NationStates Jolt Archive

Quick background to this story: Last week in NZ a group of students from a High School were on a camping trip. They were off tramping and went to ford a river. Unknown to them, a recent downpour further up the river led to it being very swollen and caused a flash flood. A wall of water came down and hit them. They were swept away and 7, including the teacher drowned.
Then this report comes out:
Teacher tied himself to disabled teen in bid to save him

Teacher Tony McClean, one of the seven to die in the Mangatepopo River tragedy, tied himself to one of the students, a disabled boy, in a bid to save him.
Braced on a ledge in the swollen Mangatepopo River, McClean tied himself to the last teenager left to enter the water and they let go.
The selfless bid to try to save the life of cerebral palsy sufferer Tom Hsu, 16, has prompted many to call the 29-year-old a hero.

...

"He (Tom) can't speak properly and his hands are no good, but his legs go all right," said Mr McClean snr.

...

Mr McClean snr said his son's body was witness to his struggle to save his own life and Tom's.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10505045

Which, on first impression, makes one think what an admirable, selfless act.
However, on further reflection, I do have to stop and think, "Was it really such a great, noble act? Or was it a really dumb thing to do?"
He must have known that they would both drown. Let's face it, even a top Olympic swimmer couldn't make it out of a flash flood with a crippled boy tied to him. Heroics is one thing, but when faced with the options of saving yourself and letting the other person die, or staying with that other person and both of you dying, then it's not much of a choice surely.

What do you lot thunk?

I'm thinking that not doing a solid check of the potential for flash floods if you're going to camp in a place that's prone to them makes him irresponsible. I think "idiot" is going a bit far. The tying the CP kid to him was a noble thought, but also ill-advised. All a rope link between two floating bodies in a torrent is increase the likelihood of snags.

i think its heroic to make the effort to save that kid even if it did doom him. lots of heroic actions are "stupid." maybe most are. if it were easy and safe he wouldnt be a hero.

In a situation like that, I highly doubt anyone had time to stop and think "Hmm, what's the best way to deal with this?" Given that he was already in a high-stress situation, he probably had less than a split second to think, and this was the best he could come up with. Besides, in a situation like that, I'm pretty sure any option that could seem to have a "we both survive" oucome would seem like a good one when you don't have time to consider other options.

Considering the situation thusly, I would be more inclined to say it was heroic.

I'd say it is far more heroic to try and save a life, even at the risk of your own, than to stand by (or float by in this case) and not try.

That, and the guy was a teacher and the kid his student, he probably felt very responsible for him.

Okay, good points. But when have you ever in your life seen anyone attempting a water rescue tie a rope to the victim? Again, not dismissing the nobility and self-sacrifice of the man in question.

His actions were noble yes, but also incredibly stupid. Also he didn't manage to achieve anything apart from getting himself and someone else killed, and I'm not likely to grant him the status of hero for that.

Yes.

Okay, good points. But when have you ever in your life seen anyone attempting a water rescue tie a rope to the victim? Again, not dismissing the nobility and self-sacrifice of the man in question.
The problem with that question being was the teacher trained to perform a water rescue? It's hard to hold him up to a standard that he might not have been trained to make in the first place.

heros are always idiots... though many idiots are not heros

both?

Bit of pirates of the carribean i think is in order.
"Your're MAD!!"
"If I wasn't, this would probably never work."

I'd say it is far more heroic to try and save a life, even at the risk of your own, than to stand by (or float by in this case) and not try.

I had a somewhat humorous mental image of two people being swept down a river; one of them is obviously drowning, the other is just floating along and thinking, "Sucks to be you."

Absolute idiot, if I understand the story correctly.

McClean tied himself to the last teenager left to enter the water and they let go.

While on the ledge, Mr McClean encouraged the students with prayers and talk of hot showers before sending them off to swim downstream to the waiting instructor.

As I understand it from the article, they were in safety and jumped into a flash flooding river. That is suicidal idiocy.

As I understand it from the article, they were in safety and jumped into a flash flooding river. That is suicidal idiocy.

A flash flooding river in above a dam. You left off the part about the dam.
The article isn't clear (nor are any of the others) but I get the impression that most of the students were already in the water when the flooding started.

I had a somewhat humorous mental image of two people being swept down a river; one of them is obviously drowning, the other is just floating along and thinking, "Sucks to be you."

"Something's clawing at my leg! … Okay, it stopped."

A flash flooding river in above a dam. You left off the part about the dam.
The article isn't clear (nor are any of the others) but I get the impression that most of the students were already in the water when the flooding started.


No, I didn't particularly leave that out, as I thought it wasn't germaine. From what I gather from the article, the students were in a relatively safe place (on a ledge out of the water) and the teacher urged them into a very dangerous situation (into the flood waters), in which he died along with several of the students. Yes, there may be extenuating circumstances, but such circumstances were not enumerated. We have at the moment, the circumstances pointed out above - a teacher encouraging students, and possibly forcing a disabled student, to leave a situation of apparant safety into a deadly situation. There may be circumstances not presented, but going by what information I've seen, he was an idiot.

i personally would have titled this thread... "Psychotic Cultist sacrifices 7 teens and self on Sects Survivalist Training Ordeal"... then again people have accused me of being a troll.

No, I didn't particularly leave that out, as I thought it wasn't germaine.

Dams are freakin' dangerous.

rest of post

None of the articles clearly specify where they were or what danger they were in before entering the water. It's almost as though they specifically do not specify. That article mentions a ledge (that was about to be flooded? Who knows?), another makes it sound as though they were already in the water…
At any rate, jumping into a flooding river, especially above a dam, is one of the dumbest things someone can do involving water. I'm just naïvely giving these people the benefit of the doubt.

Dams are freakin' dangerous.

Yes, I know this. And that makes the decision to enter the water more intelligent how?

None of the articles clearly specify where they were or what danger they were in before entering the water. It's almost as though they specifically do not specify. That article mentions a ledge (that was about to be flooded? Who knows?), another makes it sound as though they were already in the water…
At any rate, jumping into a flooding river, especially above a dam, is one of the dumbest things someone can do involving water. I'm just naïvely giving these people the benefit of the doubt.

Bolded equals bingo. As I said above, as far as can be seen from what's in the article, they left a safe spot to do what you yourself call "one of the dumbest things someone can do involving water", or as I worded it "suicidal idiocy". We seem to be in agreement.

Yes, I know this. And that makes the decision to enter the water more intelligent how?

It doesn't. It makes it even more stupid. "Keep away from dams" is up there with "look both ways before you cross" and "don't play in the tiger pit".

Bolded equals bingo. As I said above, as far as can be seen from what's in the article, they left a safe spot to do what you yourself call "one of the dumbest things someone can do involving water", or as I worded it "suicidal idiocy". We seem to be in agreement.

Yeah. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying the article isn't clear. The article is almost deliberately unclear.

It doesn't… :confused:

Exactly so.

Yeah. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying the article isn't clear. The article is almost deliberately unclear.

Again, exactly so. There may have been some extenuating circumstances, but from what we know, he appears to have been a suicidial (or even murderous) idiot.

There is a mention of where they were in relation to the river. Second paragraph of the story:

"Braced on a ledge in the swollen Mangatepopo River, McClean tied himself to the last teenager left to enter the water and they let go."

They were fording the river over a rocky ledge, nothing bad about- that just don't get your feet too wet. The fact it was near a dam is no surprise, that's really common around here in Ohio. Your have a flood control dam near where there's a rocky narrowing of the river. Crossing the stones within sight of a dam is no big deal. I don't know about NZ, but rivers with dams usually hve floats and a line above the dam as a last ditch catch before going over.

Then the flash flood caught them out in the crossing. One instructor went downstream first to give people a place to aim for and to help students pull themselves out of the water. That argues they really weren't that close to the dam and not that far out into the river. They just stopped on a rock higher than the rest to see if they could make it back (nope) or forward (nope) so the decided to angle swim for the closest bank. Apparently a couple of the students made it too. Then the flood swept everyone else under and drowned.

So, from what I'm reading, he didn't just tell people to jump in. They were in an obvious flood and even if they froze where they were at they would have been swept away.

As far as trying yourself to someone...the article said the student didn't have good arm control so lacking a rescue harness the instructor tied him off. No way to get that line to the other instructor downstream, so he tied it to himself. If he made it, then the student had a fighting chance...otherwise none. That's my reasoning of it, anyway.

So yeah, a heroic act. They were caught in a situation that may have been avoided, but once in it I can't fault his immediate thinking.

I find myself agreeing with Daistallia...

even if they were on a ledge in the middle of the river, they were safer there then trying to swim across a flooding river.

Remember, a total of 7 died and 5 survived.

They [the article] try to make Tony McClean out to be some sorta outdoorsman type, and thus he SHOULD'VE known not to attempt swimming accross a flooded river.

I would've hunkered down with the kids and try to call for help with the radio I WOULD HAVE ON ME! Especially if a group of kids are with me. a Radio would be very, VERY important and always with me AS WELL AS the other adults.

now the interesting part.

The group of school students were on a canyoning trip down the Mangatepopo River when rising flood waters caused by heavy rain swept six students and Mr McClean to their deaths.
this does not mean that the water pulled them off of the ledge, but that they were moved away with the water. as in they entered the river and were swept away to their deaths.

Mr McClean and Tom were the last to leave the rocky ledge, and were washed over the dam and down the flooded river.
Not island, not crumbling ledge, nothing to indicate that swimming WAS the ONLY option. In fact...

And right then everyone gathered around me, hugged me and prayed. means they had room for people to wait out the flood comfortably and that the ledge was NOT in danger of crumbling away.

No mention anywhere in the article that they were FORDING the river at the time of the flood.

AS a surfer, Tony should've known how deceptively powerful currents can be, as a chaperone, his first priority would've been the safety of the kids. that means NOT encouraging them to swim across a flooding river.

his INTENT may have been heroic, but his actions killed those kids.

Hero or idiot?
Idiot through and through. Why? Because I said so.

Kiddin´.

I wouldn´t do it, as simple as that. I wouldn´t put my life on the line to save people that are, obviously, doing something über stupid.

Can't someone be both a hero and an idiot? Because that is what it looks like to me.

Can't someone be both a hero and an idiot? Because that is what it looks like to me.

Good point. I guess all heroes have an inner idiot. This idiot was the one who prompted them to act all heroical, thus, making them succeed and making them heroes. Yeah.:p

Can't someone be both a hero and an idiot? Because that is what it looks like to me.

Definitely. In fact, one might argue that a true hero has to be somewhat of an idiot, or at least the hero cliche.

"I'm going to let you live."

Of course one could make the case that letting a defeated enemy live isn't stupidity, but morality. And that the hero, knowing the consequences, would make the "stupid" choice because it was the Righttm thing to do and the practical one wasn't.

What were we talking about again?

I find myself agreeing with Daistallia...

even if they were on a ledge in the middle of the river, they were safer there then trying to swim across a flooding river.

Remember, a total of 7 died and 5 survived.

They [the article] try to make Tony McClean out to be some sorta outdoorsman type, and thus he SHOULD'VE known not to attempt swimming accross a flooded river.

I would've hunkered down with the kids and try to call for help with the radio I WOULD HAVE ON ME! Especially if a group of kids are with me. a Radio would be very, VERY important and always with me AS WELL AS the other adults.

now the interesting part.


this does not mean that the water pulled them off of the ledge, but that they were moved away with the water. as in they entered the river and were swept away to their deaths.


Not island, not crumbling ledge, nothing to indicate that swimming WAS the ONLY option. In fact...

means they had room for people to wait out the flood comfortably and that the ledge was NOT in danger of crumbling away.

No mention anywhere in the article that they were FORDING the river at the time of the flood.

AS a surfer, Tony should've known how deceptively powerful currents can be, as a chaperone, his first priority would've been the safety of the kids. that means NOT encouraging them to swim across a flooding river.

his INTENT may have been heroic, but his actions killed those kids.

Pretty much this.

In a situation like that, I highly doubt anyone had time to stop and think "Hmm, what's the best way to deal with this?" Given that he was already in a high-stress situation, he probably had less than a split second to think, and this was the best he could come up with. Besides, in a situation like that, I'm pretty sure any option that could seem to have a "we both survive" oucome would seem like a good one when you don't have time to consider other options.

Considering the situation thusly, I would be more inclined to say it was heroic.

I agree.

Hero or Idiot?<SNIP>
What do you lot thunk?

Both

I find myself agreeing with Daistallia...

even if they were on a ledge in the middle of the river, they were safer there then trying to swim across a flooding river.

Remember, a total of 7 died and 5 survived.

They [the article] try to make Tony McClean out to be some sorta outdoorsman type, and thus he SHOULD'VE known not to attempt swimming accross a flooded river.

I would've hunkered down with the kids and try to call for help with the radio I WOULD HAVE ON ME! Especially if a group of kids are with me. a Radio would be very, VERY important and always with me AS WELL AS the other adults.

now the interesting part.


this does not mean that the water pulled them off of the ledge, but that they were moved away with the water. as in they entered the river and were swept away to their deaths.


Not island, not crumbling ledge, nothing to indicate that swimming WAS the ONLY option. In fact...

means they had room for people to wait out the flood comfortably and that the ledge was NOT in danger of crumbling away.

No mention anywhere in the article that they were FORDING the river at the time of the flood.

AS a surfer, Tony should've known how deceptively powerful currents can be, as a chaperone, his first priority would've been the safety of the kids. that means NOT encouraging them to swim across a flooding river.

his INTENT may have been heroic, but his actions killed those kids.

Ouch. If that is indeed true, he's an idiot. I wonder if any more information will come out about it.

I find myself agreeing with Daistallia...

even if they were on a ledge in the middle of the river, they were safer there then trying to swim across a flooding river.

Remember, a total of 7 died and 5 survived.

They [the article] try to make Tony McClean out to be some sorta outdoorsman type, and thus he SHOULD'VE known not to attempt swimming accross a flooded river.

I would've hunkered down with the kids and try to call for help with the radio I WOULD HAVE ON ME! Especially if a group of kids are with me. a Radio would be very, VERY important and always with me AS WELL AS the other adults.

now the interesting part.


this does not mean that the water pulled them off of the ledge, but that they were moved away with the water. as in they entered the river and were swept away to their deaths.


Not island, not crumbling ledge, nothing to indicate that swimming WAS the ONLY option. In fact...

means they had room for people to wait out the flood comfortably and that the ledge was NOT in danger of crumbling away.

No mention anywhere in the article that they were FORDING the river at the time of the flood.

AS a surfer, Tony should've known how deceptively powerful currents can be, as a chaperone, his first priority would've been the safety of the kids. that means NOT encouraging them to swim across a flooding river.

his INTENT may have been heroic, but his actions killed those kids.

OK, here's a more detailed account. (Note, I'm only quoting the account of the events.)

That morning, the 10 students had been well rested and on a high after tackling the high ropes.

They kitted up with wetsuits, helmets and lifejackets, and walked down to the river.

Accompanied by Mr McClean and a Sir Edmund Hillary Outdoor Pursuits Centre instructor, they climbed up a Genesis Energy dam.

"We went through all these rocks and then we went into this place where there were two cliffs on each side," said Kish.

"The whole group was happy, we were excited - everyone had a good attitude and we were like, 'Yeah, this is just so fun'. Everyone was talking about how fun it was."

With their feet in the water, the teenagers worked their way along the edge of the river, holding on to rocks.

But the torrential rain was bringing a problem.

The outdoor pursuits centre instructor turned the group around, apparently saying the water level was too high, and they reached a rocky crevasse, intending to wait for the water level to drop.

But it kept rising.

"We were all sitting down and we were real cold," said Kish.

"She [the instructor] said, 'We'll wait for the water level to go down', and it kept raining and the water kept going up and up and up and water kept gushing and gushing.

"From barely our ankles, the water went up to past our knees - this was 30 minutes we waited there."

As the torrent kept rising, a plan was made for students to jump in, float across the river and around a blind corner, to be caught by the waiting instructor.

The instructor went first with one student strapped on her back.

Mr McClean had arranged to start sending students five minutes later.

"They asked for a volunteer to go first, and I said I would go first," said Kish.

"I went on my back and I let go and I moved from the rock and everyone was cheering me on."

Once in the water, he faced an unexpected problem.

"I couldn't see what was around the corner. I just went - the current took me - and it went out and it opened up into this large place nearby where the dam was and she [the instructor] was on the other side ... I was a long way away and there was no way she could have caught me.

"She saw me and I tumbled off the dam and I tried to catch the rope.

"I just kept tumbling and hitting rocks and my helmet split open - it split into half. I lost my boots and everything.

"I was just gasping for air and I was under the current most of the time. Every time I got up, I just breathed in air and I just called on God's name.

"'God save me', I said that, 'God, please just do this for me'."

Kish ended up in a pile of logs, battered and bruised, catching his breath as his bootless and sockless foot started to turn black.

He said he propped himself up, hit his own chest and spat out water, and called on strength to move - knowing that if he didn't, he would never get out.

"I just felt it was God telling me, 'You have to get up and go, otherwise you're going to die', because water just kept coming and it was getting higher."

Once out of the water, Kish got to a road and started walking towards the dam.

"Two instructors came and said, 'Are you all right? Are you okay? Have you seen anyone else?' I didn't know anything at that point."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1501824&objectid=10504593
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1501824&objectid=10504593&pnum=2

And there appears to be questionb of weather warnings...

MetService says two alerts - a heavy-rain warning and a severe thunderstorm watch - were in place when the Elim group entered Mangatepopo Gorge, near Whakapapa Village.

But centre chief executive Grant Davidson said: "There was no rain warning, it was just a simple rain forecast that was in the MetService report we get faxed here at eight o'clock every morning."

The flow of water in the stream swelled from 0.5 cubic metres a second to 18 cubic metres within half an hour. The pupils and their teacher were swept downstream about 4pm.

Mr Burton has stood behind the centre, which ran the course, but said questions needed to be answered over the decision to take people into the canyon that day.

"We have natural questions as to what decision-making process they went through and that would be good to find out, but that is where I will leave it at this stage."

He said the group was well prepared and everyone wore wetsuits, lifejackets, hard helmets and polypropylene clothing during the river outing.

But when a flash flood took the stream to perhaps four times its normal level, the pupils were trapped by the high walls and had no escape.

One of the survivors told his mother he survived because he found a log to hang on to. "He had already had his helmet split from off his head so there were huge rocks around."

Hamilton's Fraser High School principal Martin Elliott, whose pupils also attend the pursuits centre, asked why the canyoning trip went ahead at all. "My concern is, we all knew the weather was going to be bad right across the country. It might not be an appropriate time to say this, but why did that trip take place? Why were they in a swollen river?"

Outdoor pursuits centre chief executive Grant Davidson said weather reports were faxed every morning, but it did not get the heavy-rainfall warning that day.

"We subscribe to a MetService report that comes in every morning in time for our 8 o'clock staff meeting.

"The report in the morning in question had the words 'rain with intermittent visibility'."

Staff visually checked the stream above and below the gorge before they went in.

"We had experienced staff review what was happening in the mountains and there was no sign of anything that would lead us to not carry out the trip at that time.

"When they entered the gorge the water was at a very low level and there was no prediction for heavy rain.

"Obviously, if we had known or predicted about the pulse of water, we would not have been there.

"Unfortunately in the outdoors there's often completely unpredictable events that can happen despite the best training and judgment in the world."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4483423a11.html

Unless some other version of the facts comes up, I'd say it's still looks like he was an idiot.

OK, here's a more detailed account. (Note, I'm only quoting the account of the events.)


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1501824&objectid=10504593
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/story.cfm?c_id=1501824&objectid=10504593&pnum=2

And there appears to be questionb of weather warnings...


http://www.stuff.co.nz/4483423a11.html

Unless some other version of the facts comes up, I'd say it's still looks like he was an idiot.
thanks for the additional articles.

my problems with the additional info, aka, a disection...

But the torrential rain was bringing a problem.
Torrential... hard rain.
MetService says two alerts - a heavy-rain warning and a severe thunderstorm watch - were in place when the Elim group entered Mangatepopo Gorge, near Whakapapa Village.

and it was heavy from the onset, not a cloudburst but a steady rain that probably started, at the latest, after they climbed up the dam. (even tho the watch was there before they went up)

my opinion of Tony McClean goes up by the use of wetsuits, lifejackets and helmets. but again, the lack of radios still bothers me.

The outdoor pursuits centre instructor turned the group around, apparently saying the water level was too high, and they reached a rocky crevasse, intending to wait for the water level to drop.

attempting to cross a flooded river... their chances were better waiting it out.

The difference between "stupid" and "heroic" is usually survival.

The difference between "stupid" and "heroic" is usually survival.

that is a good point. what would be the difference between 'Stupid' and
'Heroic'?

after all, a man who dives on a grenade to save some bystanders would be a hero, yet not a survivor...

would Tony McClean be a hero for the one life he tried to save while ignoring the other 5 that were lost?

thanks for the additional articles.

my problems with the additional info, aka, a disection...


Torrential... hard rain.


and it was heavy from the onset, not a cloudburst but a steady rain that probably started, at the latest, after they climbed up the dam. (even tho the watch was there before they went up)

my opinion of Tony McClean goes up by the use of wetsuits, lifejackets and helmets. but again, the lack of radios still bothers me.



attempting to cross a flooded river... their chances were better waiting it out.

As to the rain, I'll quote a website focused on canyoning:
Check the weather forecast. If rain is in the works, stay out of the canyons. If a canyon trip is planned to last several days, be sure to check the extended forecast.
http://www.canyoneering.com/gear/tech_flashfloods.html

The rest of the points there are also germaine...

As for the wetsuits, I understand that's standard for canyoning.

At this point, let me summarise my position (I was in a hurry earlier).

1. The group leaders were either uninformed of the weather watches or ignored them.

2. They entered the canyon despite the rain, which is contrary to standard safety precautions.

3. The leadership apparently did not know the watershed adequately (ie the blind corner mentioned in the article I quoted above).

4. Other safety precautions (having planned escape routes in the case of a flash flood, checking high ground) appear not to have been observed.

5. Finally, the leaders directed their students from a place of relative safety into the flood waters.

Can't someone be both a hero and an idiot? Because that is what it looks like to me.

And to me.

http://www.canyoneering.com/gear/tech_flashfloods.html
[snipped]
thanks Canyoneering is not something I'm familar with, so my views were more of hiking with alot of rock-climbing mixed in with standard and basic open water safety.

but I like the points in your link...

all common sense...

and I don't think they followed any of em...

which makes wonder if they (the adults in the group) knew what they were doing... :(

He's both. His actions were not well-thought, but his intention was to help others by putting himself at risk.

Screw the cripple. Teacher was an idiot.

He's both. His actions were not well-thought, but his intention was to help others by putting himself at risk.

his only tied one child to him and swam the river. the other kids crossed by themselves.

hence why the first article only talked about him and the last child, nothing about the other 5 who died.

thanks Canyoneering is not something I'm familar with, so my views were more of hiking with alot of rock-climbing mixed in with standard and basic open water safety.

but I like the points in your link...

all common sense...

and I don't think they followed any of em...

which makes wonder if they (the adults in the group) knew what they were doing... :(

I'm not that familiar with it either, but I think we both have similar experiences, but maybe a bit more familiarity with canyons in my background...

Anywho, yep, there were a bunch of good points in that and indeed the leadership seems to have been questionable (and not just McClean).