. Where the Reenter and Roll really comes into its own however, is in rough seas, because it skips the vulnerable part of..Paddlefloat reentry..at which you climb on top of your kayak and try to balance." (p.64)

Just to compare:

"Practice is the vital ingredient in learning the paddlefloat rescue...Without practicing this rescue in a variety of conditions, the paddlefloat will do you no good." (John Lull, Sea Kayaking Safety and Rescue, 2001, p.74)

"There are two advantages of the sponsons over the paddle float: first, you have support on both sides of the boat, not just the paddle float side; and second, you have a paddle to use and a stabilized boat once you are back in the cockpit." (David Harrison, Sea Kayaking Basics, 1993, pp.55-56)

"In a traditional kayak, after you flop over you have but two choices: roll up or swim. Once you're out of the traditional kayak it is extremely difficult-even for a trained and skilled paddler-to reboard. Hundreds of pounds of water are sloshing around inside, making the kayak very unstable, and you're going to have to balance your boat in the conditions that put you over in the first place while also attempting to remove the water." (Dennis Stuhaug, Sit-On-Top-Kayaking, 2000, p.40)"

For contact information and further research data: See http://www.sponsonguy.com/
 
 

Next Page: Chapter 6: Blaming Victims for Their Own Deaths in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chaptersix.html)


Atttention OPP headquarters:

Re: Meeting July 23, 2002 at OPP Headquarters, Orillia, Ontario. Material below sent to "JUS-G-OPP-GHQ Duty Office"
July 17, 2002

Dear Canadians:

Yesterday afternoon on the CBC radio phone-in program, Mr. Peter Garapick, Superintendent, Office of Boating Safety, Canadian Coast Guard, provided further evidence against the Canadian Coast Guard.

Re: Canadian Coast Guard Murder Program

Mr. Garapick, without qualification, stated that "only 5 or 6 of about 165 boating deaths a year would occur if everyone wore a PFD." This is a blatant lie. Mr. Jon Churchill, also Superintendent in the Same Office, is not the only murderer in the Canadian Coast Guard, to say nothing of Thibault, Minister, Cote, senior murder counsel, and Cauchon, Attorney General.

Twelve (12) children died in PFDs in Lake Temiskaming. They were able to execute all of the rescues they had practised. But they just recapsized since there was no emergency stability (built -in $65 Life Raft.) Eight hundred (800) have died in Canadian Canoes and Kayaks since.

Mr. Garapick and Mr. Churchill are serial killers of the worst kind. They are allowed to insert themselves within Canadian society and strike Canadians dead without warning. They kill at a rate over ten (10) times the rate of serial killers without the canoe and kayak modis operandi.

These killers are cruel and without remorse, trampling on the graves of 800 Canadians who simply made the fatal mistake of canoeing or kayaking, almost all of whom died in the water because they were denied an inexpensive ($65), built-in Life Raft to get out. The sailors in 2 World Wars had both Life Rafts and PFDs or life jackets. (Sailors on the Bismark had inflatable Life Jackets so they would not be imperilled while at action stations, or running to abandon ship through narrow corridors.)
Without the Life Rafts they were soon just as dead as they would be without a PFD, even in tropical waters. (See the tiny Life Rafts needed by fighter pilots.) Fighters usually carried the recommended knives in the cockpit to deflate these life rafts if accidentally inflated in combat, as occasionally happened.

The senior government lawyer, Mr. Cote, and his superior Mr. Cauchon, Attorney General, deliberately counsel the murder of Canadians. This matter must be brought to court as quickly as possible. The RCMP are not responsive. However the OPP is responsive, although they feel, quite rightly, that the Attorney General of Canada should correct this matter. (Or at least the RCMP.) Nevertheless, more Canadian deaths occur in Ontario than in any other province. So the OPP, bless their hearts, are going to become involved.

If the Canadian Coast Guard were serious about PFDs, the law would require PFDs to be worn. But the Coast Guard apparently wants death (job security?) The Coast Guard wants to deny canoe and kayak life rafts to Canadians to murder them, that much is clear. The OPP must charge these murderers as quickly as possible to save more innocent lives.

Four dead Canadian civilians are just as important as 4 dead Canadian Soldiers! Her Excellency the Governor General Does not want any more Dead in Canoes and Kayaks, to award the Medal for Bravery posthumously.

Tim Ingram

July 10, 2002

Her Excellency, Governor-General of Canada
Your Excellency:

Re: Canadian Canoe and Kayak Deaths

You reminded Canadians that you could intervene in a non-political manner with bureaucracy, in a CBC radio interview that was broadcast from Newfoundland July 6, 2002. You awarded Nicholas Mark Seltzer your Governor's General Medal of Bravery in 1999 posthumously, in a kayaking accident that claimed 2 lives.

About 800 Canadians have died in kayaks and canoes since 12 children died on Lake Temiskaming in 1978. Then the 12 victims had practised "rescues", but rescues cannot depend on practice. They must work regardless, like wearing a PFD. If victims don't get out of the water they die, even wearing a PFD.

Your 2 kayaking deaths involved the use of 4 kayaks made by Current Designs in Victoria, B.C. A Search and Rescue Officer from the Canadian Coast Guard visited this company in August 1994 and found that instructors there were very impressed with the idea of creating a life raft out of a capsized and fully flooded canoe or kayak by using sponsons. (This reflected the same findings of the US Special Forces Military Kayakers.)

However, the owner of Current Designs told the Officer that Life Raft Sponsons "prevented rescue". The Canadian Coast Guard also prevented this report from reaching the public. Hundreds of Canadians have died since then.
As you can see, it is plain and obvious that canoes and kayaks are the most vulnerable watercraft and they have by far the highest rate of death.

(Over 3 times the US death rate: "USCG Release No:071-01 ...Canoes and kayaks have by far the highest fatality rates per million hours of exposure .42 as any other boat type.")

It is also plain and obvious that almost all deaths occur in the water, victims succumbing to hypothermia and drowning, even wearing PFDs.

The Canadian Coast Guard's Office of Boating Safety has deliberately prevented Canadians from having a canoe and kayak Life Raft since 1994: For example, a $65 built-in Life Raft, created by two tiny gas canisters, each fitted to one side of a canoe or kayak and inflating in 5 seconds.

You may ask: "Why would they do this? This is not rational. Why would they mislead Canadians by saying that there are all sorts of canoe and kayaks rescues, that in fact are so difficult to perform and are so unreliable, even in a swimming pool, that only a fool or a criminal would entrust such trickery with human life."

In contrast, the Life Raft is the World Standard for Marine Safety. The Canoe and Kayak Life Raft Uses identical technology and materials as the already approved Coast Guard inflatable PFDs: Having the identical gas cartridge inflator and oral inflator for backup.

The canoe and kayak Life Raft utilizes weight of the flooded interior of the craft as ballast since capsized canoes and kayaks are inevitably flooded; and without protection against flooding or reflooding otherwise in emergencies, canoes and kayaks are death traps.

This ballast stability, coupled with the sponsons far exceeds the overall stability of 2 man Life Rafts that have carried people successfully through thousands of miles of stormy seas in the Pacific ocean. The flooded interiors make superior boarding platforms to the boarding platforms of contemporary Life Rafts approved for airliner use.

(Of course this stability permits pumping out of the interior too. However, in most emergencies canoes and kayaks are prone to reflooding. Better not to waste energy on pumping, even if a pump is available; but paddle immediately to safety to escape the hypothermia-inducing situation, warming the body in the process.)

Best of all the canoe and kayak Life Raft can be easily paddled to shore even fully flooded. Flooded canoes and kayaks do not necessarily mean death for recipients of the Governor's General Medal For Bravery.

This victim's family, and the families of 800 Canadians are mocked by government actions that make canoes and kayaks as dangerous as possible. The deaths of their loved ones, instead of stimulating Canadian society to lead the world in canoe and kayak safety, are thrown away.

I have attempted to persuade the Canadian Coast Guard to respect the sacrifices of 800 Canadians in marking both the inherent dangers and the ethical safety practices needed for canoes and kayaks. For many years I used very diplomatic language.

I hope, Your Excellency, that you are able to persuade the government to act immediately to save lives. If not, perhaps you can initiate an investigation by the RCMP.

Just a few facts here:

1. The family of your recipient of the Medal for Bravery would feel much better if his death can lead to real safety for kayaks and canoes. Most citizens, including Your Excellency, might otherwise think that this death, however brave, is this person's own fault.

This death is a result of extreme negligence and even willful intention to kill, in the disguise of safety: Both Coast Guard personnel and instructors sometimes state that without deaths, people would not know that canoes and kayaks are dangerous! At the same time canoes and kayaks are advertised to be "safe, they hardly ever capsize". As you know, when they do capsize, and victims can't get out of the water, they die. Near Toronto or in the Arctic. There are a large number of "experienced experts" who die or nearly die in mishaps every year.

So 800 Canadians have died since the group of 12 children died on Lake Temiskaming, trying "canoe over canoe rescues" only to capsize the "rescuing" canoes also. (Bill Mason's last book before he died clearly condemns this rescue notion, as did my own YMCA camp 30 years before his book.)

2. Usually canoe and kayak deaths are not rationalized in public as a positive safety measure. This fallacious contention is usually reserved for discussions among "experts", around campfires that are not in the public eye. The value of "character building" from such human sacrifices and suffering normally becomes part of these discussions. I have literally thousands of pages documenting such points of view from self-appointed canoe and kayak experts in internet discussion groups.
You are probably aware, Your Excellency, that the motives of serial killers involve gratification from murder and domination, control and suffering of victims. There is an enormous volume of scientific literature on such human behavior, especially since the Nuremburg trials. I was able to test numerable hypotheses, once involving the Head of the Sociology Department from a well-known University in the US.

3. Police departments understand the powers of group psychology, as they pursue the goal of public safety. The Canadian Coast Guard however has engineered canoe and kayak "safety" in order to kill as many as possible. Your Medal recipient apparently did not know this and thought he would not die. If people capsize, and can't get out of the water, they die. Near Toronto or in the Arctic. The public mistakenly assumes that the Coast Guard would not set them up for dying in a canoe or kayak, just like Nicholas Mark Seltzer.

The Canadian Coast Guard enforces safety that the American Canoe Association (ACA) and The British Canoe Union, both condemn. The ACA letter to the Attorney General of Florida, June 2001, did not defend against my charges of misleading safety regarding paddlefloat rescues (actually making capsized craft less stable than before capsize), nor against expecting all people to Eskimo roll (the Greenland Rolling Championships use a large rescue boat due to the large numbers of world champions who are unable to rescue themselves, SeaKayaker Magazine, Feb. 2001, p.41).

Instead, the ACA recommended the same assisted rescue techniques that murdered 4 schoolchildren in the UK in 1994, (resulting in convictions for manslaughter.) Capt. Thompson of the UK Coast Guard (MSA) contacted me during huge media outcry in the UK, on the advice of BCU author Mr. D Hutchinson, who stated that the safety advantages of Life Raft canoe and kayak sponsons were "obvious" in one of his many books. I discussed this matter with Mr. Rouncevelle USCG and Ms. K. Sandiford, CCG in 1994.

In 1998 a Grade 6 school class from Elliott Lake, Ontario almost died under the supervision of the YMCA camp at St. John's Island in the North Channel. The chance cruise of a motorboat, large enough to get the kids out of those deadly cold waters immediately, plus able to radio ahead for 3 ambulances to treat all for hypothermia at the nearest road, prevented a New World Record for Canoe and Kayak Deaths that is still Held by the Temiskaming Tragedy. Usually the deaths are not widely known, like the student of a Sports Camp on Lake Rosseau, Ontario, Thankgiving Day, 1997.

This brave child died in the water while wearing a PFD. The 2 staff were able to get the other child to Parry Sound General Hospital for treatment of hypothermia.

4. I have been able to construct a courtroom conviction scenario for 2nd degree murder charges, involving only 7 necessary questions. Of course competent legal counsel would plea bargain for lesser charges and argue that the Canadian Government, through the Canadian Coast Guard, authorized the murders. This is OK. The message to Canadians and to the Canadian government is that killing people by deliberately endangering them is a serious criminal offence.

This is why, Your Excellency, your intervention is so important. You can stop these deaths now. The Prime Minister and his ministers have been aware of this issue for some time now. Canadians die in kayaks and canoes whenever Canadian waters lose that protective covering of ice.

5. I state these points briefly and without intended humour, although I realize the inherent irony blurs the border of comedy and tragedy, however unintended.
I do not wish to lengthen this email to you, Your Excellency, unnecessarily. However, I wish to give you as clear an opportunity as possible to make the best decision as Governor General of Canada.

6. All of this information is in the public domain. And it is fitting to point out where dedication to canoe and kayak safety can lead. Canoes and kayaks can offer great benefits to society: Embracing wilderness skills, natural history, navigation, ecology, the-list-is-endless. Once canoes and kayaks are safe enough. Canada is the world centre for canoeing and kayaking, historically. This is an outstanding legacy throughout the world!

I would like canoes and kayaks to be included in a school curriculum. A grade 6 class can easily calculate the force of buoyancy needed to oppose any capsizing force (calculated centre of gravity of canoe or kayak) to protect against capsizes, or recapsizes (that mark so many brave and desperate struggles against death.) Recently CBC radio June 21, 2002 "Ontario Today" broadcast a program on canoes and kayaks that indicated the "expert" and host could not pass a simple grade 6 test for stability.

7. Keep in mind how many families are in grief when you address Mr Chretien and his ministers. The 800 victims represent a considerable force of public opinion. If the PM and others attempt to "slow walk" you, Your Excellency, bluntly ask them: "Why would you deny people an inexpensive, built-in Canoe and Kayak Life Raft and leave them to die in the water?"
You will have to repeat this, perhaps several times. Eventually they will find the right answer: "Life Rafts are the world-standard safety device for any marine emergency, but especially so for canoes and kayaks! There is not much boat for residual stability and safety to begin with!"

Do not give up! They may be resistant to reason and may even petulantly state that they are entitled to continue the murder policy of the Canadian Coast Guard.

Remember that they are only further proving my point that they are identical in behavior and motive to serial killers. This is plain and obvious to most judges and courts in the world. Eventually they will understand their own position. (I believe most of them know this now but are behaving identically to serial killers, hoping all will blow over and they can continue to kill.)

You must be patient and persistent. But the outcome is worth it. Your Medal for Bravery is a great means to encourage the best from Canadian Society. In this case you can make an even greater contribution to society, the memory of Nicholas Mark Seltzer, his loved ones, as well as the 800 other dead Canadians and their loved ones.

Thank you for your help.

Yours truly,

Tim Ingram
231 Gordon Drive
Penetanguishene, Ontario L9M 1Y2
phone: 705-549-3722

cc: The government of Canada, members of Parliament, and others

reference:
Your message has been forwarded to the Transportation Safety Board of Canada
Thank you
Privy Council Office / Bureau du Conseil privé
General Inquiries / Renseignements généraux
Room 1000 / Pièce 1000
85 Sparks Street / 85 rue Sparks
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
K1A 0A3
Telephone / Téléphone: (613) 957-5153
TTY / ATME: (613) 957-5741
Fax / Télécopieur: (613) 957-5043

>>> "oldguy (Tim Ingram)" <oldguy@csolve.net <mailto:oldguy@csolve.net>> 06/26/02 08:47AM >>>
June 26, 2002

Attention: Transportation Safety Board of Canada

MURDER IN OTTAWA

Since your investigation, Report Number M93W0008 (the dead kayaker wearing a PFD but drowning after suffering hypothermia, Group of Chartered Sea Kayaks, Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia, 30 July 1993), about 300 Canadians have died in the water similarly, according to the willful intention of the Canadian Coast Guard...

----- Original Message -----
From: "oldguy (Tim Ingram)" <oldguy@csolve.net <mailto:oldguy@csolve.net>>
To: "JUS-G-OPP-GHQ Duty Office" <JUS.G.OPP.GHQDutyOffice@jus.gov.on.ca <mailto:JUS.G.OPP.GHQDutyOffice@jus.gov.on.ca>>
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: Contact Results
 Dear Sir or Madam:
> I have just returned from several days holiday and I see no change in your
> reply. Please forward this to your superior officer:
>
> The OPP broadcast a clear warning on CBC radio following the death of a
> kayaker in Spring 2001 warning of criminal charges for endangering human
> life on the Grand River. The OPP were represented at the inquiry for 12
dead children in Lake Temiskaming, 1978. However, hundreds of Ontario
citiizens have died in the water since then.
>
> The OPP permits the obvious endangerment of citizens in kayaks and canoes,
> however unintentionally, through inconsistent application of the law.
> Please have your superior forward an appointment time. I suspect that the
> local OPP detachment in Penetanguishene can only refer this to your
> headquarters, so please save time and effort here.
>
> I realize that the OPP has finite resources.
>
> Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
>
> Yours truly,
> Tim Ingram
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "JUS-G-OPP-GHQ Duty Office" <JUS.G.OPP.GHQDutyOffice@jus.gov.on.ca <mailto:JUS.G.OPP.GHQDutyOffice@jus.gov.on.ca>>
> To: "'oldguy (Tim Ingram)'" <oldguy@csolve.net <mailto:oldguy@csolve.net>>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:21 PM
> Subject: RE: Contact Results
Sir,
>
> If you wish to make a conduct or service complaint involving the OPP you
may attend any OPP Detachment anytime or the Professional Standards Bureau at
> the OPP General Headquarters during normal business hours. The address is
> 777 Memorial Ave. Orillia ON, L3V 3V7
>
> OPP GHQ Duty Officer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oldguy (Tim Ingram) [mailto:oldguy@csolve.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:57 AM
> To: JUS-G-OPP-GHQ Duty Office
> Subject: Re: Contact Results
>
>
> No, I don't wish to merely report an incident. I clearly and respectfully
> ask you as below for an appointment at OPP headquarters in Orillia.
>
> Please respond appropriately. This will involve discussion other OPP
staff..
>
> Thank you, Tim Ingram
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "JUS-G-OPP-GHQ Duty Office" <JUS.G.OPP.GHQDutyOffice@jus.gov.on.ca <mailto:JUS.G.OPP.GHQDutyOffice@jus.gov.on.ca>>
> To: "'oldguy (Tim Ingram)'" <oldguy@csolve.net <mailto:oldguy@csolve.net>>
> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 1:09 PM
> Subject: RE: Contact Results
> Sir,
>
> If you wish to report an incident requiring police investigation, please
> contact your local police service. To report an incident to the OPP, you
may
> contact the regional communications centre at 1-888-310-1122.
>
> GHQ Duty Officer.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oldguy (Tim Ingram) [mailto:oldguy@csolve.net]
> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 7:43 AM
> To: JUS-G-OPP-GHQ Duty Office
> Subject: Re: Contact Results

> Dear OPP - Duty Office
>
> The email addresses below have already been used with no reply, weeks ago.
> I live within a 45 minute drive to OPP Headquarters in Orillia. Please
send me an appointment time to meet with the appropriate people at your
> headquarters. As you know, deliberate endangerment of people is a criminal
> offence, especially when these people die.
> Please ensure that the list of canoe and kayak deaths in Ontario is
brought to the meeting. Since 1978, with the deaths of 12 children in Lake
> Temiskaming, hundreds have died in Ontario.
>
> Thank you, in advance, for forwarding my appointment time. I am aware of
> community policing initiatives as well as other programs that set the OPP
> among the best police forces in the world. I look forward to meeting with
> your staff in Orillia.
>
> Yours truly,
>
> Tim Ingram
> 231 Gordon Drive
> Penetanguishene, Ontario L9M 1Y2
> phone: 705-549-3722
 


Owner Says He Won't Rent to Campground Again after Storm Swamped 31 Young Kayakers

August 4, 2005

"According to an article in the Minnesota-based Duluth News Tribune, Brian Carlson, owner of Brule River Canoe Rentals, said that he no longer plans to rent Lake Superior sea kayaks to a local campground after 23 girls, ages 9 to 11, were rescued on the lake after a line of intense thunderstorms and high winds swept the Apostle Island National Lakeshore area. Carlson stated that, "The girls were probably a little young and not strong enough…" However, some also question the guides' decision to continue with the trip despite a forecast predicting stormy weather.

The rescue involved the Bayfield County Sheriff's Department, the U.S. Coast Guard, Red Cliff Police and the National Park Service. Following the rescue, Carlson and other employees spent eight hours retrieving 14 kayaks that were spread over three miles of Wisconsin coastline.

The rescue is one of a half-dozen..."

These tragedies of pain and grief, are imminent, always. Death is just around the corner when canoe and kayak safety is a scam. The willingness to subject children to agonizing deaths is not a surprising fact, thanks to the remarkable research of this man:
 
 

The Man Who Shocked The World
By Thomas Blass, Ph.D.

From http://www.stanleymilgram.com.

FEATURE By Thomas Blass, Ph.D. The Man Who Shocked The World Linsly-Chittenden Hall on Yale’s old campus is easy to miss-an improbable hybrid of Romanesque and neo-Gothic styles that sits in the shadow of the magnificent clock-arch straddling High Street. But in July 1961, the building hummed with an unusual amount of activity as people came and went through its doors at hourly intervals. The increased traffic was due to the arrival and departure of participants in an experiment with unexpected findings that would make it one of the most significant-and controversial-psychological studies of the 20th century.

The research was the brainchild of 28-year-old Stanley Milgram, then a recent graduate with a Ph.D. in social psychology from Harvard’s department of social relations. The name Stanley Milgram may not elicit the kind of instant recognition as, say, Sigmund Freud. And though he was something of a Renaissance man, making films and writing poetry, Stanley Milgram was no Sigmund Freud: He did not attempt an all-encompassing theory of behavior; no school of thought bears his name. But what he did do-rather than probe the interior of the human psyche-was to try to expose the external social forces that, though subtle, have surprisingly powerful effects on our behavior.

Milgram’s research, like Freud’s, did lead to profound revisions in some of the fundamental assumptions about human nature. Indeed, by the fall of 1963, the results of Milgram’s research were making headlines. He found that an average, presumably normal group of New Haven, Connecticut, residents would readily inflict very painful and perhaps even harmful electric shocks on innocent victims. The subjects believed they were part of an experiment supposedly dealing with the relationship between punishment and learning. An experimenter-who used no coercive powers beyond a stern aura of mechanical and vacant-eyed efficiency-instructed participants to shock a learner by pressing a lever on a machine each time the learner made a mistake on a word-matching task. Each subsequent error led to an increase in the intensity of the shock in 15-volt increments, from 15 to 450 volts.

In actuality, the shock box was a well-crafted prop and the learner an actor who did not actually get shocked. The result: A majority of the subjects continued to obey to the end-believing they were delivering 450 volt shocks-simply because the experimenter commanded them to. Although subjects were told about the deception afterward, the experience was a very real and powerful one for them during the laboratory hour itself.

That year, the headline of an article in the October 26 issue of The New York Times blared, “Sixty-five Percent in Test Blindly Obey Order to Inflict Pain.” A week later the St. Louis Post-Dispatch also informed its readers about the experiments-in an editorial lambasting Milgram and Yale for the ordeal they put their subjects through. That article marked the beginning of an enduring ethical controversy stirred up by the experiments that sometimes overshadowed the substance of the findings.

Those groundbreaking and controversial experiments have had-and continue to have-long-lasting significance. They demonstrated with jarring clarity that ordinary individuals could be induced to act destructively even in the absence of physical coercion, and humans need not be innately evil or aberrant to act in ways that are reprehensible and inhumane. While we would like to believe that when confronted with a moral dilemma we will act as our conscience dictates, Milgram’s obedience experiments teach us that in a concrete situation with powerful social constraints, our moral sense can easily be trampled...

It wasn’t just Asch’s work that influenced Milgram. Milgram’s interest in the study of obedience also emerged out of a continuing identification with the suffering of fellow Jews at the hands of the Nazis and an attempt to fathom how the Holocaust could have happened. A poignant illustration of this can be found in a letter Milgram wrote from France to his schoolmate John Shaffer in the fall of 1958:

"My true spiritual home is Central Europe, not France, the Mediterranean countries, England, Scandinavia or Northern Germany, but that area which is bounded by the cities of Munich, Vienna and Prague.... I should have been born into the German-speaking Jewish community of Prague in 1922 and died in a gas chamber some 20 years later. How I came to be born in the Bronx Hospital, I’ll never quite understand."

During a period of a year, Milgram conducted more than 20 variations of the basic experiment to see how changing aspects of the experimental situation might alter subjects’ willingness to obey. Four days after Milgram’s last participant was studied, the Israeli government, after a lengthy trial, hanged Adolf Eichmann for his role in the murder of 6 million Jews. The action seemed to anticipate the important role Milgram’s experiments would come to play in debates about how to account for the behavior of the Nazi perpetrators..."

Next Page: Chapter 6: Blaming Victims for Their Own Deaths in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chaptersix.html)