Page 4. Back to last page, Chapter 6: Blaming Victims for Their Own Deaths Through Degrading Propaganda

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.

Chapter 1: Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety Scandal, US Governmental Affairs (
Chapter 2: Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety Scandal, Canadian Governmental Affairs
Chapter 3: Fundamental Lifesaving Error in Rescue Safety of Canoes and Kayaks, No Level Flotation Standard: Responsible for Thousands of Deaths Since 1978
 Chapter 4. Recognition by All Major Authors of The Simple Facts of Human Life Saving and Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
Chapter 5: Criminal Fraud in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
Chapter 6: Blaming Victims for Their Own Deaths Through Degrading Propaganda
Chapter 7: The Milgram Studies and Criminal Rescue Safety
Chapter 8: Legal Developments in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety
Chapter 9: Ongoing Reckless Endangerment and Death in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. The Intent.
Appendix: Ongoing Police and Homeland Security Investigations in Canada and the United States, Regarding Criminal Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. Canada:
Appendix2: Ongoing Police and Homeland Security Investigations in Canada and the United States, Regarding Criminal Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety. America:
Appendix3: OPP Supplementary Index, Ongoing Canadian Government Milgram Experiments:

RCMP Zaccardelli File

New Book:
The Minnesota Canoe Murders

Chapter 7: The Milgram Studies and Criminal Rescue Safety

The Milgram experiments are probably the most important ever undertaken in the social sciences. They are part of the basic curriculum in any introductory Psychology course in any university. They have been so for nearly forty years. Most of us are only vaguely aware of exactly what Milgram actually found. I suggest that you do a simple Google search. Type in: milgram.

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


FEATURE By Thomas Blass, Ph.D. The Man Who Shocked The World Linsly-Chittenden Hall on Yaleís 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 Harvardís 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.

Milgramís research, like Freudís, did lead to profound revisions in some of the fundamental assumptions about human nature. Indeed, by the fall of 1963, the results of Milgramís 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, ďSixty-five Percent in Test Blindly Obey Order to Inflict Pain.Ē 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, Milgramís obedience experiments teach us that in a concrete situation with powerful social constraints, our moral sense can easily be trampled...

It wasnít just Aschís work that influenced Milgram. Milgramís 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, Iíll 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 subjectsí willingness to obey. Four days after Milgramís 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 Milgramís experiments would come to play in debates about how to account for the behavior of the Nazi perpetrators..."

I prefer "The Perils Of Obedience" by Stanley Milgram, coming directly from the author, rather than from the many who have studied the studies. These quotations are from this article which appeared in Harper's Magazine. It is derived from Dr. Milgram's Book  "Obedience to Authority", 1974.

"The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous import, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects' strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects' ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation."

I think that you are now experiencing some insight into how canoes and kayaks have been allowed to inflict agonizing torture and death on over 3,000 Canadians and Americans, while other boats have been required by law to be much safer (i.e. the level flotation standard for small boats.) "The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of authority constitutes the chief finding of the study" in Milgram's last sentence above, helps explain how the Canadian Coast Guard and the US Coast Guard might be so willing to allow a canoe and kayak lobby group (so-called "experts") permit canoes and kayaks to be as deadly as possible. Instead of the Coast Guards being in charge of human life; they allow canoe and kayak instructors make money and enhance ego by selling difficult, time-consuming, expensive, fraudulent, and deadly instruction that does not get people out of the water and kills them in a most agonizing fashion, for the victims and the loved ones.

"The real focus of the experiment is the teacher. After watching the learner being strapped into place, he is seated before an impressive shock generator. The instrument panel consists of thirty lever switches set in a horizontal line. Each switch is clearly labeled with a voltage designation ranging from 14 to 450 volts.

The following designations are clearly indicated for groups of four switches. going from left to right: Slight Shock, Moderate Shock, Strong Shock, Very Strong Shock, Intense Shock, Extreme Intensity Shock, Danger: Severe Shock. (Two switches after this last designation are simply marked XXX.)...Each subject is given a sample 45 volt shock from the generator before his run as teacher, and the jolt strengthens his belief in the authenticity of the machine.

The teacher is a genuinely naive subject who has come to the laboratory for the experiment. The learner, or victim, is actually an actor who receives no shock at all. The point of the experiment is to see how far a person will proceed in a concrete and measurable situation in which he is ordered to inflict increasing pain on a protesting victim."

Probably the reader was unaware just how "real" the subject thought the "shock" was. Plenty real, and this is all the more disturbing, given the severity of "torture" administered. The agonizing quality of canoe and kayak deaths are also very "real."

"As the voltage increases, his protests become more vehement and emotional. At 285 volts, his response can be described only as an agonized scream. Soon thereafter, he makes no sound at all.

For the teacher, the situation quickly becomes one of gripping tension. It is not a game for him: conflict is intense obvious. The manifest suffering of the learner presses him to quit: but each time he hesitates to administer a shock, the experimenter orders him to continue. To extricate himself from this plight, the subject must make a clear break with authority...." SNIP

Milgram states:

"Before the experiments, I sought predictions about the outcome from various kinds of people -- psychiatrists, college sophomores, middle-class adults, graduate students and faculty in the behavioral sciences. With remarkable similarity, they predicted that virtually all the subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrist, specifically, predicted that most subjects would not go beyond 150 volts, when the victim makes his first explicit demand to be freed. They expected that only 4 percent would reach 300 volts, and that only a pathological fringe of about one in a thousand would administer the highest shock on the board.

These predictions were unequivocally wrong. Of the forty subjects in the first experiment, twenty-five obeyed the orders of the experimenter to the end, punishing the victim until they reached the most potent shock available on the.generator. After 450 volts were administered three times, the experimenter called a halt to the session. Many obedient subjects then heaved sighs of relief, mopped their brows, rubbed their fingers over their eyes, or nervously fumbled cigarettes. Others displayed only minimal signs of tension from beginning to end."

End of Milgram quote.

Think about this for a moment. The US Coast Guard and CCG are both supposed to be looking after public safety. So of course some think it is impossible that the US Coast Guard or the CCG are allowing innocent people to die in the water after using canoes and kayaks, despite all evidence. It is foolish to believe that of course, especially when the US Coast Guard now has a 35% canoe and kayak fatality rate in 2002 for wearing PFDs. (BARD)  It is commonly advised that "All you need is to wear a PFD to be Safe!" Not in a canoe or kayak. Over 3,000 deaths could have been easily prevented if the canoe or kayak had CO2 sponsons to enable a victim to get out of the water: The Level Flotation Standard.

Subjects in these Milgram experiments sometimes suffered considerable remorse after discovering what terrible things they were capable of. Consequently universities decided that these experiments breached ethical standards, putting an end to more experiments of a similar nature. It is worth thinking here about the lack of remorse within the canoe and kayak industry for preventing the level flotation standard from saving 3,000 victims.

This is worth exploring in any courtroom in the United States or Canada.

More Milgram:

"When the very first experiments were carried out, Yale undergraduates were used as subjects, and about 60 percent of them were fully obedient. A colleague of mine immediately dismissed these findings as having no relevance to "ordinary" people, asserting that Yale undergraduates are a highly aggressive, competitive bunch who step on each other's necks on the slightest provocation. He assured me that when "ordinary" people were tested, the results would be quite different. As we moved from the pilot studies to the regular experimental series, people drawn from every stratum of New Haven life came to be employed in the experiment professionals, white collar workers, unemployed persons, and industrial workers. The experimental outcome was the same as we had observed among the students.

Moreover, when the experiments were repeated in Princeton, Munich, Rome, South Africa, and Australia, the level of obedience was invariably somewhat higher than found in the investigation reported in this article. Thus one scientist in Munich found 85 percent of his subjects obedient.

Fred Prozi's reactions, if more dramatic than most, illuminate the conflicts experienced by others in less visible form. About fifty years old and unemployed at the time of the experiment, he has a good-natured. if slightly dissolute, appearance, and he strikes people as a rather ordinary fellow. He begins the session calmly but becomes tense as it proceeds. After delivering the 180-volt shock, he pivots around in the chair and, shaking his head, addresses the experimenter in agitated tones:

Prozi: I can't stand it I'm not going to kill that man in there. You hear him hollering?
Experimenter: As I told you before, the shocks may be painful, but . . .
Prozi: But he's hollering. He can t stand it. What's going to happen to him?
Experimenter (his voice is patient, matter-of fact): The experiment requires that you continue, Teacher.
Prozi: Aah, but, unh, I'm not going to get that man sick in there -- know what I mean?
Experimenter: Whether the learner likes it or not, we must go on, through all the word pairs.
Prozi: I refuse to take the responsibility. He's in there hollering
Experimenter: It's absolutely essential that you continue, Prozi.
Prozi (indicating the unused questions): There's too many left here, I mean, Jeez, if he gets them wrong, there's too many of them left. I mean, who's going to take the responsibility if anything happens to that gentleman?
Experimenter: I'm responsible for anything that happens to him. Continue, please.
Prozi: All right. (Consults list of words.) The next one's "Slow -- walk, truck, dance, music" Answer please. (A buzzing sound indicates the learner has signaled his answer.) Wrong. A hundred and ninety-five volts. "Dance." (Zzumph!)
Learner (yelling): Let me out of here My hearts (sic) bothering me (Teacher looks at experimenter.)
Experimenter: Continue, please.
Learner (screaming): Let me out of here! You have no right to keep me here! Let me out of here, my hearts (sic) bothering me, let me out!
Prozi (shakes head, pats the table nervously): You see he's hollering. Hear that? Gee, I don't know.
Experimenter: The experiment requires . . .
Prozi (interrupting): I know it does sir, but I mean -- hunh! He don't know what he's getting in for. He's up to 195 volts! (Experiment continues, through 210 volts, 225 volts, 240 volts, 255 volts, 270 volts, at which point Prozi, with evident relief, runs out of word-pair questions.)
Experimenter: You'll have to go back to the beginning of that page and go through them again until be's learned them all correctly.
Prozi: Aw, no. I'm not going to kill that man..."

End of Milgram quote.

Read the rest of this article yourself. You will see that this experiment continues above, despite the subject's reservations about "torture".


"One theoretical interpretation of this behavior holds that all people harbor deeply aggressive instincts continually pressing for expression, and that the experiment provides institutional justification for the release of these impulses."

To check the validity of the above the above explanation, against other possible explanations for the behavior, in Milgram's words:

"It becomes vital, therefore, to compare the subject's performance when he is under orders and when he is allowed to choose the shock level."

When the subject was allowed to choose, "the great majority of people delivered very low, usually painless, shocks when the choice was explicitly up to them."

The theory that the people who shocked the victims most severely were actually sadistic persons was not born out: "Indeed, it is highly reminiscent of the issue that arose in connection with Hannah Arendt's 1963 book, Eichmann in Jerusalem. Arendt contended that the prosecution's effort to depict Eichmann as a sadistic monster was fundamentally wrong, that he came closer to being an uninspired bureaucrat who simply sat at his desk and did his job. For asserting her views, Arendt became the object of considerable scorn, even calumny."

"Somehow, it was felt that the monstrous deeds carried out by Eichmann required a brutal, twisted personality, evil incarnate. After witnessing hundreds of ordinary persons submit to the authority in our own experiments, I must conclude that Arendt's conception of the banality of evil comes closer to the truth than one might dare imagine. The ordinary person who shocked the victim did so out of a sense of obligation -- an impression of his duties as a subject -- and not from any peculiarly aggressive tendencies."

We can now certainly understand Coast Guard employees blandly accepting any canoe and kayak safety suggestions, from a canoe and kayak lobby group. Especially if these people, like the American Canoe Association (ACA) or the Canadian Recreational Canoeing Association (CRCA) are happy, smiling people who look like they are not con artists, no matter how ridiculous and deadly their safety ideas look. Even though: US Coast Guard report 071-01: "Canoes and kayaks have by far the highest fatality rates per million hours of exposure (.42) as any other boat type".  And this USCG figure is now found to be far too low, using American Canoe Association figures in "Critical Judgment 2", funded by the USCG, (considering the death statistics of the Ford/Firestone scandal, over a decade, with millions of vehicles, many millions of use/hours daily, and only 200 deaths in ten years.

Note the recent evidence that IBM actually sold some of the equipment to keep track of shipments of Jewish citizens to the gas chamber. Canoe and Kayak instructors do not have any trouble sending people to their deaths for a little money either. And they certainly don't see anything wrong denying victims a means to get out of the water to live, ($25 CO2 sponsons.)

Most importantly, Milgram found out that there was a strong reluctance to disappoint expectations, despite real and serious consequences for others, like the suffering victim. For example, a reluctance for Coast Guards to disappoint the ACA and CRCA by insisting on the Level Flotation Standard for Canoes and Kayaks (CO2 Sponsons), to save literally thousands of lives, just like other small boats.

Remember that the USCG investigated some type of mandatory canoe/kayak side flotation in the mid-70's, according to the ACA's Charlie Walbridge, just before implementing the Level Flotation Standard for all small boats. (p. 135, Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1000 Americans.) According to the USCG Sponson study, these murderers kicked up quite a political fuss over mandatory canoe and kayak safety, See:

Instead, to please the ACA and the CRCA, "safety exemptions" were issued, despite the consequences of thousands of dead citizens who the Coast Guards were entrusted to protect!

See Milgram's words:

"The situation is constructed so that there is no way the subject can stop shocking the learner without violating the experimenter's definitions of his own competence. The subject fears that he will appear arrogant, untoward, and rude if he breaks off. Although these inhibiting emotions appear small in scope alongside the violence being done to the learner, they suffuse the mind and feelings of the subject, who is miserable at the prospect of having to repudiate the authority to his face. (When the experiment was altered so that the experimenter gave his instructions by telephone instead of in person, only a third as many people were fully obedient through 450 volts). It is a curious thing that a measure of compassion on the part of the subject -- an unwillingness to "hurt" the experimenter's feelings -- is part of those binding forces inhibiting his disobedience. The withdrawal of such deference may be as painful to the subject as to the authority he defies."

This helps explain the amazing negligence of duty by the US Coast Guard toward public safety, despite their own database, BARD showing tremendous loses and human suffering, depite 35% PFD compliance!

However the ACA and the CRCA show a very different behavior. They know their "rescues" are tricky and deadly. They know that $25 CO2 sponsons get people out of the water to live. Just look at the unbiased US Military Study. They are not interested in anything but evaluating what is safest for their soldiers: "basic, no nonsense...dramatically 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." Invitational Military Kayak Paddle 1994 Evaluation

There is no Milgram explanation for certain murderers in the ACA and CRCA, who even sadistically murder children for ego and dollars.

Milgram again:

"I will cite one final variation of the experiment that depicts a dilemma that is more common in everyday life. The subject was not ordered to pull the lever that shocked the victim, but merely to perform a subsidiary task (administering the word-pair test) while another person administered the shock. In this situation, thirty-seven of forty adults continued to the highest level of the shock generator. Predictably, they excused their behavior by saying that the responsibility belonged to the man who actually pulled the switch. This may illustrate a dangerously typical arrangement in a complex society: it is easy to ignore responsibility when one is only an intermediate link in a chain of actions...

Even Eichmann was sickened when he toured the concentration camps, but he had only to sit at a desk and shuffle papers. At the same time the man in the camp who actually dropped Zyklon-B into the gas chambers was able to justify his behavior on the ground that he was only following orders from above. Thus there is a fragmentation of the total human act; no one is confronted with the consequences of his decision to carry out the evil act. The person who assumes responsibility has evaporated. Perhaps this is the most common characteristic of socially organized evil in modern society."

There does not appear to be any strong excuse for Coast Guards to not protect people dying in canoes and kayaks either. Especially when this issue is put to them by my emails on a weekly basis for months at a time, over many years. And Chairman Muldoon came close to lifting the canoe/kayak "Safety Exemptions": "Chairman Muldoon said that they are very strongly considering requesting the removal of exemptions because of their lack of interest in the Council." (National Boating Safety Advisory Council, part of Homeland Security, October, 2002.) But after New Orleans, there are obviously many problems regarding the safety of citizens.

US Senators are about to be added to the fray. I have no doubt that none of them want to be even remotely compared as an Eichmann, presiding over USCG funding to murder victims in canoes and kayaks.

In Canada the Federal Attorney General will not escape his duties, nor will the Provincial Minister whose department includes the most deadly and incompetent coroner's office in the Western world. The details into the horrendous Girl Guide tragedy are extremely powerful, as you can see by reading the entire chapter above.

Note Bene: See OPP Supplementary Index, Scroll down page, Ongoing Canadian Government Milgram Experiments:

"Hitler's Willing Executioners" by Daniel Goldhagen refers to the Milgram studies a great deal. The Milgram studies of course at some level suggest that human beings can't be held responsible for terrible crimes against humanity. Nazi Germany and the Nuremburg trials following World War II, are very much in our present consciousness and conscience.

Page 384, "Hitler's Willing Executioners":

"The kindred psychological argumentation of these second and third conventional lines of reasoning - that Germans in particular and humans in general are prone to obey orders, and that social psychological pressure was sufficient to induce them to kill - are untenable. As shown, in part, by the choice of some to opt out of the genocidal killing, Germans were indeed capable of saying "no.""

It is indeed reasonable to expect the USCG and CCG protect the public against needless deaths. Especially when the canoe and kayak death rate is the highest in exposure hours in the history of either country. The Canadian death rate is over 3 times the US canoe and kayak death rate. There are many fewer paddlers in Canada, with just over one-tenth of the population and only about 2 warm-enough months and a few weekends a year in Canada. Whereas canoes and kayaks can be paddled year round in the Southern States.

US Coast Guard report 071-01: "Canoes and kayaks have by far the highest fatality rates per million hours of exposure (.42) as any other boat type". This USCG figure is too low, actually 3.49 deaths per million use hours, using the figures in the American Canoe Association's "Critical Judgment 2". (See the calculation in the Preface of this book.)

James Raffan's "Deep Waters", referred to previously in regard to the Girl Guide deaths and their Coroner's Inquest in Ontario, in Chapter 4, is a worthwhile book. This book on the Temiskaming Tragedy (12 dead boys, and one dead teacher from St. John's school), is one of the best researched canoe and kayak books available. It mentions sponsons as a life saving device. It is accurate and better written than most other canoe and kayak books, that tend to be little more than highly contradictory, many-paged instruction manuals; that in fact mislead and endanger citizens due to tricky "bait and switch", fraudulent  rescue concepts, as well as inaccurate treatment of sponsons.

It is true that many authors mention the 1987 sponsons very favourably, despite potential boycott of their books by the instructors lobby. (REI, the largest outdoor retailer in the world, rode out a sponson boycott in 1997. L.L. Bean did not, and caved in; despite the best intentions originally.) In fact the best books are the ones that make very astute references to the dangers of conventional instruction, compared to sponsons. John Dowd would be the most competent author by far, in this regard. He has more experience paddling the open ocean out of the sight of land than the others, too. Mr. Dowd was present at the Military Kayaking Symposium in 1994 where the evaluation was done:

"basic, no nonsense...dramatically 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. "  Invitational Military Kayak Paddle 1994 Evaluation

See page 108 of "Deep Waters": "Somewhere in the middle of the lake, about two miles from shore and too far from the camp to be seen with the naked eye, the canoe upset. Whether this was from a sudden gust of wind on an otherwise calm summer evening, or from a novice paddler "catching a crab" (a paddle) on the water and shifting position, is not clear, although there was a tendency for some newspaper writers (as there would be with Timiskaming fifty years later) to concoct a violent storm to overturn the canoe. There was likely no storm. In any case the big canoe upset. It had no air tanks, sponsons, or flotation chambers,..."

Without proper sponsons there was no way for the victims to get out of the water, back into the canoe, and paddle safely to shore entirely flooded, (like the 7 year old and 10 year old girls paddling the fully flooded canoe in the pictures in this book, standing up.) Good for Dr. Raffan mentioning "sponsons" above, regarding the Balsam Lake Tragedy in relatively "warm" July waters in 1926. Ten boys and one leader died because they had no means to get out of the water. Sponsons are the only means to do this.

There was a tremendous amount of sustained outrage at the time, 1926. This was true as well for the 4 students who died in the UK in 1994, resulting in one conviction of manslaughter. (You can see the Letter from the Principal Marine Surveyor of the Coast Guard in the UK (MSA) to me, following this tragedy. His friend, the noted kayaking author Derek Hutchinson suggested sponsons to him. See my previous book "Canoe and Kayak Scam Kills 1000 Americans: US Coast Guard Studies Device to Save Victims". Just type this title into Google Search and buy it from or dozens of other online bookstores.)

In "Deep Waters", Dr. Raffan gives a good idea of the huge importance of this story: "On July 28, the Toronto Star reported that the Ontario Attorney-General's Department had instructed the Crown prosecutor in Lindsay to conduct the fullest...never happen go beyond the usual coroner's inquest..." (p.111) Strangely, this was exactly what I was requesting of Dr. Porter only weeks Before the Girl Guides died, for the same reason: no Sponsons.

And ironically, a year later the coroner's inquest insists on leaving Girl Guides and other canoe and kayak victims in the water to die, in full knowledge of the quick and deadly effects of hypothermia in any waters in Canada, any time of the year! You can see this in Chapter 4, in one of the faxes to Dr. Porter. I also mention James Raffan and "Deep Waters", in which the details of the Temiskaming Tragedy of 1978 are made known, claiming 12 boys and one leader. These boys practised "canoe rescues" intensively over a long period of time. In the end, the only survivors were the boys who gave up on these useless "rescues" and swam to shore in PFDs.

Significantly, Bill Mason made big changes to his idea of "canoe rescues." Why not simply refer to this on p.xii, in the Introduction to my previous book, that I made available to the Ontario Coroner's Office many times:

"When I began canoeing at summer camp over 40 years ago, my YMCA camp knew that the traditional canoe rescues ("shaking out" and "canoe over canoe"), did not work. Especially in waves. The rescuing canoes were simply capsized as well. This was well documented in the tragedy on Lake Temiskaming, 1978 (12 dead schoolchildren and one adult who were well-practised in traditional rescues.) The famous Canadian canoeist Bill Mason reversed his rescue ideas after this tragedy, stating that these rescues simply cannot work, in his last book "Song of the Paddle": "canoe over canoe...I have since changed my mind..." p.126., 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 finally 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!

The recent 2005 book "Expedition Canoeing" by Cliff Jacobson of the American Canoe Association's Hall of Fame, p.202.) states: "The canoe-over-canoe rescue touted by the Red Cross and Boy Scouts is generally impossible to perform in a running sea. Far better to forget about the swamped canoe and gear and put your efforts into rescuing the paddlers". However, in "Deep Waters", James Raffan notes that Jacobson's idea merely capsized more canoes, killing 12 boys and one leader, Ontario's Lake Temiskaming, 1978. ACA Dillon and Jacobson murder over 90 Americans a year, plus a few Canadians. And many children.

The best canoe safety idea at my YMCA camp (40 years ago! my note) was to stay close to shore. And we were required to be able to swim a good, long distance to qualify for a canoe trip. (It was advised to "swim" with the canoes to shore, since the canoes contained the gear to keep warm and stay alive.) Waterproofed packs were tied in to provide internal buoyancy as Bill Mason later suggested. Canoe packs are much lighter than the weight of the volume of water they displace, i.e. they float. Besides it is crazy to think of heavy packs being unloaded from a capsized canoe, everyone in the cold water. Then the canoe is emptied by pulling it upside down over a rescuing canoe, then righted and returned to the water where the heavy packs are put back in. Finally the cold victims get back in, if the rescuing canoe has not also been capsized by all of this! Licensed Maine guides have failed. No wonder Bill Mason changed his mind after Temiskaming. The kids who survived swam to shore immediately while wearing PFDs. But the deadly "canoe over canoe" rescue is still taught be instructors in the US and Canada. It takes a lot of time, it is profitable, and it is difficult enough to make customers think the instructors are powerful and masterful when they take the money.

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.

Since that time it has become obvious that simply adding sufficient beam buoyancy (about 80 lbs. buoyant force) to the widest point on each side of a kayak or canoe makes a Life Raft, even if fully flooded and loaded with gear. In fact, leaning one float will spill most of the water out of an open canoe, like the ones used on Lake Temiskaming and at summer camps. However, even small waves can quickly refill a canoe, so it is very important that a canoe can be easily paddled to shore, even if flooded over the gunwales.

Almost 3 years ago I told my 2 daughters, then 7 and 10 years of age, to clip on the floats and paddle a fully flooded canoe to shore standing up. They were able to easily do this without any previous instruction or experience, moving at about 2 knots. The pictures are still on the website and the floats (normally called sponsons), are usually set lower than in the pictures. The position of the sponson floats in the pictures enabled water to be over the gunwales, otherwise some of this enormous volume of water would have normally spilled out. The point of the pictures was to demonstrate absolutely maximum possible flooding, and also the heaviest possible canoe being easily paddled at 2 knots by 2 very young children. This canoe is so heavy that it is not easily affected by capsizing waves, due to the great neutral buoyancy ballast that is created by all of that water inside.

Kayaks are usually much narrower than open canoes, and require the lowest possible seating arrangement to avoid regular capsize. If the weight of the paddler exceeds the buoyant force created by the immersed volume on the beam of the kayak, the kayak will capsize. Wider kayaks are less likely to capsize since there is more transverse buoyancy than a narrower kayak, in waves or calm water. (Only wide canoes and kayaks, using sponsons or equivalent beam buoyancy have crossed the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.)

This is a simple equation understood by elementary school students. This is why the kayaker must try to keep body weight centred. If body weight leans to either side too far, and the transverse (beam buoyancy) of the kayak is exceeded, it will capsize. This is simple scientific fact. And no boat is immune from this fact. Ships capsize when cargo shifts. The Law of Gravity ensures that whatever weight is in the kayak operates downwards. And if there is not enough buoyant force operating upwards, should the kayaker lean sideways, the kayak will capsize.

Nevertheless many canoe and kayak publications now lie, stating that narrower kayaks (or canoes) are more stable in waves. It would seem that this is an attempt to squeeze more dollars for Eskimo roll lessons. The narrow kayak is perceived as easier to roll, but also capsizing more often to encourage lesssons. Narrower kayaks have less transverse stability to begin with, and that creates deadly problems without emergency stability.

Kayakers attempt to stabilize kayaks sideways by using the paddle to provide a "bracing" force against the Force of Gravity. But if this "brace" is insufficient to counteract the Force of Gravity, capsize will inevitably follow. And then the kayak must have sufficient emergency stability (provided by the sponsons floats on both sides of the kayak), to permit the kayaker to get out of the water and resist capsizing again in the same conditions, that have not magically disappeared. The Life Raft concept for kayaks and canoes has existed since 1993 in all major publications, and even before that in others.

Life Rafts are the marine safety standard world-wide. All soldiers on all sides in both world wars had both life rafts and life jackets. Unless the human body is out of the water, where body heat is sucked out at a rate about 25 times faster than the rate in air, hypothermia quickly weakens victims, and soon they cannot hold their head above the water and they drown."

That just about covers it. Dr. Raffan wrote a book about the famous Canadian canoeist Bill Mason. The title is "Fire in the Bones". A good book. Mr. Mason was a fine person and a great promoter of the wilderness, canoes, and all of the intrinsic honesty that outdoor education has to offer. It is remarkable that the Canadian Recreational Canoeing Association uses Mr. Mason's fame and good name in its' promotional materials, but continues to sell the same deadly "rescues" that Mr. Mason condemned. Why does Dr. Raffan not mention Mr. Mason's integral flotation stability concept? Not sponsons, but a step in the right direction. As I have mentioned before, Dr. Raffan would not be popular in canoeing circles promoting sponsons, and his books would not be promoted by these canoeing circles. I have provided the US Coast Guard with evidence of  "sponson boycotts" by angry people with an investment in deadly instruction. All large companies have been affected: REI, L.L. Bean etc. It is the same in Canada. The Canadian Coast Guard deliberately funds instructor organizations like the Canadian Recreational Canoeing Association with taxpayer dollars, to promote expensive instruction that does not work and kills citizens, including Girl Guides. This has prevented the marketing of CO2 sponsons, or any kind of sposons, against the Federal Trade laws in both countries. And against criminal laws against the deliberate endangerment and killing of citizens, for profit or any other reason.

We must draw the line at a Coroner's Inquest into the deaths of Girl Guides. If we are not a society of deliberately cruel barbarians.

This is the task of the Hon. Mr. Kwinter and the Hon. Mr. Cotler in Chapter 4.

What do you think about the remarkable facts of the Milgram experiments, indicating such willingness to torture other human beings; even, apparently, to the point of endangering life?

What do you think about the evidence in Goldhagen's book "Hitler's Willing Executioners" that ordinary German citizens sometimes did resist murdering innocent people, even in a societal context that posed potential risks to not complying or at least appearing to comply?

What do you think the Minister of Justice, Canada (who is also the Attorney General), and the Ontario Minister of Comunity Safety and Correctional Services, are going to do? Continue the slaughter in canoes and kayaks? I doubt it. But it will be interesting to watch this process. See how long it takes. This is certainly a warning signal for any country in the world that thinks it is a civilization.

The US senators are dealing with canoe and kayak death numbers, since the US Coast Guard granted "safety exemptions" to the American Canoe Association (that allow their murderous instruction propaganda to deny sponsons on all canoes and kayaks), that exceed the 9-11 death toll from Osama bin Laden. This canoe and kayak safety scandal is a warning signal of current practices of democratic government. There is no economic or other benefit to canoe and kayak deaths obviously. Rather these canoe and kayak deaths, so easily fixed, indicate very serious governmental disfunction as well as despicable moral and criminal behavior tolerated even by the US Senate!

Next Page: Chapter 8: Legal Developments in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety

Before You See Dr. Milgram's experiments at Yale University, after studying the NAZI holocaust, please note a few "fellas" at, regarding my first book:

 "this man is mentally disturbed, steer clear of this paranoid pamphlet, October 6, 2005
Reviewer: Perry W. Chamberlain "wireless maven" (Littlerock, CA USA) - See all my reviews

This fella is the same peron who in the late 90's and early 2000's destroyed dozens of internet canoeing and kayaking news groups with his ramblings and barely coherent mass spamming attacks and bizarre rambling e-mails
This pamphlet is a collection of his bizzare paranoid ramblings with no actual layout or plan.
He rambles on about organizations such as the coast guard and the american canoe association and any one else he claims is in on the plot to keep his product he manufactures from the masses so they can kill as many people as possible.
He's a wack job who cant write.
The book would make a good coaster or maybe kindling in case you needed to start an emergency fire.
whooo hoo- earth to Tim - put the tin foil hat back on now..
Dont encourage this sad individual by buyinhg his self published pamphlet.
nuf said"

See today, February, 22, 2006:

I should point out here that this man stunned the newsgroup with his casual reference to a "handgun" whenever he goes out. He also referred to his future attendance, in a few months, at a canoe building workshop in Algonquin Park, Ontario. At that time, on, he said that he was a "carpenter", residing in Nevada. He phoned me at my home. He is not stupid, and he was aware of the law. He was more articulate to me on the phone, than his post to would suggest. I only applied Scientific Psychological Principles, as the Milgram studies at Yale Univesity would have suggested to any educated person: to inform the "subjects" at that they were in fact hurting and killing innocent citizens, even children.

At the same website, at the above address, please see:

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

"The only scam is this book, September 14, 2004
Reviewer: JD Chatham "JD Chatham" (Florida, USA) - See all my reviews
I had to give this book a one star rating because there was no way for me to rate it a zero.

As stated in my review title, the only scam going on with canoes and kayaks in America is this book put out by Tim Ingram. To use a relevant cliché, Tim obviously has only one ore in the water. I can clearly understand the Mr. Ingram would like to see not one more person die in a paddling accident, however, I believe his claims and statements are motivated by the lack of industries willingness to integrate his products into their designs.

The idea that the government is conspiring with the paddling industry to kill people is absurd.

They all laughed at Professor Kaczynski until he started using the Post Office to send his messages, he's now known as the Unabomber. Let's hope Mr. Ingram doesn't start mailing these poor selling, gas-charged tubes."

The CO2 sponsons are well-known to the above poster. The CO2 sponsons, when set as the lower sponson in the picture below, allow spilling-out of most of the water, so any 10 year old girls can rescue themselves and large, disabled adults, who only need to crawl over the submerged gunwale. It is good to know that in waves (when the young girls would be sitting on the seats, not standing up to demonstrate the enormous stability created by the Couple of airbag sponson buoyancy with a ton of Water Ballast. This is a common principle of naval architecture.

This is why is better-behaved today. If they were allowed to continue their "Darwin" explanation that citizens deserved to die, we would perhaps have more deaths today. *

*You will note that all universities in the world, after replicating Milgram experiments in every developed country: Canada, Germany, France, Norway, South Africa, the UK, and the US, etc., these experiments were Stopped, due to the extreme distress suffered by subjects knowing that they would torture and even kill an innocent "experimental victim", simply because they were asked. I have simply replicated these Milgram experiments with victims who would be tortured to death anyway! Most significantly,  the subjects (canoe and kayak "experts") mostly suffer no remorse, guilt or anxiety whatsoever, regarding their torturing to death of about 120 victims annually. I believe that I have made clear references in other chapters, to major authors who do indeed speak out against the lack of canoe and kayak rescue safety.

But this is the truly remarkable finding of these new experiments! The original Milgram experiments were discontinued at universities around the world due to the ethical concerns regarding the stresses suffered by the experimental subjects, when they discovered that they could torture, even to death, perfectly innocent victims; simply on the instructions of the experimenter.

The power of Degrading Propaganda makes it OK for these innocent citizens, even children, to be tortured to death by Police, Transport Canada and US Coast Guard officials, etc. Once they have been sufficiently degraded, their lives are worthless; as they are blamed for their own deaths to perpetuate the criminal scam.

It is foolish indeed to think that human nature has been changed by the Nuremberg Trials, or other tribunals for Crimes Against Humanity. Constant vigilence is necessary or we shall continue to see illegal torture in the prisons of Iraq, like Abu Graib. Or police violence in Ontario against unarmed native peoples: about 12 men, women and children who occupied their own burial ground at Ipperwash.

Next Page: Chapter 8: Legal Developments in Canoe and Kayak Rescue Safety