Haverfordwest tragic SUP accident.

^ totally agree with that. Learning skills is great fun and really important. I stopped WW after I made one too many bad decisions when I was not thinking straight and wanted to add some risk in. I spent almost too long in gods waiting room ! But I’ve taken my daughter in grade 1 and 2 ish stuff to start to introduce her to it. But water and esp moving water demands utmost respect, I’ve had friends die.

Tragic human element to this story incoming…

just had the youngest member (25, known his family all my life) of our regular riding group on the phone to say he won’t be coming riding with us tonight as the young girl who died in this incident was his girlfriend. He wants me to let the group know so he doesn’t have to tell everyone himself. They haven’t been together long, as they only got together about 6 weeks before our trip to the Pyrenees in September, but I know he had spent a lot of time with her and that they got on very well. She sounded like a really lovely person from his description. I am gutted for the lad and am left here feeling like someone has just knocked all the wind out of me. 🙁

That’s sad. Condolences to all involved and affected.

< deleted, none of my business>

🙁

Soz Welshfarmer and riding buddies. ☹

Condolences again to all involved.

Condolences to your pal @Welshfarmer. I’ve lost friends on the river and its tough.

Pyro, Straightener ( and indeed anyone else who paddled serious WW in the past)

Do you still?
If so, how long have you been doing so?

If not, why did you stop?

I’ve been paddling WW since I was 16 so 25 years. I’ve run hard rivers all over the world with a few first descents. Things definitely slowed down after I had kids 12 years ago and the core group of pals I boated with dispersed. But I’d really started getting back on my game pre covid, mainly due to finding a new group of guys to boat with, and had planned a big multi day in Nepal in 2020. Unfortunately covid restrictions and injury meant I barely paddled any WW in 2020 and the first half of this year. Getting back on it again now though!

Back in the news this morning. 4th person died, and someone arrested for gross negligence manslaughter!!

someone arrested for gross negligence manslaughter!!

Does this mean the group were on a paid guided paddle or was being run by a business?

Oh dear.

Probably best to shut this thread down now mods.

Does this mean the group were on a paid guided paddle or was being run by a business?

It was an organised group rather than a group of friends certainly. My local ‘club’ have an organiser and qualified instructors, but not a committee (like a conventional amateur sports club) and participants pay £5 per session. Unravel what that constitutes at your leisure.

4 lives lost. Tragic. As ever, the most important thing next is what lessons are learnt and how they implemented nationally.

Does this mean the group were on a paid guided paddle or was being run by a business?

That’s what I picked up from the initial reports, and why (sadly) I think this’ll be an event use for teaching for years to come

This is awful. I saw the news, looked at the location on Google Maps and street view. Downstream from the bridge you can barely see the horizon line. To me, the weir itself has “Deathtrap” written all over it, but I have 30 years of paddlesports experience. I fully appreciate how it could appear relatively benign to a relative beginner. Even Matt’s “safe” weir from page 1 would be a very different beast with 1m depth of water hosing over it. Actual conditions on the day make massive difference.

Rescue at this point is extremely difficult and will place any rescuers in grave danger. Hats off to all involved in the events that unfolded. It is very likely that the equipment, skills and knowledge required were not instantly available and took time to arrive on the scene. The unfolding scene must have been awful, and I don’t want to put the scene in my mind down in type. The instant it started, it was never going to end well.

This is another Lyme Bay moment. Heartfelt condolences to all involved. In time questions may be answered, but sadly that won’t bring anyone back.

This is another Lyme Bay moment.

Legislation will be written

That’s what I picked up from the initial reports

Me too….I’m sure in the early reports of the tragedy there were condolences being sent by, what seemed like, a shop or club.
And I’ve been wondering if anyone was going to be held accountable – because they should be.
The fact that anyone thought it was a good idea to be on a river after the amount of rain that had fallen is rediculous.

The fact that anyone thought it was a good idea to be on a river after the amount of rain that had fallen is rediculous.

That’s what I thought initially, not knowing much about kayaking. But then, as a few others have pointed out. It’s after heavy rain that it gets fun. Which I can understand.  I suppose that’s only ok if you’re doing it yourself, personal responsibility and all that.  Personally, I’d stay out of the river after heavy rain due to all the shite that would be getting washed into it…

Deleted as saw up date above.

And I’ve been wondering if anyone was going to be held accountable – because they should be.

Depends on whether it was group of consenting adults out for a fun trip together or a guided trip with a paid/qualified leader in charge of safety. Police involvement would suggest the latter but I really hope that this girl is not being blamed just because she was the most qualified person on the water in a club setting.
Perhaps a rhetorical question but – Do we always need someone to blame when tragedies happen?
This is part of the issue with people getting experience on the water/on the hills etc when litigious culture says I might get sued if it all goes wrong.
I do hope as many details as possible are published so we can all learn from this.

Do we always need someone to blame when tragedies happen?

Good point.
Every person in that group had the option of not going so arguably why should someone be to blame.
But if the “leader” said that the conditions were suitable, when clearly they weren’t, then maybe that changes things.

Police involvement would suggest the latter but I really hope that this girl is not being blamed just because she was the most qualified person on the water in a club setting

I presume it must have been a paid for guiding/weekend away – rather than a club/friends setting. I read somewhere that one person decided not to go out with them on that day.

Ok so I grew up in Haverfordwest but moved away after university approx 1,000,000 years ago.
So much depends on the tide at the time. The weir at that point marks the end of the tidal water .. mostly.

With a very high tide the weir gets covered by a foot or two of water in an ordinary tide at high tide there may well be a foot or two drop to the tidal water. At low tide there is a serious (5ish) drop off the weir and nobody would contemplate it on a paddle board.

My sister who is still in H’west tells me that there was serious almost monsoon like rain showers at the time and was stunned that anyone would be paddling a SUP on the Cleaddu at that time.

I know bugger all about kayaking or SUPs BTW.

It is just very sad.

Perhaps a rhetorical question but – Do we always need someone to blame when tragedies happen?
This is part of the issue with people getting experience on the water/on the hills etc when litigious culture says I might get sued if it all goes wrong.
I do hope as many details as possible are published so we can all learn from this.

As a cycle club ride leader, I’ve seen the debates we go through when the forecast is grim as as to whether rides should be cancelled, whether it’s snow and ice or rain and storms. Not so much from a “being sued” aspect, but we don’t want club members to get hurt, and we don’t want our ride leaders to worry about “what if?”. I’ve had a rider fail to unclip at a junction and smash his hip and pelvis, and that’s not an hour I’d wish on anyone, in any capacity. So we cancel rides when we feel it’s safer to do so, and if consenting adults then do their own thing, that’s on their shoulders.

It’s obviously an even bigger factor for a businesses. I understand that kayakers like rough conditions, I was a little surprised the paddle boarders would do the same.

I understand that kayakers like rough conditions

Some kayakers do. I would tend to expect though after heavy rainfall that unless its a group of advanced ww paddlers that there would be a good chance of cancelling unless you are really confident about how the river stands up to rain.

What a tragic and horrible accident. I’ve got 15+ years on the water, a few friends I’ll not see again and many many good times here. I’ve been SRTA-W and WRT qualified and made a living(ish) from the river for a few years in my 20s.

The thing that sets moving water aside from other adventure sports is how dynamic the environment is – and it takes years of experience to be able to look at water and work out what is happening below the surface and exactly how dangerous a feature is. What was safe yesterday or an hour ago may not be safe now.

That’s what I thought initially, not knowing much about kayaking. But then, as a few others have pointed out. It’s after heavy rain that it gets fun.

The relationship between water level and difficulty/fun is not always a linear one. Some sections can be easy at low water, get harder as the levels come up, and then all the features wash out and it just becomes fast and flat over a certain level. Understanding where and when to paddle and where and when to go home is a really tough learning experience for so many paddlers, especially when ego, peer pressure and time comes into play.

To anyone on this thread considering getting into whitewater – it will take you places you cant imagine (or even access otherwise), with amazing people, but go safe, go humble, and go educated and experienced.

Does this mean the group were on a paid guided paddle or was being run by a business?

It doesnt matter which, if the Group had a ‘Leader’.
British Canoeing have a number of discipline specific Leader qualifications.
For the group, the Leader should have a SUP Leader qualification. I dont think there is a Whitewater SUP qualification yet, as it’s a pretty small group of people who do WW SUP.
Even if only a flat/moderate Leader, they should know the dangers of weirs, and have relevant safety measures in place at danger points.
If leading for money, or just a group of friends for free, if you have said I will lead this group, then you have then taken responsibility for their welfare.
The only way out of it is to say ‘I’m not leading this group, we’ll go as a peer group’. Which is what many people do each week outside of Club trips. There are usually one or 2 people who are less confident on the water, and need a little help getting down, but without making it formal and appointing a Leader.

It doesnt matter which, if the Group had a ‘Leader’.

+1

Even 30+ years ago, it was recognised as a theoretical risk, at least, that (totally free and voluntary) university clubs could end up being regarded as responsible for their members. Group outings were clearly described as being ‘for the convenience of like-minded individuals’ (or similar wording) and that as the group contained a mixture of skill levels, each individual was responsible for evaluating activities in light of their own skills / ability.

A very sad incident, and I have sympathy for everyone involved.

As a long-time watcher of ‘Saving Lives At Sea’, and as someone who truly values the work of the RNLI, I’ve seen so many instances of people getting into trouble in SUP’s and in kayaks, watching the video of the weir rescue just shows how quickly an afternoon’s paddle can turn into a life-threatening situation. As a non-swimmer, while I like the idea, I’m not really inclined to go out in a canoe or kayak.
Having said that, I did do once, on Llangorse lake, but I was a lot younger then.

Every person in that group had the option of not going so arguably why should someone be to blame.

If you don’t know the river and/or your not an experienced paddler, how can they be expected to make the decision? The guide makes the decision about conditions being safe or not, not the clients

Again depends on the definition of guide. BBC made it sound like a club setup so not commercial. Then it comes down to if the “guide” makes a poor decision which leads to an accident what is the response to that?
Trying not to speculate on the circumstances but if this manslaughter charge is brought I have real fears for the future of club paddling and other activities.
Another rhetoric question- does having someone to blame make the grief any easier/better?

I presume it must have been a paid for guiding/weekend away – rather than a club/friends setting. I read somewhere that one person decided not to go out with them on that day.

I think that is a common misconception. Even the group of friends setting – there can be a duty of care to others; or someone may “unofficially” have adopted the role of the leader despite any understanding that it was all “peers” and “personal responsibility”. Of course a jury might be satisfied in the end that they owed no duty of care or weren’t grossly negligent in that duty.

Trying not to speculate on the circumstances but if this manslaughter charge is brought I have real fears for the future of club paddling and other activities.

Really? I’ve never been involved with club paddling but I have with other water and land based activities and most serious clubs are well structured, well run and have processes and procedures in place to keep their members safe. It doesn’t follow that someone dies = manslaughter; it needs someone to have failed to do something they should reasonably be expected to do.

I actually think this is the sort of event that makes well run clubs stronger, safer than ad hoc arrangements or informal clubs, by forcing everyone to look again at what they do and if it would stand up to scrutiny if it all goes wrong. (E.g. the person above who cancels club runs “but if people go themselves that’s their own call” – I’ve seen that written on event cancellations – that’s a total mess. There’s no need to write that – and just encourages people to go without the one person who was able to make the sensible decision).

Another rhetoric question- does having someone to blame make the grief any easier/better?

I think people think it does, but actually a criminal trial which may or may not be successful will draw the grieving process out for years. At the end of the day it won’t bring those four people back, won’t help those involved be totally upfront about what went wrong, who took which decisions or why.

Again depends on the definition of guide. BBC made it sound like a club setup so not commercial. Then it comes down to if the “guide” makes a poor decision which leads to an accident what is the response to that?

I was pondering this. Obviously getting into speculation but anytime you do an activity with at least one other person then someone ends up as a “guide”. Just following a mate down a hill on your bike and they are guiding. If it’s a paid activity then that is very different but still has grey areas, eg a club where you all put a fiver in but no one gets paid.

Does speculating without any access to the most basic facts help either?

Another rhetoric question- does having someone to blame make the grief any easier/better?

I think people think it does, but actually a criminal trial which may or may not be successful will draw the grieving process out for years.

And potentially make it worse I’d it’s a “not guilty” verdict maybe.

We have become so good at minimising risks in so many walks of life now, through training and legislation, that people aren’t exposed to tragedies like this as often as they were 50 years ago, and maybe that rarity factor makes it easier to fall back on a “someone must be to blame and/or punished”. So called compensation culture probably hasn’t helped suggesting someone is always to blame* – we’ve lost touch with the idea that tragedies can happen despite people doing all they reasonably should have done.

*as a claims manager in the mid 90s just as ambulance chasing was becoming a thing, insurers didn’t help by paying small claims for economic reasons as they weren’t worth defending.

Just to stress these are my thoughts on the general grief/blame question raised, not linked to this particular case

Does speculating without any access to the most basic facts help either?

Potentially it does! If it forces someone here to take a moment of reflection and think – “oh, I had never considered that when I go riding (or paddling) with my mates that if I’ve done all the planning or encouraged a hesitant participant to come beyond their skillset that I might have a duty of care to them” similarly all the posts from experienced WW paddlers helped my understanding or risk (as someone who paddles occasionally, but never near weirs or any serious WW). So whilst speculation may not help understanding this particular tragedy and preventing its recurrence – discussion about the sort of things that can go wrong and who has a moral obligation to protect others may prevent/protect others.

@poly yeah that bit is fair enough but speculating on specifics is a bit off until facts are known. The arrest may well be a formality pending further investigation under corporate H&S or could well be a very obvious case of negligence however at this stage it’s not helpful to anyone to speculate on this or the potential for impact in the future.

This is another Lyme Bay moment.

No it is not.

Legislation will be written

We already have legislation in place, unlike when Lyme Bay happened.

There is a duty of care that exists whether you are volunteer or paid leader/coach. This is the reality of volunteering – guess why I apply same preparation and care to my DofE trips as I do at work with a team of 15+staff leading outdoor learning daily.

This also is not about a traditional approach to risk management. In industry (And therefore how so many are trained and understand risk) is about a risk deficit approach. This seeks to reduce all risks to zero through the traditional approaches of elimination, isolation, substitution, training, ppe etc.

This approach does not work in education, recreation, health and some areas of industry and construction. Here we take a risk benefit approach – striking a balanced approach. We therefore can justify legally and morally that to paddle on a river is acceptable. As is putting someone at the bottom of the north sea to work on an oil valve. Or riding a bike on a bumpy trail. Or asking kids to batter into each other for a rugby match (etc). We have great precedent in approach, in systems and in court cases over this.

The assumption that someone will personally be to blame is also not always correct. I used to work for an organisation that had the death of a 15 year old girl on our hands. The investigation and prosecution held the organisation failings to account – and exonerated the leaders on the day as they were working within the systems and training they had been given. The organisation was fined heavily, the directors publicly held to account. In one of the very few cases of a teacher being held to account for a pupil death occurred when a teacher ignored the risk assessment, ignored a head teacher phone call to say ‘don’t do it’, ignored their training to not do it and ignored the pupils and a colleague saying ‘that looks dodgy’. Unsurprisingly they were prosecuted.

My biggest learning in risk management over 30+ years now, particularly having been up close and personal to the tragedy of my previous employer, and now writing policy around this on a national level, is that to learn from the events is more important than the blame. The press, and we discussing on here, both miss the nuance and detail of the HSE report, and tend to immediately go for the blame. We should be waiting for the full details from HSE/AALS/Police and looking to learn from it.

We take on risks – it is daily life. What we need to do is find that balance, and that includes learning from everyones past experience, but even then we would not want (And could not have) all risks removed from life.

The arrest may well be a formality pending further investigation under corporate H&S or could well be a very obvious case of negligence however at this stage it’s not helpful to anyone to speculate on this or the potential for impact in the future.

This is true. I was cautioned after an accident MTB’ing when a friend looked like they may not make it.

Perhaps a rhetorical question but – Do we always need someone to blame when tragedies happen?
This is part of the issue with people getting experience on the water/on the hills etc when litigious culture says I might get sued if it all goes wrong.

Every person in that group had the option of not going so arguably why should someone be to blame.

and the question of waivers.

I have no knowledge of watersports, or the situation in this instance but have led road and MTB rides for many years.

It’s one of the misconceptions that as long as everyone knows the risks and has signed a waiver then we’re all good. The waiver is to cover accidents that can happen when doing the right things, not the wrong things, or doing the right things wrongly.

Second, and more important is the litigious culture. With so many people being self employed, or even having life insurance that pays out on critical illness or injury (my house term insurance does for example, if I have an accident that stops me from working then the mortgage gets paid up) – the insurers don’t just pay if they think someone else might be liable for it.

Theoretical example. Say I joined a skills course, and during that extremely well organised and led activity had an accident and paralysed myself so I can no longer work. I’ve signed a waiver for the ride, so shit happens. I’m not blaming the leader, I’ve no intent of suing them. I’ll just claim on my life cover, that’s what I pay it for.

But I put a claim in and they want the details. And in doing so, they wonder if the risk assessment / assessment of my skill level was as good as it could have been? And decide they want to contest paying out quarter of a million quid when the instructor has liability insurance that would cover it, or at least part liability. Which involves me supporting their claim by giving evidence ‘for’ them, ‘against’ the instructor. Doesn’t make me look good does it? I’d expect to get dog’s abuse because I knew what I’d signed up for, etc…….

Theoretical example? or I *believe* this is what happened in the BKB case from 5-10 years back based on what i heard through local ITK people……