- 注册
- 2002-10-07
- 消息
- 402,325
- 荣誉分数
- 76
- 声望点数
- 0
Swimming off some parts of Constance Bay Beach, where a sandbar drops off dramatically into fast-flowing water, can be treacherous. Apparently the locals know this, but it isn’t common knowledge among those from afar who come to relax in the summer. On Saturday, a 10-year-old boy drowned there. “It’s only a matter of time before it happens again,” one resident said.
Why is there no signage to point out where the dangers lie? Here, the buck-passing begins.
The ownership of the beach is, the city says, complicated (as of this writing city officials had not responded to our requests for specific information). There are public beaches nearby (though it’s not clear what “public” means), with amenities such as toilets, though there are no lifeguards. Residents have said the section where the boy drowned – after his older brother heroically tried to rescue him – was in waters off of a private beach.
From a public safety perspective, who cares where he entered the water?
The point is, there is public access to the water from roadways, private lands and public beach areas. Though a city legal opinion from 2010 concluded that a portion of the beachfront was privately owned, people have treated all the land as a community beach.
If the public is known to frequent the area, believing it all to be general beachfront, it seems logical the city should inform people of any potential dangers. At one time, in fact, there was a sign – a generic one, mind you – warning parents to watch their kids, says West Carleton-March Coun. Eli El-Chantiry.
The city should fork over the cash – even if it doesn’t own the beach – for signage. Ultimately, the human costs of an accident at an unmarked beach fall back on the taxpayer anyway. In this case, the low cost of prevention makes more sense than the public cost of a rescue or recovery operation. If the city balks, the community association should start a GoFundMe campaign. The nearby property owners could pitch in a bit. Any lover of a good swim on a hot day could contribute too.
Not all tragedy can be prevented, nor do we imply that accidents are the government’s fault. People – often children – do swim in waters they are unfamiliar with, regardless of whether or not there’s a sign to inform them of any specific risks. And we all want the Ottawa River to be as accessible as possible; on the same weekend the little boy died, scores participated in the annual Riverkeeper’s Swim.
But it shouldn’t take a tragedy to have people thinking about basic safety tools: signage, maybe a life buoy station or rescue pole, to-boot.
查看原文...
Why is there no signage to point out where the dangers lie? Here, the buck-passing begins.
The ownership of the beach is, the city says, complicated (as of this writing city officials had not responded to our requests for specific information). There are public beaches nearby (though it’s not clear what “public” means), with amenities such as toilets, though there are no lifeguards. Residents have said the section where the boy drowned – after his older brother heroically tried to rescue him – was in waters off of a private beach.
From a public safety perspective, who cares where he entered the water?
The point is, there is public access to the water from roadways, private lands and public beach areas. Though a city legal opinion from 2010 concluded that a portion of the beachfront was privately owned, people have treated all the land as a community beach.
If the public is known to frequent the area, believing it all to be general beachfront, it seems logical the city should inform people of any potential dangers. At one time, in fact, there was a sign – a generic one, mind you – warning parents to watch their kids, says West Carleton-March Coun. Eli El-Chantiry.
The city should fork over the cash – even if it doesn’t own the beach – for signage. Ultimately, the human costs of an accident at an unmarked beach fall back on the taxpayer anyway. In this case, the low cost of prevention makes more sense than the public cost of a rescue or recovery operation. If the city balks, the community association should start a GoFundMe campaign. The nearby property owners could pitch in a bit. Any lover of a good swim on a hot day could contribute too.
Not all tragedy can be prevented, nor do we imply that accidents are the government’s fault. People – often children – do swim in waters they are unfamiliar with, regardless of whether or not there’s a sign to inform them of any specific risks. And we all want the Ottawa River to be as accessible as possible; on the same weekend the little boy died, scores participated in the annual Riverkeeper’s Swim.
But it shouldn’t take a tragedy to have people thinking about basic safety tools: signage, maybe a life buoy station or rescue pole, to-boot.
查看原文...
