Page 4. Back to last page, Chapter 8: Legal Developments in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chaptereight.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)

Supplementary OPP Appendix:
(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 9: Ongoing Reckless Endangerment and Death in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. The Intent.
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/chapternine.html)

N.B. I want you to bear in mind, at the beginning of any chapter in this book, and always, the wilful and reckless endangerment of human life for profit using DEGRADING PROPAGANDA;

Whereas Any 10 Year Old Girls, Without Previous Experience or Instruction Can Easily Rescue Themselves and Many Others From Deadly Waters, Far Superior To The Most Expert Instructor.
Grieving families are similarly degraded (somehow their grief was the fault of their loved one); and deprived of their legal rights and community sympathy. These facts are obvious. But also obvious is the power of  Degrading Propaganda to blame any identifiable group for their own deaths; used throughout history to achieve the ruthless ends of special interest groups.

Some people who may appear here to be villains at first, are also victims of the power of Degrading Propaganda too. Outside of this context, most would be good, law-abiding neighbours, with care and compassion towards their own families, and other families too. This is what Dr. Milgram at Yale University found, in the most famous experiments in social psychology.

It must be carefully acknowledged here that Dr. Daniel Goldhagen of Harvard University, in his recent bestseller (even in Germany) "Hitler's Willing Executioners", found that many, (Milgram's experiments suggested a norm for most countries being 35%), would not comply with hurting or killing others, even at personal risk or risk of torture of their own families, by the Gestapo; their own families indeed were sometimes tortured to death for saving Jewish persons and other targeted "identifiable groups" within the NAZI Holocaust.

Dr. Milgram set up the Yale experiments after studying NAZI "monsters", who baffled prosecutors at the Nuremberg Trials; by showing love and compassion for others who were outside of their targeted "identifiable hate group." Of course the chapters in this book show not the Diligent Pursuit of Rescue Safety, to save innocent victims, even eleven-year-old Girl Guides. Instead, as Dr. Milgram's experiments predict, any number of  "reasons" are given for "why" these deaths must continue.

The purpose of this online book is to stop these cruel deaths as quickly as possible. The psychological power of degrading propaganda must not be underestimated. It permits many terrible human tragedies, including war; quite apart from the agonizing deaths here.

(Notice that one airbag (sponson)  is higher than the other. This is to demonstrate total flooding. If it were set lower, the same as the other sponson or "air bag", most of the water would pour out just by leaning on one Airbag sponson. Also the two girls, 7 and 10 years of age, would normally be sitting on the seats.

However, even standing up they can paddle the canoe that weighs over one ton at a speed of 2 knots. They can also turn and pick up any victims in the water. Even large and disabled adults can be rescued from the water easily, since victims only have to make it over the low gunwale to be in the canoe, so that they can be paddled to shore at 2 knots.)

See how some of the "experts" below play with the concept of "judgment" with the berieved mother of an eleven year old Girl Guide. None of this has been edited. (Emails that are written while someone is severely affected emotionally by the content, often show spelling and punctuation errors.) Pay close attention to the content, not the style, while observing the cool "mastery" of the "experts" who actually have no concrete safety contributions whatsoever: Only the nebulous word "judgment", that only they have. The masters. Contrast this with actually making canoes and kayaks into safe watercraft that can rescue people and also rescue any other swimmers who have happened to end up in the water. Superior rescue craft!

Re: A word about Timmy-boy
Posted By: Nick Schade <http://www.qajaqusa.org/cgi-bin/GreenlandTechniqueForum_config.pl/noframes/profile/nick+schade>
Date: Thursday, 20 November 2003, at 1:33 p.m.
In Response To: Re: A word about Timmy-boy <http://www.qajaqusa.org/cgi-bin/GreenlandTechniqueForum_config.pl/noframes/read/16657> (Shelley Mitchell)

"Words are inadequate for expressing my sympathy for the loss of your son.

The dangers of canoeing and kayaking are real. A simple solution for eliminating the dangers would be appreciated by many people. Tim holds out his sponsons as that simple solution. If you are to believe Tim, all that is required to turn a recklessly dangerous canoe or kayak into an absolutely safe vessel is a little bit of nylon and a few breaths of air. Unfortunately, the solution is not that easy. Don't be fooled by Tim's rhetoric. Just because Tim strongly advocates for his product, does not mean his claims are justified.

After losing a child I understand that you may feel even the slightest increase in safety is worth any price. I can not argue that. It is possible that sponsons provide a measurable safety improvement, but I don't think they are the best way to get that marginal improvement.

In a camp or rental situation Ingram-style inflatable sponsons would not hold up well. They are just thin nylon and are easily punctured or otherwise damaged. Treated with care, they will last a long time. While maybe as simple to install as anything requiring long straps and buckles, any protection will only be provided when installed correctly. If you have ever installed a child's car seat, you know that a few straps and buckles can prove quite difficult to get right. There are canoes and kayaks available with built-in sponsons. It doesn't make sense to strap on cheap nylon when a more reliable equivalent is available.
Unfortunately, there is no magic bullet. It would be great if all that was needed was less than $100 worth of nylon to protect children from the dangers of boating. Unfortunately, Tim's claims are greatly exaggerated, much of the evidence he cites is out of context and not applicable to his claims."

: First i would like to say yes he's definately a little crazy but some of the
: stuff he is saying should not be disregarded.I am a mother who lost her
: child to hypothermia May 31/2003 and you and everyone else who thinks that
: canoeing is safe is crazy your telling me that a life jacket and rope is
: enough bull my 11 year old died because they could not get back into the
: canoe after capsizing in Lake Huron how can you close the door on these
: safety sponsons when they really work. ...
Canoe Sponsons <http://www.canoegear.com/sponsons.html>

The above post deliberately ignores the CO2 PFD Sponsons refered to in this book. These built-in CO2 sponsons are made of 400 denier nylon just like USCG approved inflatable PFDs. But they could for a few cents per pair be made much stronger, with Kevlar, etc. (in bullet-proof vests, etc.) They are in tiny 1 lb. containers, analogous to the life raft containers that you might see on a sightseeing boat. This is built-in fail-safe passive safety. In the words of the National Transportation Safety Board: "...incorporation of buoyant sponsons exterior to the hull. Only the inherent reliability and fail-safe nature of a passive safety system can ensure the level of dependability essential to safeguarding the lives of passengers." p.5

These people are well aware of these significant CO2 sponson details since year 2000, as in many posts both to rec.boats.paddle and this one, exactly the same posting title:

Posted By: Brian Nystrom <http://www.qajaqusa.org/cgi-bin/GreenlandTechniqueForum_config.pl/noframes/profile/brian+nystrom> <brian.nystrom@att.net <mailto:brian.nystrom@att.net?subject=A word about Timmy-boy>>
Date: Monday, 26 November 2001, at 11:34 a.m.

"I agree that sponsons are the ticket for fishing, but I will NEVER give a dime of my money to Tim Ingram, regardless of the merits of his product. For those who don't know him, he's a borderline psychotic that will apparently do anything to make a buck. He's terrorized the rec.boats.paddle newsgroup for years and has attempted to organize class action lawsuits against the kayaking industry in order to force them to equip all boats with sponsons. He has stooped as low as to use the tragic deaths of children as a marketing ploy for his products. Although he appears to have taken most of his rantings off of his web site, the guy is a low-life profiteer and in my opinion, is not deserving of our support or our money.
BTW, sponsons for fishing can be easily and cheaply made from dock bumpers or a pair of paddle floats. Actually, almost anything that will provide extra buoyancy will work. Personally, I don't think I'd want to use nylon bags around treble hooks."

This poster is sufficently intelligent to understand that paddle floats and "bumpers" are both too small and the wrong shape to create adequate sponson buoyancy. Two bumpers of significant size are very expensive, over $100. Same with two paddlefloats that are commonly of only 200 denier nylon. The $25 CO2 sponsons can be 400 denier nylon reinforced with Kevlar, used in car tires and bullet-proof vests. This is rather obvious. It is interesting that the obvious safety of a canoe or kayak that is stable enough for fishing is not acknowledged by this poster. Particularly when almost all deaths result from victims not getting out of the water, or not being able to stay out!

Would you like to see the pictures of the 2 dead boys in the Rome Tribune, February 2005? You see, they were wearing PFDs too, in Florida waters on a school trip; but they were denied any means to get out of the water, so they died like the Girl Guides, when the back-up powerboat suffered an entangled propellor:

I made the following rec.boats.paddle post Friday, November 24, 2000 9:28 AM regarding Slim Jim Stuart's post, that was significant for its' honesty and intelligence, regarding the dangers of teaching kids skills, that could be applied here:

Slim Jim <jgstuart@--------> wrote:
>
> > Need a little help sorting this out. I have coached juniors slalom, particularly more advanced 12-16 year
olds, with emphasis on technical technique, bigger water (i.e. Dickerson,
Potomac Gorge), and physical development training. I haven't coached for a few
years, partly due to work, but more due to the issues described below.

Here's the dilemma:
- I can help kids develop elite slalom and WW skills, and fast. - By the age of 14, some are highly skilled, if with limited "mean" river experience.
- Coaching develops skills which get kids competent enough to even
consider "extreme zone" runs. - Teen peer group pressure to push for extreme runs is enormous, and the definition of extreme continues to mount. - Safety focus in whitewater is nearly non-existent these days, and role modeling only goes so far. - WW slalom can be richly rewarding for developing youth - exercising
talent, dedication to hard work, complex brainwork and experience pyramiding, physical development, travel and intrigue, camaraderie and community,
all very admirable and noble activities. (keeps em off the street too)
- But out in the falls, kids are now making decisions in mere seconds to
run extreme risk WW, usually without perspective.
- If they ask me: "Do you think I should run it?" I respond: "Which
would be more dangerous, running that drop, or having all four of your wisdom
teeth extracted? And how much time would you want to decide about having your
teeth pulled?"
- I've already had several kids with "off the course" very close calls
and serious injuries. How do I rationalize coaching - or not coaching for that matter? Coaching seems like something worthwhile doing, when I'm doing it. But what would I tell the parents of a kid who dies "off course?"
> >
> > Jim Stuart

This appears to have a great deal of merit. Of course the big question is
how do kids at a beginning level learn to read the river for the hazards?
Expert coaching would be valuable there, but then, how does one ensure that
they continue to use their knowledge wisely, without raising the risk level
to a point where Jim decides it is best to stop coaching.

This thread is a very tough one and I have no whitewater suggestions.

I could only suggest a different type of canoeing and kayaking where the
risks for kids can be more easily controlled, while giving the an exciting
outdoor learning experience. Mother Nature is always exciting for kids,
sometimes the wrong type of adult supervision is what bores them out there.

Thanks Tim



You can find my above reply to Jim in rec.boats.paddle, a newsgroup that has fallen on hard times recently. You can see that if confronted, most citizens do not want to post any more deadly and degrading canoe and kayak propaganda. This experiment, conducted by me over several years, shows how responsive the most rabid "experts" are, when confronted with the simple facts. Daily posts on rec.boats.paddle went from about 50 daily to about zero! The Nuremberg trials certainly stopped similar crimes aginst humanity, conducted on the world stage. Legal action now, in Canada and the United States will quickly put an end to these horrible crimes by the canoe and kayak industry. And save about twenty (20) agonizing deaths of children every year, in the United States and Canada alone, out of about 120 dead in canoes and kayaks total, in both countries every year! See the US Coast Guard website numbers and Canadian numbers annually.

Indeed, the craze for risk appears to be isolated within a few very risk-prone individuals (as long as they don't expect to die) who think that this is the essence of canoeing and kayaking. And they appear to have convinced the USCG for 30 years that this is essential canoeing and kayaking, even though whitewater kayaks represent about 5.2 % of all kayaks sold in 2002, and touring type sea kayaks are less at 2.9 %! (National Marine Manufacturers Association website.) These are the canoes and kayaks for which these "skills", like rolling, are focused.

So this discussion group, advising the berieved mother, is actually referring to about 7.1 % of  kayaks sold in the US in 2002! They assume that their "rolling" is an extremely reliable way to save human lives, and easy to do for everyone; although they admit that they fail sometimes, since they do not possess a "bombproof" roll. (The point made in almost all canoe and kayak books, and this book,  is that rolling, usually described as the "best" rescue, is so unreliable that it must have other back-up rescues like the paddlefloat; which is described as even less reliable, since the boat is swamped, unstable and impossible to pump out through the edge of a sprayskirt, except perhaps in a swimming pool.)  This leaves 92.9 % of all kayaks with no rescues at all! No rescues whatsoever for canoes, as the mother well knows.*

These experts do not have any advice for the mother regarding canoes, except no sponsons of any kind for canoes. She obviously can't see the sense in this. No sane person can.

Transport Canada has covered up the Canadian Coast Guard Search and Rescue Study, August 1994, and punished the whistleblower. (Over 350 Canadian deaths ago, or over 160 deaths ago in Ontario.) This study was similar to the US Military Study:

"basic, no nonsense...dramatically increase...safety and...capabilities... It should be noted that within the North American civilian sea kayak industry there is some controversy...Sea Wings' direct competition with...the paddle float...the merits of Sea Wings...far outweigh those of the paddlefloat...During the IMKP 1994 we used Sea Wings with all our rescue boats as back-up flotation/stability for awashed kayaks needing assistance pumping out in heavy seas. In addition, IMKP's rescue kayak was fitted with Sea Wings on a permanent basis which allowed us to be far more stable in possible rescue operations...Sea Wings dramatically increase re-entry operations with capsized boats. Indeed, even with heavily loaded boats (those approaching 1000 lbs.) most paddlers can easily re-enter the kayak. However the most notable advantage of Sea Wings is with lightly loaded boats; ie, those kayaks which are far less stable (more tippy) than fully loaded boats. Recovery operations are far more difficult in these boats and most students have extreme difficulty in mastering the necessary techniques. This is compounded in heavy seas. Sea Wings offers an almost guaranteed method of re-entering a lightly loaded kayak even in heavy seas. Stability increase in heavy seas. Paddling in extremely heavy seas is difficult. Sea Wings offer the crews an additional method of dealing with such sea states. One of the most dangerous situations a detachment can find itself in is that of towing a disabled crew with full operational loads in heavy seas at night. The employment of Sea Wings dramatically increases the safety margin. In my opinion, this is one of the sponsons' most important contributions to MAROPS... As an historical footnote it should be noted that circumpolar kayakers (Greenlanders and Inuit) employed a similar sponson/ float for stability. It differed significantly though from Sea Wings in that it was free floating; i.e., there was apparently no harness system and stability came from pushing down on the float on the side of the kayak. In addition, during the late 70's and early 80's we employed a similar system with our commo boats. Waterproof bags were blown up and hand held to the sides of the kayak while communication was conducted. The point here is that the idea of some sort of support on the sides of the kayak for stability is very old and universal." (Spring 1994, 10th Airborne, Special Forces, Fort Devens, MA)

*The mother is obviously somewhat critical of my threats to the canoe and kayak industry, although I am only a "little" crazy compared to "and you and everyone else who thinks that canoeing is safe is crazy".  She now understands, over 2 years after her post: the situation. She no longer thinks that I am a "crackpot". I have her emails to me. Do not attempt to contact her. She has already suffered enough, along with about 40 American and Canadian families who have lost their children since her post.   This is why I want full criminal court proceedings against the Canoe and Kayak Organizations, who act as murder cults to destroy innocent lives. When the context of their behavior is considered, of course my accusations are quite "sane" and obviously my course of action is the quickest way to save lives. Consider that I invented sponsons in 1987, and I have documented about 2000 deaths in the US and Canada since then. Regretably, ten years ago I did not realize how deadly the scandal was, and its' nature. I spent many years just waiting for decent people to speak up and many did, in the US Military, at the Canadian Coast Guard, and in the kayaking books (only the main authors in 1993.) See "Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1000 Americans: US Coast Guard Studies Device to Save Victims".

Against a well organized lobby group within the US government, and the Canadian government, only the strongest words will effectively save lives. I am actually quite successful in this endeavor, considering I am one person against tens of thousands who make money from the instruction scam, or enjoy "fringe benefits" as "experts" who plainly and obviously operate to make canoes and kayaks as deadly as possible, to enhance their self-importance.

Next post and reply from the "experts.":

: Hello,
: First i would like to say yes he's definately a little crazy but some of the
: stuff he is saying should not be disregarded.I am a mother who lost her
: child to hypothermia May 31/2003 and you and everyone else who thinks that
: canoeing is safe is crazy your telling me that a life jacket and rope is
: enough bull my 11 year old died because they could not get back into the
: canoe after capsizing in Lake Huron how can you close the door on these
: safety sponsons when they really work. Why should they not be on every
: canoe that camps or organizations take our children out in as safety
: feature kids that have no idea how to get back in, or even the strength to
: do it. I am a boater myself and as a adult in a bad situation could not
: get back into a everturned canoe.I am fine with adults making the decision
: to go out but to play god with lives is crazy when these safety devices
: can save lives.Now i don't agree with all the threats and crazy arguements
: he throws out there but realisticlysponsons work, unfortunately it will
: take the lives of many more before something is done to regulate whos
: going in these canoes and what safety devices should be used when it comes
: to children, the canoe and kayak association as well as the government
: knows that these water crafts are dangerous for adults never mind sending
: our kids out in them up antil my daughters accident i had no idea how
: unsafe they were and how little safety precautions are taken not enough in
: my opinion.I love the water and still do but do we as parents know how
: unsafe it is out there people must be informed about this.I dare everyone
: to try to get 3 people back into a canoe adults not even children and then
: you will know what kind of a chance a child has.Well i agree hes a crack
: pot but don't agree that some of the stuff he says isnt true do some
: cheaking of your own about all the dealths that could have been stopped by
: another safety device being installed whether his or maybe the government
: should take the time to invent something on there own.
: Thank-You for reading my post Shelley Mitchell

"Ms Mitchell,
First off, I want to offer my condolences for the lost of your child. As a father of two boys, I can't imagine what that would be like...

As regards to sponsoons, I don't think a "device" will necessarily make canoeing/kayaking safer. I much rather rely on the development of judgement and skills to stay out of trouble. Right now, my boys never go out without me being present and they will never go out in a seakayak except in the most benign conditions -- flat, warm water -- until I feel they are ready. I have taken them out to work on some basic white water paddling techniques -- one on one -- to further develop their skills. I take very seriously the need to educate myself on the dangers of kayaking and to develope my skills and judgement to match the conditions. I take as seriously my responsibility to educate my children on these should they choose to continue to pursue this sport as I have.

In my opinion, more government regulations and/or devices will never make up for education, judgement and skills. I will take your loss as an example of why I probably should nudge others I see on the water as being less than safe in their approach.
sing"

It is difficult to see what "sing" considers "enough skills and judgment". It is is impossible for anyone, including his sons to determine what is "enough". You just make the safest possible craft in the most simple way possible. It is peculiar that "devices" are so disparaged, when airplanes, cars, all modern concepts rely on the safety of devices. Who benefits from the promulgation of such nonsense? There have been many children needlessly killed in two years, in canoes and kayaks. Tim Ingram

"Shelley,

First off, I offer my most sincere condolances regarding the loss of your child. I cannot and probably most of us cannot imagine what you have gone through.

One of the reasons this Forum exists is to make safety information and skills readily available to all who read. That being said, it is up to all of us to learn, practice, and teach those same skills to others. This cannot be imposed by the Government or any other outside force. Sad stories such as your own should be motivation enough to paddle and teach paddling in as safe way.
Canoes and kayaks (the focus of this Forum) are not the most stable craft when compared to powerboats, swiming floats, etc. However, with a sufficiently skilled operator, the kayak can navigate safely in rough conditions. My personal experince with canoes is not so positive. I dislike them for many reasons, but that is my personal opinion formed by observation and limited skill with these craft.

Sponsons and other safety equipment are/is usless... unless the operator knows how to use it. Again, I must stress the issue of training. It matters little how old the operator is, if the person is trained, taking advantage of the safety equipment leads to non-tragic outcomes.

Now to judgement and supervision... This is the hardest part to learn. In theory, adults should supervise, make good judgements, and teach children the why and how of good decisions. In the cases when the wiser ones are not able to swoop in and repair the problems, tragedy can and often does strike. Fortunately for me, I have survived my mistakes and times of missing adult supervision. It has not been without cost, however. I carry some bad scars and my hearing is not what it shood be, but I learned.

It is my opinion that humans like to take risks. Some more, others less, but it has allowed us to advance as a species. However, it comes with a price. I suppose I could paddle a 'risk-free' kayak with outriggers, floats, and the like. I would also find it dull beyond tollerance and still the Ocean will deal with me as it likes anyway.

In summary, having some hysterical fanatic force me to build a kayak with sponsons doen't make me safer. Having the Government impose this design on all kayaks won't make them safer. It is up to us.
I wish with all my might that this somehow could bring your child back, but it cannot."
Sincerely,
Juan Ochoa

Juan seems like a "nice guy" who wants needless risk of life for himself and every one. But he propagates the same degrading canoe and kayak propaganda, regarding sponsons/airbags evaluated by US Military Kayakers, that murders children in cool waters.  The $25 CO2 sponsons were available since year 2000.

Whereby Any 10 Year Old Girls, Without Previous Experience or Instruction Can Easily Rescue Themselves and Many Others From Deadly Waters, Far Superior To The Most Expert Instructor.
Grieving families are similarly degraded (somehow their grief was the fault of their loved one); and deprived of their legal rights and community sympathy. These facts are obvious. But also obvious is the power of  Degrading Propaganda to blame any identifiable group for their own deaths; used throughout history to achieve the ruthless ends of special interest groups.

In the examples here, some "experts" (who may be victims of the degrading propaganda themselves, as in Milgram examples), obviously enjoy their "status", and pronounce that the lives of these kids could not have been easily saved. A lie of course. These kids could get out of the water without any instruction or experience. These experts cannot get out of the water themselves when they capsize (note that they have no built-in or fool-proof means of self-rescue that they can refer to. Just smug Bullshit offered to a grieving mother.

Tim Ingram

: Hello,
: First i would like to say yes he's definately a little crazy but some of the
: stuff he is saying should not be disregarded.I am a mother who lost her
: child to hypothermia May 31/2003 and you and everyone else who thinks that
: canoeing is safe is crazy your telling me that a life jacket and rope is
: enough bull my 11 year old died because they could not get back into the
: canoe after capsizing in Lake Huron how can you close the door on these
: safety sponsons when they really work. Why should they not be on every
: canoe that camps or organizations take our children out in as safety
: feature kids that have no idea how to get back in, or even the strength to
: do it.

"Shelley, My sincerest condolences to yourself and family. It's not the same,I know, but I lost a few members of my immediate family some time ago and understand grief seems like it has no bottom. It does, it just takes a while.

Regarding the introduction of young people to self propelled watercraft. A teenaged neighbor asked for an introduction to this sport and though I've given him numerous "lessons" he was a bit disconcerted that his first lesson was a safety equipment, judgement and hypothermia discussion.His father dropped in to see what kind of introduction I was providing, and he being a highly experienced outdoorsman was very pleased with my intro. My young friend did get to paddle but not until later that day.

Regarding sponsons. A paddler should have the right to make decisions on their own equipment and training. Already we are mandated here in the US to carry a PFD and a whistle. A pair of nylon bags, which is what sponsons really are, may work in some situations for the casual user, will likely not if they are in any kind of disrepair. An advanced paddler with a lot of experience using them in a variety of conditions might find them to work in some of them and even be the kind of paddler that looks after their upkeep. I for one will not consider them as I am spending my time training with techniques I know will work,are far quicker to execute and enable you to make a run for it far more expeditiously.

I would caution anyone on trying to mandate a particular gadget as a panacea to a seemingly urgent safety issue. It is not gadgetry, but judgement that is at a deficit.

The death of any person is tragic, none more so than a child, no parent should have to bury their child.
That said. I have to concur with the general spirit of the other posts, but I do have something to add.
Americans, and forgive me if the woman who posted was not a US citizen, but the majority of the posters are, (there are some Quebecois?), seem to think that stuff-i.e. equipment will keep them safe. This is not specific to paddling of course. Does driving with a seatbelt make you a better driver? Does flying with a parachute make you a better pilot? Or is it just "stuff" that gives you the illusion of safety. This is what my opinion of sponsoons is for both open canoeing and kayaking-- something that may add limited safety and possibly add more danger to those without enough judgement and skills.
If we as paddlers would focus on skills and judgement, as I believe Qajaq USA does, instead of equipment I think we would see alot fewer deaths on the water.

Unfortunately accidents happen even to those with good training, judgement, and all the right kit..."

My guess is that this poster is not a fan of seatbelts either.

Tim Ingram

Next Page: Conclusion of Canoe and Kayak Criminal Rescue Safety
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/conclusion.html)


November 19, 2002

Mr. Alexander
Office of the Crown Attorney
Barrie, Ontario

Dear Sir:

Re: Ontario Canoe and Kayak Murders, By Means of Instruction

The Canadian Recreational Canoeing Association of Merrickville, Ontario has for many years deliberately made canoeing and kayaking much more deadly to citizens by means of their instruction, that leaves them to die in the water with no means of escape, than would be the case otherwise (if the public were simply informed that there are no reliable CRCA rescues.)

This is rather simple: Statistically canoes and kayaks are the most deadly watercraft in the world, not only due to minimal inherent stability. They are extremely vulnerable to flooding. They have no stability at all when flooded. And they are impossible to pump out successsfully in emergency conditions. They will reflood or capsize other canoes and kayaks assisting them since they have no emergency stability.

Some form of emergency stability has been available for 10 years, for example a 5 sec. life raft, gas powered inflation with oral inflator back-up like all inflatable PFDs. All canoes and kayaks can be stabilized and paddled to shore fully flooded if the floats, one on each side on the beam ends (called sponsons), have sufficient buoyancy i.e. 80 lbs. each (about 2 feet long and 1 foot in diameter.) No practice necessary. It just works, like seatbelts in cars, to save lives. The canoe or kayak end becomes a boarding platform, superior in performance to FAA airliner life raft boarding platforms.

This canoe Life Raft is paddled fully flooded to shore at 2 knots, even with 3000 lbs. of water, by 2 children standing up, ages 8 and 10. No previous practice necessary. It just works, like a PFD. It is also partially self-bailing; but that is not necessary (for stability) here, and waves tend to just refill boats in capsizing conditions anyway. Canoe/Kayak Safety and Canoe/Kayak Rescue cannot depend on practice. It must work regardless, like seatbelts in cars.

However the CRCA instruction has killed over 300 Canadians in the past 10 years. (Over 1000 in the US over this time.) The Lifesaving Society reports 12 Ontario canoe and kayak deaths 1994-98. However, there were 3  Ontario deaths within 6 days near Toronto alone, this year! Canada does not have a sophisticated database like the US Coast Guard, who are now studying both the canoe/kayak sponson life raft, and the American Canoe Association who could not defend their safety instruction to the Attorney General of Florida. (I have the letter.)

Recent 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." ( 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.")

Canadian canoe and and kayak instructors continue to murder innocent Canadians, including children, despite 2 Manslaughter convictions in the UK regarding this same instruction (that murdered 4 students wearing PFDs but denied them any means to get out of the water.) No simple built-in Life Raft created by gas sponsons in 5 seconds.

Children at YMCA camps are endangered. The ethical framework of the YMCA and general society is hurt by deadly or sick personalities within organizations of Canadian Canoe and Kayak Instructors. The late Bill Mason, "patron saint" of the CRCA criticized their canoe rescues: "canoe over canoe...I have since changed my mind...", (p.126, Song of the Paddle), in favour of strategic buoyancy. In his earlier book Path of the Paddle he referred to the 13 dead from St. John's School on p.177: "No blame can be laid because they assumed help was coming." The "help" was the canoe over canoe rescue that he concluded was false, 10 years after C.E.S. Franks, concluded in The Canoe and White Water, p.123: "...nearly useless...On a stormy lake where upsets are likely to occur, the water is often too rough and choppy." A year later, 13 (including 1 adult) died on Lake Temiskaming!

These children were highly proficient, practising their rescues for years. But they simply recapsized and reflooded as I have stated above. Mason's buoyancy rescue concept was a positive moral and intellectual step. (It was taught at my old YMCA camp 40 years ago.) But it could not work with unloaded canoes, and it does not work effectively like life raft sponsons.

The CRCA continues to intentionally make canoes and kayaks as deadly as possible to sell their instruction. Their own magazine wanted to publish an article on Life Raft Sponsons over 2 years ago. But they were prevented from doing so. (I have the correspondence.)

Please give me an appointment time with one of your staff to discuss possible prosecution charges. Otherwise these murders will continue.

Yours truly,
 

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

PS: (Nov. 20/02)

Dear Mr. Alexander:

You will notice that the CRCA is not only fraudulently selling "rescues" and "safety" that don't work and leave victims to die in the water even if they wear a PFD, but also they deliberately prevent canoes and kayaks from being much safer. Not only is the public told to go paddling with no means of saving themselves, canoes and kayaks are rented to persons who are not told of the consequences of tipping out of sight of rescuers on shore, or a friendly nearby powerboat.

This organization sells its' instruction despite years of information, warnings, and hundreds of deaths. They operate like any criminal organization, without regard for dead victims. Since many paddlers will paddle while not wearing a PFD, against advice, these people are condemned to death, just as those who do wear a PFD. Whereas otherwise they all would have a "life raft". This must be stopped. Thank you. Tim Ingram

Contact information: http://www.sponsonguy.com/


Next page:

Conclusion
(http://www.canoekayaksafety.com/conclusion.html)