WHEN LIFE-SAVERS MIGHT DROWN

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 184, 3 May 1934, Page 10

WHEN LIFE-SAVERS MIGHT DROWN

Rescues In Fresh Water CRITICISM OF HOLDERS OF HIGH AWARDS A startling picture of holders of high life saving awards effecting rescues with difficulty and only if given plenty of time, with a strong probability of themselves drowning if operating in a current, was drawn at a meeting of the committee of the Canterbury Head Centre of the Royal Life Saving Society. The matter arose when a circular was received from the Central Executive of the society in London, advising that there was a proposal to establish a salt water diploma owing to the physical make-up of some candidates preventing them from floating motionless to pass one of the requirements of the present diploma test, the highest award of the society. It was stated that some doubts bn the efficiency of some holders of high awards had been expressed, as outlined above, at a recent meeting of the New Zealand Council of the society. The circular from the Central Executive, signed by the chief secretary, Mr. Sydney J. Monks, invited suggestions as to the suitability or otherwise of a salt water diploma in view of the diffi culty experienced in motionless floating by many candidates for the present diploma examination. A salt water diploma had been proposed, so that those who could not float in fresh water would have the opportunity of attenipting a diploma examination, although such an award would naturally not rank as high as that for fresh water.

Mr. S. K. Bassett, who, in addition to being a delegate on the Canterbury committee, is also secretary of the New Zealand Council of the Royal Life Saving Society, said that the matter had come before the council, where opinion was against a salt water diploma. It was considered that such an award would be second-rate. Mr. J. Breward expressed the view that not much would be gained by having such a diploma. If there was dissatisfaction with the floating part of the present examination, then that requirement could be cut out. Mr. R. J. Fyfe pointed out that in some'cases for life saving purposes it was better to be able, to swim under the water than float—such as when looking for a body. Twenty-five yards under the water would be a good tost. The meeting carried a motion by Mr Breward that the centre disapprove of the suggested salt water diploma, and considered that if revision was necessary, the substitution of the floating test by something else would bo approved.