Rafter dies of injuries after Bow River rescue

[msommers]

No idea what these guys' experience level was like but for the casual rafter, this is an unfortunate reminder to stay off The Bow right now.


As a man died in hospital after being tossed from a raft along Harvie Passage, fire department officials say the message for inexperienced river enthusiasts to avoid the rapids is not being heard.

"This incident has got to refocus everybody," said Calgary Fire Department battalion chief Larry Fisher.

"It is unbelievably frustrating for us and it scares the blazes out of me that the message isn't getting to everyone. It looks fun and inviting, but it is very dangerous."

In Monday's incident, a man was taken to Foothills Hospital in life-threatening condition following a dramatic rescue on the Bow River by the water rescue team.

Just after 4 p.m., four adults were floating in a raft when it was swept up in the swift rapids and capsized.

Three of the passengers made it to the shore, but the fourth was swept downstream by the strong current. All four were wearing life-jackets.

The water rescue team plucked the man from the river near the 17th Avenue bridge, about 750 metres from the scene of the incident, said spokesman Jayson Doysher.

The rafter was found unconscious in critical, life-threatening condition caused by near drowning.

He later died of his injuries at Foothills Hospital, officials said.

While the rescuers were wrapping up that incident, a kayaker flipped and someone on a nearby raft scrambled to help. Both appeared unhurt.

Monday's incident comes on the heels of emergency responders pleading with people to stay off the rivers over the long weekend because of extremely high and fast water levels. In addition, the water is littered with debris, such as logs and branches, which increases the danger level.

Fisher said most people complied with the request from emergency services on Saturday and Sunday, and there were fewer boats on the river than anticipated.

That changed Monday, though, as the mercury rose, with five separate river rescues, including the fatal one.

Fisher said he, and many others in the fire department, are concerned by the number of inexperienced boaters, rafters and kayakers tackling Harvie Passage, which, under typical conditions, boasts a less turbulent Class II rapid and one with a challenging Class III rapid.

"I am so worried that there is this one family out there that we have missed, whom we haven't got the message to," said Fisher. "They are going to come floating along in a raft and it's going to be a huge surprise to them and we are going to lose them. That is my biggest fear."

Fisher said the water temperature at this time of year is about 5 C.

He reminded experienced kayakers to wear the proper gear, including a helmet. "It's tough enough to survive a spill in that water. But with no helmet and you hit your head on the rocks under the water it's even tougher."

The area around the existing weir on the Bow River was reconstructed to form a series of man-made pools and rapids, which opened to users in May. Before the reconstruction, the weir's hydraulic action made it nearly impossible for people caught in the churning water to get out. Over the past 100 years, the weir killed 14 people.

When the passage opened in May, officials warned of the dangers.

"We want to really point out to people who are intending to use the river over the summer that it isn't a waterslide," said Derek Lovlin, operations manager with Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. "Don't misinterpret it - it's safer, but there's still risk involved."

At the same time, while creating a safer river was the No. 1 priority of the Harvie Passage project, designers of the water features also had recreation in mind. Boulders, chutes, drops, play holes and play waves combine to create a type of "water playground" that exists in few other North American urban centres.

Fisher said there is sufficient warning and signage in place to let river enthusiasts know what's ahead.

[email protected]

[email protected]
© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald


http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/Rafter+dies+injuries+after+River+rescue/6874528/story.html

[D'z Nutz]

That's crazy. I was just there yesterday watching kayakers while taking a 5 minute breather during my bike ride. I was thinking to myself, these guys have balls doing this right now with after all the recent rain. I had no idea someone died there just hours before :(

[Xtrema]

Piss me off that people were warned and doing it anyway. Risking other people's lives trying to save their asses.

[Spoons]

Originally posted by Xtrema
Piss me off that people were warned and doing it anyway. Risking other people's lives trying to save their asses.

Yupp, hard to feel sympathy for this one.

[msommers]

Like I said, it entirely depends on your skill level. The section is classified by R2 which isnt anything crazy but people get overly confident and thats when shit happena. The accident out on Kicking Horse not long ago was led by very experienced guides. Accidents happen.

[Spoons]

Originally posted by msommers
Like I said, it entirely depends on your skill level. The section is classified by R2 which isnt anything crazy but people get overly confident and thats when shit happena. The accident out on Kicking Horse not long ago was led by very experienced guides. Accidents happen.

Yes but on Kicking Horse, even though the waters are high, they classified them as still being quite safe. Here on the other hand, not the case. There have been numerous warnings to stay off but these guys still go out. I can understand kayakers a bit more (still wouldn't go out if it was me) but these guys were on a fucking raft.

It's the equivalent of me going riding when everyone is saying no cause the avalanche warning is high.

Accidents happen, but more often than not in these cases, it's just natural selection that happened.

[got_mike33]

Originally posted by Spoons


Yes but on Kicking Horse, even though the waters are high, they classified them as still being quite safe. Here on the other hand, not the case. There have been numerous warnings to stay off but these guys still go out. I can understand kayakers a bit more (still wouldn't go out if it was me) but these guys were on a fucking raft.

It's the equivalent of me going riding when everyone is saying no cause the avalanche warning is high.

Accidents happen, but more often than not in these cases, it's just natural selection that happened.

It also entirely depends on the equipment you have too. Maybe if these guys were in a legit whitewater raft they probably wouldn't have had an issue, but if they were in the $10 dinghies from Canadian Tire then there is no reason they should have been out there.

Also the passage has two different channels for different types of raft. The low flow channel (south part of the passage) is meant for your smaller rafts and inexperienced rafters while the high flow channel (north part of the passage) is meant for more experienced individuals.

The other thing that isn't mentioned is just how cold the Bow is right now. Falling in the water alone could have been enough to shock his system to the point where he couldn't get out of the river.

Hopefully the City can use this to raise even more awareness or these accidents will continue.

[kenny]

Dumb signs like this are part of the problem:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-K1ii8DpV1Pg/T7E99jtne6I/AAAAAAAAACs/JxMzj3smu4o/s1600/Harvie%2Bpassage.jpg

Casual users would have no idea what the difference between Class II and Class III rapids are.

The signs on the Bow River should just say "DANGER AHEAD - KEEP RIGHT"

[got_mike33]

Originally posted by kenny
Dumb signs like this are part of the problem:

Casual users would have no idea what the difference between Class II and Class III rapids are.

The signs on the Bow River should just say "DANGER AHEAD - KEEP RIGHT"

Yeah that's terrible... I am not surprised people are getting caught up on the wrong side of the river

[clem24]

Why should the city babysit these users? I would never even venture out to a place that says "rapids" to begin with. People probably see it as nothing and decide they can go ahead. Can't comment on their circumstances facing these particular people, but in the internet age, it's really not that difficult to a just little bit of research before heading out. Like literally 5 minutes to save your life. Not only that but didn't they notice that the water level was quite extreme??

[CompletelyNumb]

Originally posted by kenny
Casual users would have no idea what the difference between Class II and Class III rapids are.


You have to know what street signs mean before you can drive, why should rafting be any different. The city shouldnt be responsible for peoples ignorance.

[-relk-]

Originally posted by clem24
Why should the city babysit these users? I would never even venture out to a place that says "rapids" to begin with. People probably see it as nothing and decide they can go ahead. Can't comment on their circumstances facing these particular people, but in the internet age, it's really not that difficult to a just little bit of research before heading out. Like literally 5 minutes to save your life. Not only that but didn't they notice that the water level was quite extreme??

:werd:

If you are going out on a river, you should know at least the basics of rapid classifications. Not very hard to determine that class 3 > class 2. Its too bad that some people don't listen.

[msommers]

Originally posted by got_mike33
The other thing that isn't mentioned is just how cold the Bow is right now. Falling in the water alone could have been enough to shock his system to the point where he couldn't get out of the river.



Fisher mentions it's about 5C during this time of year which is fucking cold. R3 ups the danger, thought it was just R2. Lack of equipment and experience could be the major factors here.

I think the fire department is going to err on the side of caution with rapids within city limits.

[kenny]

Originally posted by CompletelyNumb
You have to know what street signs mean before you can drive, why should rafting be any different. The city shouldnt be responsible for peoples ignorance.

Considering you need to be licensed to drive, thats a bad comparison. The Harvie Passage was designed as a "water playground" for recreational users of the river and they even removed the sign that advises users of the river to portage around the area because it wasn't safe. The new sign just shows two possible routes to take with no recommended path to take.

This is from the Harvie Passage website for the question "What if I fall into the river?"

There will be areas of faster water separated by slow, deep pools from which most people can easily swim or walk to shore

I'm not saying people shouldn't be responsible for their own safety, because they should. I'm saying the Harvie Passage area is still really dangerous in the best conditions and the City has not done enough to stress that to users of the river--and in fact I feel they've done the opposite by promoting it as a fun, recreational river park/playground.

[HyperZell]

Originally posted by kenny



I'm not saying people shouldn't be responsible for their own safety, because they should. I'm saying the Harvie Passage area is still really dangerous in the best conditions and the City has not done enough to stress that to users of the river--and in fact I feel they've done the opposite by promoting it as a fun, recreational river park/playground.


Maybe, but in this specific case, police personally warned this group, who ignored them and went in anyways.

[sillysod]

Originally posted by CompletelyNumb



You have to know what street signs mean before you can drive, why should rafting be any different. The city shouldnt be responsible for peoples ignorance.

True, but not much the city can do when they get a call someone fell in the river. They are obligated to go and rescue them.

That being said, I think if you fall in and they have to come save you you should be on the hook for at least some of the bill.

[got_mike33]

Originally posted by sillysod


True, but not much the city can do when they get a call someone fell in the river. They are obligated to go and rescue them.

That being said, I think if you fall in and they have to come save you you should be on the hook for at least some of the bill.

The funny thing is the city is not really obligated. All bodies of water in Canada (rivers, lakes, oceans, steams etc.) are federally regulated, so it's actually the coast guard's responsibility.

[Spoons]

Originally posted by sillysod


True, but not much the city can do when they get a call someone fell in the river. They are obligated to go and rescue them.

That being said, I think if you fall in and they have to come save you you should be on the hook for at least some of the bill.

Agree'd.

I bring my point up again. If you go out of bounds skiing and get stuck back there and ski patrol has to come and get you, you're on the hook for the bill. Why not this?

[J-hop]

Originally posted by kenny


Considering you need to be licensed to drive, thats a bad comparison. The Harvie Passage was designed as a "water playground" for recreational users of the river and they even removed the sign that advises users of the river to portage around the area because it wasn't safe. The new sign just shows two possible routes to take with no recommended path to take.

This is from the Harvie Passage website for the question "What if I fall into the river?"

There will be areas of faster water separated by slow, deep pools from which most people can easily swim or walk to shore

I'm not saying people shouldn't be responsible for their own safety, because they should. I'm saying the Harvie Passage area is still really dangerous in the best conditions and the City has not done enough to stress that to users of the river--and in fact I feel they've done the opposite by promoting it as a fun, recreational river park/playground.

What about skiing? Many times their are just black diamonds, blue and green signs with no description on them (yea I know in some cases they write "easy", "hard" etc). Should a ski hill have to give every user an orientation and discuss the difference between the colors and/or have lengthy descriptions on each sign?

The problem is people don't take anything on the water seriously. From power boating to basic swimming lessons very few have the proper training/experience and when someone gets hurt somehow every one is surprised?????

[FixedGear]

Originally posted by J-hop


What about skiing? Many times their are just black diamonds, blue and green signs with no description on them (yea I know in some cases they write "easy", "hard" etc). Should a ski hill have to give every user an orientation and discuss the difference between the colors and/or have lengthy descriptions on each sign?


I think every single ski resort that I've ever been to has "Easiest way" written on the signs and maps, from top to bottom of the hill. I think the easy route is made very clear for anyone looking for it.

[FraserB]

I think it time to start making people personally responsible for dumb decisions. If you go in against the advice of the people who know their shit, you are on the hook for the $$ required to rescue you if you get in trouble. Make it apply to the rivers, the paths that get flooded, back country areas etc...

Maybe if it costs you tens of thousands, you'll think twice the next time.

[Go4Long]

given that it is the fire department that responds to rescue these idiots, I'd wager they get a bill for the services...at least I hope so. Boats are expensive.

[kenny]

Originally posted by J-hop
Should a ski hill have to give every user an orientation and discuss the difference between the colors and/or have lengthy descriptions on each sign?

Nope, but they do it anyway. Not only do they label every run and explain the different colors they also rope off the dangerous areas to prevent anyone from accidentally going out of bounds.

Not to mention that in skiing, an individual propels themselves. A run looks too steep? No problem, you stop and ski towards a more gentler decline. Completely stuck with no easy runs to get down? take off your skis and walk down.

I do agree that river users don't take the warnings seriously and I think anyone that requires rescue should get a bill of some sort. I do also think that more can be done to inform people about the dangers and to steer newbies in the right direction.

[J-hop]

Well to be honest I've never ridden up to a double black and seen a sign that says "this run contains moguls, drop offs, steeps sections and is intended for experienced riders only". I like the individuals propel themselves (which isn't exactly true, gravity propels you just like the force of a river propels you) that comment conjured up memories of seeing kids flying down the hill out of control and running into the ski racks at COP hahaha.

Plus, im sure you can go online and find maps with rapids classifications for anything around Calgary and in the age of smart phones if you show up to the parking lot and they have a sign by the river saying class 2/3 rapids you have absolutely no excuse....

But the one thing that stops the above common sense from working is people just don't give a damn.

[max_boost]

Damn that's a shitty way to go.

[Spoons]

Originally posted by kenny
take off your skis and walk down.

Yeah that is one thing you never ever ever ever ever ever ever want to do. Especially when you're stuck on a steep pitch. People have died because they did this.

[gretz]

Originally posted by Spoons


Yeah that is one thing you never ever ever ever ever ever ever want to do. Especially when you're stuck on a steep pitch. People have died because they did this.

I'm not positive an amateur skier/boarder would have a better chance of killing themselves because they walked down as opposed to "riding out of their comfort zone" > You can still fall, having planks strapped to you isn't going to be what saves your life...

In deep powder / on steep pitches with trees and snow pockets, I can see walking being very dangerous

[FixedGear]

Footage of the 4 people in question was actually captured by a CBC camera. I don't know if anyone else saw it, but they were in a tiny raft that was completely overloaded... one guy even had his legs hanging out as they went down the rapids. IMO they were kind of asking for it, but then again I think most Calgarians think this area of the river is now safe.

[speedog]

CBC video (http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/Calgary/ID/2253191560/)

[speedog]

Well, the video tells so much - probably way too small of a raft for he class 3 rapids on the north channel plus the last set of rapids is really churning right now because of the high water. Question is how many will the CPS and CFD pull from the river this weekend - 27-30C and sunny is most likely going to make for a bunch of poorly prepared and under trained fools on the rivers.

[dj_patm]

As others have pointed out, the city has played up the "safe" factor way too much for the Harvie Passage.

Honest to God, I saw reports everywhere back when they were testing the rapids claiming that it was completely safe and until now I probably wouldn't have hesitated trying even the class 3 rapids simply because of the city's safety claims.

HOWEVER, I also would never go on the river when it's this high. I never heard any official warnings earlier but everyone knows that it's high so why take stupid risks.

[clem24]

watching at work so no sound but I am assuming then everything was captured in film, including the guy falling in?

[kenny]

Couple lucky idiots:

J0wi-ZVjm94

[speedog]

Idiots in that Youtube video above do not appear to realize the actual danger they were in - one knock on the melon and then what? Guess Trevor Shaw (youtube account holder for that video) probably doesn't have an issue for attending a funeral or two sooner than later.

[JfuckinC]

i mean, if they both had lids and paddles it wouldn't be that bad.. but that's so stupid hahaha

[gretz]

Originally posted by JfuckinC
i mean, if they both had lids and paddles it wouldn't be that bad.. but that's so stupid hahaha

Nice pants on too... perfect for swimming lol

[J-hop]

Originally posted by dj_patm
As others have pointed out, the city has played up the "safe" factor way too much for the Harvie Passage.

Honest to God, I saw reports everywhere back when they were testing the rapids claiming that it was completely safe and until now I probably wouldn't have hesitated trying even the class 3 rapids simply because of the city's safety claims.

HOWEVER, I also would never go on the river when it's this high. I never heard any official warnings earlier but everyone knows that it's high so why take stupid risks.

The thing is though, the city has been telling everyone that the bow isn't safe at these water levels for months now. It's like avalanche warnings on a ski hill. Yes fernie is an absolutely safe ski hill, but when the conditions favor avalanches it is not and they have to mitigate that via warnings, avalanche guns etc. Same applies here but you are dealing with water....

I just don't understand what some are asking for. Should the city wipe our asses as well????

Then people wonder why we have to implement stupid laws in Calgary.... Hmmm I wonder why....

[-relk-]

Originally posted by J-hop


The thing is though, the city has been telling everyone that the bow isn't safe at these water levels for months now. It's like avalanche warnings on a ski hill. Yes fernie is an absolutely safe ski hill, but when the conditions favor avalanches it is not and they have to mitigate that via warnings, avalanche guns etc. Same applies here but you are dealing with water....

I just don't understand what some are asking for. Should the city wipe our asses as well????

Then people wonder why we have to implement stupid laws in Calgary.... Hmmm I wonder why....

When your on a ski hill, they keep all areas that they think might cause an avalanche closed until they deem them very safe for the public. If you don't follow those rules, then you get your lift ticket taken away. Of course there is always a risk that you cause a slide, because it is impossible for ski patrol to reduce the risk 100% of the time (although they usually are in the %99.9 range).

If we were to apply the same principle to the Bow, then it would mean closing the bow. I personally do not have a problem with that, as I don't use it for rafting or kayaking. If I did however, and I was fully trained and properly geared to enjoy the bigger rapids due to the high current, I would be pissed. But bad apples ruin it for the rest of us all the time.

[phreezee]

Originally posted by kenny
Couple lucky idiots:

J0wi-ZVjm94

hahaha, I have the same Crappy Tire inflatable. Seahawk FTL.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by -relk-


When your on a ski hill, they keep all areas that they think might cause an avalanche closed until they deem them very safe for the public. If you don't follow those rules, then you get your lift ticket taken away. Of course there is always a risk that you cause a slide, because it is impossible for ski patrol to reduce the risk 100% of the time (although they usually are in the %99.9 range).

If we were to apply the same principle to the Bow, then it would mean closing the bow. I personally do not have a problem with that, as I don't use it for rafting or kayaking. If I did however, and I was fully trained and properly geared to enjoy the bigger rapids due to the high current, I would be pissed. But bad apples ruin it for the rest of us all the time.

I think you are missing the point. What I'm saying is you can't blame the city for people's stupidity, short of roping off the entire bow and posting police everywhere to catch stupid people there really isn't much more they can do, they put out extensive warnings, especially this month, people just aren't listening....

[Cos]

.

[msommers]

Those posted videos are eye openers. People really are that stupid. Accept the risks and the consequences. People get choppered out of the mountains because they're ill-equipped or an accident happens, but guess who's paying?

I'm not sure why ski hills keeps coming up as an analog. They're private places that are regulated.

What you should be doing is comparing it to say an area in the mountains, that is free to access but monitored. If the rangers are advising to stay out of an area because they're is a huge populations of cougars right now, and you go anyways, well that's your own problem.

Agreed that I think the city is backpedaling on their safety claims of this particular spot. Global interviewed a couple guys, one at the UC Outdoor Centre and another at a water sports store. Both guys looked pretty disappointed about the city, the signs and the fact people are still going out.

At the end of the day, you need to educate yourself on the dangers, put on the big boy pants and be responsible for yourself AND for the people you're with. When you haven't and you get in trouble, a big bill should be headed your way because of it.

[-relk-]

Originally posted by J-hop


I think you are missing the point. What I'm saying is you can't blame the city for people's stupidity, short of roping off the entire bow and posting police everywhere to catch stupid people there really isn't much more they can do, they put out extensive warnings, especially this month, people just aren't listening....

I didn't mean to say blame the city for people's stupidity (although I realize that I sort of implied it). But the only way to minimize the amount of stupidity on the Bow would be to put an outright ban in situations like this. Of course, it would be very very hard to enforce it, and would take up a lot of resources, making it not very viable imo.

I agree with what others have said, charge them for the rescue.

[Khyron]

Originally posted by J-hop


The thing is though, the city has been telling everyone that the bow isn't safe at these water levels for months now. It's like avalanche warnings on a ski hill.

Right but it's become like fire bans. Every little tiny things, they call "danger danger, no fire, no rafting" so when it actually IS dangerous, people either ignore or are sick of the constant bs warnings.

It's like the lifejacket->Elbow thing. I can't take a firefighter talking about water safety seriously when he actually says I (strong swimmer) need a life jacket in knee high water (on a raft) while my 4 year old daughter wading off the shore in exactly the same fucking waterway does not. Of course that discredits anything else that comes out of his mouth.

The Bow warnings? I don't raft on it but still figured it was more legal overprotective bullshit.

[got_mike33]

Originally posted by -relk-


I didn't mean to say blame the city for people's stupidity (although I realize that I sort of implied it). But the only way to minimize the amount of stupidity on the Bow would be to put an outright ban in situations like this. Of course, it would be very very hard to enforce it, and would take up a lot of resources, making it not very viable imo.

I agree with what others have said, charge them for the rescue.

Plus the city has no jurisdiction over the river. Rivers are the federal government's responsibility, so they would have to be the ones putting out the ban, making it even tougher.

+1 for charging for a rescue

[Royle9]

After watching this on the news last night there's a few points I don't agree with.

1. They are trying to blame the city(police/fire) for allowing the boaters to continue on after being stopped previously in the day.

2. Claiming that posted warnings is not enough.


For one were talking about grown adults here, its been stated & posted for WEEKS "to stay off the river" as its considered very dangerous. I'm sorry but if you choose not to listen to that then you've accepted responsibility should something go wrong.

Boat was stopped earlier in they day (up river from the passage) and they were TOLD specifically to not venture any further as they shouldn't be on the river in the first place. Group chose to ignore said warning, resulting in the unfortunate circumstance that now the family deals with.

Am I missing something here? At the end of the day, unless they have about 2 dozen boats patrolling the water all day every day its pretty much impossible to ban anyone from venturing out on the river. I see this no different then speeding, can't outright ban it however they enforce it with fines & penalties.

I'm a +1 for charging for rescue, if you choose to ignore signs/warnings then you pay the price.

[narou]

I never heard or saw any warnings to stay off the driver. But driving home every day it is easy to notice the river is flooding.

Frightened just by looking at it!

[Royle9]

While walking the dog I saw 2 posted signs near bearspaw (frequented raft loading zone) 1 in the parking lot, the other at edge of the path right before heading towards the water. It's been on the news at least a dozen times I'm sure.

Don't recall if these were city signs or publicly posted by a concerned citizen none the less common sense just by looking at the swollen brown river.. most people would assume that's not normal.

[msommers]

On Global the cops were saying they were along the river telling people they should get off. Apparently they had even warned this particular group and they went anyway. It's really hard to feel compassion for a group that was probably warned more than once, didn't have the experience, and probably overloaded their raft.

[kenny]

Turns out Calgary Police has had the authority to ban users from the Bow River all along. They however do not want to do it because they lack the manpower to enforce it.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by narou
I never heard or saw any warnings to stay off the driver. But driving home every day it is easy to notice the river is flooding.

Frightened just by looking at it!

It has been all over the news (radio, TV and papers) few a while now. Even if it wasn't at some point common sense has to kick in.

Maybe we are at the point where they need to start saying there is a ban on rafting in place, giving out nice fat tickets for violating it and not reducing them in court later. I think if they slapped a few people with $10,000+ rescue bill, made it stick and it made the papers, people might think twice.

[nixon45]

Not sure if anyone else saw this but on my drive in to work around 8:50 this morning, HAWCS was circling the Harvie Passage and Fire was on scene as well.

They had lookouts on the sides of the passage.

Not sure whether another idiot went through there or whether it was a training exercise?

Maybe we will hear later

[narou]

Originally posted by FraserB


It has been all over the news (radio, TV and papers) few a while now. Even if it wasn't at some point common sense has to kick in.

Maybe we are at the point where they need to start saying there is a ban on rafting in place, giving out nice fat tickets for violating it and not reducing them in court later. I think if they slapped a few people with $10,000+ rescue bill, made it stick and it made the papers, people might think twice.

I wasn't implying it was a good idea that to go on the river. I have been following this thread so I know it has been all over the news etc.

But honestly the first time I have heard of this outside of this forum was on the radio this morning. Not everyone watches the news frequently.

Anybody should be able to tell just by looking at the river and hearing of flooding in other areas of the country that water levels are high and dangerous.

[Maxt]

Originally posted by narou


I wasn't implying it was a good idea that to go on the river. I have been following this thread so I know it has been all over the news etc.

But honestly the first time I have heard of this outside of this forum was on the radio this morning. Not everyone watches the news frequently.

Anybody should be able to tell just by looking at the river and hearing of flooding in other areas of the country that water levels are high and dangerous.
I think the city should turn it over to an organization or club , so those that use it can organize and pay for their own onsite emergency services. Similiar to how users of race city had to have their own EMS on site for events.

[got_mike33]

Originally posted by kenny
Turns out Calgary Police has had the authority to ban users from the Bow River all along. They however do not want to do it because they lack the manpower to enforce it.

Source?

From what I understand a ban has to come from Transport Canada. Once that occurs then the city can go out and enforce it.

[kenny]

Calgary Police (but not Calgary Fire) has delegated authority to ban river users.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/energy-resources/Transport+Canada+says+police+have+authority+restrict/6885030/story.html

[VTEXTC]

From my experience, some of these media stories can be a little inaccurate. The police can be delegated enforcers of the ban, however, only when Transport Canada (federal gov't) has actually implemented one.

A

[speedog]

Originally posted by VTEXTC
From my experience, some of these media stories can be a little inaccurate. The police can be delegated enforcers of the ban, however, only when Transport Canada (federal gov't) has actually implemented one.

A This - one of my regular police/officer/customers was in this morning and I quizzed him on this and they can only enforce a ban that the federal authorities put into place - they can not put bans into place. That said, they can go after the goofs who don't have a properly equipped raft/whatever, but then again it's not that difficult to meet the minimum regulations - for rafts like these people were using, this would consist of lifejackets/PFD's for every passenger, a bailing bucket and a buoyant heaving line at least 15 meters long.

[darthVWader]

What I dont understand is why did they spend millions to replace the "drowning machine" with another drowning machine?
If you look at all the user groups you would think rafters were high on the list. Why make the right channel class II? Why could they not make it without any rapids?
I think the real blame goes to the fucksticks who designed this new "drowning machine"

[speedog]

Originally posted by darthVWader
What I dont understand is why did they spend millions to replace the "drowning machine" with another drowning machine?
If you look at all the user groups you would think rafters were high on the list. Why make the right channel class II? Why could they not make it without any rapids?
I think the real blame goes to the fucksticks who designed this new "drowning machine"
Edited this reply as reading was better than me apparently.

Never the less, better signage is needed on the river IMHO, but no amount of legislation/regulations/warnings is going to stop some people from making a poor decision and especially so when they were successful just twice before in navigating those rapids. Of note, that group that experienced one of their party dying - they were shooting the class III rapids in the left channel.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by narou


I wasn't implying it was a good idea that to go on the river. I have been following this thread so I know it has been all over the news etc.

But honestly the first time I have heard of this outside of this forum was on the radio this morning. Not everyone watches the news frequently.

Anybody should be able to tell just by looking at the river and hearing of flooding in other areas of the country that water levels are high and dangerous.

You don't exactly have to watch the news everyday to have seen the mass amounts of warnings, just I don't know maybe come out from under your rock every once in a while :rofl:

The problem with bans is that the people that actually should be on the river (like experienced kayakers) will be penalized for the average dumbasses mistake. Experienced paddlers go to these spots for the exact reason people died...rapids... In reality, regardless of the water level the average Calgarian has no business being on the bow, especially if they are of the low common sense poor swimming variety.

Maybe what they should do is ban all use of the river to the average citizen and employ a difficult testing procedure for paddlers to get "licensed" to use the river. That might be an idea?

[got_mike33]

Originally posted by darthVWader
What I dont understand is why did they spend millions to replace the "drowning machine" with another drowning machine?
If you look at all the user groups you would think rafters were high on the list. Why make the right channel class II? Why could they not make it without any rapids?
I think the real blame goes to the fucksticks who designed this new "drowning machine"

The old weir created a hydraulic that held people under for an indefinite period of time and was dangerous all year long, not just during high flows.

The new structure was designed to be safe as possible under normal conditions, and is actually designed to push people towards shore when they fall out. At the times of year when the flows aren't this high (i.e. 90% of the time) this structure will be 100x safer than the old weir.