Topic: Lower Rouge (Elizabeth's drop-->Ottawa river) Saturday

[Martink]

Hey Jeremy try Google translate!

http://translate.google.com/

[Bill Schlarb]

Can someone translate Cindy's post for me?
I know, I know, stupid anglois, right? lol
Thanks
jer

Try www.translate.google.com, it does a nice job...
Just copy & paste the text and read the translated version.

Bill

[ChristianG]

Thanks Ryszard for clarifying things. If thingas are as you say, then there should be no problem for him to join outings. And no, he is not becoming dangerous... He's just becoming to darn good at paddling. I tend to agree with Billy Harris' advice too. --C.

P.S. Jeremy, Cindy basically agrees with what I wrote. i just don't have the energy to translate...

[Jeremy Poulin]

Can someone translate Cindy's post for me?
I know, I know, stupid anglois, right? lol
Thanks
jer

[wyszard]

Hi everyone

After reading all of the stuff about Martin,  I decided to consult with a lawyer, who is a member of our extended family, and see what some of the facts are in regards to Martin (& any other person).

The only way that anyone can get sued is if it can be proven that there was negligence on somebody's part.

If  someone says to Martin, "I think that you shouldn't run this rapid as it is too dangerous for your skill level and/or your equipment" and  he does it anyway, then that person or group of persons is not negligent and are not responsible for him.

I understand peoples reluctance to be with Martin when I am not there, however sometimes he is with other people, so without a doubt, up to Class III+ he is OK.
Anything beyond that is a difficult judgement call, which depends on a lot of different factors.

We cannot prevent people from running rivers,  however as a group we can inform people that we cannot or will not choose to paddle with them as we consider them dangerous to themselves & others or that there equipment is inadequate.

If anyone does feel that Martin is becoming dangerous, then please let me know, as I and his parents will not hesitate to ground him if we feel that it is necessary, but by the same token please don't project your anxieties about running a rapid onto Martin.
 

[Cindy D]

Ouf, je l'avais manqu? celle-l?, j'en rajoute en fran?ais.
 
C'est dit: ?a stupid waiver?, ?a n'a justement aucune valeur devant un tribunal, on ne peut pas se d?charger de ses responsabilit?s en faisant signer un formulaire de d?charge. ?a n'existe pas, ?a fait juste prouver qu'on a agi en bon p?re de famille en informant les participants des risques qu'ils prennent.  Malheureusement, ?a ne nous met pas ? l'abri des poursuites.  Je suis 100% avec Christian dans cette discussion, les gens ne r?alisent habituellement pas les risques auxquels les membres d'un ex?cutif et les organisateurs de sortie s'exposent.  Au Cdb, c'est tr?s relax pour les sorties, n'importe qui peut d?barquer de nul part et annoncer une sortie sur ce forum, c'est ?norme comme marge de manoeuvre.  Si je fais une comparaison avec le club alpin Outaouais, dont je suis la pr?sidente, chaque sortie est cautionn?e par le CA avant d'?tre affich?e sur le calendrier, c'est beaucoup plus restrictif et on s'assure que les organisateurs sont comp?tents. J'appr?cie beaucoup la marge demanoeuvre qu'on a ici mais, qu'un participant refuse de prendre le risque d'amener un mineur est parfaitement normal et d?fendable. 

Tout le monde aime Martin, ce n'est vraiment pas une question d'habilet? dans son cas, juste une question de responsabilit? et ce n'est pas un stupide formulaire de d?charge qui la fait dispara?tre par magie. ?a devrait ?tre clair pour tout le monde. Les organisateurs et les membres de l'ex?cutif SONT responsables, ils peuvent et doivent exclure des pagayeurs quand les risques sont immod?r?s pour les participants.

Cindy Doyle.

[ChristianG]

Pardon me if i sound like a dick...

Not likely.

While you are entitled to your opinions and have every right to express them, you are often rather rude in doing it. You need to adopt a polite and appropriate tone, otherwise your posts may be removed by the moderators.

And said opinions, beside being wrong and difficult to decipher precisely, are irrelevant to the topic at hand for reasons that I will make clear below.

(1) No doubt that Martin has the skills and strength to run the river, including some of the waterfalls. We all enjoy paddling with him, and we have always encouraged him. The only relevant issue is that unfortunately he is not yet 18 years old.

(2) No doubt that if anything bad happened to him, leading to injury, many have the skills and strength to identify among the adults present at the time those who are gainfully employed, own property etc. and try to 'take them to the cleaners' in a negligence lawsuit, so to speak.

(3) No doubt that such a lawsuit would be successful, waiver or not, because of the nature of the activity and this country's history of lawsuits following injuries suffered by minors.

(4) No doubt that this was an unacceptable risk to those present on the river that day.

(5) No doubt that they had the right to ask Martin not to come unless accompanied by a family member.

Grieving parents, sometimes prompted by greedy lawyers, will often pursue the maximum compensation in the case of an injury to their child. Sometimes they have no choice if for instance hospital fees not covered by provincial health insurance need to be paid. In the case of the high school student who died recently while cutting a barrel, his father is quoted about what the school board has to pay: "Right now i feel $275,000 is pocket change, it's not a big fine... (sic)".

Perhaps someone who has little to lose and therefore would not be considered a target worthy of a lawsuit may judge the above-described risk acceptable. Unfortunately I don't. I do not want to risk my future. Opinions of others are irrelevant. It's as simple as that.

Sincerely,

--Christian Gigault

[Martink]

The rouge at this level is class 3  3+ if you dont run the sisters.

[liz edwards]

This is very clear. Thank you Richard.

[wyszard]

Hi everyone

Here are some of the facts  rules etc. that I apply to Martin, so that I can clarify the situation.

1. Martin is a club member under my "family" membership, so ultimately I am responsible for him on the river.

2. I have a club signed waiver, signed  by his mother & his parents, who are aware of the potential risks, especially his father who used to do rafting at WT a few years ago. I have the waiver, if Christian needs a copy then I can give it to him.

3. Nobody expected Martin to progress as quickly as he has & I don't think that there are any doubts about his abilities to handle class III+ rapids.

4. So my rules are very simple, anything that is Class III or III+ is OK.

5. Anything above class III+ IS NOT OK unless I am there, or somebody that I trust is there to take care of & be responsible for Martin. I have paddled with Jean-Nicolas & CJ, and despite their 'yahoo' cavalier attitude, they are actually quite safe on the river.

Everything depends on a little common sense. Martin has a healthy respect for the rapids, & is afraid of some of them, but at the same time he has never been seriously trashed. In the past I have let him run ST chute at Garvins, but we had a good setup & safety with some excellent paddlers, and the lines were explained to him in detail.

I had a discussion with Billy a couple of weeks ago  & his advice is "Get him a creek boat and get him some good creeking lessons, experience & training, forget about the playboating, that will come naturally". We are starting to look at creek boats & as soon as we have the money then that is the next purchase.

The bottom line is that because he is young ( & stupid at times as only youth can be) he will push his limits, whether or not we are there, So the best thing that we can do to help him is to try to equip him correctly and give him the benefit of our experiences. The real problem is to know where those limits are, this is a judgment call.

[liz edwards]

Well I hope it gets figured out and that Martin doesn't revert to hard drugs and crime in the meantime. It's the next obvious step.

[JohnCyr]

Sorry. Mentally challenged would be the proper term. Everyone should be concerned about everybodys safety. It is not for Daniel to decide what Martin has the ability to run or not. Like i stated, there is a waiver that was signed and the rules shall be made clear by the exec.

[liz edwards]

Daniel is concerned for Martin's safety and the responsibility that others are taking on by taking him on a trip. It's a very good point and one that should be brought up. He has kids of his own and is probably a pretty good judge of what they are like at that age (ie. the decisions they make). There is no need for the language used or the references (ie. retarded). It really doesn't help you make your point. I'm sure Martin's parents appreciate that people are looking out for him on the river. 

[JohnCyr]

Pardon me if i sound like a dick but im sick of hearing of that legal issue crap from some of the members on here. Martin may be 15 but hes actually quite the better paddler than a lot of people on here. He actually ran 3 of the sisters already and had some of the cleanest lines. Bill, Christian, please make it clear on the board what the rules are. Did Richard and Martins mom sign the waiver or did they not? What is the poin of having a stupid waiver if people keep putting in back in his face? Martin has the common sense to know ehat he can or cannon run according to his abilities. He may be underage but hes certainly not retarded. Last time on the sisters, he opted to walk four of the falls by choice. Would adam chappell be where hes at if people kept naggin on him about that? Oh yeah, he did stop coming to the clubs outings because of similar issues. Would tyler bradt an evan garcia or brendan and tod wells be where theyre at and pushing the sport if people kept putting sticks in their wheels? NO. id much rather see Martin frack up a line and have a swim and a safety reminder rather than be on the street drinking, and doing drugs and getting in trouble like i have when i was his age. If i had people present at the time to take me paddling or helping ne gain self confidence, id certainly wouldve had a different and healthier path in my life. Anyways, if you post an outing on the board, it is not YOUR outing, its a CLUB outing, therefore it should not make anyone responsible. Especially if a waiver has been signed. Needless to say, this isnt the first time it happened and i felt the need to ask the exec to clarify and make the rules clear. Therefore, have fun on thr sisters today an be safe. I see quite a few people who perhaps should not be running the falls either.

JN

[coolfarmer816]

I am going to come with Caro, I have ran 1,4,7 of the sisters in my playboat but tomorrow I will probably only run washing machine and maybe the last drop/slide, as I am with Caro and not Richard. If you have any concerns  let me now and  if you dont want me to come I understand.

Allo Martin, since your are not 18 there is legal issu for sure and I understand that Caro is responsable for you. Not do the 7 sisters is a must if Richard is not with us.  See you on the river

Daniel