Rafter dies of injuries after Bow River rescue

[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/busines...030/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.