Water park where boy lost legs partially re-opens

Posted Monday, July 24, 2006 8:06 PM | Contributed by greatwhitenorth

The water slide and pool at a St. Pie water park where a 7-year-boy's legs were severely mangled this month are to remain closed until a permanent cover is installed on the intake pipe that trapped the boy. But other areas of the water park, Le Camping des glissades d'eau, about 50 kilometres east of Montreal, are to reopen this weekend now that the owner has fixed some of the 24 safety problems revealed during an inspection by the province's workplace health and safety board.

Read more from The Montreal Gazette.

Monday, July 24, 2006 8:14 PM
how did that slide pass its original inspection anyway? thats sad about that boy tho.....
Monday, July 24, 2006 8:33 PM
Wait, why is the guy not in jail?
Monday, July 24, 2006 9:44 PM
More importantly, how is this place opening AGAIN? If you break 24 safety violations and don't fix them for a long time, isn't it given if another one pops up you might pull the same stunt? This is utterly amazing. Places like this really make all amusement parks sound like death traps.
Monday, July 24, 2006 11:31 PM
I don't know. Maybe if this happened at a waterpark in the states, we would probably be seeing a different outcome.

Very sad.

Monday, July 24, 2006 11:48 PM
Now that the owner has fixed "some of the 24 violations?" Only some? Why the hell not all?
Tuesday, July 25, 2006 4:42 AM
As far as this park staying open, I am sure it is still up for questioning. The owner needs to make money somehow for all the cash he's gonna be sued for.

I wouldnt be surprised if, since this is a privately owned park, after paying out in court, this place goes bankrupt. If not, maybe the government will force them to close.

Nothing is official, yet.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006 9:36 AM
The inspection was not focussed on guest safety, but worker safety. Some of the violations included improper wiring and control panels. Who the hell would build a waterpark with electrical systems not waterproofed? And with No emergency shut-offs for the lifeguards. This place is still a disaster waiting to happen.

Also note that the intake cover was home made -- a piece of plastic with holes drilled in it. Who was foolish enough to insure this operator?

Tuesday, July 25, 2006 11:19 AM
Can we say, too little too late? Not to mention, the fixes are apparently half-assed?
Tuesday, July 25, 2006 1:51 PM
Compared to that place, maybe putting water slides in your backyard would be safer.

Aren't waterproof/resistant electrical components mandatory for all out-door applications?
I would think so.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006 4:40 PM
The article talks about the fact that the Canadian gov't does not specifically regulate this industry. I can tell you that based on current state codes in both of the states I've worked in (in the Waterpark industry), this accident would never happen.

I'm still trying to figure out how the pump turbine was that close to the return grate. Every pool I've ever seen has the pumps much further down the line than described here.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006 5:47 PM
There was a waterpark near me (four bears), that was forced to close due to lawsuits. The final nail in the coffin was when a lady wore high heels(this baffles me) to the waterpark and ended up with a leg fracture when she tripped on the grass. She ended up sueing the park.

The boy that lost his leg is the parks fault, but there are other lawsuits as well that owners have no controle over that can kill a park.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006 10:00 AM

The article talks about the fact that the Canadian gov't does not specifically regulate this industry. I can tell you that based on current state codes...

Just as it is a state responsibility in the US, it is a provincial responsibility in Canada. You make it sound like a Canada wide problem. It is the provincial government that chooses not to regulate these attractions, although I would suspect that after this incident there will be some pressure on the Quebec government to make changes.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006 5:40 PM
Odd Todd.

Sorry, the way the article read, it did not sound like there was any governmental regulation...

"At present, surveillance of such equipment is left to the water-park operators and their insurance companies."


You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC