# 4yo on Flipped Raft



## producerchik (Jun 2, 2008)

So, it's time now for me to get on my rafting soapbox. Read this article and tell me what is wrong... 

*RAFT FLIPS, SENDS SEVEN INTO THE RIVER*
_A commercial raft flipped near Salida East Campground in the Arkansas River about 3 p.m. Tuesday, throwing seven people - including a 4-year-old girl - into the river. About a mile downriver, on the north river bank, rescuers found the missing 4-year-old with another juvenile and three adults including the river guide. They all self-rescued from the river moments before rescuers arrived, Chaffee County Sheriff Tim Walker, reported. Stephen Thompson 30; Janice Thompson, 51; Kenneth Thompson, 56; Crystal Thompson, 29 and two unidentified family juveniles, all of Fort Worth, Texas, were rafting with a Canyon Marine Rafting Co. guide. Walker reported Stephen and Janice were able to exit the river on the south side of the river. Stephen ran to U.S. 50 and flagged a motorist who called 911. Within minutes of the 2:31 p.m. emergency call, about 30 rescuers, some in kayaks and rafts, were along riverbanks searching for victims. Search boats from Salida Fire Department and Colorado State Parks were deployed from the Salida East boat ramp. Janice Thompson was rescued from the south bank of the river by emergency responders who used a rope and basket system to get her to a waiting ambulance. Five victims exited the river on the north bank where there is no road. "We used boats to take blankets and medical supplies to the victims on the north side of the river and then used all terrain vehicles along the railroad tracks to rescue them," Walker told The Mountain Mail from the scene. They were transported by ATVs to ambulances waiting near the livestock sale barn east of Salida. Heart of the Rockies Regional Medical Center personnel reported they treated and released four victims from the incident for being cold and wet. Other victims were not taken to the hospital. During the rescue, a heavy thunderstorm made communication difficult because of thunder, heavy rain and hail battering rescuers on both sides of the river. Other responders included Salida Police Department, Chaffee County Fire Protection District, Chaffee County Search and Rescue, Chaffee County Emergency Medical Services and Arkansas Valley Ambulance of Howard. In a press conference later, Walker said he has been asked if he has authority to close the river, but said he doesn't. "I can't just shut down the river. That's the state parks (personnel) job," he said. "But I can remind people to use common sense and make sure they are ready to get out of the river, because chances of going in at these water levels is pretty good." June 14, a raft flipped in almost the same location dumping multiple people into the river. Colorado State Parks rangers heard calls for help and rescued two small children hanging under the inverted raft as it was swept downstream._
_Courtesy: The Mountain Mail_ 

First of all, what the heck is a 4 year old doing on a commercial rafting trip on a river that is flowing at more than 3000cfs? Seriously. The Arkansas River is not a toy that needs to be played with right now. Honestly, it takes a lot to flip a raft. A lot of times, rafts flip when they hit holes or rocks. And a 4 year old should not be rafting a run with holes! I think it is the raft company's decision, on how old a child needs to be, but 4 years old is way to young for the Arkansas right now! And I hear the kid floated a long ways, before being rescued. That's because 4 year olds don't understand how to swim aggressively to the shore!!! That's insane! I just wanted to throw that thought out there real quick and see what everyone else thought.


----------



## nmalozzi (Jun 19, 2007)

4yrs old is way to young. I guided on the Lehigh River in PA, and I think our age cut off for the class III section was 6 or 8. Not to mention that river is not a legit class III anyway, more or less a solid class II with 1 or 2 class II+ mixed in there.


----------



## jennifer (Oct 14, 2003)

If I was a commercial rafting company, I would NOT want the liability of a 4 yo on a whitewater trip, and if I was a parent, I sure as hell would not want my 4 yo even having the slightest possibility of swimming down the same river, where 4 adults drowned last week. Seems like a bad decision for multiple people, but I'm really glad everyone ended up safe.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Jamie,

Will anything posted in response to your query be used in the news?

-AH


----------



## producerchik (Jun 2, 2008)

Andy H. said:


> Jamie,
> 
> Will anything posted in response to your query be used in the news?
> 
> -AH


No. It won't. I just wanted to see if anyone thought this was crazy, like I did. If you post comments on my blog, there's a chance I may use it. But I won't use anything people post on mountainbuzz.


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

4 Year old is way to young. that is some bad juju toward Canyon Marine trying to make a buck instead of telling the mother to not take the child on the raft. im sure the family didn't have any idea of what it was all about. this one really pisses me off maybe we should throw the owner in the river when they were 4 and see what happens. blatant disrepect towards the river was obvious, i wasn't expecting something like this from a rafting company. but i guess those greedy bastards would rather risk a 4yo life and make money than have the kid be safe......


----------



## Ture (Apr 12, 2004)

The issue with the 4 year old is child abuse on the part of the parents.

The issue with the huge rescue response is that a customer who swims doesn't need to run up to the highway and call 911.


----------



## BarryDingle (Mar 13, 2008)

If someone wants to take their kid out on the water then the child should at least be a very strong swimmer in cold water. I doubt a 4yr old could do this...

Stupid parents. Stupid company.


----------



## mr. compassionate (Jan 13, 2006)

Can someone tell us what section and rapid this occurred on?


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

Four yr old kid in high water? 

1. The parents are imbeciles.
2. The raft company is shameless.

Good thing the kid survived his parents' stupidity and the raft company's greed.


----------



## xena13 (Mar 21, 2007)

Most raft companies post a minimum age of 7 or 8 for Browns Canyon. I assume that's for normal flows and the age might be adjusted upward with high flows like we have now. We heard about this 4 year old because the raft flipped, but are there others? Is it common for Raft Companies who run Brown's Canyon to allow children as young as 4?


----------



## PhillyBoater (Mar 27, 2008)

This is ridiculous. If an outfitter doesn't have enough safety to handle their own carnage then they have no business being on the river. I hope the rescue squad hits them with a big fat bill for calling them out.


----------



## captishmael (Feb 8, 2008)

WTF? These assholes are-
1) guaranteeing more regulation of more runs
2) wantonly endangered a child's life
3) seriously lacking in gray matter

A 4 year old, maybe even a 6 or 7 year old that's a competent swimmer only belongs on Filter Plant, Upper C, Ruby and Horsethief or similar. Really cold, runoff engorged channels choked with rocks and holes? Ask any EMT, this kid was in great danger of perishing due to the drop in core temperature, let alone the drowning risks.


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

I wouldn't place the blame on the parents. says they were from Fort Worth Texas meaning they know absolutely nothing about the river!!!! i would place the blame on the company liable for taking the family down the river and allowing the 4 year old on the raft in the first place.. do they make pfds small enough that are still rated for that sort of whitewater or did they do the double stuff.

gross negligence! if i was the parents i would be suing because the liability weavers do not actually hold up in court.


----------



## Fuzzy (May 25, 2005)

all I have to say is WOW that was lucky. Not cool on the company


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

caspermike said:


> I wouldn't place the blame on the parents. says they were from Fort Worth Texas meaning they know absolutely nothing about the river!!!! i would place the blame on the company liable for taking the family down the river and allowing the 4 year old on the raft in the first place.. do they make pfds small enough that are still rated for that sort of whitewater or did they do the double stuff.


You make a reasonable point: a Texas mailing address does imply a certain level of, uhm, er, "naivete" about rivers and mountains. Perhaps they think of a raging mountain river as nothing more than say the "Roaring Rapids" ride at 6 Flags Over Texas.

Or... they might just be imbeciles.


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

*to the retarded*

*gross negligence*
n. carelessness which is in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, and is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety.

get er done


----------



## kclowe (May 25, 2004)

*Bear Creek?*



mr. compassionate said:


> Can someone tell us what section and rapid this occurred on?


Sounds like Bear Creek Rapid just past Salida East. Does anyone know for sure? I just ran that section during the FIBArk race and it could definitely flip a raft at this level. Big holes. No way a toddler should have been on that boat. Could have been an honest mistake, though. Usually this section is pretty mellow. Who makes these decisions? Guide or Owner? Can't really blame the parents if they were assured by "professionals" that it was safe. It's the responsibility of the rafting company to make sure the customers are aware of the risks. I don't think any parent in their right mind would have taken their child on a trip like that if they knew what they were in for.


----------



## mvhyde (Feb 3, 2004)

*wow wow wow*

Texas address does imply ignorance about fast moving rivers. I saw plenty of them trying to drive through lowwater crossing at flood stage when I lived in Texas.

But.. I have seen a number of young kids on rafts before, even down to the 2 year old range, which always made me nervous. Not sure where, how or why they flipped over towards Salida East as I don't recall anything significant until Bear Creek rapid which could flip a poorly driven raft I suppose.

But that being said, the rafting company needs to review its policies on whom it lets on their boats. Water on these rivers at any runnable level can cause havoc and kill on occasion.

My 7 yr old and I pulled a 9 yr old kid out of Confluence the other evening who was about one minute from being a drowning victim as his dad put him on top of what had to have been the tiniest tube I ever have seen, without a helmet and PFD. He got worked from the top down to the 3rd drop where he got recirc'd and flushed in and out repeatedly. So it's not just parents from Texas, there are stupid ones everywhere.


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

Tourists driving down US 24 see rafting companies damned near every hundred yards. Some of those tourists are reaching the silly conclusion that the Arkansas must be a "controlled" environment, not unlike an amusement park. Hell, it even LOOKS like an amusement park. And certain unscrupulous raft companies do nothing to dispel that misperception.


----------



## heliodorus04 (May 31, 2005)

I don't know the section, but assuming it's what KLowe says, it's a bad judgment call to be sure. I don't blame the parents because they can't know temperature stuff and they can't fathom current force, holes, etc.

This particular issue is one maybe that ought to generate this kind of discussion we're having here at a national level.

I can report this to AW (as can anyone), but I think Chik should, because you're obviously empassioned by it.


----------



## Chip (Apr 7, 2007)

*$$$ vs. common sense*

The common-sense rule might be that on Class III+ or peakflows, no one who can't swim and/or do a competent self-rescue ought to be in a boat, even a guided one. This would include small children and adults who are elderly or otherwise not robust enough to swim rapids in cold water. 

Just ran Northgate with a Texas ducky-master who told me about a recent guided run on Clear Creek, during which a woman in poor physical shape was thrown out of the boat, with some epic events following. Quite a few mishaps take place in the course of attempted rescues, when people panic and do the wrong thing.

Point being that these commercial outfits are not only hedging potential liability against profits, but taking on a serious moral burden as well. Maybe they'll have to kill a whole bunch of people before they wise up. 

Chip


----------



## Fuzzy (May 25, 2005)

who is the owner/GM/head boatman of this company??


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

This is a tricky situation, but I think most reasonable people would agree that 4 is too young for high water Brown's trip.

The raft company's main responsibility is to make sure their participants are informed on the dangers and risks present. They should be frank and up front about risks. As a general rule, companies will put age limits on certain trips, and the age limits may have sort of a sliding scale based on current conditions, and it is possible for exceptions to be made for extraordinary circumstances on a case by case basis. So a company may have 6 and up for their family friendly class III trip, and 14 and up for a IV- trip, and it is usually 18 for class V. When it is really running, though, a raft co might treat their class III trip like a class IV trip, etc. 

Anyways, they set their own rules, mostly (does Ark have set age limits due to its higher regulation?) but 4 seems a little overboard! The chances of swimming can be pretty high at runoff, especially if you run Sidel's. Also, it sounds like maybe a one-boat trip? (only guessing) Additionally, any decent outfitter also backs their guides right to overrule the rest of the system for on river safety related decisions. I know I've been involved with trips where someone was sent back because they were acting strange, out of breath, nervous, upset, etc. before a trip. Guides should know their abilities, and the risks involved, and be able to overrule the reservationsist that booked the trip, or even an eager customer who isn't prepared for something.

I've guided many kids under 6 years old on class III water without incident, however I don't think I would want to run them on a single-boat trip at high water. I would feel ok taking a toddler on the Upper C in the late summer with a properly fitting life vest...

If the raft company does their job of adequately informing the guests of the risks associated with their participation, the ball is in their court to make an educated judgement as to what they and their children are capable of handling. Once again, there is such thing as TOO young, and as long as the outfitters are smart enough to set appropriate limits, Big Brother won't have to come in and tell everyone what to do. It only takes one to ruin it for everyone else though.

I also feel pretty strongly that if you are going on a raft trip, you should research the company you are going with. Not all outfitters are created equal; the permitting system locks in the good with the bad, and locks out those who could potentially do better than the sloppy outfitters from starting their own outfitting businesses.


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

I once saw a boat with a biiiig 400+ pound dude on Brown's canyon as a commercial passenger. Now what the hell is he going to do if the boat flips, or if you have to pull him back in? Now that guys was old enough to make his own decisions. If I was his guide, I would maybe say, "here's the deal, are you comfortable with those risks?"


----------



## mjpowhound (May 5, 2006)

First off, it doesn't say anywhere that this was in Brown's Canyon as a few have assumed. I've never gone past Stone Bridge, but it seems like this is downstream of the Salida PP. I very seriously doubt any rafting company would ever take a 4-year old in Brown's, much less at high water.

Second, the parents are just as much to blame as the rafting company, if not more so. I don't care how Texas you are, you need to take responsibility for the child you chose to have and that very obviously includes keeping them far away from swift-moving current!


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

The 9 news report might have said Brown's, I will double-check. As we all know, the news is usually wrong about this kind of stuff.


----------



## one_elk (Jun 10, 2005)

4 years old?? What kind of swimmer are you a 4 years old? What do you know about moving water at 4 years old?......This is amazing to me both from a parental point of view that any parent would put their 4 year old on a river like the Arkansas at its current level and secondly that any commercial outfitter would allow that to happen. Thankfully all were safely recovered. Is there no governing organization for commercial outfitters that oversees this kind of blatant negligence? You would think that it could be a self governing business but that does not seem to be the case….again thankfully in this case all are safe


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

Nevermind, I thought it was on there as Brown's, it isn't.


----------



## Ture (Apr 12, 2004)

mjpowhound said:


> ...
> 
> Second, the parents are just as much to blame as the rafting company, if not more so. I don't care how Texas you are, you need to take responsibility for the child you chose to have and that very obviously includes keeping them far away from swift-moving current!


Amen. Even if the raft company was negligent it was the half-wit parents who signed the kid up for a river adventure without any river knowledge of their own. The chain of negligence started with the parents.

It sounds like the guide ended up with the kid, which is the way it should be. Let the idiot who swam to the wrong side sit on the opposite bank for a while until the raft company fixes the situation themselves. No need for 911 and a dog and pony show to use a basket system to get her across.


----------



## cooljerk (Jun 18, 2006)

I believe that one of the owners of Canyon Marine is Chris Bainbridge - a Captain on the Salida Fire Department and one of their Swiftwater Rescue guys. That's an interesting twist. 

The section was definatly below Salida with the initial response at Salida East. 

Many companies will run the Salida to Vallie Bridge section w/ children as young as 5. 4 is on the young side and given the drowning and near drowning in that section this year it seems like a really poor decision. 

I hope to see better judgement and accountability from area outfitters in the future. It's easy to blame the parents but the parents were paying for the professional judgement provided by the outfitter. It would be great if the parents always made the best choice but the outfitter could at least step in and say 'bad idea'.


----------



## xena13 (Mar 21, 2007)

WhiteLightning said:


> I also feel pretty strongly that if you are going on a raft trip, you should research the company you are going with. Not all outfitters are created equal; the permitting system locks in the good with the bad, and locks out those who could potentially do better than the sloppy outfitters from starting their own outfitting businesses.


How would a customer research a raft company? You could ask some questions before you make a reservation about the experiece level of the guides, but the people who answer the phones for these companies don't always know the answers. You can't really tell by whether the company has had fatal accidents, either. Some very respected companies have had these accidents in the last couple of years.


----------



## cooljerk (Jun 18, 2006)

Statistics on reportable accidents are available from the river's managing agency - in this case AHRA (719-539-7289). That's a good place to start.

Look at the company - their facility, how long they have been in the business (under the current owners - not when the company was first formed). 

Ask lots of questions. If the office staff is poorly informed that would seem to indicate poor training. If a company isn't training their office staff it may reflect on how they train their guides. A professional organization will be professional in all that they do - vehicle, facility and equipment maintenance, guide training, customer service, etc. 

The information is out there if folks take the time to research their options. I think people often just choose the cheapest outfitter and go from there.


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

I agree, I would call them, ask to speak with a guide or a TL. Ask about their equipment. Is it newer, or falling apart? Do they provide wetsuits, helmets, etc.? Use Google, and see what other people have said about their trips. Post on Mountainbuzz or Boatertalk and see what people say. Best of all, get a recommendation from a friend, and ask for their guide by name. Guides love it when they are requested (sometimes they get a bonus). You can even call the outfitter in advance, ask to speak with an experienced guide, and then ask if you can request them once you find out how experienced he/she is (years, river miles, sections they work on, etc.)

It might all be a little excessive, all guides should be qualified for the section they are running, but a little homework never hurts, and if you can choose your own guide, why not?


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

C'mon, let's get real: a family cruising down the highway, clueless about about whitewater is more likely to make their decision based on PRICE rather than the quality of the raft company. The tourists are going to ASSUME that this is safe recreation and that "bad" companies aren't allowed to operate. Besides, they wouldn't even know what questions to ask. 

Along the Arkansas there is a "whitewater themepark" ambience, and I think it's reasonable to suggest that there are bottom feeders who will take damned near anybody for a boat ride for a buck. Why else would there be 70 yr olds dropping like flies this summer and four yr olds swimming rapids?


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

DurangoSteve said:


> Along the Arkansas there is a "whitewater themepark" ambience, and I think it's reasonable to suggest that there are bottom feeders who will take damned near anybody for a boat ride for a buck. Why else would there be 70 yr olds dropping like flies this summer and four yr olds swimming rapids?


steve you nailed it right on the head. money whores is what i would call people like that.


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

This is true. I still blame the permitting system. Something that is meant to protect people, and protect the rivers makes it so that new competition can't start river outfitting businesses and make the existing ones have to play with their A-game.


----------



## highspeed (Oct 12, 2003)

caspermike said:


> I wouldn't place the blame on the parents. says they were from Fort Worth Texas meaning they know absolutely nothing about the river!!!! i would place the blame on the company liable for taking the family down the river and allowing the 4 year old on the raft in the first place.. do they make pfds small enough that are still rated for that sort of whitewater or did they do the double stuff.
> 
> gross negligence! if i was the parents i would be suing because the liability weavers do not actually hold up in court.


I agree it is not a great idea to have a 4 yr old on this section at this level but the idea of taking responsibility away from parents and putting it on a company (or society etc etc) just rubs me wrong. I firmly believe that the concept of taking away the responsibility and consequences of an individuals decisions is a major problem in society right now. 

As far as the waiver goes: IF they signed it, then they should have to accept it, no legal bullshit trying to weasel out of it. 

Lastly, although we can monday morning quarterback the decision to take this kid on the river I don't think we should paint the rafting companies in such a poor light (the overall feel of this whole topic). They are small businesses trying to make a living in a difficult industry and not some big evil corporation.


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

the only person in this situation that could've done something when they should've didn't. they put him in a jacket and put him in a boat. 

when you pay for a service you expect top notch and professionalism. allowing the 4 year old on the raft is all but. the responsiblity is with the company hence the reason they make you sign the waiver in the first place.

gross negligence was on behalf of the company not the parents. unless they are for not being smart enough about the area???? not it was a professional trip, not like they rent a raft and did it them selfs. the company needs to sack up and take responsiblilty 100% or maybe not take 4 year old kids down the river!


----------



## rjones (Oct 5, 2004)

I agree that 4 is to young, but also don't want to blame the company without knowing all the facts.

When I was a guide we had a family float, class 2+ish, that we had an age limit of 5 on. I can't even count the number of trips where I would be on the water, talking to the kids and ask how old they are and they respond with 3 or 4, and then their parents quickly say, "No, remember your 5." 

Same kind of thing would happen in the gorge. At normal flows the age limit is 15, but you'd get kids down there who were 12, looked a little bit older, but whose parents would lie in order to get them on the trip. 

Bottom line is that raft companies do what they can to control, minimally, who is on the river, but parents also need to not suck and put their kids on rivers when they are too young.


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

NONE of us knows exactly what went down, so we are ALL just spewing opinions. 

Yeah, personal responsibility is the bottom line: the parents should have realized this was inappropriate for such a small child. BUT, my feeling is that rafting on the Arkansas is presented to ignorant tourists as splashy good fun (not unlike the water ride at the amusement park) as opposed to risky entertainment in an uncontrolled, natural environment. People can sign waivers all day long, but ultimately they are putting faith in the rafting company, deserved or not. Remember that these flatlanders have NO IDEA what kind of potential danger is in the mountains and on the rivers. They have no grasp of the natural forces that can squish them like a bug. They see this cool stuff on TV and assume that their pale, fragile city selves can do it too. Further, in the hyper-competitive commercial rafting environment along the Arkansas there WILL be companies that err on the side of a quick buck rather than safety.

NOBODY gets off the hook: the parents made an (ignorant) bad decision AND the rafting company chose money over safety. The good news? NOBODY died.



highspeed said:


> I agree it is not a great idea to have a 4 yr old on this section at this level but the idea of taking responsibility away from parents and putting it on a company (or society etc etc) just rubs me wrong. I firmly believe that the concept of taking away the responsibility and consequences of an individuals decisions is a major problem in society right now.
> 
> As far as the waiver goes: IF they signed it, then they should have to accept it, no legal bullshit trying to weasel out of it.
> 
> Lastly, although we can monday morning quarterback the decision to take this kid on the river I don't think we should paint the rafting companies in such a poor light (the overall feel of this whole topic). They are small businesses trying to make a living in a difficult industry and not some big evil corporation.


----------



## Canada (Oct 24, 2006)

As a parent of a 5 and 2 year old, they have no place on a current yet.

Durango steve, your comments are always insightful and usually funny. I disagree on the 70 year old blast however. I hope that when I am 70 I am still running the numbers with my 50 year old bretherin as I understand the facts were in that case. By all accounts he had more experience and probably ability than half the people on that section and while the outcome was trajic, his story made me feel good about our sport. He made an educated choice and lost doing something he loved. Good for him!


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

Canada said:


> As a parent of a 5 and 2 year old, they have no place on a current yet.
> 
> Durango steve, your comments are always insightful and usually funny. I disagree on the 70 year old blast however. I hope that when I am 70 I am still running the numbers with my 50 year old bretherin as I understand the facts were in that case. By all accounts he had more experience and probably ability than half the people on that section and while the outcome was trajic, his story made me feel good about our sport. He made an educated choice and lost doing something he loved. Good for him!


hes talking about 70 yr old people thrown on customer rafts when they have never experienced the river. not people who are private boaters


----------



## Cliff (Apr 20, 2004)

I think the parents bare the burden of responsibility on this one. 

Yeah, IMHO 4 yrs is too young to be rafting the Ark @ 3000 - But I believe strongly in personal determination and the premise that nature will regulate. I do not need or want more rules regarding my or my families use of the river, mountain or ocean.

Rafting the river can be quite hazardous, so can parking and having a picnic near a river during peak season. I don't want to have a law or rule that says no picnicing during high water. But if I see someone letting their kids play on the rocks or not being monitored, I voice my opinion.

There are lots of ways to get hurt out there, look out for yourself, look out for your kids - but do not regulate to me what is proper for me or my girls. Feel free to voice your opinion if you don't agree with my actions and I will take or leave it as I see fit. 

Let's be safe and I am sure glad that she survived her parents choices this time.

Cliff


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

Canada said:


> As a parent of a 5 and 2 year old, they have no place on a current yet.
> 
> Durango steve, your comments are always insightful and usually funny. I disagree on the 70 year old blast however. I hope that when I am 70 I am still running the numbers with my 50 year old bretherin as I understand the facts were in that case. By all accounts he had more experience and probably ability than half the people on that section and while the outcome was trajic, his story made me feel good about our sport. He made an educated choice and lost doing something he loved. Good for him!


Canada - I'm a geezer as well. My use of the 70 yr old as an example was a poor choice. He was an experienced kayaker. Mostly I trying to point out that there are too many people who have no business being on commercial rafts in high water. Whether it's little kids or obese city folk with weak hearts, we're seeing too many cases on the Arkansas (especially) where tourists don't know what they're getting into, and companies too willing to take the cash. I'm a small business owner; I know it's hard to turn away business... but sometimes you just gotta!


----------



## rivermanryan (Oct 30, 2003)

Alright, you guys have made my decision this weekend even harder. I don't think you can say that the Arkansas at 3000 cfs is not appropriate for a 4 year old. It depends on the section. I wouldn't take my kids on Class IV or even III+, but they have a blast and I am in complete control when I take them down the Animas at 3000 (no close calls, no nervousness,etc). You have to know the lines, know the holes and not take the hero lines. I have had them on the sections below Salida a few times, and it makes for a great family float. Not a lot of other choices out there with the water going down like it is. Dolores and San Juan are too low, so it is time to head north. Call me what you want, but we'll be taking a look at it.

BTW, Canada- have your kids try swimming in some swiftwater, it helps them appreciate the power of the river and so they don't freak out if they accidently fall in. Both of mine know how to swim in current.


----------



## Ed Hansen (Oct 12, 2003)

With the Gorge, Numbers and Pine Creek sections of the river more or less "Closed" to commercial rafting, the rafting companies are going to stuff anyone they can on every other section of moving water at anytime. Talk of highwater drownings and river closures (and boats flipping near Vail  ) have been in the news, maybe cutting business? Anyone with a pulse and a dollar in their pocket who shows up to the raft company right now is going to find themselves on the water, any water, post-haste.


----------



## mvhyde (Feb 3, 2004)

*let us not forget....*

banning transvestites too.... I mean seriously, who truly wants to see a rafting company toting a bald, fat, hairy 60 year old transvestite from Houston, TX in drag on a raft? Could we as boaters stomach that?


----------



## producerchik (Jun 2, 2008)

rivermanryan said:


> Alright, you guys have made my decision this weekend even harder. I don't think you can say that the Arkansas at 3000 cfs is not appropriate for a 4 year old. It depends on the section. I wouldn't take my kids on Class IV or even III+, but they have a blast and I am in complete control when I take them down the Animas at 3000 (no close calls, no nervousness,etc). You have to know the lines, know the holes and not take the hero lines. I have had them on the sections below Salida a few times, and it makes for a great family float. Not a lot of other choices out there with the water going down like it is. Dolores and San Juan are too low, so it is time to head north. Call me what you want, but we'll be taking a look at it.
> 
> BTW, Canada- have your kids try swimming in some swiftwater, it helps them appreciate the power of the river and so they don't freak out if they accidently fall in. Both of mine know how to swim in current.


It's good to know that you won't take your 4 year old down Class III+ rapids. If there are parts in the river that are big enough to flip a raft, I don't think it should be rafted with a child that young. I rafted the Animas at 3500cfs this past weekend. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great for families, but not for a 4 year old. I saw several rafts flip at Smelter. There are big holes there, and by no means should a child younger than 7 go through that. It's just too dangerous. I wouldn't want to float through Smelter, much less see a child do it. So I am glad to see some commercial rafting companies have age limits. But private boating is a different story. I guess if a parent thinks it's ok to go through the pain and suffering of losing a child because they made a poor decision, then so be it. It's just too bad they won't have regrets, until it's too late.


----------



## rivermanryan (Oct 30, 2003)

Smelter is not that dangerous, you've got to be kidding about "big holes" At 3500 there are no holes in the classic sense, some bordering on wave holes, but we don't hit those. Swim it sometime with me! I have never seen anyone at anytime stuck in a hydraulic in Smelter. Yeah, it would be a little frightening for my kids to swim it, but their lives wouldn't be in danger. Hyde- I'm sure you can chime in here since your son swam it at 5 yrs old.

I don't know the Arkansas that well at 3000, but I can't see the section below Salida being any more difficult than the Durango town run at the same flow. I think there are certain runs to avoid, but I don't think we need to criminalize an entire river. Actually, I believe the Ark is pretty safe. It seems like the deaths that have occured have been due to external factors other than the "rocks and water" and usual whitewater hazards (foot entrapment, sieves). Maybe extended swims (but it seems that comes from inexperience and not swimming aggressively).

I want my kids to have many days of enjoyment on the river. Even a bad day of a short swim could be enough to make them not like it anymore, so I will go with the rest of the flow and made other plans for the kiddos this weekend. I just feel like there is some fear mongering going on anytime there are some flipped rafts and close calls. I love getting the feedback on the buzz (love you guys), but the decision is always the parents and I don't like to be judged for what I deem a safe section of river even if the flow is high. I will make the decision as I read the river.


----------



## producerchik (Jun 2, 2008)

rivermanryan said:


> Smelter is not that dangerous, you've got to be kidding about "big holes" At 3500 there are no holes in the classic sense, some bordering on wave holes, but we don't hit those. Swim it sometime with me! I have never seen anyone at anytime stuck in a hydraulic in Smelter. Yeah, it would be a little frightening for my kids to swim it, but their lives wouldn't be in danger. Hyde- I'm sure you can chime in here since your son swam it at 5 yrs old.
> 
> I don't know the Arkansas that well at 3000, but I can't see the section below Salida being any more difficult than the Durango town run at the same flow. I think there are certain runs to avoid, but I don't think we need to criminalize an entire river. Actually, I believe the Ark is pretty safe. It seems like the deaths that have occured have been due to external factors other than the "rocks and water" and usual whitewater hazards (foot entrapment, sieves). Maybe extended swims (but it seems that comes from inexperience and not swimming aggressively).
> 
> I want my kids to have many days of enjoyment on the river. Even a bad day of a short swim could be enough to make them not like it anymore, so I will go with the rest of the flow and made other plans for the kiddos this weekend. I just feel like there is some fear mongering going on anytime there are some flipped rafts and close calls. I love getting the feedback on the buzz (love you guys), but the decision is always the parents and I don't like to be judged for what I deem a safe section of river even if the flow is high. I will make the decision as I read the river.


That's fine. You can disagree. I'm just saying I don't think a 4 year old should have to swim in Smelter. Holes that are not big to you, are probably big to them. Plus, 4 year olds don't understand the concept of swimming aggressively to shore. They're not strong swimmers yet. Their muscles are not strong enough yet. I am sure any doctor or swim instructor will tell you this. Children that young should not be swimming in swift moving water like this. A lake, a different story. Anyhow, good luck this weekend and I hope you guys have a safe trip, where ever you choose to go.


----------



## MikeG (Mar 6, 2004)

*Interesting thoughts on this.*

Rivermanryan, it seems like you've have made a vary balanced and informed decision to take your family down the river but to assume you are "in complete control" in such a dynamic environment smells a bit like Icarus. 

Anyway, I have two points on this incident: First, this is normally a very easy stretch, normally class two with one class III- (badger creek). Too many raft companies set their policies based on low water so accidents like this happen when the river changes character with higher water. Regardless, rafts can hit strainers and run into all kinds of issues even on a scenic run. If a person would be at risk in the water, they should not be on the raft. Rivermanryan is an example of someone who knows the river, knows his kids, and is making a calculated decision. In a commercial setting, there is nobody who possesses all of that information.

There has been a lot of blame passed around and everyone seems to have some liability here. Nobody really mentioned the guide though. If I hire a guide, it's because I don't trust my own lack of knowledge in a situation. It is ultimately the guide who is trained and trusted to know the risks of the situation and should not have allowed the kid on his/her raft. I used to work for a raft company owned by business people, not guides. There were numerous times when I refused a customer on my raft or trip because the combination of person and environment didn't add up that day. Sometimes people got really pissed and sometimes my bosses did but the former are still alive and the latter are still in business. If I show up for something new to me, say paragliding, I really hope the guide has the courage to tell me I'm too fat, old or whatever for the situation. I knew a guide who didn't feel good about a situation, and ended up losing a client. She never guided again and was still messed up over it years later. Nobody wants that either.


----------



## rivermanryan (Oct 30, 2003)

Well said MikeG. And you are right, rivers are very dynamic and control is only relative to the ever changing, dynamic river. It is a calculated risk that I assume for my kids. This is why I am not bringing the big boat and the kids will be on the sidelines for this weekend. I just hope I don't get down there and see nice Class II wave trains everywhere and regret it. And if so, oh well, there will be other days.


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

*DISNEYLAND*........*with a death factor. *


----------



## danger (Oct 13, 2003)

salida east is II+ at high flows. i don't really see the problem w/ a 4y.o. rafting it. the boat flipped and the kid got out. what's the issue? i have a 2 1/2 y.o. that rafted big bend to salida twice last summer. take responsibility for your actions. don't blame the company. i also took my 4 y.o. nephew on a commercial browns canyon trip a few years back. the cut off was 6 i believe and i lied saying he was of age. at that time the kid could surf and swim and he had a blast. 

dan


----------



## Canada (Oct 24, 2006)

One thing this thread shows is that we all have really different parenting styles. My kids know that when they can swim a length ofthe pool, they can use any Kayak in the shed in the neighborhood lake. It has been a good motivational tool to keep them after their swimming. Others say put them in a current. Other say, my nephew is a stud so I take them in class III at 4. 

I've seen an olympic level athelete beaten up in a class III high water hole to the point he could barely walk when we roped him out. I don't want my 2 year old comfortable in a current yet. I have just the opposite problem. Lack of fear causes him to go head first into bad situations. 

I guess in the end I put blame for any situation with kids under 6 or 7 on the parents. Thank god the kid is alright and we can now second guess them without a fatality. With water, I'll error on the side of caution with my kids.


----------



## carvedog (May 11, 2005)

As a 15 yr guide and now private boater, the "blame" for this lies completely with the raft company. 

Outfitted trips are for the general public who does not have the tools, skills or equipment to do the trip on their own. Without experience the peeps simply do not have the knowledge to evaluate the risks and make an informed decision about what is appropriate for their children. 

I boated our local class 3 section with my 2 and a half yr old last year, and she had a blast. Could something have happened? Sure, but with 2 very competent adults in the boat and an action plan for what to do for both of us if the unthinkable happened, it seemed worth it to me. 

We are doing a family trip this fall on the Main Salmon. My kids will be 3 and a half and seven. The little one may walk around Big Mallard and Elkhorn but I am more concerned about their shore awareness than anything happening in the boat. 

I also took a quadriplegic down this section ( commercially ) a few years ago. He had two helpers in the front of the boat we had an extra safety boat and the young man had a blast. Not high water, but it wasn't low either. Was this irresponsible? I don't think so. He couldn't self-rescue at all so by some criteria he shouldn't go.

Also had an 80 yr old woman from N Carolina go down the Middle Fork with me at 5 feet ( relatively high) in a paddle boat, and she was one of the best paddlers I had all summer. Not all of the seniors are incompetent. 

Don't know what the Colorado "waivers" look like, but their isn't a waiver in existence that protects a company from negligent behaviour. Negligence is exactly that. 

We had our peeps sign an Acknowledgement of Risk form. This covers the idea that it is a wild river, things happen that can't be forseen sometimes. But if a guide were to float into a hole on purpose during high water and try to flip with a boat load of peeps with no wetsuits, helmets etc, that would be a case that could be pursued for negligence. 

My two cents.


----------



## JohnHemlock (May 24, 2008)

What a bunch of terrible parents, taking your kids down the river without permission from the auuthorities or this chat board? Why not just smear them in bacon fat and air drop them into the Yellowstone backcountry? Or send them to Neverland Ranch for a sleepover?


----------



## ChipChip (Jun 28, 2008)

In response to the writer. I happen to have met this family and just spoke with them about the events. Last year they took the same trip with their older child. The trip was on the Salida East not Browns. Last year the trip was 99% the same as a float trip on a tube. Their feeling was they would give both children the opportunity to experience the event again. When the family went in to the company they were told that the river was up but should not be much change. They however were not informed of the many deaths this year on the Ark. River. The parents would have never put their kids in that spot if that would have been told to them. Now agree a four year old probably should not be on one, but the company should have given a much much better description of the river and all that went with it. Also how did the boat flip on the first set of rapids at the beginning of those rapids with an experience guide. Seems to me some more training may be needed. I know, I know the river throws curves all the time, but on the first rapid. Something wrong here. It was very unfortunate that this happened. By the way remember the parents are from texas and they were only aware of what it was like last year. Wow what a change! By the way all is very well with them! That is the important aspect!


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

I learned from an anonymous(?), but reliable source at the beginning of this season that Canon Marine only had one guide come back that was experienced enough to provide training for all the rookies they had to hire. I happen to know this guide and he is a highly skilled professional, but with that kind of staff they are lucky this is the worst accident they have had... 
I would think that with an owner who is a member of the Fire department and search and rescue they would be a little more cautious...


----------



## ChipChip (Jun 28, 2008)

lmyers said:


> I learned from an anonymous(?), but reliable source at the beginning of this season that Canon Marine only had one guide come back that was experienced enough to provide training for all the rookies they had to hire. I happen to know this guide and he is a highly skilled professional, but with that kind of staff they are lucky this is the worst accident they have had...
> I would think that with an owner who is a member of the Fire department and search and rescue they would be a little more cautious...


I understand from the family that they are grateful for the actions prefomed by the guide after the turning over of the raft. The family has no problem with this young man. I also hear that the Cayon Marine company tried to put a bandaid on the problem by saying they would not allow anyone under 50 lbs. Guess what that still is the equivalent of a lot of 5 year olds. Wow what a change in policy. I guess they at least noticed the problem. I also bet the family was unaware of the small amount of experience provided by the company. You know that is not going to be given out!!


----------



## yourrealdad (May 25, 2004)

I love how the blame gets passed around here and eventually the final answer is sue sue sue. Seriously, research what you are doing and make your decision based on that. Don't blame some company or individual for your actions. Sorry you think that the rafts run on tracks and that they come back to where they started.

Yes the raft company should have been more informative but, the parents should have looked behind their kids' ears realized they weren't Kevin Costners' offspring and that humans, especially four yr olds don't do well in fast moving rivers.

Caspermike I feel like you are a lawyer.


----------



## Colorado River Surfing (Apr 29, 2008)

Thats way scary,Glad they got out .Did any of you here that story about Beavercreek the creek? A Women riding a horse on Vinos cabin tour with her kids and husband. The horse spooked tossed her in the creek rolling at high flow and they still havn't found her body sad sad story .and that creek is what 10ft wide ?becareful out there i know you all will 
chopper


----------



## cmike1 (Sep 10, 2006)

Just out of curiosity, was this a paddle boat or was the guide at the oars? Bear creek (assuming this happened at Bear Creek) at high water shouldn't present much difficulty to a raft on line but off line with poor orientation, lack of high side, etc, there are holes that could for sure flip a raft.


----------



## CheckYoSelf (Jun 30, 2007)

*All morons, please pay attention...*

*Don’t let them raft it unless you believe they can swim it.*


----------



## CheckYoSelf (Jun 30, 2007)

*Was a waiver signed... YES*



ChipChip said:


> The parents would have never put their kids in that spot if that would have been told to them.


Did the parents willingly sign a waiver signing their four year olds life away? Ohh let me take a wild guess here... YES!!!


----------



## tballgame (Jun 15, 2008)

" People can sign waivers all day long, but ultimately they are putting faith in the rafting company, deserved or not. Remember that these flatlanders have NO IDEA what kind of potential danger is in the mountains and on the rivers. They have no grasp of the natural forces that can squish them like a bug. They see this cool stuff on TV and assume that their pale, fragile city selves can do it too. Further, in the hyper-competitive commercial rafting environment along the Arkansas there WILL be companies that err on the side of a quick buck rather than safety.

NOBODY gets off the hook: the parents made an (ignorant) bad decision AND the rafting company chose money over safety. The good news? NOBODY died.[/quote]"


Just because you rock at rafting or kayaking and are an expert doesnt mean you can throw people from out of state or "flatlanders" under the bus. It's not there fault they are not as cool as you because they have raging rivers and mountains. They don't have a clue, because they are uneducated. The rafting companies need to be way more strict and laugh at people if they bring a 4 year old to go rafting. They come for fun and adventure and the parents should of researched this better and that was not smart to put a 4 year old in a raft and ofcourse the rafting company didnt have there A game and should be shut down.


----------



## boateralacure (Feb 27, 2007)

so i work for a rafting company and i brought down a 5 year old yesterday and we have soild class III rapids can and have fliped rafts alot i see nothing wrong with the rafting company i think the parnets are to blame


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

boateralacure said:


> so i work for a rafting company and i brought down a 5 year old yesterday and we have soild class III rapids can and have fliped rafts alot i see nothing wrong with the rafting company i think the parnets are to blame


blame the parents for what? taking their child on a trip that was supposedly safe? do you know what liability means? do you know what gross negligence means? than i wouldn't say that the parents are to blame. the trip was commercial, professional, guided how could it be the parents fault? the company fucked up by putting the 4year old in the raft! simple. could've all been avoided by not letting the littel boy on the raft and look the flip wouldn't had been a big deal the 4year old is what made it a big deal.


----------



## boateralacure (Feb 27, 2007)

caspermike said:


> blame the parents for what? taking their child on a trip that was supposedly safe? do you know what liability means? do you know what gross negligence means? than i wouldn't say that the parents are to blame. the trip was commercial, professional, guided how could it be the parents fault? the company fucked up by putting the 4year old in the raft! simple. could've all been avoided by not letting the littel boy on the raft and look the flip wouldn't had been a big deal the 4year old is what made it a big deal.


no way, nobody put a gun the famliys head and told them to get on the raft, that what happens when you go rafting, shit like that can happen the parents need to look at that then deciede if the risk is to high it is the parnets fault not the company


----------



## caspermike (Mar 9, 2007)

boateralacure said:


> no way, nobody put a gun the famliys head and told them to get on the raft, that what happens when you go rafting, shit like that can happen the parents need to look at that then deciede if the risk is to high it is the parnets fault not the company


texans do not comprehend what is going on at the moment. the rivers are high and they don't understand the river one bit. for the company to let the boy on regardless is the problem, the guide knew better than anybody.


----------



## Randaddy (Jun 8, 2007)

Who to blame? Hmmm.... I blame every fat POS from Texas that comes rafting for doing something they shouldn't. I blame every parent that shows up with tiny kids for an adventure trip. It's the age of information and these people have the internet in their SUV's, so watch a video, read up, and learn what "whitewater rafting" is!

Obviously companies need to set higher standards (age AND weight), but to say that the parents aren't to blame because they are from Texas and don't know any better is ridiculous. Would they hike their 4 year old down Bright Angel in the Grand Canyon in 110 degree heat because it's allowed? It's not Disneyland folks, and personal responsibility is a pretty important part of parenting.

At least the kid came rafting before he was the mature 300 pounds that many of his fellow tourists weigh in at!


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

I've been trying to make the point that rafting, especially on the Arkansas, IS sold as a splashy theme park ride. Some of the raft co's don't try to dispel it and the tourons buy it. In my less-than-humble-opinion, it's a SHARED responsibility thang. Nobody gets off the hook.




Randaddy said:


> Who to blame? Hmmm.... I blame every fat POS from Texas that comes rafting for doing something they shouldn't. I blame every parent that shows up with tiny kids for an adventure trip. It's the age of information and these people have the internet in their SUV's, so watch a video, read up, and learn what "whitewater rafting" is!
> 
> Obviously companies need to set higher standards (age AND weight), but to say that the parents aren't to blame because they are from Texas and don't know any better is ridiculous. Would they hike their 4 year old down Bright Angel in the Grand Canyon in 110 degree heat because it's allowed? It's not Disneyland folks, and personal responsibility is a pretty important part of parenting.
> 
> At least the kid came rafting before he was the mature 300 pounds that many of his fellow tourists weigh in at!


----------



## Randaddy (Jun 8, 2007)

Steve, you're absolutely right. I've refused to take really small kids rafting before and my employer backed me up. It's really up to those of us working and interacting with the customers to keep our employers informed and honest. 

I still think we should give Texas back to Mexico though...


----------



## DurangoSteve (Jun 2, 2006)

We should try to sell it back to them first, but when that fails, we should give it to Mexico. Then we should build a really expensive wall and require visas for Texicans...




Randaddy said:


> Steve, you're absolutely right. I've refused to take really small kids rafting before and my employer backed me up. It's really up to those of us working and interacting with the customers to keep our employers informed and honest.
> 
> I still think we should give Texas back to Mexico though...


----------



## chiefton (Aug 3, 2006)

If you are going to throw glass stones you probably shouldn't live in a house.


----------



## Randaddy (Jun 8, 2007)

You are very wise Chiefton. Are you from Texas? If you are I will throw glass bottles at you. Wild Turkey bottles.


----------

