I think you should chill out a bit. I did the race and didn't notice anything that bad. Furthermore, to my knowledge, I have not heard of, read of (either on this forum or in any other publication), or otherwise learned of anyone suffering any harm from swimming in the Hudson as part of the triathlon. If people are somehow pschologically worse off because they swam in the Hudson then I don't really count that as a harm---for one, the people who are hyper-concerned about water quality very likely knew that it had been raining and that this, afterall, was the Hudson river. Beyond psychology, what types of "harms" did people suffer? Did they get sick? Did they have skin problems? Bacteria problems? What? All I heard was bitching and complaining, which I think is par for any course.

I agree with you gigs. All we get from the few people who keep posting over and over and over again is inflammatory claims as statement of fact. I keep waiting to hear a testimonial about anything but a day of loose stool. Until someone steps forward and documents harm from the swim I really don't care what testing they did or how it came out. Yes I did the race and enjoyed the swim.

Pat

public swimming areas are monitored for coliform bacteria levels and there are bathing standards set by the health department. the results of any monitoring are public record. you should be able to get the recorded values for the time period you're interested in.

Hello, I'm no where near NY and didn't hear anything about this before hand, but if testing was done by USAT and the results were bad I'd be very curious. They flought (sp) safety concerns every time they have a dspute with a RD and to cover up something would not be particularly amusing.



Styrrell

---

Styrrell

   



That is an interesting stance. Do you work for a pharmaceutical, asbestos or tobacco company by chance? How can you say it is ok to conduct a race in unsafe conditions as long as no one is hurt?

Didn't race this race and don't even live there but I think the issue isn't if someone got sick. The issues here are did they conduct a swim they knew was unsafe? If so that is serious since we trust USAT and RDs to conduct safe (as possible) races and to not lie about conditions. Each person should be able to make an informed decision with the facts.

Second are they hiding something?

I am only going by a random post on ST but if they did this or are hiding info that is a serious issue. The RD and USAT should respond to requests, especially USAT.

No, I work for none of the above. However I did other races this summer and no one is posting endlessly on slowtwitch demanding to see evidence that the water was safe at those races either. So NYC tri conducted a race. They made a decision that the water was safe. If someone had significant problems then I agree, of course it would be appropriate to go back and review the testing/the results etc. I just don't think it's fair to put an RD under the microscope without cause. I've only read accusations that the water must have been unsafe yet no one has fessed up to significant medical problems after the swim. I care because this kind of accusatory attitude, I think, makes being an RD and running a race "not worth the hassle" and I think harms our sport.

Pat

I'm surprised you are still clinging to this. Did something happen to you as a result of swimming in the Hudson during the NYC Tri? Please let us know. I understand that you felt misguided and lied to, but you are the one who jumped into the water, they didn't push you. The way I look at it, is that I knew the Hudson was gross no matter rain or shine. Disgusting, but I still swam in it for 1500 meters for the race. My choice. I knew it was gross. If you happened to look at the water when you were walking from the transition area to the start, you should have seen the condoms, trash, cigarette butts, and the oil residue on top of the water washing up against the rocks. The Hudson is gross. Everyone knows that. Your argument would be just as valid if you were arguing about the air quality in New York. Good luck, I hope you did not get sick from the water.

---

----------
Fortitudine Vincimus

Agreed. If there is no Harm to anyone, then I am not sure why anyone wants to belabor the point.

Hello,

Where i live a promoter tried to get a tri off the ground in a historically polluted lake. They tested daily, then it rained and the tests went south, two years in row. This is not uncommon, typically pollutant go way up after rain. Given this I'm not suprised people are curious, although in my case i never would've swam in the lake in question, test results or not.

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

I agree with you we shouldn't harrass RDs but I do think he is being reasonible in asking for documentation on a test(s) they say they did and that the RD and USAT should respond in an honest and timely fashion.

It may not be fair to put him under a microscope but the easiest way to resolve this is to provide the information being requested.

for the record, based on description alone above I would have taken a pass.

Get the test results from the public agency and then we can discuss a cover up or not.



I did the race and agree that it was my choice to jump into the gross water. On the walk down I saw a dead rat, used condom, and other things but made a choice to get in and race. There are many things that regular americans ingest in their bodies that are known to kill. One swim in the hudson was my choice...I did try and stay out in the current and away from the slow moving water to limit my contact with the "gross stuff."

The race was great and I would do it again!

Actually, I bailed on going to the race (losing my entry fee and the cost of a hotel room) because, when I heard the Manhattan Island Marathon was canceled, I figured that the water was unsafe and that the RD was f.o.s (like the river). So, yes, I am an "aggreived party." I am out $. I won my age group there last year and I had fun at the race.

I have done 4 Hudson River swims, and LOVE swimming in that environment because it is different. But it is a definitely marginal place to swim, and since, like most participants, I do not run a water quality testing lab, I have to rely on the judgement of a trusted authority to say which side of the margin the water quality is. We also all pay dues to USAT to enforce safeguards as well as provide insurance so RD's can run races safely. Unless you from Mars, you know that is the backbone of our sport.

In this case, the RD was obviously lying and the USAT doesn't care. And unless you and he know more than anyone else, you probably don't know what the long term effects of exposure to such water is.

The big point is, of course, that no one should be above the rules, right? Maybe you are someone who thinks that there should be no health code in restaurants? Or that second-hand smoke is fine because only a few people got coughs the next day? Or that USAT shouldn't require RD's to a standard of safety and that your USAT dues should be flushed into the river? I don't think the sport is well served if that is the case.

The RD lied to the participants and is lying now. You think that is fine for some myopic, "live free or die" reason that equates not getting shot while playing Russian Roulette with a safe practice. That is your choice. There is no accounting for stupidity, there should be an accounting for breaking basic safety rules and for breaking a explicit and well-defined trust. Can you give me an example where it is OK for an RD to lie or not respond to a simple and basic NGB-mandated safety issue?

NO HARM = NO FOUL?? That's junk. We had a race director here in Arizona, 3 Disciplines, that lost their sanctioning from USAT because they said their races were "unsafe"...no one was ever hurt at a 3D race, they did a decent job at producting races, though USAT said they were "Unsafe". USAT is a joke, and this further proves it. If the water was un-safe, then SAFETY FOR ATHLETES is the top priority. The race should have been cancelled. It doesn't matter that no one got hurt that we know of. The RD should lose his sanctioning if he was "unsafe" by hosting this race. It happened here in Arizona, why not in the Big Apple?

see points 1 and 2 of original post. What public agency?

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/

This is the public agency that the NYC TRI group stated that they used to monitor quality. I do not have time to go through the site to find the readings for the day but someone I am sure can...

OK, Reg, back up your statements. Prove to me that "The RD was obviously lying".

Pat

[snip] Another swimming event in the area, with years of river experience, cancelled their race without any debate. The problem was obvious. [/snip]

Reggiedog,

The swim event that you are speaking of was cancelled due to serve weather. It was the day before the NYC tri and they were five hours into the swim before the severe weather hit.

http://www.nycswim.org/...aspx?Article_ID=1028

---

----------
Fortitudine Vincimus

No, you have bad info on that/read carelessly.

The "unoffical" race had the weather problem. The "official" Manhattan Island Marathon race was cancelled on Friday due to water quality. To quote the press release:

The Marathon Swim was held as an unsanctioned, unofficial event due to the storm water run-off and recent torrential rains from the remnants of Hurricane Cindy.


They "let" people swim unofficially (after the City pulls their permit) because people come from all around the world and train for a year, so they let them make their own decision after a very clear, all-competitors meeting where they explain exactly the problem with the water and why it is considered unsafe to swim.

So no harm/no foul? How do you know there was no harm? My boyfriend picked up an intestinal parasite in Morocco and didn't know for 10 years. There was significant harm (although delayed) which resulted in him having to consume arsnic for a period of time (not pleasant). I was pissed to discover after the fact that a race I particiapated in at Mission Bay in San Diego was the site of a toxic waste dump. Most triathletes I know are hyper sensitve about health, I don't think its too much to ask to swim in a safe, clean evnvironment.......kj

---

---------------------------------------
Awww, Katy's not all THAT evil. Only slightly evil. In a good way. - JasoninHalifax

And so it goes. People trained and people swam in both races. We are sorry you couldn't be there to take your age division again. I'm still wondering why you are so obsessed with this though.

---

----------
Fortitudine Vincimus

Here's a few of the falsehoods/inconsistencies/lies that have been going around. Please refer to the earlier ST thread http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=480448;search_string=search_string;#480448

Problem #1 - When Tests Were Done

1. The day before the race, this was posted on ST: "I presented most of the race meetings today in NYC. We have documented water quaility tests from today and everyday this week. We also tested the water each week for the last six weeks. We will test again tomorrow. Each of these tests has come back with levels that are approved for swimming." (Tom Zeibart on behalf of the RD)
   
2. Then the story changed to: Water quality is tested regularly by city agencies. It was tested 3 times the week of the triathlon, including within 72 hours of the race. (response from Victoria Brumfield NYC Triathlon, the week after the event)

Again, there is a specific known model (which the RD used in previous years to cancel the swim) that MUST be applied to any test to account for the effect of rainfall on water quality.

Problem # 2 - Who Did the Tests

1. According to another post (see ST), John K. (the RD) claimed that the EPA conduted testing for E Coli and something else which he did not recall.
2. The NYC Tri web site says, The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) monitors bacteria levels on a weekly basis in the Hudson River, in support of the Ford New York City Triathlon.
3. Skip Gilber of the USAT says that: the water quality was overseen by the NYC Dept of Health

Problem # 3 - Documentation of the Tests

The RD said he would supply a fax of the results page(s) to USAT and he will allow USAT to release the results. So far (3 weeks) nothing has come of this.


Problem # 4 - Another Race was Canceled due to Unsafe Water Quality

The Manahattan Island Marathon Swim was cancelled for poor water quality the day NYC Tri said that the water was fine. And public nearby beaches were closed for several days afterwards.

Sorry Reg, I still don't see it like you do. #1 none of that is proof that the water was below standard. #2 All those inconsistencies seem to me just that, inconsistencies and not proof that they lied. Different people and different sources often get details wrong. To me it doesn't mean that they lied or misled. I do appreciate watchdog groups but I'm not getting any proof of harm here. This is obviously a huge issue with you and if you do find proof that someone was harmed or they willfully put people at risk then well, I'd have to thank you but until then I'm done bumping this thread up.

Pat

The RD changes his story several times over several weeks - in response to a very simple question - can't come up with any proof, explanation nor documentation while a nearby race cancels because of unsafe water and public beaches are closed for days afterwards...and you don't think that stinks like dead fish?

Who's onus is it on when you ask a simple question and you can't get an answer?

We test ever day...er three times a week...er three days before the event...the DEP tested...er the Dept. Of Health, yeah, that's it....no...maybe it was the EPA...

....how about Morgan Fairchild? Yeah...that's the ticket!

Reg, you are not unreasonable in your request; any results confirming acceptable water standards should be provided or at least made available to you and, done so in a timely manner. If none were taken as required, you are owed an apology and the RD should be sanctioned.

This is one of my lines of work (water quality sampling and analysis). Like we say on ST, if you don't have pics, it didn't happen. Same with sampling results. If you don't have them, you didn't sample. And, even if your results were not to your liking, you have a duty to disclose. Otherwise, you open yourself to accusations like those posted here.

Rain happens, RDs have to make tough decisions (USAT Nationals, need I say more.) At a minimum, an RD has a duty to err on the side of safety. Any thing less smacks of negligence and possible criminal behavior.

Whether or not sanctioning a RD who breaks the rules hurts the sport should not even be in this discussion. As Reg points out, there is a higher standard of care when safety is a question. That's it. Period.

This issue should have/could have been resolved weeks ago. I have no leverage with any of the parties involved here but I suspect the NY Dept. of Health some jurisdiction vis a vis sampling and posting unsafe water conditions. If USAT is not acting on behalf of its members, this is a good forum to publicize that opinion, and folks may decide their membership isn't worth the card its printed on.

Much as I am loathe to say this, sometimes the courts are the only path left if some of the involved parties are less than forthcoming.

---

Mr. Uncaptured External Costs

Fossil carbon is planetary poison.