Graham376
Well-known member
River in Spanish and Portuguese is Rio.
Do be careful before you go paddle boarding
- Thread starter davidej
- Start date
River in Spanish and Portuguese is Rio.
AntarcticPilot
Well-known member
I was wrong - it's river in Galician, and is the same word as Rio in Spanish and Portuguese.
See Ria - Wikipedia
Last edited:
dunedin
Well-known member
I saw a lone SUP paddling through the Torran Rocks south west of Mull, fully exposed to the Atlantic waves and the tail end of a F5-6, with no other boats from horizon to horizon. I called up the coastguard but they were aware - the SUP was on a round Britain trip and had already done the Pentland Firth, Cape Wrath etc. Some are very experienced and capable - but clearly there is a range of skills and capabilities.
AntarcticPilot
Well-known member
Crikey! The Torran Rocks are a place I have a great deal of respect for, even in a capable yacht. I've got a strong suspicion that they aren't terribly well-charted to this day! Being out here with no more power than a paddle - well, all I can say is that it would take a stronger nerve than I've got!
Graham376
Well-known member
In general Portuguese use (and I'm reliably told Spanish is the same) Ria and Rio have different meanings in that a Rio flows to the sea whereas a Ria floods from the sea, nearest English term being lagoon.
AntarcticPilot
Well-known member
Yes, but the term as used in geomorphology derives from Galician (the region where most Spanish Rias lie), where it does indeed mean river, and has the same meaning as Rio in Spanish and Portuguese. It's a mistake to think of Spanish as being a single language - the language we call Spanish is Castilian; Catalonian and Galician are similar but different languages. Castilian is the "official" Spanish language, but the regional languages differ as much as the various flavours of Celtic languages do. It's particularly interesting in that many of my colleagues at BAS had at least a little South American Spanish, and they found communicating with Spaniards quite difficult!
Graham376
Well-known member
It would appear you think you have a better knowledge of Portuguese use than my Portuguese wife and a school teacher I've just discussed it with. Ria and Rio here have two entirely different meanings. Anyway, it's way off topic so let's get back to paddle boards.
Last edited:
dankilb
Well-known member
I am a qualified SUP instructor (and beach lifeguard) and co-own a commercial SUP 'school'. I don't strongly self-identify with SUP either on here or elsewhere (I have another full-time professional job, as well as a massive boat refit project, etc.!). Together my business partner and I have been involved in the sport for nearly 20 years combined, which is a lot in SUP terms. We've largely been happy to watch it all take off around us the past few years (we're no more involved than 5 years ago!), but here are a few reflections on this basis (apologies for the length!):
I have obviously been following this incident with sadness and concern - if not with complete surprise, as the anecdotes above suggest. As suggested above, I don't keep myself particularly 'in the know' (no social media, no SUP fora, etc.) so cannot shed more light on what happened.
What I can do is provide a bit of context:
In fact, there are various organisations competing to be the national governing body (NGB):
1) BSUPA
As the name suggests, this organisation purports to represent British SUP. We're not involved with them, although don't hear bad things either. We just perceive their qualifications and accreditation to be less widely known/accepted internationally compared to others (see below). Their qualification scheme for instructors broadly mirrors ASI.
2) British Canoeing
This is the former BCU and have representative kayak/canoe to Olympic levels. We require our instructors to have BCU membership/insurance and also affiliate a club we help run with the BCU. Old hands in paddle sport may have their opinions, but as a well-established organisation the BCU is arguably best placed to assist with things like insurance, club roles, juniors/safeguarding, etc. They also offer instructor qualifications - but worringly, for those with existing paddlesport quals, this can be gained in as little as 1 day (which seems insufficient to us - even though we took the course and it was as good as a day could be, to be fair).
3) Academy of Sufing Instructors (ASI)
This is one of two (international) NGBs for surfing. They have the longest association with SUP, going back to some of the sport's modern founders (in the distant days of the 2000s!). We use ASI for our instructor qualifications and accreditation because, by our assessment, they are the most rigorous. Even though the most basic (non-tidal) course can be completed in 2 days (not inc. rescue, 1st aid, etc.), it still involves a modicum of proper 'assessment' (time trials and a technique video analysis). Most importantly, theirs seem to be the only courses everyone doesn't pass first time! They offer more advanced add-ons from exposed/tidal up to surf.
Add to this other bodies too. Some private (e.g. 'Waterskills Academy') others operating in the same sphere as the above (e.g. the International Surfing Association).
We don't offer rentals/hire - only coached sessions. However, I'd imagine that you'd need affiliation with one or other of the above (plus risk assessments and SOPs) to satisfy insurance conditions. With no public licensing requirement, however, the question would be whether all rental operations even bother with insurance and the likes.
Yes and no. It sounds like this may have been a last-minute change to the planned operation on the day, which for most SOPs might precipitate moving from a codified prior risk assessment to a 'dynamic' one (in the minds of some operators, at least). This puts more of the onus on the operator's knowledge of prevailing/local conditions on the day (the front coming across that morning being a manifest example of such conditions).
I've got experience across various high-risk sectors (general aviation as a PPL and sailing, of course) and I can see both sides - the 'get going itis' versus the confidence to say 'no' when your SOPs are exceeded.
Totally agree with this - and other sentiments to the effect above.
Despite the explosive growth in SUP participation and equipment sales, we haven't seen that much growth in demand for our (accredited, insured, well-reviewed, long-standing, etc.!) training and coaching input. We're busy, don't get me wrong. But it's been broadly stable post-lockdowns and the clientele seem to remain the 'sensible' types (I wish we had more coming with "we've just bought all this kit for the family..." rather than "we're looking to get into the sport...", as we could have more of a safety impact with the former).
However, the growth really is driven by the equipment industry. There is some interesting history here, with SUP coming in at the tail end of the windsurf boom and (what were, then, hard board...) manufacturers desperate for another outlet to survive. Then along came inflatables and the whole thing took off.
But put this way - with prices as low as they are now, a session with a 'school' like ours might be approaching 1/4 (or more) of the total buy-in for the cheapest board/paddle kit. It is hard to convince people who just want to give it a go that they need to spend extra time and money on some training. I wish it were different. Even in a 'taster' session, we go over wind, tide (despite operating in an enclosed location), safety equipment, etc. We also wear and encourage BAs (despite being surfers who mightn't always wear them ourselves).
To see a commercial operator getting into grief with such tragic outcomes is sobering indeed. But it is only a matter of time before incidents, injuries and loss of life amount across the scene and I'd imagine it'll mainly be private/inexperienced users.
For all those aided in, rescued from, or chastened by the sorts of anecdotes reported above (thankfully without further incident - aside from the tragic story of the canoeist) - there are bound to be a (hopefully very small) % who will suffer a worse fate in the future.
[minor edits for typos!]
I have obviously been following this incident with sadness and concern - if not with complete surprise, as the anecdotes above suggest. As suggested above, I don't keep myself particularly 'in the know' (no social media, no SUP fora, etc.) so cannot shed more light on what happened.
What I can do is provide a bit of context:
This is a major issue...
In fact, there are various organisations competing to be the national governing body (NGB):
1) BSUPA
As the name suggests, this organisation purports to represent British SUP. We're not involved with them, although don't hear bad things either. We just perceive their qualifications and accreditation to be less widely known/accepted internationally compared to others (see below). Their qualification scheme for instructors broadly mirrors ASI.
2) British Canoeing
This is the former BCU and have representative kayak/canoe to Olympic levels. We require our instructors to have BCU membership/insurance and also affiliate a club we help run with the BCU. Old hands in paddle sport may have their opinions, but as a well-established organisation the BCU is arguably best placed to assist with things like insurance, club roles, juniors/safeguarding, etc. They also offer instructor qualifications - but worringly, for those with existing paddlesport quals, this can be gained in as little as 1 day (which seems insufficient to us - even though we took the course and it was as good as a day could be, to be fair).
3) Academy of Sufing Instructors (ASI)
This is one of two (international) NGBs for surfing. They have the longest association with SUP, going back to some of the sport's modern founders (in the distant days of the 2000s!). We use ASI for our instructor qualifications and accreditation because, by our assessment, they are the most rigorous. Even though the most basic (non-tidal) course can be completed in 2 days (not inc. rescue, 1st aid, etc.), it still involves a modicum of proper 'assessment' (time trials and a technique video analysis). Most importantly, theirs seem to be the only courses everyone doesn't pass first time! They offer more advanced add-ons from exposed/tidal up to surf.
Add to this other bodies too. Some private (e.g. 'Waterskills Academy') others operating in the same sphere as the above (e.g. the International Surfing Association).
We don't offer rentals/hire - only coached sessions. However, I'd imagine that you'd need affiliation with one or other of the above (plus risk assessments and SOPs) to satisfy insurance conditions. With no public licensing requirement, however, the question would be whether all rental operations even bother with insurance and the likes.
Yes and no. It sounds like this may have been a last-minute change to the planned operation on the day, which for most SOPs might precipitate moving from a codified prior risk assessment to a 'dynamic' one (in the minds of some operators, at least). This puts more of the onus on the operator's knowledge of prevailing/local conditions on the day (the front coming across that morning being a manifest example of such conditions).
I've got experience across various high-risk sectors (general aviation as a PPL and sailing, of course) and I can see both sides - the 'get going itis' versus the confidence to say 'no' when your SOPs are exceeded.
Totally agree with this - and other sentiments to the effect above.
Despite the explosive growth in SUP participation and equipment sales, we haven't seen that much growth in demand for our (accredited, insured, well-reviewed, long-standing, etc.!) training and coaching input. We're busy, don't get me wrong. But it's been broadly stable post-lockdowns and the clientele seem to remain the 'sensible' types (I wish we had more coming with "we've just bought all this kit for the family..." rather than "we're looking to get into the sport...", as we could have more of a safety impact with the former).
However, the growth really is driven by the equipment industry. There is some interesting history here, with SUP coming in at the tail end of the windsurf boom and (what were, then, hard board...) manufacturers desperate for another outlet to survive. Then along came inflatables and the whole thing took off.
But put this way - with prices as low as they are now, a session with a 'school' like ours might be approaching 1/4 (or more) of the total buy-in for the cheapest board/paddle kit. It is hard to convince people who just want to give it a go that they need to spend extra time and money on some training. I wish it were different. Even in a 'taster' session, we go over wind, tide (despite operating in an enclosed location), safety equipment, etc. We also wear and encourage BAs (despite being surfers who mightn't always wear them ourselves).
To see a commercial operator getting into grief with such tragic outcomes is sobering indeed. But it is only a matter of time before incidents, injuries and loss of life amount across the scene and I'd imagine it'll mainly be private/inexperienced users.
For all those aided in, rescued from, or chastened by the sorts of anecdotes reported above (thankfully without further incident - aside from the tragic story of the canoeist) - there are bound to be a (hopefully very small) % who will suffer a worse fate in the future.
[minor edits for typos!]
Last edited:
oldmanofthehills
Well-known member
In my industry - railway construction and design - we try and enforce the culture that if the task ahead does not match the task brief and its associated risk assessment, we stop work. Any change must then be authorised at a higher level and appropriately briefed on site.
Those poor dead ladies expected to get home alive, and we might regard their deaths in the incident as due to management failure not accident. Thus subject to possible crown court prosecution. (I assume they did not give earlier explicit consent to go into known dangerous waters)
There are a few group situations where such a cautious approach would not work, but areas such as war zones and high level mountaineering already carry implicit high risk of death or injury
dankilb
Well-known member
Absolutely. We have to wait for an investigation/report - but it certainly looks like institutional, managerial or ‘human’ factors must have combined in the lead-up to the accident (unplanned launch site, forecast poor/deteriorating weather, potential move from non-tidal to tidal location, etc.).
It is also worrying this some of the group appear to have chosen not to launch due to weather. You’d have hoped the leader(ship) would make that decision for all.
But I wouldn’t want to jump the gun and criticise the operator, after such a tragic incident, before a fuller investigation.
dankilb
Well-known member
I’ve been thinking about this - and it does seem/feel preferable to ‘dynamic’ risk assessment…
You can see why the notion of the instructor making an assessment on the day/spot has its appeal - and arguably its place - within a (‘dynamic’) outdoor environment.
But something seemingly as critical as a decision to launch at an alternative venue and/or in/after poor weather should surely trigger an SOP to at least whip out your phone and file a photo, weather/tide/sea state report, and POBs with your boss (or with yourself via email, as a sole trader, which I know some colleagues do).
That way you can agree/lodge any mitigations and show you’ve considered all factors.
This case raises so many other questions too, like; why no board rescue was possible; how (a) rescuer(s) ended up in the water; why no throw lines to get people out of trouble; were waist leashes worn (safety req for rivers or shallow water with possible snags); etc.?
I wish I hadn’t got to thinking of this in the first place, but ‘sobering’ doesn’t quite cut it.
Daverw
Well-known member
From reports today it looked very much like an incident at a weir with a river in flood, as a former BCU kayak coach this is probably the worse scenario, especially on an unfamiliar river. Rescue from water nearly impossible from a kayak I would expect impossible from SUP. Without white water rescue training and equipment from the bank within minutes very little could be done. I’ve been in a stopper once in a weir and luckily it was angled and through me out. On all the BCU courses I’ve done and run this is drummed in fir good reason.
all very sad
all very sad
Wing Mark
Well-known member
Haverfordwest: Fourth paddleboarder dies and woman arrested
Fourth death and someone arrested.
Think long and hard before taking responsibility for others?
Terrible business, it needs to be a wake-up call for some of us I think.
Fourth death and someone arrested.
Think long and hard before taking responsibility for others?
Terrible business, it needs to be a wake-up call for some of us I think.
oldmanofthehills
Well-known member
In the climbing world we have debated this matter often. The consensus is that you owe your companions a duty of care. If you state that it is safe and you are not sure, you will have failed.
If you say you think it might be safe and invite discussion from other informed parties then you are taking prudent steps. Thus if you know - and you should know - that others are less experienced than you, more responsibility rests on you. Beginners are thus partnered by more than one experienced climber- three on a rope at first.
No issues seem to have arisen amongst the club climbers, one guide was correctly sued for the death of a client in the alps
dgadee
Well-known member
No idea if the case here but I've seen incidents where kayakers were led by qualified coaches who went beyond their/their trainees' competences. Lyme Bay was the big one, but lots of smaller incidents including a friend stuck under a rock only just managing to get out. A few more court cases might well reduce these incidences in the future. I had to remind one kayaking colleague of how it might sound when he was standing in front of a judge if things went wrong. He organised a night paddle and said it was suitable for novices. A nit.
rotrax
Well-known member
The boating/watersports world is fast finding that the 'Duty of Care' can be pretty all encompassing if you are in a coaching/training/instructor role.
After being a Motorsport Instructor/Trainer in the past the duty of care was one I took very seriously.
I had the opertunity to allow 15 year olds loose on a Methanol burning 200lb Speedway bike with no brakes and 70 BHP.
Track condition, bike technical condition,trainee tiredness - it is very physical - and safety equipment condition were paramount in my decision to allow them track time.
I was called as an expert witness once after a fatality during a motorsports training session at another venue.
A very sad situation and one I fully expected to develop to the point it has, once it became clear a club was involved.
After being a Motorsport Instructor/Trainer in the past the duty of care was one I took very seriously.
I had the opertunity to allow 15 year olds loose on a Methanol burning 200lb Speedway bike with no brakes and 70 BHP.
Track condition, bike technical condition,trainee tiredness - it is very physical - and safety equipment condition were paramount in my decision to allow them track time.
I was called as an expert witness once after a fatality during a motorsports training session at another venue.
A very sad situation and one I fully expected to develop to the point it has, once it became clear a club was involved.
Hate to be a pedant but the Algarve is in Portugal. Ria may mean river in Spanish but it is normally "Rio".
sarabande
Well-known member
Wing Mark
Well-known member
Not SUP management.
I think this could have consequences for anyone taking any responsibility for others in any adventure sport or pastime.
Any club where experienced people or club officers take responsibility for less experienced people need to think about their procedures.
Anybody who organises anything where the could be an element of risk, whether it's afloat or on the hills or a bicycle ride around the lanes should probably be considering their responsibility more than many do.
rotrax
Well-known member
See post #56.
I often wonder how a clubs race officer would explain a dinghy being run down by a larger vessel when they set a racecourse across a busy fairway at the tide time when many boats are coming and going.
Questions from a Coroner are often very pointed................................