Drowning in simple-mindedness

Every accidental death raises the same simple-minded cry

by Andrew Coyne on Wednesday, August 19, 2009 5:00pm - 46 Comments

Drowning in a sea of simple-mindednessIn a typical year, somewhere around 450 Canadians will die by drowning. As it happened, in the first week of August this year, eight Canadians drowned—about the number one would expect in any given week, except that, on this particular week, all the victims met their end in Ontario. Or more precisely, within the catchment area of the Toronto Star.

In an instant, an entirely probable series of tragic accidents was transformed into an epidemic, with a single cause and a universal remedy. “Drownings prompt calls to reform boating laws,” the paper’s front page headline blared. “A shocking spate of drownings on Ontario’s lakes and rivers,” the story reported, “has officials demanding all boaters be required to wear life jackets.”

Of course, the drownings themselves “prompted” no such demands. The prompting was all the Star’s. Moreover, as the story airily conceded, “not all these deaths involved boats.” No, indeed. Three of the dead drowned while cliff-jumping at Moon River Falls. Two more died trying to save a little girl down the river at Bala Falls. Note the addresses.

Of the three boating deaths, one involved a tunnel-hull speedboat that, as the same story reported, “was travelling at high speed when it cartwheeled end over end.” The driver died in hospital. The second was at least a drowning: the victim, whose dinghy capsized, was reportedly a non-swimmer. The third was a man, also a weak swimmer, who went canoeing with a friend sometime after midnight. Again, I’ll quote the Star story: “Police believe alcohol was involved.”

To most readers, the lessons to be drawn from this catalogue of misfortune might be apparent. Don’t jump into waterfalls. Don’t go sailing if you can’t swim. Don’t get into a canoe drunk after dark. To the Star, the only appropriate response is federal legislation requiring all of Canada’s estimated 10 million boaters to wear a life jacket at all times.

The Star’s leap to judgment is all the more bizarre when you look at the broader picture. Contrary to the story’s premise, Canada’s lakes and rivers have not suddenly turned into foaming maelstroms of death. According to figures compiled by the Lifesaving Society, the number of drownings nationwide has been falling steadily for the past two decades: from 683 in 1990 to 433 in 2004 (though it spiked back to 492 in 2005, the last year for which it has figures). For all we know, 2009 may come in lower still.

About one-third of drowning victims each year are boaters. Of these, 12 per cent or more go to their watery graves wearing their life jackets. So we are looking at 120 or so deaths a year that could conceivably be prevented by such a law. But drill further into the data, and other risk factors come into view.

According to the Lifesaving Society, 60 per cent of boating drownings occur in water that is colder than 10° C. Where the victim’s swimming ability is known, two-thirds are listed as weak or non-swimmers. At least a third of the time, alcohol is involved.

Even allowing for some overlap in these figures, that suggests the number of preventable drownings among what I’d guess is the vast majority of the boating population—sober, warm-weather swimmers—is somewhere south of 40: about the same number of people, literally, that drown every year in the bathtub.

Presumably the Star does not want a law requiring us to wear a life jacket in the bath. Yet it’s not clear the risk of drowning is any greater for the millions of boaters it would forcibly clap in synthetic foam. Even if we include the drunken non-swimmers who go boating in winter, it’s about one in 70,000.

Bookmark and Share
  • G Andersson

    A guy just drowned (sp?) in the Fraser River a couple weeks ago. He and his buddy were refueling their outboard equipped boat. They had forgotten to put it into neutral and when they restarted the engine, the one of them was thrown out of the the boat because the steering wheel was positioned far off centre. He apparently banged his head on the way overboard and because he was not wearing a life jacket, he was not able to keep himself afloat by swimming i.e. he was unconscious. If he had been wearing his life jacket, there at least would have been a chance for his buddy to pull him back into the boat. I don't like the compulsory operator's licensing but it might do some good. If people weren't so stupid/ignorant to start with then we probably wouldn't need these intrusive laws.

  • Ken N

    We're avid sailors with a small but sturdy small cruising boat that we do the occasional weekend in. The boat has more than the required safety equipment for her size, and we've both completed sailing courses and can do our Man Overboard drills. We do wear our PFDs when in challenging conditions, but we also enjoy just being in T-shirt and shorts when doing a gentle sail in a sheltered bay, or just sitting at anchor.

    I'm in favour of mandatory PFD use for children, but i do not think it's the magic bullet for adults. I'm mainly against making PDF use mandatory for adults because it avoids the main problem of boater education and responsibility. Educated boaters are more likely to act prudently, including the wearing of PFDs. For the same reason, I am actually in favour of requiring the boating card, because it (theoretically) means the holder has had to think about responsible boating, at least for long enough to pass the test. If the government is really serious about safety, a first offense for not having the operator card should result in mandatory attendance at a boating safety course, instead of a fine.

    In a similar move, mandatory helmets for all cyclists is being discussed in Toronto, as if helmets will make up for the lack of public education, or insufficient car/bike infrastructure.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

    Great article, especially the final line. Reminds me of the gun control debate that crops up every time someone gets shot with an already-illegal weapon.

    On a (doubly) related note: here's to the day when government bureaucracy is small enough that we can drown it in a bathtub (apologies to Norquist).

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

    Great piece, Andrew. Loved the last line.

    By the way, does Canada really have eight million power boat users? That's more than the combined vote total for the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc Québécois in the last election.

  • Anon

    Gush and treacle.

  • Dot

    I know who the Okanagan Lake jet skiers supported. Of course, the remaining 7.999 million didn't.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DZulu Dave Z.

    At approximately 7.5 million votes, I don't think the aforementioned parties are doing that bad collectively. Mind you, if it meant fewer BQ votes, I could suffer that number to decrease.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

    I know. I just do it to bug you.

  • Don Bennett

    The only winner in this operator card scam are the self anointed "experts" at the Power Squadron. Again " follow the money". I personally took four Power Squadron courses and passed their examinations, served 12 years in the RCN, have operated small craft for 60 years and am suddenly disqualified from operating a boat because this special interest group can swing legislation in their favour using safety and the public good as an excuse. God protect us from do-gooders!.
    DB, Kingston,ON

From Macleans