Questioned by RNLI re not wearing lifejacket.

[Seajet]

Can only be a good thing

At my club, our moorings are a usually sheltered 5 minute row from the shore.

Over the last couple of years I have known 2 friends - both fit, experienced yachtmaster offshore's - go over the side of their tender, 1 due to the outboard hitting something, the other due to a momentary lapse of balance.

Alcohol was not a factor in either.

They both were wearing lifejackets, but both had trouble recovering into the rescue dinghies; lifejackets are great for survival, inc' being knocked over unconscious by the boom etc, but there is something to be said for a bouyancy aid if within swimming distance of shore and conscious - a difficult situation to cater for.

Having said that, a friend when sailing in the Med' had his thigh broken against a sheet winch then got tossed overboard by the mainsheet; he got away with it without a lifejacket, due in no small part to the skipper's skill ( a tip I was taught by a veteran of the Murmsansk convoys was especially in poor vis', throw everything which will float, inc' berth cushions, over the side to leave a 'bread crumb' trail back to the casualty ).

On another occasion, we and a lot of other boats responded to a VHF call search for a person overboard ( knocked over by boom, thought to be unconscious ) in the Eastern Solent.

It was a steady F6 at the time, so the sea was full of white-caps.

She was wearing then ( 1980's ) trendy white waterproofs; no-one could find her, this story does not have a happy ending.

Personally I think white waterproofs ( and lifebouys ) ought to be illegal, and I'd like to lump anyone selling them.

 

[alant]

MCA seem happy with not wearing LJ's

Came ashore from our mooring in Dartmouth in our 2.8m RIB and was immediately accosted by local RNLI chap who asked why I wasn't wearing a lifejacket? Was initially somewhat taken aback but answered that it was my choice not to wear one, he countered with did I know about the shock of falling into cold water, didn't like to say that the water in October is warmer than any other time of year. Explained that as a diver I am well aware of water temperatures. With that he then questioned my partner in the same accusatory fashion.
Is this common place? I appreciate all the arguments for wearing a lifejacket but I choose not to and I don't expect to be accosted by the local RNLI. I wasn't sure how I felt as he walked away muttering something or other, not really angry but a little annoyed to be questioned in a fairly aggressive manner. Has not happened to me in 25 odd years of boating, still in 2 minds as to whether he was being a bit of a pr@t or actually trying to help. After speaking to us he didn't hang around to speak to other dinghy crews.

There is a post on the commercial forums of www.rib.net which concerns a commercial RIB operating out of Lulworth Cove.

The posts have ruminated at length over the safety of this operator, because his passengers do not wear LJ's.

This fact has been reported to MCA - they have investigated & are happy with his Licenced Operation, in which the MCA insist that he carried the requisite number of LJ's, but have no concerns or issues about requiring passengers to wear them.

This on a high speed RIB doing waterbatics off Dorset.

 

[prv]

This on a high speed RIB doing waterbatics off Dorset.

Right, and that's the crucial difference between that story and the OP's situation poddling around in a harbour.

Pete

 

[alant]

More detail. Was there an MAIB report?

Remember the skipper of Chris Evans' yacht who died off Cowes - he wasn't wearing a LJ & died!
Should be a MAIB/Coroners report on that, if evidence that people actually do die is required.

 

[alant]

Right, and that's the crucial difference between that story and the OP's situation poddling around in a harbour.

Pete

How did the RNLI know that?

All they could see was someone in a RIB with no LJ!

Something a previous poster claimed was "non tippy" - sorry but they can & do!

 

[alant]

Cold water survival/effects

Water temperature itself is not the important thing in cold water shock, it is the unexpected shock and cooling effect. We have a 'Loonie Dook' not far from where we come from and my brother also took part in long distance sea swims when he was a bit younger. There the effect of cold is the simple one of lowering the bodies core temperature unless you can generate the heat to counteratc it as long distance cold water swimmers do. If you don't it is the slow collapse to hypothermia. Cold water shock happens when your immersion is unexpected and hits literally in seconds and can make you hepless in less than a minute.

Now I also have some experience of falling into the water as an ex laser sailor and even when the sea was at it's warmest laterly I always wore a dry suit because it allowed me to recover from capsizes faster.

Now a yachtie fully booted and spurred with his foulies on has less chance of cold water shock than some one in a dinghy in their run ashore kit.

When I had a boat on a swinging mooring we always wore a lifejacket in the dinghy, our choice, and many others in our club did so too.

I don't wear a lifejacket 24/7 at sea but almost always when I go out of the cockpit, and I am also hooked on then too. I far prefer to avoid going in in the first place. If you don't want to wear one fine, your choice. Even so I have no problem with people pointing out the risks to you just as they do about smoking, eating too much fat, healthy eating and road safety too.

Please read these threads regarding 'cold water'.

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=252011

 

[alan_d]

Clearly, in this instance, the issue was raised in an inappropriate and counterproductive manner, since the OP felt offended and slighted. Perhaps as has been suggested, the RNLI should take note and encourage their officials to behave in a less dictatorial fashion?

This is of course the central point raised by the OP. (Although most of the people who have responded to the thread have chosen to debate something else.)

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

This is of course the central point raised by the OP. (Although most of the people who have responded to the thread have chosen to debate something else.)

Actually that's a pretty good point. We all talking about the wrong issue.

I'm ducking out. In my view the RNLI guy should have kept his opinions to himself, but I fully respect people who think otherwise.

Fair winds all.

 

[prv]

All they could see was someone in a RIB with no LJ!

Indeed, and nevertheless it is not their role to harangue fellow members of the public.

Since you (unlike most here who are happy to respect others' choices) seem to be particularly fanatical, I have to ask whether you take any precautions before walking along the pavement beside a busy road. Go to any A&E department and you won't have to wait long before you find a pedestrian who's been hit by a car. A modern kevlar bike jacket with its internal armour would go a long way towards preventing or reducing injury, and they look quite comfy and stylish to me. A lightweight helmet would help a lot too, of course, but we'll let you off that part, got to be realistic about this. And yet do you take this simple step towards improved safety? Of course you don't. Why so fixated on one risk, but not the other?

Pete

EDIT: "fanatical" is probably unfair; it was an impression gained from seeing several posts in quick succession.

 

[DownWest]

The attitude of the RNLI person is the question here. Lack of training in how to educate or being trained by people with agendas? Shades of the recent post on the beach guards from the RNLI.
I was aproached by the local rescue service, who questioned my idea of launching in the rising wind to return to our local port ( this is in a small sailing dinghy off a beach) it was not patronising, and I said we thought it would be a good sail and thanked them. We nearly beat them back in cracking conditions. It must be difficult to try and advise if one is unsure of the abilities of the recipients, so it sounds if the OP's experience is one of a zealous inexperienced/ badly trained operative.
I used to be fairly casual about LJs, but wore one if I had people aboard who might be in need of help ( i.e. kids). Now I wear one most of the time in small boats. After a LJ failure and a long swim, I prefer the none auto type, and accept the risk of being whacked on the head. Once it has inflated, ones ability to do anything usefull is limited.
Education for the fishing types in small open boats might be more usefull, they often figure in the stats. I agree about the biggest risk is in getting to/from the boat in tenders. Watched two or so people fall in on transferes. (some friends on the local river did it twice in a w/end, booze influenced)
A

 

[alant]

Indeed, and nevertheless it is not their role to harangue fellow members of the public.

Since you (unlike most here who are happy to respect others' choices) seem to be particularly fanatical, I have to ask whether you take any precautions before walking along the pavement beside a busy road. Go to any A&E department and you won't have to wait long before you find a pedestrian who's been hit by a car. A modern kevlar bike jacket with its internal armour would go a long way towards preventing or reducing injury, and they look quite comfy and stylish to me. A lightweight helmet would help a lot too, of course, but we'll let you off that part, got to be realistic about this. And yet do you take this simple step towards improved safety? Of course you don't. Why so fixated on one risk, but not the other?

Pete

"I have to ask whether you take any precautions before walking along the pavement beside a busy road."

Of course.
Any sensible person would. I also walk facing oncoming traffic if there isn't a pavement & wear clean underwear in case of being knocked down by a Bus.
Your point being?

"Since you (unlike most here who are happy to respect others' choices) seem to be particularly fanatical,"

How fanatical, just someone who has experienced going o/b & being saved because the rules insisted that anyone outside accomodation wore a LJ or get sacked! It was in the North Sea at 0500 hrs, whilst wearing full kit & believe me was not foreseen or enjoyable.

Perhaps you might explain your particular objection to good advice.

You happen upon someone about to do something stupidly dangerous, would you not shout a warning? Me, I don't mind looking ridiculous if I get it wrong, much better than being a witness to a tragedy.

Then I'd feel responsible.
Then I might have to explain to the Coroner & any family, why I did F/All.

I know what I'm most comfortable with.
Perhaps the haranguer felt the same.
Perhaps he actually knew what he was talking about.

Too many sit on the sidelines these days & ignore the obvious or think they know better.

 

[longjohnsilver]

You happen upon someone about to do something stupidly dangerous, would you not shout a warning? Me, I don't mind looking ridiculous if I get it wrong, much better than being a witness to a tragedy.

Then I'd feel responsible.

Perhaps the haranguer felt the same.
Perhaps he actually knew what he was talking about.

Too many sit on the sidelines these days & ignore the obvious or think they know better.

This seems to have become a polarised argument. As the OP can I just set the scene. It wasn't a north sea oil rig in mid winter, it was the river Dart on a sunny October lunch time, a very small neap tide with virtually no wind in a very stable Avon RIB travelling within the 6kt speed limit, distance between mooring and shore perhaps 200 yards at most. I wouldn't describe that journey as "stupidly dangerous".

 

[DownWest]

Quite, LJS. There are many experiences that could be quoted, just they need to be relevant.
A

 

[PilotWolf]

Out of interest - what was the RNLI guy's status? Cox, Mechanic, Seacheck man, Divisional Training Officer, lifeguard or naive wannabee?

W.

 

[alant]

This seems to have become a polarised argument. As the OP can I just set the scene. It wasn't a north sea oil rig in mid winter, it was the river Dart on a sunny October lunch time, a very small neap tide with virtually no wind in a very stable Avon RIB travelling within the 6kt speed limit, distance between mooring and shore perhaps 200 yards at most. I wouldn't describe that journey as "stupidly dangerous".

I wasn't implying that 'you' were doing anything described as "stupidly dangerous", simply reponding to criticism that I was some sort of fanatic.

Even a skipper heeds warnings from the lowliest of crew, then discards if appropriate. Only a fool would do otherwise. If someone shouts 'duck', I do it. I don't stop to consider at length if its eider or.

There seems to be an attitude on some posts, which suggests an anarchiacal attitude to either authority (not always wrong) or common sense safety matters - we always know better. Perhaps the RNLI guys attitude was irritating, but was he entirely wrong?

Best not throw baby out with the bathwater, by ignoring all he said eh!
Bit curates egg perhaps.

Even I'm wrong sometimes - or so my wife tells me.

 

[Peter_Chennell]

From the horses mouth...

Hello, everybody.

I’ve posted elsewhere about the RNLI’s rationale for encouraging people to wear lifejackets (http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=245268&highlight=RNLI+lifejacket+prevention&page=9), but here’s a quick response to this current debate.

Firstly, I’m sorry the OP felt ‘accosted’ by an RNLI volunteer – I’m sure he was just trying to help, but in the future, if anyone has a complaint about an RNLI volunteer or staff member, please feel free to give us a call so that we can address any issues. I am, however, glad that he has sparked such debate, even if his manner was perhaps a little gruff.

It’s great to see the topic discussed so thoroughly and passionately – I welcome anything that gets people thinking and talking about lifejackets and when to wear them. From what our crews have seen and from research we’ve conducted with the MCA and RYA, we are convinced that wearing a lifejacket can save your life (in fact the research shows that it can double your chances of survival if you go overboard). An objective annual review of marine deaths hosted by the MCA also found that 81% of the fatalities between 2007 and 2009 could have been prevented if a lifejacket had been worn. Of the 80 deaths in those three years, 65 “may have probably or possibly been saved, if the casualty had been wearing a lifejacket.”

So yes, we do urge you to wear your lifejacket, but we never say you must. We’re not so unrealistic as to expect you to wear your lifejacket all the time, but we feel if you automatically put one on, you can decide if you want to take it off. We want to turn the risk assessment process on its head – why not always wear a lifejacket and then make an informed decision when to take it off rather than the other way round? We do respect your ability to make your own decisions over lifejacket wear (if you don’t want to wear a lifejacket, don’t), we just hope that by providing information on cold water shock and making people think about the risks, we’re giving you the best knowledge on which to base your decision and in doing so make our seas a safer place.

As for cold water shock – some of you have suggested that those hardy enough to brave a swim at New Year prove that cold water shock is over-rated. I would disagree. Unexpectedly falling into the waters around the UK and Ireland, even in summer, can be a shock to the system. If there’s no chance for you to prepare for immersion in cold water (either mentally or by easing yourself in) then your body will react by increasing heart rate and blood pressure and gasping for breath. Without a lifejacket to keep you afloat and your airway clear, this can have dire consequences. Take a look at Professor Mike Tipton’s research in his book Essentials of Sea Survival if you would like a more in depth study of cold water shock.

So what we are trying to do, far from enforce lifejacket wear, is to give people access to credible, scientific data and thus provide you with the means to make an informed decision for yourself. Yes, we believe that a lifejacket is ‘useless unless worn’, but ultimately the decision to wear it is up to you.

If anyone would like to contact me directly, then please feel free to do so.


Peter

 

[Lakesailor]

but ultimately the decision to wear it is up to you.

Perhaps the information and training is needed at Volunteer level.
LJS certainly gives the imprssion he was being scolded, not informed.

It's not just the RNLI. I come across a range of people involved at an instructional level in Outdoor Activity pursuits.
They can be very officious and bombastic. However there is a major difference in that they are in a formal training, overseeing role with people who have put themselves under instruction/leadership.

To approach people who are going about their rightful business and tell them they are putting theselves at risk, and are in the wrong seems a bit evangelical and presumptious.

 

[chanelyacht]

Out of interest Peter, have you noticed any difference in stats since the Irish decision to require lifejackets, or is it too early days yet?

Having spoken to my colleague at Irish CG, his gut feel is that it has reduced some call out, but that is just gut feel at this stage.

Agree with you on cold water shock though, which is why personally I reckon manual LJs should be pretty much regarded as a thing of the past.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

If there’s no chance for you to prepare for immersion in cold water (either mentally or by easing yourself in) then your body will react by increasing heart rate and blood pressure and gasping for breath.

And your body doesn't react that way to a three mile run? Are the RNLI going to campaign against running? In fact, why do the RNLI patrol beaches at Easter which surely encourages swimming in the sea in freezing water? I suspect a lot of people swimming at easter on beaches patrolled by the RNLI will find themselves with "increasing heart rate and blood pressure and gasping for breath.".

Personally, I think the RNLI (and others) take the very worst cold water shock scenario and portray it as the norm.


As for life jackets... Well the best thing the RNLI could do to convince people that lifejackets are really the only critical factor in marine safety is to stop wearing dry suits and cut the jack stays off lifeboats. The fact that they don't seems to suggest that marine safety is a tad less simplistic than they try to portray in their literature.

 

[Robin]

Peter

Your response is both reasonable and appreciated but doesn't really address the original poster's statement of how this incident arose. This was an experienced owner (of a 48 foot Trawler Yacht BTW) who went ashore in his 2.8m Avon RIB from his permanent mooring, a distance of at most 200yds, on a calm warm sunny midday in October in the River Dart, a place I know that you also know well. This was not in an exposed area or a tippy little tender or a flippable inflatable but a substantial RIB, and one used as a tender not a sports boat. I would suggest that very few would consider that to be a dangerous trip and that most would also feel somewhat patronised or preached at to receive the same lecture.

I also rather suspect and perhaps you can elaborate, that the figures for drownings quoted from the MCA would be substantially less if broken down into meaningful categories that might match the circumstances quoted by the original poster? Of the 65 (over 3 years) that could potentially have been saved by a lifejacket, how many were for example MOB at sea or from fishing vessels or incidents where other major factors were involved like collisions or sinkings?

The RNLI are treading a fine line here IMO and lecturing, campaigning and haranging could well prove counter productive.

Robin