River safety warnings follow Boy Scouts death

[fgoodwin]

River safety warnings follow Boy Scout's death

 

 

 

June 08, 2008 19:51PM

by Peter Zuckerman, The Oregonian

 

Cold, high water on the Clackamas River is treacherous, officials warned after the death of an 11-year-old Boy Scout this weekend.

 

Finn Terry, an 11-year-old who loved poetry, drowned this weekend during a canoe trip with his Boy Scout troop.

 

The canoe -- carrying an unidentified man and Terry -- capsized as it raced down a section of the Clackamas River that sheriff's deputies described as dangerous. The man wasn't seriously injured.

 

Terry and others with Troop 107 were canoeing between Barton and Clackamette parks in the Gladstone area near Interstate 205 late Saturday afternoon, according to the sheriff's office.

 

Don Cornell, field services director for the Boy Scout Cascade Pacific Council, was unfamiliar with the specifics of the trip.

 

He said the troop had a reputation for canoe trips and that leaders of such trips typically went through two training courses. But he didn't know who had been on this trip, what kind of training they'd received or what kind of conversations about safety they'd had.

 

[excerpted]

[John-in-KC]

Prayers for the family of the lost Scout. Prayers for the Scouter who was with him in that canoe.

 

Beyond that, there are lots of questions which may only come out in a coroner's inquest, if he chooses to have one.

 

All I can hope is the unit did the very best preparation for this particular stretch of white water possible.

[Knot Head]

This is a very sad story. I take safe swim and safety alfoat very seriously and this just reinforces my resolve. I can't imagine how sad the parents, friends and people in that troop must be over this incident.

 

Next year when the scouts complain that the river we canoe on is too slow and boring this story will come to mind. For an inexperienced and young canoers moving water, especially swift moving water is dangerous.

 

This scout was on a swim team and was wearing a PFD according to the article, yet the current took him under.

(This message has been edited by knot head)

[fgoodwin]

I'm no canoing expert, but the article questions whether the canoes were appropriate for the fast-running river.

 

As John says, many unanswered questions . . .

[Beavah]

My prayers to da family and the scouters in this unit. Not bringin' home one of the kids is every scouter's worst nightmare.

 

I don't know that river, but it sounds like da water level was way high if there was "debris" in it. Debris in rivers is typical of a flood-level flow, eh? Washin' things that are normally on the banks downstream. Takin' first-year scouts on a river at that kind of extreme high water ain't wise.

 

Problem is most scouters don't understand how important current flow rate is in makin' decisions. Principles of Safety Afloat don't teach any practical specifics of how to be safe afloat.

 

Beavah

 

[theysawyoucomin']

Merlyn and his ilk don't need to destroy Scouting.

 

The Leaders that killed this kids are doing a fine job. TOTALLY INACCEPTABLE.

 

The kid was 11 years old.

 

I pray for his parents, family and friends

 

 

 

[scoutingagain]

This is my worst nightmare. A leader given responsibility for the safety and well being of other people's children and losing one. I too, say a prayer for the boy, his family and his unit.

 

None of us were there so we don't know the circustances. What little information is provided in the article leaves many questions. The article indicates this was a unit had a reputation for doing canoe trips and it sounds as if they were experienced. They probably filed a tour permit and met all the G2SS requirements. Life jackets were used and the boy sounds as if he was a strong swimmer. However, it sounds as if (and I'm speculating here) while they may have been experienced and maybe even had run this river before, under lower flow conditions and considered it a safe river for young scouts. Conditions this spring turned out to be more dangerous than they had encountered in the past and I suspect they were not aware of how bad the conditions were until they got on the river. The headline provides a hint, "River warnings FOLLOW Boy Scout's Death". But, again the above is all speculation by me.

 

This is a stark reminder to all of us to not just follow the G2SS but to think about what we do. Anticipate, plan, then do and it some cases maybe do something other than our intial plan. Nothing is routine.

 

SA

 

 

 

[John-in-KC]

I really like what SA said. The Good Lord willing, this Troop did everything right... not just by the book, RIGHT. Lots of common sense. Even so,

 

We won't know for many weeks, if indeed ever. Prayers are what the family, the Scouts, and the Scouters need. That's what I'm giving them.

 

 

[le Voyageur]

Condolences to the family for their loss...

 

I keep harping on it, but BSA Lifeguard does not cut it. Way past time to develope a comprehensive BSA Swiftwater program for unit and trek leaders....

[fgoodwin]

How would that differ from the Whitewater MB?

[Gunny2862]

Easy, it's a way to put yet another requirement on adult leaders who are overwhelmingly under-trained already.

 

For those of us who aren't professional(paid) outdoor guides these kind of requirements make us second guess volunteering. Especially when it soaks up an additional week of weeknights or successive weekends to complete, and ten ask for an annual recert..

 

I'm unable to find ANY WFA courses without traveling >500 miles. I bet I'd have to go to TN, or CO to get to the suggested "Swiftwater" course.

 

Especially IF, the water wasn't supposed to be especially swift, as hasn't been stated yet. It's one thing to plan a Swift water event, it's another to have an accident on what would otherwise be considered a "normal" stream.

[AvidSM]

Scoutingagain stated, "Conditions this spring turned out to be more dangerous than they had encountered in the past and I suspect they were not aware of how bad the conditions were until they got on the river."

 

I would suspect the same thing, and ask if any of us had a canoe trip planned for this weekend, how would we check the condition of the river? Who would we call or what web site would we go on? And where specifically in our training or the Guide to Safe Scouting does it tell us to do this? At what point do we change our plans or call off the trip?

 

The only general guidance I could find in the G2SS is the statement, "All participants in activity afloat must be trained and experienced in watercraft handling skills, safety, and emergency procedures." Does this mean I must know enough about the handling skills of a canoe to know its limits in certain river conditions? That when conditions exceed the craft and handling limits the trip should be postponed?

 

I ask these questions that we all might learn from this tragedy.

[Gunny2862]

True AvidSM,

but often it's not just about the canoe or watercraft's capabilities, but about the level of training and comfortability of each of the Scouts on the trip, not just whether the SM is certified at whatever level unless he's going to ride in every boat on the trip...

This is and will remain a judgment call which will most often be based on the skill of the Scouts and their capabilities for the SM in question.

[Knot Head]

We called the outfitter to get the flow rate & river level. I guess the best advice is know your scouts and pick the right river. There are many rivers in TN and ARK I would never take new scouts on. I need to see a guy on the river to get a feel for him. The front of the canoe needs to provide power. Some new guys barely get the blade wet. To run certain rivers I'd want to handpick 13 yr old scouts that hold both the swimming and canoeing MB and who I've run a river with before hand. And I may even delegate them to the front of the canoe with an adult in the rear of each canoe I knew could handle it.

 

There are rivers that are suitable for 11 year olds with zero experience. Those rivers probably bore a 15 year old. To make it interesting tell those guys that if they can drive the canoe (in the rear) for all 20 miles without tipping, touching a tree or rock and making zero errors reading the water on the easy river then maybe they are ready for the front of a canoe in a faster river. Guys often want to rush into things they are not ready for. "It's a canoe" they say, "how hard can it be"?

 

This is a really sad story, and it scares me... alot. Even slow rivers can have a chute or two with a narrow opening forcing fast water and a horizontal tree nearby that can pin a young guy from a flipped canoe underwater.

[fgoodwin]

AvidSM: I agree the Safety Afloat training doesn't come right out and say we should check current flow conditions, but it does say this:

 

7. Planning

Float Plan: Obtain current maps and information about the waterway to be traveled.

Weather: Check the weather forecast just before setting out, and keep an alert weather eye.

Contingencies: Planning must identify possible emergencies and other circumstances that could force a change of plans. Appropriate alternative plans must be developed for each.

 

8. Equipment

All equipment must be suited to the craft, to water conditions . . .

 

I think the suggestion to check with a local outfitter is good advice.