To think this charity deserve prosecution for being so bloody stupid?

[Fucklechuck]

Just seen this in the news and went down a rabbit hole reading the whole story plus comments on their FB.

They took a bunch of young kids on a frozen lake (apparently without parental consent) and tried to justify it as a safety lesson despite clearly having no understanding themselves of the actual dangers. For example they're claiming the entire lake was frozen over with 2ft thick ice - no, it definitely wasn't, not in the south west of the UK, it's just not that cold in this country even in the recent cold snap. That's just impossible.

Their comments on their FB page are shockingly blasé and they've even been liking other people's comments saying that vaccines are a bigger danger to children than this was

Just can't believe anyone would be so stupid less than a week after the tragedy in Solihull and then to take to social media calling it a knee jerk overreaction to suspend their license until an investigation is complete shows a total lack of regard for the most basic H&S or risk assessment processes. I actually hope their registration to look after children is revoked by whoever has such powers!

People are genuinely becoming thicker and thicker with every passing year.

If there is only a 0.01% percent risk why would you risk it, especially with other people's kids.

I’m the owner of a large pond /small lake. It’s a natural one not man made. You’d be forgiven for thinking it’s not too deep, after all around the sides you can wade in the knee deep water and feel quite secure.
Then it drops. At its deepest we’ve measured around 35ft.

The thing with ponds and lakes is you really can’t be sure of their depth because they don’t usually have flat bottoms. They can drop off like the edge of a cliff.

Bodies of water are always dangerous. To take kids on there is just negligence.

👋 to @AlanThePig how are things at the pond?

If the parents gave permission then I don’t see an issue.

The lake was shallow and the ice was 2ft deep, and they were with trained staff. This would be normal in Norway.

In Norway it’s possible to have ice that’s two foot thick. 🙄

Evening @TangledWebOfDeception
Good thanks, Egwina and Duncan have returned along with a couple of other stray males.
DH and I have been discussing after the Solihull tragedy whether we should invest in a life ring and put some signs up. Not many people know the pond is here really but still, shook me a bit that did.

The ice absolutely was NOT two feet thick.

This isn’t Norway.

Norway is completely different, weather wise, to the UK!

As a Scout leader who has to a risk assessment for every tiny thing we do I just can't see how they even thought stepping one foot onto ice was a good idea!

Risks - ice breaking, children falling in, other children panicking, shock, injuries, hypothermia, adults getting injured and not being able to help children, deaths!

How to avoid these risks - don't do it!

Jeez, how can people not see a problem?

Don't go on fucking icy ponds in this country! Ever.

The charity claim it was 2 foot deep - it's a virtual certainty that it was not. It simply was not consistently cold enough for long enough. And in what way were the staff trained in assessing the thickness of ice on natural ponds and lakes? We get virtually zero experience of it in the UK.

Given that a parent complained, it doesn't look like they gave permission, either.

I’m just going by what the article in the OP says

lake was frozen solid - the lake is 3ft deep right across to the island, and had at least 2ft / 60cm of ice on it

Absolute stupidity. Well done to Forestry England for taking quick and decisive action in suspending these idiots.

You've missed off the highly significant first three words from that quote, namely "Staff said the lake was frozen solid". That doesn't make it true. These are staff trying to defend their extremely stupid action given that it is likely to have very serious consequences for their employers.

Yes, I saw this post too and it disappeared pretty quickly. People were questioning if the op was.telling the truth it seemed so outrageous that anyone would do this so soon after the Solihull tragedy.

Its parents who have complained

One of the reasons complaints have been made is several of the children are neuro diverse, and, in the parent opinions, lack the capacity to understand that just because one iced over lake is safe to walk on another might not be

Which makes the decision even more concerning.

Spot on. Absolutely baffling that adults don’t realise that sometimes people lie or are incorrect about things. The ice was not 2ft thick and the article doesn’t say that it was, it says that someone said it was 2ft thick - that’s not the same.

Agreed.
I have no idea if this particular activity was safe or not. But in many very cold countries people walk and skate on frozen ponds and lakes. And they do teach children how to tell if it is safe to walk on it.

There is no need for anyone - child or adult - to learn what "safe ice" feels like. Because there is no need for anyone to be ON the ice in the first place. That's what should be taught - stay off the ice. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Exactly. This wasn't even a theoretical risk, assessment, it was a known risk that resulted in multiple deaths a few days before. None of those deaths were drowning so drowning was not the only very significant risk and the depth of the water becomes irrelevant.
This is into the territory of negligance and will have to be treated as such. The doubling down is not helping them. And if the two adults were trained leaders they need to review their training ASAP.

Yes, I saw this post too and it disappeared pretty quickly. People were questioning if the op was.telling the truth it seemed so outrageous that anyone would do this so soon after the Solihull tragedy.

Never underestimate stoopid.

That is perfectly fine in those very cold countries.

This is not sensible nor safe in this country where it isn’t ever very cold for very long.

You have just said “in very many COLD countries”

It was an unusually cold period for England but we aren’t a cold country and 2 feet of frozen water would be unusual.

You’ve got to be joking, right? In places where it might be safe they teach whether or not it’s safe. But they’re not taught by absolutely numpties who don’t know what they’re talking about and they don’t learn by venturing out onto unsafe lakes to find out. In the UK, it’s not safe, so we don’t risk our children pretending it might be.

No such thing as 'safe ice'.

Ffs how are people not getting it? It is not safe to walk on a frozen lake. Ever.

I agree about bringing back the public information films - those thing were terrifying. I still remember the firework one..."Arghhh Juuulie" 😱

Even shallow lakes are dangerous, children can go into shock in seconds in cold water and you can still be dragged under in shallow waters. This was very foolish, they don't actually know the lake was frozen, 2ft of Ice sounds unlikely Tbh.

No one has refuted them though have they? Here is their statement.

In a statement, the Rewild Project said: "After a week of minus 10 degree temperatures- Woorgreens lake was frozen solid - the lake is 3ft deep right across to the island, and had at least 2ft / 60cm of ice on it.

"[...] There were two adults present (trained leaders, keeping the children in a compact group at all times).
"Lake is so shallow, if the ice did break / (which it wouldn't because of the depth of the ice & prolonged cold) then they would be able to stand up and wade back out - to go back to sheds (5 minutes walk) and warm up.

It was an important sensory lesson in what THICK SAFE ICE feels like - if they were to go out exploring on their own they would have more idea of the difference and would have some knowledge [...] about how people cross ice in the Nordic countries.

"Plus kids that have the opportunity to explore WITH adults present, are much less likely to go out and take risks on their own.
"No one was in ANY DANGER at any time."

The forest charity added: "We do know that people die on ice, people do also die on roads, they die in vehicles, they die doing knife work and cutting arteries, they die chainsawing, and die when trees fall on to them - people still do all of these risky activities and- we still run these activities, do training in these risky activities - we do this because we have proper measures in place to mitigate risk of death and serious injury.
"Not all roads are the same, and there are simple measures and commonsense approaches that are important.

"We purposely do not mitigate low risks (trips / slips / falls etc) for young people as its important for their development to learn their own boundaries and risk assessments."