Breaking Rules
Published July 31, 2012 | 
Last night a friend and I were out floating on the local lake when we started noticing clouds building to the north. It wasn’t long before the heads starting topping out and lightning began to shoot down to the ground. Of course that means it’s time to get off the water. No questions asked.. Well, yeah, but… The clouds were moving west to east and staying north. They were at least 10 to 15 miles off. Well, we decided to stay out on the water and watch the lightning.. Now I know what some people would say about that… but I’ve never believed in rules for rules sake. Sometimes it’s all about judgement. Sometimes it’s all about measured risk. Yeah, we probably should have rushed to shore.. but wow, those moments on the water last night were all about living. Beautiful.
8 Responses to Breaking Rules
Leave a Reply
YES:}
10-15 miles off seems like time enough if you’ve got an idea how long it would take to get to shore… we had a near identical situation come up during a night paddle on a lake in western MI – during a symposium. We had 6 – 8 lightning strikes in the distance followed in pretty close order by thunder, but not *real* close. We were the only boats of any kind on the lake except for one motor craft which passed us (no problems, we had white lights aplenty and the boat had its lights on, too)
We had a divergence of opinions… two ppl didn’t think the storm would pass over the lake & kept paddling, separating from the rest of the group.
One person thought we should bolt for the take out by going clear across the lake & that was quickly voted down.The person elected to stay w. us while we figured out what to do.
A third group (all five of us) listened to our weather radios, looked at the sky, and made for a sandy shoreline where there were no tall trees nearby. We were wet though and we should have gotten out of our boats and sat on our pfds, is what I was told later. Makes sense as an insulator. We waited about 15 minutes.
As it turned out the two who left the group were right.. the storm did not pass over our part of the lake…but it rained like hell w. lightning and thunder just as our boats touched shore about 20 minutes after theirs. I acknowledge their right to decide for themselves but question the overall merit of splitting up the group, esp. since this was a symposium event… p.s. we had no instructors w. us and one of the trip leaders was part of the duo that separated themselves. The other trip leader served as sweep and she was part of the group which elected to go to shore briefly.
Thoughts anyone?
Thunder closely following lightening usually means the lightening is fairly close. Was any one in your group aware of counting flash to bang time? It can give you a good idea of how far away the lightening strike was.
I have read of kneeling on a PFD in a crouched over position when in an area where lightening is striking. Having been in a situation where 38 people were lightening strike victims in one afternoon I doubt seriously if a wet PFD would provide much protection. In my opinion its a waste of time.
Given the make up and circumstances the group should not have fragmented as described. Again from the earlier mentioned experience I do think the group should have spread out enough that only one person might be a lightening strike victim as opposed to having multiple casualties. Even though spread out there should still be sufficient contact so aid can be rendered if necessary.
There was discussion about the time between lightening and thunder, but no one had the exact calculation. I recall vaguely from a childhood on the Jersey coast that a two second interval meant it was close enough to get exciting.
I was one of the ppl who voted to go to shore, one of those who spoke up strongly against an open water trek of about 25 minutes across the lake to the put in. I found the sandy shallow cove based on a previous paddle. I am OK with my contributions.
when two ppl want to separate themselves from the group and head off on their own there’s not much to be done about. Both individuals are very strong willed and happen to be very fast paddlers who were separating from the group all night . IMO a poor decision to separate. Those group dynamics again.
Haven’t been convinced one way or the other about the usefulness of the wet pfd as insulation against lightening strike. When I asked a few instructors about it the next day (just some one on one convo, for “lessons learned”) 2 out of 3 of them mentioned using the pfd in that way.
Hear you about spreading out the group, but we were shore skirting an inland lake and it was easy to land. Open water and prolonged exposure would entail a different strategy.
Flash to bang time distance is very close to 1/5 of a mile per second, one one mile for every five seconds. In my opinion going to shore was the correct move and then the group should have dispersed enough to avoid multiple casualties but close enough to be aware of any casualties so aid can be rendered as quickly as possible.
Definitely agree with you that when someone wants to break the group there is nothing that can be done about it.
Having been an instructor in a different water activity, the instructors you talked to were most likely repeating what they had been taught to say. My view is that if you are on a wet PFD which is on the wet ground and you are wet from rain and then are either hit directly or indirectly by lightening you will be a casualty. The PFD will not protect you. As you probably already know not all lightening strikes are fatal. The injuries can be anything from quite minor to fatal. Most minor injuries seem to be burns, which are small on the skin surface but can be quite serious on the inside from the electricity passing through the body. Other injuries are based on the bodies own electrical system. Cardiac arrest, dysrythmias, and disruption of brain function. One of the 38 people I mentioned earlier became waxy catatonic instantly after he was indirectly hit.
I really like the isolated or localized nature of the two storms in this photo. Two essentially violent events juxtaposed against a “sea” of tranquility.
Absolutely not related to your article:
)
I noticed that when you click on “Blog” in the menu, the last article shown dates from March and makes your site look like it has not been updated since. Which is not true of course.
Yet it is a trifle confusing as I don’t quite get the logic behind it all.
Great meaningful content otherwise and I like the style, the introspection.
One of these days you should write a novel.
( The old kayak and the sea, something like that
Storms on the lake are the best. I often go down to Lake Michigan and watch the big storms come in. From shore though.