ACA Whitewater Survey - Please Help!

[cnicholsACA]

Smurfwarrior -

I understand and hear your criticisms, however, I believe that you are far overestimating the actual scope of this exercise. This survey is in no way intended to boost the need for additional training by the ACA, and will likely have very little impact on ACA policy in the future. I am an intern, doing a summer project for ACA, looking to start to untangle the vast array of data available on both whitewater and flatwater paddle accidents. As you have pointed out, there are inherent problems with surveys of this nature, and without having significantly more resources than one individual, it is logistically very difficult to collect data with this level of outreach and speed. I can assure you, hands down, that as somebody trained in the sciences, I would never let my name, or the name of an organization I support (especially one that does so much for the hobby I love!) be attached to a publication built on faulty data.

You are also correct in noting that AW does a fine job of keeping up with whitewater events, to them I nod my cap. The fundamental purpose of this exercise is just to put a toe in the water, and see if there are any suggestive (note, not significant) trends that should be further explored using more official and better documented means. Please don't think that I'm dodging your criticism by claiming that this whole thing doesn't matter, so why worry about it, as that is far from the truth. In my time working with the numbers, I started to wonder about many of the specifics that are hard to glean from media reports and numerical sorting of paddlesport accidents. Therefore, as a means to just start to get some idea on the information I currently don't have, I created this survey and opened it to the community for some info. I have other data that cover some of the gaps in information the questions leave out, this is a narrowed down version looking to get at exactly the things I have very little to no information about. I also didn't want to write a definitive 900 question survey and get 10 responses. As you probably experienced, it is very quick and easy to complete.

Again, I think you're just reading too much into what this could turn into, and I can assure that it will not. The results of this survey will likely have little to no impact on ACA operations, but instead serve as a possible ground level starting point for those that come after me. I appreciate your interest, and greatly respect your commitment to our sport.

[ohioboater]

Seems to me the purpose of this survey is to somehow draw (force) a parrallel between the need for more training (by the ACA presumably) to reduce injuries. . . the last thing we need is to give ammunition to the club insurance underwriter to start demanding a level of "ACA Training" for coordinators and participants before providing insurance for events.

I'm sorry, but I question your motives and the possible unintentional consequences of your admittedly skewed results. The AW does a fine job of documenting events that we can all learn from and I see no need for this. Pardon my bluntness

My thoughts exactly.

[cnicholsACA]

Ohioboater- please see above. No black helicopters here!



I will be out for the rest of today but glad to further clarify any questions CBoaters might have tonight, and I am glad that many of you have chosen to participate and/or raise important questions.

Carey

[Al Donaldson]

Carey:

Well, I completed the silly thing, but was completely unimpressed with the survey design. As an instructional designer, I found that almost all of the questions had logic holes through which one could throw a fair-sized rowboat. I'll give one example only, as nobody would wish to read through all of it again:
Question:

Which improvement to your equipment or your training do you think would make the biggest improvement in your safety on the river?

The answers to this question all made the assumption that either training or equipment might actually make a difference! (see below)

# Additional Instruction on Techniques
# Additional Medical Training
# Additional Rescue Training
# Additional Rescue Equipment
# Additional Personal (Non-Rescue) Equipment
# Additional Equipment Use Training
# Additional "River Skills" Training - reading water, safe lines, correct levels, etc.
# Additional Strength/Conditioning Training
# New Vessel Outfitting
# New Vessel

There is certainly a possibility that I might think that my future safety would not be impacted by any training or equipment changes. However, the question may not be left blank, as the survey cannot be completed with an unanswered question.

Almost every question has exactly this same sort of logic bomb included.

As has been mentioned previously, either the motives or the data gathering skills of the writer MUST be questioned, as a survey that is this poorly designed can lead to bad data only, regardless of its intent.

This effort does not speak well for the ACA's efforts.

If you are going to try and get good data, regardless of whether you want 10 questions or 10,000, get some professional help or training on survey design! I would have been willing to offer my services gratis, had a request been made in time.

Regards,

al

[cnicholsACA]

Mr. Donaldson,

Thank you for both taking the time to complete the survey, and offer your thoughts to it's design and contents. I am sorry that you found it unsatisfactory, you clearly have a great deal of experience in professional survey administration. I must also apologize for the problems you found with my logic in some instances, however, many of the choices listed were intended to capture paddler opinion of a given set of variables or things that we already track. I am interested to see what people actually select, even if their idea of the best choice is not present. Additionally, many of my answer choices were selected from things that are frequently incorporated in USCG data, things that I would like to further refine and/or compare to a quick snapshot of average paddlers.


As to my motives, I can assure you that there are none. My project is not part of ACA's mainstream operations, I function very much on the periphery of what is a great group of people. These results are for my purposes, on behalf of ACA, not something they asked me to go out and track down. I hope that your disappointment with my project will not reflect how you view what is unquestionably a positive organization for all paddlesports. Their efforts are constant, well-intentioned, and incredibly valuable for enthusiasts like ourselves. View my data gathering skills however you like, but again, me, not ACA. Once again, the survey is not definitive, and the options were this, or standing by various take outs with a clipboard. You are confusing what is a simple exercise with a complicated scientific endeavor, which I agree with you that this survey is not.

I will certainly pass along your username to ACA intern posterity for future reference, your offer is very generous, and if nothing else I have uncovered the need for improved accident reporting.

Again, I am sorry for the issues you have with this exercise, and I thank you for your input and time.




Alright folks, I'm trying to be as glass-box as is humanly possible with all this. I realize that there are problems, but I also believe that there are benefits if nothing else than at a fundamental level. I will continue to respond to comments or questions that have not already been brought up, and feel free to post here or PM me. Thank you all again for your time, in whatever modality it may be.

Carey

[Smurfwarrior]

My project is not part of ACA's mainstream operations, I function very much on the periphery of what is a great group of people. These results are for my purposes, on behalf of ACA, not something they asked me to go out and track down.

You sure came in here flying the ACA flag as if this was an official ACA survey that you were tasked to perform in your duties as an intern, and your survey page conveys that impression too.

Your attempts at shutting people down with comments about "black helicopters" by kookifying those who are openly questioning you is not what you should be doing while attempting to properly represent an organization that you are interning with.

[cnicholsACA]

Smurfwarrior -

I am not attempting to shut anybody down, or kookify anybody who is questioning me. I am sorry if I have offended you, and will continue to do my best to be open and responsive to ideas and comments.


My previous statements were meant to clarify and remove any distress people might be having regarding my survey as impacting ACA's training policies and/or suggestions. People raised the question and concern that this would be used to draw up a need for more training, and my intent is to demonstrate that it is not.

I am an intern at ACA, and the survey was created to help me with a project that I am working on for them, it is not something they tasked me to collect. I was however asked to work through what is a mountain of USCG information, and come up with suggestions and additional ideas. This falls under one of my processes to accomplish the above goal, and I believe merits the "ACA flag." It is part of my project, and I am part of ACA, but it remains far from their policy-making.

This is something I'm working on for their benefit, but is not a necessity to their operation, and this is difficult to convey. The only reason I brought up this facet of my exercise is to dispel the suggestion that ACA was in any way using this survey to draw a parallel between the need for more training and whitewater injuries.


Please let me know if you would like any further clarification
Carey

[TheKrikkitWars]

Just answered it, I couldn't think of training that was neccessary.

I also answered the question "If you did not answer 100%, can you specify why?" in reference to "What percent of your paddlesport-related injuries or accidents have been reported to some form of authorities?" with: Reporting is an uneccessary nucience which is not statutoraly required (UK law).

[yarnellboat]

Gotta agree the survey set-up isn't great - both with the questions focussing on the injured person (I was trying to respond as part of a rescue group, not as the victim), and with a bias towards official training.

Regarding accidents, the biggest correction factor to me isn't the actual training that people may have, but how often they practice the skills.

Similarly, it's not necessarily paddling techniques that is the biggest problem, but saftey techniques like communications and group management.

I think the survey underplays those important elements.

Another personal bias I have that I wish organized paddling would change is the use of "throwrope" without making a distinction between little poly throwropes and rescue ropes that are spec'd for use in mechanical advantage systems.

Good luck, Pat.

[TheKrikkitWars]

Another personal bias I have that I wish organized paddling would change is the use of "throwrope" without making a distinction between little poly throwropes and rescue ropes that are spec'd for use in mechanical advantage systems.

Good luck, Pat.

Well in britain, the thin cheesewire ropes which are both harder to grip and not strong enough for mechanical advantage have long since fallen out of fashion, a massive majority of boaters will have a 10mm line with a 20000kN breaking strain, lengths range from 10-25m.

HF throwlines have popularised spectra ropes which seem to be offering 8mm line with a 35000kN breaking strain and lengths of 20-30m

As a guide and SRT, the merits of carrying bags of semi-static canyon line and waterproof static line (the latter requiring floats as it's not buoyant) have been demonstrated to me numerous times, and I'd seriously consider taking one if I was going to be somewhere where a pin in a remote location was likely.