# Clear Creek Closed Today for Tubers (Temporarily)



## PattyNYCO (Mar 21, 2005)

*Golden Police Closing Clear Creek to Tubers*

*Golden, Colo. ­— June 12, 2013 —* Effective at noon on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, by order of the City of Golden Police Department, waterway activities on Clear Creek will be limited. The boundaries affected by the order extend from Grant Terry Park Bridge, mile marker 270 and eastward along the canyon through the city limits of Golden including Vanover Park.
This order is being taken due to limited resources with our Fire Rescue crews. Golden Fire has a crew at the Black Forest Fire, and a large number of our water rescue crew members with assistance from West Metro Fire Rescue, will be working all day to remove a car and victim out of the creek further up the canyon. Because our resources and those of our mutual aid partners are stretched very thin and water levels are high, we are closing the creek for the day. 

Water activities prohibited by the order include all single-chambered air inflated devices such as belly boats, inner tubes and single chambered rafts, as well as “body-surfers” and swimming. Violators may be issued a summons for a class 2 petty offense, punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars. These restrictions will be strictly enforced in an effort to minimize the risk to those using the waterway.

Kayaks, whitewater canoes and multi-chambered professionally guided rafts and river boards are exempt, but are encouraged to observe extreme caution due to the safety concerns surrounding swift moving water and floating debris. All of the above users and occupants must have the use of a Type I, Type III or Type V Coast Guard approved paddling life jacket and a water use designated helmet.

These temporary water restrictions will remain in effect until further notice.


----------



## craven_morhead (Feb 20, 2007)

There you have it buzzards; now pulling your skirt in clear creek isn't just a bad idea due to the high water, it's against the law.


----------



## PattyNYCO (Mar 21, 2005)

They are hoping to lift restrictions quickly. They are just super-short on personnel right now. Spread thin....lots going on.


----------



## raymod2 (Jul 22, 2010)

They don't have the resources to handle swimmers in distress but they have the resources to write tickets.


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

raymod2 said:


> They don't have the resources to handle swimmers in distress but they have the resources to write tickets.


To be fair, the ticket writers are not the same group as the rescuers. Cops write tickets, fireman and search & rescue save your ass when you're up shit creek without your paddle.

There's a difference in the groups.


----------



## PattyNYCO (Mar 21, 2005)

Originally Posted by *raymod2*  
_They don't have the resources to handle swimmers in distress but they have the resources to write tickets._

_________________________________________________________

_You can bash all you want, but I personally think they are doing a great job this spring/summer. I have heard of a few warnings being handed out for glass open containers (use your head, idiot) and one ticket to a guy who had his BBQ grill actually in the creek (complete moron), but the Rangers have been pretty cool. Better than the sh*t-show they had last year. _


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

raymod2 said:


> They don't have the resources to handle swimmers in distress but they have the resources to write tickets.


Golden Fire (mostly unpaid volunteers) is working the Black Forest Fire east of Colorado Springs. 
Search & Rescue (also volunteers) is doing a body/vehicle recovery in dangerous water up Clear Creek.

What have you done for your community other than whine?


----------



## raymod2 (Jul 22, 2010)

I have no problem with fire and rescue being spread thin. I do have a problem with the police telling me I can't be on the water because of it. If I ever need the services of fire and rescue I will be glad to have it but I sure as hell don't get on the water expecting it.


----------



## miker (Jan 26, 2006)

Where is the car in the river?


----------



## powdahound76 (Jul 20, 2006)

Exactly Rich. Banning tubers is fine with me for short periods. They have a propensity to suck up resources and don't give a damn about safety. Spent more than trip chasing them down and towing them to shore because they were too tired to swim. I am a fan of Darwin, but have spent too much time and training keeping people alive to sit back and watch someone go down.


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

raymod2 said:


> I have no problem with fire and rescue being spread thin. I do have a problem with the police telling me I can't be on the water because of it. If I ever need the services of fire and rescue I will be glad to have it but I sure as hell don't get on the water expecting it.


You used the word "I" six times in three sentences.
We get it, its all about you.

Once again, what have you done for your community other than whine?

Thanks for all the fire & rescue personnel who give their time & energy during times of crisis.


----------



## justin.payne (Oct 28, 2009)

The City of Golden is making the correct decision in shutting down the river to tubers. A great majority of the people in tubes have little to no understanding of hydrology, and are completely puzzled when rodeo hole keeps thier tube as they keep floating downstream. Very few of the tubers wear PFD's, and I couldnt tell you how many i've had grab on to the back of my boat as I brought them to shore in tears, including 1 lady that almost flushed drowed 2 years ago when the level was over 1000 cfs. We, as kayakers and rafters, know what clear creek is like @ 1000 cfs, but tourists from Texas, who have never seen any such thing, have no idea. 

They arent telling you, you cant be on the river RayMod. Unless of course, you are floating down clear creek in an innertube without a pfd at 1070 cfs. In which, you probably wouldnt mind getting that ticket anyways.

My suggestion to companies that rent out tubes is that you should offer and encourage people to wear a pfd and helmet. Because its the right thing to do.


----------



## powdahound76 (Jul 20, 2006)

Exactly. If you can't tell the difference between 1k cfs and 400 cfs you shouldn't be in the damn river. Kinda like people who run lower CC at 400 and wonder why they get spanked at 950. It's a whole different creek.


----------



## lemsip (Sep 11, 2009)

Do people drown in the Golden play park? I saw a girl on a tube get surfed then flipped in the rodeo hole this weekend, she was terrified and had no idea what to do. Fortunately two kayakers went after her.


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

lemsip said:


> Do people drown in the Golden play park? I saw a girl on a tube get surfed then flipped in the rodeo hole this weekend, she was terrified and had no idea what to do. Fortunately two kayakers went after her.


yes, body surfers have died in Clear Creek.


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

raymod2 said:


> I have no problem with fire and rescue being spread thin. I do have a problem with the police telling me I can't be on the water because of it. If I ever need the services of fire and rescue I will be glad to have it but I sure as hell don't get on the water expecting it.



Are you some sort of hard-core tuber dude? If not why do you even care? Go boating dude, you obviously need it.


----------



## Kendrick (Jul 8, 2010)

I used to go down CC in nothing but a tshirt, shorts and old shoes. That was before it was a playpark and there'd be no one else on the river. I once showed my 10 y/o friend down it (sort of from the top of the playpark and down, but it's hard to tell), and lent him some spare ski-boots I found by the dumpster, so his feet would be safe (he didn't have a junk pair of shoes with him, at the time.) We called them "Mega Man Boots" since they were blue. That coors-brewery-dam-thingy was the finish line. 

Good times.


----------



## raymod2 (Jul 22, 2010)

I forgot this board was hostile towards tubers. I raft, kayak, and tube and I personally don't see a major distinction between any of these activities. I'm betting there would be a lot more "whining" here if the Golden police decided to ban kayaking due to "lack of available rescue personnel".


----------



## PattyNYCO (Mar 21, 2005)

justin.payne said:


> My suggestion to companies that rent out tubes is that you should offer and encourage people to wear a pfd and helmet. Because its the right thing to do.


The responsible ones do. Two days ago a husband and wife (from Denver I believe) came in to Golden River Sports (while I was there) to buy tubes for themselves and their 4 kids. Bart asked them if they had PFD's. The answer was no. Bart asked them if they wanted to rent PFD's. The answer was no. So Bart refused the sale, suggested they wait a few weeks and told them he hoped they returned some other time. The father was initially (let's just say) NOT HAPPY as he left he store. But to my surprise he returned 10 minutes later after actually going down 10th St to look at the Creek itself. He actually came back to thank Bart for his advice then quietly left.

For the past year, I whispered, chatted and eventually screamed, yelled and kicked my feet to anyone that would listen that Golden needs to enact a PFD Regulation regardless of the flow. I went to every single Clear Creek Corridor meeting, sent as many emails to City officials as possible, made phone calls and even had a copy of the AHRA PFD rules and regulations sent to the city managers (did you know Salida and all of the Arkansas Headwaters River Area has a PFD regulation?). My hope is that the regulation gets adopted into policy next year for Golden. It is my true belief lives will be saved and I also truly believe it will cut down on the amount of overuse of the corridor. 

If you feel the same, feel free to email Rod Tarullo - Director of Parks and Rec for the City of Golden. [email protected]

Regardless, stay safe out there.


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

raymod2 said:


> I forgot this board was hostile towards tubers. I raft, kayak, and tube and I personally don't see a major distinction between any of these activities. I'm betting there would be a lot more "whining" here if the Golden police decided to ban kayaking due to "lack of available rescue personnel".



raymod2, the reason this board is hostile toward tubers is because they are ignorant and usually drunk, it's unnerving knowing you're boating where there may be a submerged body.

You and the average "tuber" have nothing in common when it comes to river knowledge.

It's a good thing the river is closed to drunken college kids and idiots.

You seem to not realize the differences between a tuber and a boater, whatever.


----------



## OldFatMan (Jan 10, 2011)

Sign on I-70 says "No Rafting on Clear Creek Today". Prob because of the recovery effort.


----------



## twitch (Oct 16, 2003)

Car in Creek 06122013 - YouTube

Golden Fire & Rescue were a bit busy yesterday, and didn't want to have to worry about "what if's" in and around the WW Park with tubers in the water and flows approaching 1300cfs. Be thankful, as they normally close the creek to tubers and other types of single chamber inflatables around 900-1000 CFS. 

Patty - your hubby is such a hard ass. Tell him to lighten up


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

PattyNYCO said:


> (did you know Salida and all of the Arkansas Headwaters River Area has a PFD regulation?).


This is true, but they certainly don't enforce it. There has been some local push to try and get the rangers to at least issue warnings, but you can find people in the playpark on any given hot day in the water without PFD's.

You don't see it much at the BV park because of the higher altitude and steeper gradient, but Salida and Canon City have major problems with this IMO. Although it has been many years since someone playing in the park drowned...


----------



## NYourd (Mar 29, 2013)

I live on the creek and paddle it daily. Couple thoughts from my end. First thing, tuber ban is awesome for kayakers because there is no traffic ha. But everyone is entitled to enjoy the creek because its awesome. Personally I think the ban should be anything over 750 cfs if not lower. Its for peoples safety, and most that end up swimming above that level are VERY grateful when they get to shore safe and will agree that was DUMB! ha. I have talked with cops, fire, and ranger patrollers. They are all amazing people and critical to keeping the creek safe, clean and scenically restored. They are looking for things GLASS containers, open alc containers, drunk or lewd behavior, risk to personal safety and people posting up in eco protected areas. WE NEED THEM or this place is going to turn into a shit hole. Kayakers should be nothing but stoked on this.


----------



## deepsouthpaddler (Apr 14, 2004)

Ban on tubes is the right thing to do. Probably should make an exception for floating alligators though, cause those guys look they know what they are doing.


----------



## Don (Oct 16, 2003)

*Tubes*

Monday was a junk show. I saw one little girl leave in an ambulance after she had a rough swim. Her tube was still in the bleacher hole an hour after she was pulled out. Over the few hours I was there I saw at least a dozen folks that were lucky to get the breath they got before washing down stream. Lots of props for the PO PO.


----------



## DanOrion (Jun 8, 2004)

Some large scull and cross bones signs at high water would go a long way.


----------



## 2tomcat2 (May 27, 2012)

twitch said:


> Car in Creek 06122013 - YouTube
> 
> Golden Fire & Rescue were a bit busy yesterday, and didn't want to have to worry about "what if's" in and around the WW Park with tubers in the water and flows approaching 1300cfs. Be thankful, as they normally close the creek to tubers and other types of single chamber inflatables around 900-1000 CFS.
> 
> Patty - your hubby is such a hard ass. Tell him to lighten up


Thank you for the visual...


----------



## Miller Time (Apr 3, 2009)

Have you ever heard the saying "your rights end where mine begin"? 

Allowing tubers creek access above unsafe levels put rescuers (kayakers, SAR, or swift water rescue) at unnecessary risk. It's not about protecting the tuber rights. It's about protecting the safety of the rescuers. 

Why would you want them dedicated to a civilian swimmer rescue when they can save a paddler from a Cripps Hole beat down?


----------



## streetdoctor (May 11, 2012)

Saw no less than 4 tubers yesterday in clear creek... I was explaining to one (drunk) why it wasn't a good idea and to read the posted signs just as he flipped and lost his tube. I've also been asked if it runs in a continuous loop before though....


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

... they are tubers. Fuck 'em. 

Also, lives and homes take priority over recreation particularly when there are many other opportunities available. It's not like every stream in the state is shut down.


----------



## FrankC (Jul 8, 2008)

Speaking of tuber saftety. I see that a wooden fence is now going up on the lower section of the creek near the library. This will probably make it a lot harder to help out swimmers in trouble. I've pulled a few people and a dog out of the water there myself over the last couple years. They really need to keep this section open.


----------



## mountainsurf123 (Sep 11, 2007)

FrankC said:


> Speaking of tuber saftety. I see that a wooden fence is now going up on the lower section of the creek near the library. This will probably make it a lot harder to help out swimmers in trouble. I've pulled a few people and a dog out of the water there myself over the last couple years. They really need to keep this section open.


I thought the same thing and shared that at the public forums about the project. They politely disagreed that the fences they were installing would impede rescue...


----------



## CBrown (Oct 28, 2004)

FrankC said:


> Speaking of tuber saftety. I see that a wooden fence is now going up on the lower section of the creek near the library. This will probably make it a lot harder to help out swimmers in trouble. I've pulled a few people and a dog out of the water there myself over the last couple years. They really need to keep this section open.


I had to climb the fence to rescue a ******* female overcome by tubing fatigue today. Apparently,her blue jeans were not the right choice for the creek today. Her kids kept floating by while she was carping holding onto a rock mid stream. There needs to be a PFD rule on CC over 500.


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

CBrown said:


> There needs to be a PFD rule on CC over 500.


Either that or a complete "at your own risk" policy with no search and rescue option, let Darwinism thin the gene pool a bit...


----------



## robanna (Apr 20, 2004)

We talked to a cop yesterday and the reason they don't have "use at your own risk" signs is because all people see is "use" and that put liability back on the City.


----------



## Flohotter (Jun 22, 2010)

Jensjustduckie said:


> Either that or a complete "at your own risk" policy with no search and rescue option, let Darwinism thin the gene pool a bit...


I agree with this. No rescuer should be called to put her/his life at risk for these folks. 

Does anyone know if they get fined for losing their tube and littering the creek? I guess that could go for manless kayaks also though...


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

andru187 said:


> I agree with this. No rescuer should be called to put her/his life at risk for these folks.
> 
> Does anyone know if they get fined for losing their tube and littering the creek? I guess that could go for manless kayaks also though...


I too agree. Why do we keep saving stupid people?


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

andru187 said:


> Does anyone know if they get fined for losing their tube and littering the creek? I guess that could go for manless kayaks also though...


True, but normally a kayaker will go to great lengths to find and recover their boat. A tire tube only costs 10 bucks so they feel fine losing it to the river, I wish they got littering fines for losing them or their beer cans.


----------



## Flohotter (Jun 22, 2010)

Jensjustduckie said:


> True, but normally a kayaker will go to great lengths to find and recover their boat. A tire tube only costs 10 bucks so they feel fine losing it to the river, I wish they got littering fines for losing them or their beer cans.


I was kidding about the manless kayak, but seriously a couple hundred dollar fine for littering a creek would probably change things on that stretch.


----------



## FrankC (Jul 8, 2008)

mountainsurf123 said:


> I thought the same thing and shared that at the public forums about the project. They politely disagreed that the fences they were installing would impede rescue...


That fence will probably improve safety where there is a steep embankment. It will just impede recue everywhere else. A few years ago a pedestrian pulled out and resuscitated a face-down floater he just happened to spot in that area near the library. This kid would probably be dead now if there was a heavy wooden fence blocking the view from the trail.


----------



## justin.payne (Oct 28, 2009)

PattyNYCO said:


> The responsible ones do. Two days ago a husband and wife (from Denver I believe) came in to Golden River Sports (while I was there) to buy tubes for themselves and their 4 kids. Bart asked them if they had PFD's. The answer was no. Bart asked them if they wanted to rent PFD's. The answer was no. So Bart refused the sale, suggested they wait a few weeks and told them he hoped they returned some other time. The father was initially (let's just say) NOT HAPPY as he left he store. But to my surprise he returned 10 minutes later after actually going down 10th St to look at the Creek itself. He actually came back to thank Bart for his advice then quietly left.
> 
> For the past year, I whispered, chatted and eventually screamed, yelled and kicked my feet to anyone that would listen that Golden needs to enact a PFD Regulation regardless of the flow. I went to every single Clear Creek Corridor meeting, sent as many emails to City officials as possible, made phone calls and even had a copy of the AHRA PFD rules and regulations sent to the city managers (did you know Salida and all of the Arkansas Headwaters River Area has a PFD regulation?). My hope is that the regulation gets adopted into policy next year for Golden. It is my true belief lives will be saved and I also truly believe it will cut down on the amount of overuse of the corridor.
> 
> ...


Thank you Patty for everything you guys do for the boating community. I know several places that wouldnt blink and eye to sending someone on Clear Creek in a tube without a PFD. Its great to know our local river sports shop does more than just push product out the door. 

Everyone, just as Patty stated, if you feel the same way, you should take the time to send an email to Rod Tarullo, I did.


----------



## benpetri (Jul 2, 2004)

Why not just a PFD and helmet rule all the time? Afterall, what good is a rule based on safety if it doesn't reinforce proper safety? Should golden say its okay to tube at 499 cfs without a pfd but not 500, even when no kayaker I know would ever boat anywhere without a helmet and PFD (well, maybe squirt boaters, but who squirt boats these days anyway)? Heck, most tubers don't even know what a cfs is, much less how to check. And tubers have proven just as capable of killing themselves on 100 cfs as 1000. One good whack to the head at low flow and you have an unconscious nonfloating swimmer.

The situation down there last year was totally out of control. I'm all for the fences too since the place was getting completely destroyed, and I don't think the residents of Golden should have to live with a trashed out park just so we can maintain rescue access for complete idiots. Golden is well within its rights to set reasonable rules on the whitewater park and it should do so. If tubers want to whine about it, let'em whine. Most of them are out-of-towners anyway, and don't vote in our elections.

Props to Golden River Sports for telling them how it is! If only Walmart would do the same now...


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

FrankC said:


> That fence will probably improve safety where there is a steep embankment. It will just impede recue everywhere else. A few years ago a pedestrian pulled out and resuscitated a face-down floater he just happened to spot in that area near the library. This kid would probably be dead now if there was a heavy wooden fence blocking the view from the trail.


The fence does not block any views of the creek or emergency access to the creek. It is a three rail, open fence about 42" high. In an emergency rescue situation it would a a couple of seconds to go over the fence. By keeping people away from the edge of the creek, it adds to safety.


----------



## raymod2 (Jul 22, 2010)

I also sent an email to Rod Tarullo. I expressed my opposition to a PFD regulation. We don't need more laws protecting us from ourselves.


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

raymod2 said:


> I also sent an email to Rod Tarullo. I expressed my opposition to a PFD regulation. We don't need more laws protecting us from ourselves.


You're absolutely right Raymod, but we do need laws protecting rescuers from unnecessary situations. You keep avoiding the point.


----------



## raymod2 (Jul 22, 2010)

Jen, I think you are missing the point. Rescuers are volunteers. They choose to put themselves at risk (and I applaud them for it). But if they don't want to rescue tubers or anyone without a PFD then that is also their choice. You don't need a law for that.

I should also point out that you are a hypocrite. Your boating activities are just as "unnecessary" as a tuber's. Why do you put rescuers at risk by getting on the water?


----------



## benpetri (Jul 2, 2004)

I don't like any more rules than necessary either, but it has become necessary. Golden is a city, next to a bigger city. Last year typical weekend days saw crowds easily exceeding 1000 people in/on the creek, and even weekdays were pretty bad. 90% are not wearing any form of protection, so the liability exposure for Golden is huge due to sheer numbers alone. Its not just a drowning / rescue risk either. Its also a crowd control issue. There are drunks. There are fights. There are DUIs. There were people building fires on the riverbanks. There is trash all over. Cities control these problems with rules. Emphasizing "person responsibility" as a safety and crowd control approach just doesn't fly when you're dealing with the riff raff that is 1000 tubers.

I'd be curious what the call volume was on the Golden fire and police department was last summer. I'm sure it had to be a pretty increase from previous years...


----------



## justin.payne (Oct 28, 2009)

raymod2 said:


> Jen, I think you are missing the point. Rescuers are volunteers. They choose to put themselves at risk (and I applaud them for it). But if they don't want to rescue tubers or anyone without a PFD then that is also their choice. You don't need a law for that.
> 
> I should also point out that you are a hypocrite. Your boating activities are just as "unnecessary" as a tuber's. Why do you put rescuers at risk by getting on the water?


 
Ray, you are obviously as ignorant about this situation as the tubers in question. Rescuers are volunteers, but you should understand the due diligence that rests upon the shoulders of the SWR instructors, WW kayak instructors, etc that are playing in the hole when a tuber comes down and screams for thier life because they do not understand how powerful the water is below the surface. How is Jen being a hypocrite? The point is to wear a pfd, and i've never seen a boater in the play park without one. 

Good luck to your non-pfd, non helmet wearing super tuber self. You should tube from tunnel 2 down, I hear its pretty fun.


----------



## justin.payne (Oct 28, 2009)

benpetri said:


> I don't like any more rules than necessary either, but it has become necessary. Golden is a city, next to a bigger city. Last year typical weekend days saw crowds easily exceeding 1000 people in/on the creek, and even weekdays were pretty bad. 90% are not wearing any form of protection, so the liability exposure for Golden is huge due to sheer numbers alone. Its not just a drowning / rescue risk either. Its also a crowd control issue. There are drunks. There are fights. There are DUIs. There were people building fires on the riverbanks. There is trash all over. Cities control these problems with rules. Emphasizing "person responsibility" as a safety and crowd control approach just doesn't fly when you're dealing with the riff raff that is 1000 tubers.
> 
> I'd be curious what the call volume was on the Golden fire and police department was last summer. I'm sure it had to be a pretty increase from previous years...


Bingo Ben, I also agree that Golden residents should not have to deal with it. I'm glad the GPD is finally doing something about it.


----------



## Kyle K (Dec 17, 2008)

*Rescue and First Aid Liability*



raymod2 said:


> Jen, I think you are missing the point. Rescuers are volunteers. They choose to put themselves at risk (and I applaud them for it). But if they don't want to rescue tubers or anyone without a PFD then that is also their choice. You don't need a law for that. /QUOTE]
> 
> My understanding is this is not a legal choice: If you have up-to-date rescue and/or first aid training and skills, and you can affect rescue/aid without putting yourself in harms way, you are legally obligated to perform said rescue/aid.
> 
> ...


----------



## merritrd (Feb 1, 2010)

My understanding is this is not a legal choice: If you have up-to-date rescue and/or first aid training and skills, and you can affect rescue/aid without putting yourself in harms way, you are legally obligated to perform said rescue/aid. 


As someone with the skills and training, I have no legal obligation to perform a rescue/aid, at least not in CO.


----------



## twitch (Oct 16, 2003)

I took some clients down to the creek for a picnic lunch today. Unfortunately, access to the creek was listed as restricted for the reasons that we've already re-hashed here plenty of times. I found it interesting that all the kids still found a way to access the creek, just blazing new trails through the foliage, and jumping in where they pleased. I found it most disturbing when one of them found the current too swift, freaked out, and stared me right in the eyes looking for help. Yes, I helped, and then I gave that little fucker a tongue lashing he's not soon to forget as the only reason he finally jumped in the water was peer pressure from his like minded friends. The rules are there for the safety of the greater population. Like water, stupidity will still find a way. 

Raymond, stop being a douche. This isn't the NSA spying on you. These are rules being enacted to protect the people. The ability of law enforcement to restrict access to waterways - in particular to single chamber inflatables - is a state led initiative, not a Golden thing. If you don't like it, go tubing somewhere else - preferably not in my backyard were people like Patty and Bart work so hard to create a harmonious relationship with the community and it's administrators. You're splitting hairs here to stay afloat, but it's not working and you're head is no longer above water. No need to respond, you've already established your point. I respect that you're entitled to it, but seriously dude, you're like a little kid trying to come up with every excuse for mommy and daddy as to why you are special and shouldn't have to follow the rules. If you don't like the society we live in, move, it's a big and awesome world.


----------



## Kyle K (Dec 17, 2008)

*Correction*



merritrd said:


> As someone with the skills and training, I have no legal obligation to perform a rescue/aid, at least not in CO.


Thanks for pointing that out, I stand corrected. Being an invasive specimen, I wasn't aware of the CO laws. My understanding came from Oregon and, after looking into it, I think I am incorrect there as well. 

As for the park employees (rangers, safety personnel, etc), the law is clear for those that have the training and it falls under their job description: They must perform rescue/aid in an emergency. It is not so clear about volunteers, at least from what I can find. 

Sorry to hijack this thread!


----------



## powdahound76 (Jul 20, 2006)

Raymod2,
Stay in Longmont with your tube. Go tubing on the St Vrain where it crosses under I25, I hear it is awesome. Be sure to drink a lot and dont wear a PFD.


----------



## TriBri1 (Nov 15, 2011)

Kyle K said:


> Thanks for pointing that out, I stand corrected. Being an invasive specimen, I wasn't aware of the CO laws. My understanding came from Oregon and, after looking into it, I think I am incorrect there as well.
> 
> As for the park employees (rangers, safety personnel, etc), the law is clear for those that have the training and it falls under their job description: They must perform rescue/aid in an emergency. It is not so clear about volunteers, at least from what I can find.
> 
> Sorry to hijack this thread!


The distinction come to if you are on the clock or not, if you are on the clock and you job description says you r preform care, then you do or you hold yourself and your company legally responsible. If you are not on the clock, you are covered by Good Samaritan laws if you provide care. The only hitch, is once you begin providing care you are obligated to continue until the situation fixes itself or someone else takes over care. Volunteer FFs are a little trickier, but essentially work the same way. They need to decide if they are in or out before they go on the call. This is fairly standard in every state.


----------



## tuberslickmysweatyballs (Sep 24, 2005)

PattyNYCO said:


> *Golden Police Closing Clear Creek to Tubers*


Finally, after years of bribery,lobbying and political contributions from the Tubers Can Suck It Coalition....some progress. 

A toast to all of my hard work!


----------

