A resident of Port Sydney has called on the Town of Huntsville to install a buoyant lifesaving device at the local public beach.
Kailey Richter presented her request to Huntsville’s General Committee on May 26, citing the drowning of a man in Bracebridge in August 2020. In that incident, 51-year-old Kevin Schell and three others came to the aid of a distressed swimmer at Kelvin Grove Park. Schell slipped under the water and out of view during the rescue; his body was recovered later that evening.
“I realized that locally in our village of Port Sydney, we don’t have a buoyant throwing assist at the dock,” said Kailey Richter, a mother of three and teacher at V.K. Greer. “I care very deeply about all children in families in our community.”
She quoted the following from the Lifesaving Society Waterfront Safety Standards: “Every unsupervised waterfront shall have at least one buoyant throwing assist with a 15-metre rope and at least one reaching pole at least three metres in length.”
Richter said her request to Town staff had been denied in part due to the possibility of vandalism. “But I challenge you that we have in our beautiful parks here, we have benches, we have picnic tables, we have gorgeous planters, all of these things that may be potentially vandalized that are for our beauty and enjoyment. I’m asking you to install something that will save a life.”
It would also set a precedent, Richter said she was told by staff, that would require similar devices to be installed at all public swimming areas within the Town of Huntsville.
“Please do,” said Richter.
Richter’s friend, Jo-Anne McCarthy was present when Schell drowned and made an emotional, tearful plea to councillors.
“…a group of children were the first ones on the scene, and that was a group of 12-year-old boys,” said McCarthy. “Those children, because they learned it in lifesaving swimming lessons, those children knew enough to run for the device… Sadly, this was a situation where vandalism did occur and the device was not there…I strongly believe that regardless of vandalism or just not having one there, no one would have had to enter that water that day. And yet six people at different times entered that water, and two of them were 12-year-old children, the others were adults and as we know Kevin Schell was one of them. I feel really strongly that if we don’t have something there, we’re never going to save a life and we’re going to risk the lives of so many others.”
McCarthy also spoke to the impact witnessing a drowning has had on her and others who were present that day.
Later in the meeting, staff and councillors discussed the merits and barriers to providing such devices at public beaches.
Director of community services, Simone Babineau, said staff would need time to investigate equipment costs, insurance compliance, and the number of other locations that may need to be considered for this type of device. All of the Town’s public swimming areas, which she said number about 50, are unsupervised.
In addition to concerns about vandalism or theft of the equipment, Babineau said that “there’s also some question about how they are used, and we don’t provide training to the general public on how to use them.”
Deputy Mayor Nancy Alcock said that Richter’s argument for installing equipment was compelling. “Port Sydney Beach is a really busy beach, and yes, there’s vandalism, so we replace it.”
Councillor Tim Withey said that, in his opinion, an insurance provider would welcome the move.
“A little bit of vandalism and even some cost isn’t worth a life,” added Mayor Karin Terziano. “We really need to put it in perspective.”
Councillors Dan Armour and Jason FitzGerald also voiced support for the suggestion, as did Councillor Dione Schumacher who recommended that equipment also be installed at Hutcheson Beach.
Councillor Jonathan Wiebe said he’d like to see “bylaw signage that states that any tampering or theft of that equipment would be probably a five or ten-thousand dollar fine.”
Withey added that he’d prefer to see action taken immediately, as did Alcock, but procedure requires that any decision at committee be ratified at the next regular council meeting. Rather than make a decision about installing equipment at this meeting, committee directed staff to return to the next regular council meeting with a report and actionable items that, if approved, could be implemented quickly.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
Henk Rietveld – this is brilliant! An alarm at the waterfront to get people out of the way in the midst of trying to save a life and others to call 911 would be fantastic!
Brilliant idea Hank Rietveld. If cost is an issue, it would not be hard to find community business partners to sponsor both a lifesaving buoyant ring and a defibrillator, both of which would be invaluable in a case as was described here. Yes, vandalism is a concern, but the alarm is a great idea. Creative solutions could save lives.
Here’s an idea. Mount the life ring on a switch that activates a very loud alarm when it is removed…it will draw attention if it is needed, but also if someone tries to vandalize it. If someone is in distress, the more notice, the better. Think of a fire alarm.
Oh my goodness! Please tell me this is a made up story…do Town staff really believe that saving costs related to potential vandalism is more important than saving the lives of our residents and visitors?! And that insurance rates may increase upon installation of the equipment? How absurd! I’m sure a quick call to the insurance provider would confirm otherwise. Let’s install these life saving pieces of equipment! And in future, rather than providing responses based on assumptions and baseless conjecture, Town staff should be directed to research and report on best practices and potential impact.