Drinking and boating

[alan_fincher]

So what is the level of acceptable alcohol or beers when navigating, operating swing bridges, locks etc on say the GU or the Oxford

 

Well everybody's view on this will no doubt differ, but if there is a legal level of alcohol in the blood below which it is considered acceptable to drive a motor vehicle on the roads, I can't think of any great reason why it is less acceptable when navigating a canal boat.

 

I realise that some people who have reached that limit may be salowe down moe, or have their judgement more affected than others reaching the same limit, and I wouldn't claim most people are as safe or aware as they might have been if they had not drunk at all.

 

However I would think in the vast majority of cases it is no greater danger to be at the tiller than at the wheel of the car, so if the latter is accepted, why on earth should the former not be.

 

Generally myself I will not do it by habit, but have certainly been known to have a pint when passing down past the Admiral Nelson on a particularly scorching day, and long may that possibility continue!

 

 

Geo can correct me if I am wrong but I suspect that the bad outcomes he refers to are the ones from the stories he could tell, not about alcohol and driving etc as a whole.

 

Howard

 

I wonder how many he can tell about outcomes for people at the tiller of a canal boat who have consumed less than the legal limits for driving a car though? Not many, I suspect!

[rasputin]

Having an overactive brain the size of a planet, getting mildly drunk enables me to speak and think more clearly. drinking coffee turns me into a jabbering idiot.

 

One of the things I love about boating is alcohol.

[Mike Todd]

Sorry but this a rather 'holier than though' statement.

 

Hurtling along the M1 is a rather different scenario than pootling along the North Oxford at walking pace.

 

Any consequences of having a couple of glasses of wine are much more likely to impact on the person enjoying a glass of Merlot in the late evening sun than they are on anybody else.

The speed (or lack of it) is one of the factors that can lead the unwary or inexperienced into difficulty. The more important measurement is the amount of momentum being carried. As a result not only is there a lot of energy to be dissipated on impact but the normal methods for stopping take much more time than is sometimes expected.

 

Also, the leisurely pace can be deceptive when things go awry. As most of the boaters who end up on the cill discover, in a panic time evaporates in a twinkling. As a result the chance to think through a solution is lost. What might seem obvious in the cool light of day - or at least when one is not a victim - can be elusive at the time.

 

But that is what boating is all about and just something to come to terms with.

 

However, the relevance in this thread is that even modest amounts of alcohol (which at the right time I enjoy as much as anyone!) provably diminish both aspects of the above: it impacts reaction times so that the time left to do something is seriously reduced and also it can effect judgement (as many a student has discovered!) so that the 'obvious' solution is missed.

 

For me there is every reason to treat being in charge of a canal boat as seriously as for a car. The relatively low frequency of incidents reflects the much lower levels of activity rather than lower risk. Manufacturers of cars have progressively made cars much safer in an accident and road designers seek to remove the more obvious traps. That cannot be said of canals - except perhaps for the somewhat controversial extra lock bollards and ratchet pawl restricters!

[Mike Todd]

To drink or not to drink? Context and moderation must come into it somewhere. After a large and late shot fuelled Friday night responsible folks should be nowhere near a car all next day, but after two pints of regular beer Friday teatime the head will be perfectly clear to drive down the motorway long before breakfast time. Same on the water, if someone is absolutely hammered they shouldn't be moving any kind of craft, be it dinghy, narrowboat or supertanker. Excessive drunkenness and the water can far too easily become a lethal combination.

 

Helming a small boat and having a couple of alcoholic refreshers can be combined responsibly, given benign conditions, and the taste of a favourite cool beverage can often add to the pleasure of an afternoon's cruising. Moving slowly along a well known and lock free length of canal on a well known boat is not going to be more dangerous after two small glasses of regular lager or vino. Half a dozen Navvy's Nightcap however would be a different story and the ropes should remain firmly tied. Where conditions are less favourable I personally wouldn't think any alcohol would be wise eg: if it was an unknown boat, the water's fast or lumpy or there are additional hazards like locks.

Apart from stretches such as the Fossdyke and some other Middle Levels, I am not aware of any parts of the main canal system where potential danger does not lurk around almost every corner.

 

Bridges often come with minimal sightlines, reduced by overhanging vegetation is many unexpected places. Suddenly seeing a boat coming the other way and unwilling or unable to stop requires pretty fast reactions and sensible judgments. We have rarely had an impact in that situation but more often because we stopped faster than the other boat. Earlier this year we had one rare such impact from a boat whose steerer reacted slowly and inadequately - we were less than stationary (ie going backwards) by the time he hit us head on, fortunately our reaction reduced the effect to a minimal level but if both boaters had been equally tardy their would have been a somewhat disconcerting event. Some people do steer (as some who drive) in the expectation that the other boat will dig them out of trouble.

 

This simply isn't true though is it? In 99.99 (something) percent of cases of moderate consumption, even if you acknowledge it does impede reaction times), it does not end up badly for anybody or anything.

 

I'm not making the case one way or the other, but a suggestion it will always have a bad outcome is clearly overdramatising things, and I would say unhelpful to the debate.

 

In all the recent canal based mishaps I personally have witnessed alcohol has played no part in any of them, AFAIK. Please can we keep a sense of proportion?

Quite right but what would be more accurate is to say that it always increases the risk.

[mross]

http://www.nhtsa.gov/reports/HS810761/pages/2Method.html

 

This is for motorcycle accidents. It shows that low levels of alcohol in the blood do NOT increase risk. This is why the UK government will not lower the limit for drivers. This is sensible and proportionate. If you want to remove all risk then you should not talk to others when steering; you should not use a mobile phone or VHF radio; you should not steer when tired, hungry, hot, thirsty - as all of these may affect your concentration and reaction times to SOME extent. Moderate consumption of alcohol is not sinful!

Edited September 6, 2016 by mross

[frangar]

Well at least this thread has meant I know who I would be more willing to share a lock with!

 

Cheers

 

Gareth.

[Chertsey]

Apart from stretches such as the Fossdyke and some other Middle Levels, I am not aware of any parts of the main canal system where potential danger does not lurk around almost every corner.

 

Bridges often come with minimal sightlines, reduced by overhanging vegetation is many unexpected places. Suddenly seeing a boat coming the other way and unwilling or unable to stop requires pretty fast reactions and sensible judgments. We have rarely had an impact in that situation but more often because we stopped faster than the other boat. Earlier this year we had one rare such impact from a boat whose steerer reacted slowly and inadequately - we were less than stationary (ie going backwards) by the time he hit us head on, fortunately our reaction reduced the effect to a minimal level but if both boaters had been equally tardy their would have been a somewhat disconcerting event. Some people do steer (as some who drive) in the expectation that the other boat will dig them out of trouble.

My goodness, perhaps you should just stay at home if it is that dangerous.

 

By the way. a large number of collisions in the circumstances you describe are CAUSED by people trying to stop. In many cases much the safest thing to do is to keep going AND STEER. As soon as you try to stop you will nearly always to some degree swing across the canal and present a bigget target.

 

Also even when there is a collision there is rarely serious damage and hardle ever injury (never, I would venture to suggest, simply as the result of a collision, but when people are hurt is is because of doing foolish things like standing where you can fall off or trying to fend off with your body).

[Bettie Boo]

In my experience (as a mental health worker) drug users of many kinds live in denial of the damage they do, to themselves and others. Those who have escaped catastrophe deny that it could happen. There is a loss of objectivity, which leaves only a blinkered view of their lives. This is as true of alcohol as it is of tobacco and any number of illegal drugs.

In the end it is only public campaign and ultimately legislation that protects the rest of society and preserves its right to be safe from the less mindful. But taking sweets away from children will certainly make them cry 'unfair!', so this is to be expected.

 

Accusing critics of being patronising or hypocritical is ok for teenagers, but just sounds silly from adults. Address the issue, instead.

 

Habitual drinkers are not my choice of company, any more than smokers. So I try not to let either spoil my enjoyment of boating, or anything else. I do confess that I find a lovely hot cup of tea both as irresistible as it is refreshing. I am aware of the dangers of caffeine highs, but I wonder if tea has ever been blamed for society's ills. I once scalded my hand on an over-zealous teapot.

 

ah, least you forget the Boston Tea Party?

 

 

 

 

My drinking habits have changed quite a bit in the last 5 years mostly due to the medications I need to take; I'll still have the odd glass or two of vino or a large Pimms on a hot summers day, and yes it wouldn't bother me to have either a Pimms or glass of wine when in charge of the tiller but I can count on one hand the amount of times I have over the past 3 years. If I'm doing the locks I won't partake in anything as I do have turns of poor balance / lightheadedness.

 

Dave will have a couple of cans of beer or cider while at the tiller but normally no more until we are moored up for the day.

[The Lockie]

Having an overactive brain the size of a planet, getting mildly drunk enables me to speak and think more clearly. drinking coffee turns me into a jabbering idiot.

 

One of the things I love about boating is alcohol.

Did you post this after a cup of coffee

[rasputin]

Did you post this after a cup of coffee

 

No, but it was done sober.

[churchward]

 

ah, least you forget the Boston Tea Party?

 

Alex Harvey told me all about that!

 

[frahkn]

In my experience (as a mental health worker) drug users of many kinds live in denial of the damage they do, to themselves and others. Those who have escaped catastrophe deny that it could happen. There is a loss of objectivity, which leaves only a blinkered view of their lives. This is as true of alcohol as it is of tobacco and any number of illegal drugs.

In the end it is only public campaign and ultimately legislation that protects the rest of society and preserves its right to be safe from the less mindful. But taking sweets away from children will certainly make them cry 'unfair!', so this is to be expected.

 

Accusing critics of being patronising or hypocritical is ok for teenagers, but just sounds silly from adults. Address the issue, instead.

 

Habitual drinkers are not my choice of company, any more than smokers. So I try not to let either spoil my enjoyment of boating, or anything else. I do confess that I find a lovely hot cup of tea both as irresistible as it is refreshing. I am aware of the dangers of caffeine highs, but I wonder if tea has ever been blamed for society's ills. I once scalded my hand on an over-zealous teapot.

I may have suffered an objectivity failure but to me, this reflects a rather blinkered view of the situation. I think you may be in denial about the damage to your hand.

[IanD]

The risks of drinking while driving and boating are fundamentally different. In a car reaction times have a big effect and a crash at 70mph is very likely to kill somebody, often somebody apart from the drinker. The same does not apply to a narrowboat travelling at 3mph, a fraction of a second longer reaction delay makes zero difference in most cases.

 

The other main causes of road accidents due to drink include increased risk-taking due to overconfidence ("it'll definitely go through that gap") or showing off/stupidity ("look what I can do") and it's difficult to see how either of these transfers directly to a narrowboat, at least in older people -- and where they do, it would probably be much better to ban inexperienced young single-sex day boat hirers, who anyway are perfectly capable of doing all the above sober. Though it has to be said, drink encourages such behaviour.

 

I'd guess that steering a narrowboat drunk isn't that more dangerous than crossing the road drunk -- or maybe less so given car speeds and drivers running red lights -- and nobody suggests that pedestrians should have a legal blood alcohol limit, though they can be arrested for being drunk and disorderly or causing damage while under the influence.

 

All this is why airline pilots have *very* strict rules on drinking and flying, car drivers and commercial skippers have fairly strict rules, and pedestrians and private boats don't have any (apart from the general laws) -- and given the evidence (as opposed to hearsay or speculation, or extrapolation from one atypical case) this seems to be the correct approach.

[howardang]

The risks of drinking while driving and boating are fundamentally different. In a car reaction times have a big effect and a crash at 70mph is very likely to kill somebody, often somebody apart from the drinker. The same does not apply to a narrowboat travelling at 3mph, a fraction of a second longer reaction delay makes zero difference in most cases.

 

The other main causes of road accidents due to drink include increased risk-taking due to overconfidence ("it'll definitely go through that gap") or showing off/stupidity ("look what I can do") and it's difficult to see how either of these transfers directly to a narrowboat, at least in older people -- and where they do, it would probably be much better to ban inexperienced young single-sex day boat hirers, who anyway are perfectly capable of doing all the above sober. Though it has to be said, drink encourages such behaviour.

 

I'd guess that steering a narrowboat drunk isn't that more dangerous than crossing the road drunk -- or maybe less so given car speeds and drivers running red lights -- and nobody suggests that pedestrians should have a legal blood alcohol limit, though they can be arrested for being drunk and disorderly or causing damage while under the influence.

 

All this is why airline pilots have *very* strict rules on drinking and flying, car drivers and commercial skippers have fairly strict rules, and pedestrians and private boats don't have any (apart from the general laws) -- and given the evidence (as opposed to hearsay or speculation, or extrapolation from one atypical case) this seems to be the correct approach.

 

 

I must challenge your point about young single sex day boat hirers. I am sure many people have seen mixed groups, both young and not so young, who have been a downright menace after they have "celebrated" during their trip. Young, single sex has sometimes little to do with it

 

I would also strongly challenge your statement that "steering a narrow boat drunk isn't that more dangerous than crossing the road drunk" With the potential damage a badly steered narrow boat can do to other boats and bridges/locks and so on, and any potential injury risk both to his/her crew for which the skipper is responsible for their safety, and to innocent observers, I think this is a most irresponsible statement and I hope you didn't really mean it in the way it reads.

 

I personally don't think there is any excuse for being drunk when steering a boat and I would suggest that your insurance company would agree.

 

Howard

[magictime]

http://www.nhtsa.gov/reports/HS810761/pages/2Method.html

 

This is for motorcycle accidents. It shows that low levels of alcohol in the blood do NOT increase risk.

 

I think that's overstating it. That graph has been designed to show how quickly the risk of an accident increases twentyfold, fortyfold, sixtyfold etc. as BAC level rises from .16 or so to .20 and beyond; but if you could zoom in on what looks like a flat line describing a close-to-zero increase in risk as BAC level rises from .00 to .04 to 0.8 and beyond, you wouldn't see no increase in risk - you'd see the risk rising by 25%, then 50%, then 100%, and so on.

 

According to table 1 on the page you link to, the risk of a motorcyclist being involved in an accident has almost tripled by the time his BAC level reaches the current legal limit.

[Geo]

 

This simply isn't true though is it? In 99.99 (something) percent of cases of moderate consumption, even if you acknowledge it does impede reaction times), it does not end up badly for anybody or anything.

 

I'm not making the case one way or the other, but a suggestion it will always have a bad outcome is clearly overdramatising things, and I would say unhelpful to the debate.

 

In all the recent canal based mishaps I personally have witnessed alcohol has played no part in any of them, AFAIK. Please can we keep a sense of proportion?

 

Alan, you surprise me quoting part of the sentence out of context.

You talk about personally witnessed mishaps and state that alcohol played no part in them and end with AFAIK. That is the problem unless someone is tested for alcohol or they are observed drinking it or the physical evidence is there you cannot know either way. I have been astounded the number of times I have seen incidents where alcohol is either out on the cabin top or in their hands.

 

Just two quick incidents

 

Hillmorton Locks on a busy day boats queuing, I was well down the queue and I walked up to help. Part way through a 70 footer or so came steaming into the lock, the helm actually drinking from a can of beer, failed to slow down hit the bottom gate and bounce back down the lock. The helm still had that can in his hand although he had been half pushed on to the boat's roof.

 

On the GU, Wide but blind bend, vegetation, curving to my right. I got a quick glimpse of a boat moving fast coming from the opposite way. I eased off more than normal plenty of room and pull over to the right, blipped the horn to let them know I was there. The boat came round the bend on my side of the channel big bow waves and breaking wash. As he was heading straight for me I went astern. He woke up went hard to starboard and rammed himself up onto the bank. The canal was getting on for 40 foot wide. I stopped and went to help him and the booze hit me when he open his mouth to blame me. Having checked his bows I pulled him off and went on my way. I think he was quite badly bruise where he hit the hatch edge.

 

Both were private boaters, not hirers or bachelor parties just singlehanded boaters. If I include hirers and bachelor parties ...

 

 

Geo can correct me if I am wrong but I suspect that the bad outcomes he refers to are the ones from the stories he could tell, not about alcohol and driving etc as a whole.

 

Howard

 

Thank you, you are correct.

[billS]

 

Hillmorton Locks on a busy day boats queuing, I was well down the queue and I walked up to help. Part way through a 70 footer or so came steaming into the lock, the helm actually drinking from a can of beer, failed to slow down hit the bottom gate and bounce back down the lock. The helm still had that can in his hand although he had been half pushed on to the boat's roof.

 

 

That's just poor planning. If he wanted to hang onto the can, he could have let the tiller go once the boat had entered the lock, and then used that hand to put the throttle in reverse.

[Geo]

 

Well everybody's view on this will no doubt differ, but if there is a legal level of alcohol in the blood below which it is considered acceptable to drive a motor vehicle on the roads, I can't think of any great reason why it is less acceptable when navigating a canal boat.

 

I realise that some people who have reached that limit may be salowe down moe, or have their judgement more affected than others reaching the same limit, and I wouldn't claim most people are as safe or aware as they might have been if they had not drunk at all.

 

However I would think in the vast majority of cases it is no greater danger to be at the tiller than at the wheel of the car, so if the latter is accepted, why on earth should the former not be.

 

Generally myself I will not do it by habit, but have certainly been known to have a pint when passing down past the Admiral Nelson on a particularly scorching day, and long may that possibility continue!

 

I wonder how many he can tell about outcomes for people at the tiller of a canal boat who have consumed less than the legal limits for driving a car though? Not many, I suspect!

 

So you would suggest no more beer that would put the helm over the driving alcohol limit.

 

Sitting here I can think of 8 or 9 canal incidents which I believe were linked to alcohol, 2 above.

[Ray T]

This thread needs a cultural interlude........

 

 

or

 

 

Edited September 6, 2016 by Ray T

[Geo]

This thread needs a cultural interlude........

 

 

or

 

 

 

Thank you Ray

[DrRD211]

 

I think that's overstating it. That graph has been designed to show how quickly the risk of an accident increases twentyfold, fortyfold, sixtyfold etc. as BAC level rises from .16 or so to .20 and beyond; but if you could zoom in on what looks like a flat line describing a close-to-zero increase in risk as BAC level rises from .00 to .04 to 0.8 and beyond, you wouldn't see no increase in risk - you'd see the risk rising by 25%, then 50%, then 100%, and so on.

 

According to table 1 on the page you link to, the risk of a motorcyclist being involved in an accident has almost tripled by the time his BAC level reaches the current legal limit.

[Captain Pegg]

Ironically when I boated through the evening into the night in pouring rain a couple of weeks ago I took a sip or three from my hip flask while mitigating some of the potential consequences of any impending accident by wearing a life jacket. It's not uncommon for me to do this when single handing and in that case the combination of darkness, rain and tunnels were a factor.

 

The approach to risk is a very individual and often illogical thing which makes we wonder if those who espouse total abstention while on the move would also suggest the wearing of life jackets.

 

JP

[magictime]

Ironically when I boated through the evening into the night in pouring rain a couple of weeks ago I took a sip or three from my hip flask while mitigating some of the potential consequences of any impending accident by wearing a life jacket. It's not uncommon for me to do this when single handing and in that case the combination of darkness, rain and tunnels were a factor.

 

The approach to risk is a very individual and often illogical thing which makes we wonder if those who espouse total abstention while on the move would also suggest the wearing of life jackets.

 

JP

 

Fair point. I think we probably all should be wearing lifejackets, really - better safe than sorry and all that - but I never have (except on rivers). As you say, not terribly logical.

[Chertsey]

 

I would also strongly challenge your statement that "steering a narrow boat drunk isn't that more dangerous than crossing the road drunk" With the potential damage a badly steered narrow boat can do to other boats and bridges/locks and so on, and any potential injury risk both to his/her crew for which the skipper is responsible for their safety, and to innocent observers, I think this is a most irresponsible statement and I hope you didn't really mean it in the way it reads.

 

I would challenge that statement too. Crossing the road drunk is MUCH more dangerous.

 

Please give an example of a badly steered narrow boat causing injury to innocent observers.

There are dangers associated with canal boating, but the melodramatic focus and language here does nothing to highlight or mitigate them. Why do people feel the need to be so melodramatic?

Fair point. I think we probably all should be wearing lifejackets, really - better safe than sorry and all that - but I never have (except on rivers). As you say, not terribly logical.

My fellow travellers all donned life jackets for the tidal stretch of the Thames - then took them off at Teddington. I did point out that the non-tidal water was just as deep and wet...

[Guest]

Apart from stretches such as the Fossdyke and some other Middle Levels, I am not aware of any parts of the main canal system where potential danger does not lurk around almost every corner.

 

Bridges often come with minimal sightlines, reduced by overhanging vegetation is many unexpected places. Suddenly seeing a boat coming the other way and unwilling or unable to stop requires pretty fast reactions and sensible judgments. We have rarely had an impact in that situation but more often because we stopped faster than the other boat. Earlier this year we had one rare such impact from a boat whose steerer reacted slowly and inadequately - we were less than stationary (ie going backwards) by the time he hit us head on, fortunately our reaction reduced the effect to a minimal level but if both boaters had been equally tardy their would have been a somewhat disconcerting event. Some people do steer (as some who drive) in the expectation that the other boat will dig them out of trouble.

 

Quite right but what would be more accurate is to say that it always increases the risk.

Thanks for the insite into the inherent dangers of boating on the UK waterways, I clearly was not aware of all this horrible catastrophe events that could have befallen me when we're boat owners.

 

Probably a good idea we adopted the clearly much safer leisure pursuit of caravaning.