UK 19.8 - Safety Rule - Comment?

[Canadian Paddler]

UKC19.8
Two aspects to consider in this rule
UK C19.8 After their run a Competitor MUST stay in their boat within sight of the finisher, or (if defined) within a clearly indicated distance from the finish, until the next, and next but one Competitor has finished, in case they are called upon to act as rescue boat, UNLESS the Organiser, having made other rescue arrangements, has specifically indicated that this is not required or the paddler has arranged an alternate to provide this safety cover. This regulation applies equally to team events. Failure to comply with this rule will result in disqualification from that run (DSQ-R).
a) Is the Competitor required to stay in the sight of the finisher, or where the Competitor can see the finisher? Very different prospects
b) Should we extend the rule to include any paddler behaviours that are included in the safety plan? E.g. at Grandtully the suggestion was that three paddlers should stay at the finish, despite the rules. At Lee Valley we may decide that staying by the finisher is not required, but staying above the lake bridge is sufficient. Similarly if the safety plan excludes access from an area, or requires behaviour above start, there is currently no sanction, short of complete disqualification from the competition, and using that rule requires interpretation.
Propose changing the rule to read:

UK C19.8 After their run a Competitor MUST stay in their boat within the sight of the finisher, or (if defined) within a clearly indicated distance from the finish, until the next, and next but one Competitor has finished, in case they are called upon to act as rescue boat, UNLESS the Organiser, having made other rescue arrangements, has specifically indicated that this is not required or the paddler has arranged an alternate to provide this safety cover. This regulation applies equally to team events. Competitors must comply with any aspects of the safety plan published at competition control. Failure to comply with this rule will result in disqualification from that run (DSQ-R).

[JimW]

I would also propose that "next, and next but one competitor" be changed to "next, and next but one boat", so that when C2's are covering safety there are always 2 boats available, no matter how people interpret the rule. If 2 competitors are in the same boat, they cannot easily go in different directions if required, or go ahead in relay.

[djberriman]

There is also the other rule in section D which states a notice must be displayed which is ambiguous and many don't seem aware of.

D3.3
There must be safety and rescue services as appropriate to
the conditions, or as directed by the Slalom Committee or
the Chief Judge. If rescue arrangements are not provided, a
clear sign must be placed near the finish indicating the
approved rescue distance for Competitors who have fin-
ished their runs

This one is very ambiguous as there are often rescue arrangements but they do not relate to the finish. Thus you could argue that at say Tully you do not have to wait as there are rescue arrangements.

I would suggest the rules be changed to state that the paddler should wait between finish and a clearly denoted safety limit (usually denoted by a high vis rope across the river). We have used this at Howsham for the last couple of years. It leaves paddlers in no doubt where they should be.

At Tully this year the rule was 3 but it was not displayed at the safety point (although well displayed elsewhere). I'd suggest at all races its should be displayed at the safety point so as to make things very clear.

[Dee]

There is also the other rule in section D which states a notice must be displayed which is ambiguous and many don't seem aware of.

D3.3
There must be safety and rescue services as appropriate to
the conditions, or as directed by the Slalom Committee or
the Chief Judge. If rescue arrangements are not provided, a
clear sign must be placed near the finish indicating the
approved rescue distance for Competitors who have fin-
ished their runs

This one is very ambiguous as there are often rescue arrangements but they do not relate to the finish. Thus you could argue that at say Tully you do not have to wait as there are rescue arrangements.

I would suggest the rules be changed to state that the paddler should wait between finish and a clearly denoted safety limit (usually denoted by a high vis rope across the river). We have used this at Howsham for the last couple of years. It leaves paddlers in no doubt where they should be.

At Tully this year the rule was 3 but it was not displayed at the safety point (although well displayed elsewhere). I'd suggest at all races its should be displayed at the safety point so as to make things very clear.

A high viz rope is great where feasible but this just isn't an option everywhere. Paddlers need to wait in the location defined at control would leave flexibility (control can then define the area to be as designated by a rope or as shown on a plan or defined by specific features, eg a bridge).

When you say the safety point I assume that you mean the point at which you wish paddlers to wait. It is just not practical to display a notice on all sites. In a previous discussion I mentioned that good place to wait a Sheppy could be downstream of the centre of the course. The only means of putting a sign there would be to have someone in a boat holding it.

[boatmum]

A wee rant. As the current slalom rules stand I am very doubtful they would pass the "plain English" test. Slalom is not alone, many sports suffer in the same way.

So some thoughts:

.... stay in sight of the finisher.What does that mean? If you are on the water can you actually know if the finisher can see you? You may be able to see the finisher but can they see you? I think a clear definition of where 'safety' paddlers are to remain for each venue is needed there can then be no doubt or argument.

boat and boat after next? Just say 2 boats in the order they come down the course? or whatever number of boats depending on the venue.

I would also suggest that any variations of the rule regarding this should be posted in the organisers information as well as posted at control. Not everyone goes to control first at a race.

[Canadian Paddler]

History:
The rule used to say in the defined safety area (or words to that effect), but few organisers actually marked the area. So paddlers could just keep going as they never found the end. This was deemed unacceptable, so an ACM changed it to 'in sight of the finisher' OR the defined safety area.
That left us open to 'whose sight' Paddlers could see the finisher, but the finisher could not see the paddler. So the Chief Judge was called only to see the paddler hiding behind trees below the finisher, just able to see the top of the finishers head through the branches.

So Howsham having put a clearly defined area you just have to stay in the area, other races where this is not possible, stay where you can see the finishers face, so they have a good chance of seeing you.

D3.3 - Rats missed that. Another proble with the rules, multiple references to the same thing! I will add a change to that rule (so that there is one reference).

I agree that the rules are not in clear English, this is for two reasons:

• The basic rules are drafted by the ICF and adopted unchanged by the UK. These rules are drafted by the ICF Slalom Committee, currently chaired by a Frenchman, and including an Australian, an American, a German and a Czech. To make it worse, major changes then have to go to ICF congress for acceptance, and could be changed there by a multinational group. Having said that, the level of English on the Slalom Committee is very high, I wish I could speak 1 other language as well!
• Both ICF and the UK variations have suffered from evolution, look at this rule, it has been changed three times (to my knowledge) and not once has the carefully though out and drafted wording survivied the ACM where it is changed on the fly to reflect a different view from the meeting. That is why I have started putting Committee motions out here for review and picking over before the meeting, so we can try to get some agreement to the change and, the English straight.

I am trying to look at the English used in sections, hence Section A - the easy one to review, if accepted this will be at least consistent in terminology.

I will also look at making it 'until the next two boats have finished' in the next draft.

Nobody commenting on must comply with any aspects of the safety plan published at competition control? This would allow Grandtully to enforce the 'three boats at the finish' rule, and other events to ensure paddlers comply with any other safety measures in their safety plan.

Finally: not a fan of asking organisers to put up yet more notices around their slalom sites. Organisers are often short of volunteers and very busy, so may not find it easy to, for example, put a notice at the finish of Cardiff, where it can be seen and read by paddlers telling them that they have to stay at the finish, ditto Orton Mere wg=here treh finish can be mid river, and good luck on that if we ever get anyone willign to organise Llangollen Twon Falls again. . . .

Final questions - do you guys think this consultation is worthwhile, or should I just wait till the ACM papers come out and let the clubs discuss.
Anyone else getting close to getting motions from their clubs? I am happy to help with drafting explanations / rules if that is a problem.

[Dee]

Given that this discussion has already called to your attention something that could have been missed; it points to it being worthwhile

While reviewing rules - I wonder when C18.3 was last revised? I don't think I have ever seen a start list include a list of prizes, location of Chief judge etc

[djberriman]

Just a thought what about teams? Perhaps it should read the next two boats/teams.

[djberriman]

It does not have to be a rope, it could be markers on the bank. It should just be made clearer what the area is and where it is, this removes all doubt and also ensures from an event safety officers prespective that people can not claim they do not know. Leaving it to the paddler means they can claim they thought the finisher could see them.

At some events the finisher can see a long way, at others it may only be a few yards.

It also makes it clear if people go down below that area to play they are not covered for rescue.

[Dee]

It does not have to be a rope, it could be markers on the bank. It should just be made clearer what the area is and where it is, this removes all doubt and also ensures from an event safety officers prespective that people can not claim they do not know. Leaving it to the paddler means they can claim they thought the finisher could see them.

At some events the finisher can see a long way, at others it may only be a few yards.

It also makes it clear if people go down below that area to play they are not covered for rescue.

You may have missed the point here. For slaloms such as Orton Mere, Shepperton and even Town Falls (if it were reintroduced), there isn't necessarily a handy bit of bank on which to put a marker! Add to that the finisher can probably see far further than we would expect people to wait.

Imagine a capital T, drawn with a very thick pen, the slalom takes place in the stem but the main river is the cross bit. The finisher and starter sit opposite sides of the junction and will have a pretty good view in all directions. Where we need people to wait is somewhere between start and finish, but labeling this on the river would be problematic to say the least.

Anyway we have so many signs up these days with H&S, that no-one reads any of them. I have a suspiscion that I could put up a sign at Start/Finish saying £10 for first person reporting this notice to control and not one person would claim

[jjayes]

Anyway we have so many signs up these days with H&S, that no-one reads any of them. I have a suspiscion that I could put up a sign at Start/Finish saying £10 for first person reporting this notice to control and not one person would claim

Thats a great idea?

[JimW]

I think it is a very worthwhile consultation.

Some of my thoughts on safety generally (mostly based on more powerful water):

• Each venue is different so making the rule too prescriptive may make it impossible for all events to comply, flexibility is key as Colin is trying to build in.
• When deciding where to put safety cover you need to consider:
  • The features most likely to give racers trouble
  • The features that have serious consequences
  • The position(s) of maximum usefulness for safety team(s)
  • Downstream cover for catch all
  And then distribute safety team(s) to provide the most effective cover.
• Paddlers waiting near the finish can always provide downstream cover whatever you feel you may need to put in place further up the course.
• Safety boats should work in pairs. Generally the issue is a swim, so one should make contact with the swimmer and push/tow them to an eddy, whilst the other follows at a safe distance to take over in case the swimmer loses grip or has to let go because there is another rapid/drop approaching and it is safer to be away from the boats until afterwards. Once the swimmer is safely in an eddy from where they can get out, if reasonable the spare safety boat may start pushing the empty boat towards an eddy, and when the paddler is definitely safe, the other would assist - often by paddling ahead and egressing to catch the boat as it is pushed near shore. But if the running of the event depends on the safety boats returning to their ready position, they should leave the empty boat for the downstream cover to deal with.
• Paddlers/swimmers come first - neither safety team nor competitors should even think about salvaging the boat until the swimmer is safe, we aren't on a remote expedition, no-one will die if we don't get their boat out.
• Empty boats survive much better with well inflated airbags in them (float higher, hang up on rocks less, and are stiffer when they do hit rocks).
• Whilst a C2 has 2 pairs of hands, it is only one boat and cannot easily paddle on ahead of itself
• Teams might need thinking about, or not - how often do all 3 boats of a team take a swim at the same time? do we need 6 boats to cover a team or only 2? In most cases if one boat of a team swims, the other 2 boats would be the best people to deal with it - they are a pair already and should be closer than anyone else, plus the team run is blown so they have no imperative to keep going to the end.
• If we are going to require additional boats, we should probably define how we want them to work. My thoughts are that they should work as a pair as above, leaving extra boat(s) to cover the next competitor. As a rescue runs to completion, one of the rescuers will become free a good time before the other, and should be able to move into support of the remaining boat - it might not be possible to get back to 'near the finish' before the next competitor appears, but it should certainly be possible to get to a position to join in the chase.
• In the lower divisions much of the above is over the top, I was talking to some kids at the weekend and explained that if they weren't strong enough to tow a swimmer, they could at least give them instructions and encouragement. But also that it is good to get into practice of waiting for 2 more boats right from the start of their careers.

Not much of that needs to be reflected in the rule, it is just how I see safety cover, and why I think the 2 boats rule (unless something else has been organised) is mostly good enough.

As for the waiting area and noting whether people are following the rule, maybe we need a post-finisher (another volunteer instead of another sign) to tell each paddler when their duties are finished and they can get off? I suggest we make them easy to identify by giving them a jacket or bib in a hi-vis black and white chequer pattern

[djberriman]

I realise it may not work in some specific locations in which case instructions posted at control will make it clear however this does not mean we can not encourage most sites to make it clear where paddlers should stay.

What we actually need in most cases is paddlers sat close to finish so they can try and assist any paddler as soon as possible and in many cases before they go to far down river.

[djberriman]

Perhaps air bags should be fitted front and rear if fitted otherwise boats do not pass the float level test and also tend to end up getting more damaged due to going down the course with the nose under water and the tail in the air.

[djberriman]

Yes I have seen a full team swim and regardless of whether it might or might not happen if it does then it will take more than 2 people to rescue them. Each paddler is only remaining on for the next 2 teams to finish exactly the same as they do in individual runs.