"Volunteers from Gaston Fire maintain two new life-jacket loaner stations at Henry Hagg Lake. The life-jacket stations were created as an Eagle Scout project by Kyle Giesbers. Kyle worked on the project for two months after being approached by the Washington County contingent of Safe Kids-Portland Metro. The two life jacket stations are at Boat Ramp C and at the Sain Creek Swim area. Both operate on the honor system. Park users can borrow the jackets and return them upon completion of their children's swimming activities. Each kiosk contains several sizes of jackets. Gaston Fire will maintain the stations as part of its ongoing commitment to safety at the popular recreation area. Gaston Fire also operates the Water Safety Program, administered by Firefighter Randy Hoodenpyl."

So... they're free. Nobody has to go through any trouble like filling out paperwork--the life jacket stations work on the honor system. There really was no excuse not to utilize the life jackets.

I agree in this case because they were non-swimmers, but

“I hope that people will learn and whether their children are good swimmers or not, have them in life jackets,” Rushing said.

is ridiculous.

If you are a good swimmer and you go to the beach to swim, then a life jacket makes no sense.

That's just paranoia and modern society's laws saying, "Overprotect your kids, or you can be arrested for negligence, manslaughter, etc." There's no such things as accidents any more. If you can't foresee your child getting into trouble, it's your fault, apparently.

I think in this case it's a little unusual due to the sharp drop off. You're wading in ankle deep water ,you can't see the bottom, then all of a sudden you slip and you are literally in over your head.

I wonder if they have prominent signs warning of the danger, that might get more ankle waders to take it seriously and grab a vest.

While the outcome in this case was outstanding, how many more of these stories do we have to read before idiots, who can't swim, stop going in "to rescue" other people? You are not saving anyone...you are just victim number two, and a major distraction to saving victim number one.

First off, glad everyone came out alive and hats off to these people and their quick thinking. Now for this issue at hand, a potential warning sign may be due, even though it seems we have too much of that nowadays with warnings everywhere, but more over if you can't swim I say just stay out of the water unless you are absolutely sure. Especially with children that can't swim since the lake will get deeper at some point so there is that chance and if you can't swim then certainly don't let them go in the water if you are supposed to watch them. Also really bad that there where life jackets and no one bothered but I do agree with S. and StandUp, if you can swim not a need for a life jacket.

It is time

I am glad the kids were saved. Hell, I think they don't have that many Darwin Awards around because they are giving so many out this year.

As a former beach lifeguard, I don't think life jackets are a good idea. 95% of them won't save a young child from drowning and they tend to make parents let down their guard. The old "Oh don't worry about Jr., he's wearing a life jacket" effect.

The only kind of life jackets that really work are those old style ones that go around your neck like a toilet seat and keep your head out of the water. But even those only work if they are properly fitted and the child hasn't squirmed out of it in anyway.

Would life jackets have helped in this specific instance? Probably. Are the a panacea against children drowning? No way.

This is a great story but. What the hell kind of parent lets their children walk into the water, knowing they don't know how to swim?

I was raised fishing and swimming in lakes in Texas. I was never allowed in the water without a life jacket until I could swim the distance from shore to shore. When my kids started growing up, I always walked the swim area so I knew if there were drop-offs or holes. Even then I was always in the water with them. My grandkids come to my home now and first thing they want to do is go to the pool at the club house. Thats ok. But one of the adults are always in the water making sure the non swimmers even with floaties can't go past the 3' line. Beware parents, kids in any type of floaties can get turn upside down and can slide out of them. Get wet and have a safe fun day.

Why would you even let kids in the water if they didn't know how to swim? Trust me, I'm not a fan of the current culture of "finger pointing", but this situation warrants it. None of the family (adults or children) knew how to swim?

I hope they learned their lesson, I'm glad they are ok, and I hope they continue to enjoy family days out, just in a safer, more conscientious fashion.

@phalaeo, before reading your comment, I was thinking basically the same thing, but if you will allow me, I would like to phrase it this way: If you can't swim, you are basically letting your kids swim alone. Would you let your kids swim alone if you COULD swim?

If you take yours kids swimming, and you can't swim, bring and wear life jackets.

Scubasteve: FYI: That was the style of jackets there "the old fashioned ones", and they come in MANY SIZES there. But I do agree, even if your child is wearing a life jacket, you need to be paying attention, make sure it is on properly. Don't have a false sense of hope. Teach your child to swim and supervise them, please!!!

Glad everyone came out OK this time!!

You shouldn't be taking your kids swimming if you and they can't swim unless it's for swim lessons. In LA, not too long ago, six teenagers drowned when they also stepped off a ledge, not one of them nor their family members could swim. Six teens who belonged to only two families. I can't imagine the heartbreak and I'm glad there was a different outcome here.

We should solve this problem by banning swimming. It's obvious too dangerous and we all know that anything dangerous needs to be banned immediately with knee jerk reactions and no thought what so ever. We also must blame everyone and everything now because it's obvious that blaming makes things better and ones self feel more important than the person who's obviously at fault. Nevermind the fact that accidents happen and have happened since the dawn of humanity.

Reminds me of what happened a year ago. Seven children at a family reunion died and one survived. The children died because non of the family member could swim. It happened on the Red River in Louisiana.

These 8 children were very lucky and blessed that another family kept their cool and saved all of them.

The parents of these children were idiots for not putting life jackets on their children.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people go to lakes for family-fun outings when nobody can swim. There is no question the children and little ones will want to go in the water, but if they get into trouble, which happens often, there is no one to save them. If you can't swim, go to the park - or to a public pool with lifeguards. If you want to go to a lake or any body of water, for heaven's sake, LEARN to swim!

Thank you Evan Gibson, April MacLean, Lorne MacLean, Lura Kirby, Michelle Rushing and Eric MacLean .

I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Sincerely, Lee

This rescue was amazing! Thank goodness this family was nearby to help. But for the life of me, I don't understand why people don't use life vests. My child is a good swimmer, but I don't trust natural bodies of water. Lake, rivers and even artificial wave pools are NOT the same as a backyard pool. They are unpredictable. I think life vests should ALWAYS be used under these circumstances, even for young kids that can swim because they can panic in these situations.

There's more good news than I think is covered.

But this also shows what a community and 'sense of community' means.

Community seems to be a bad word to Republicans the past several years.

They were risking their lives. The first thing most drowning peole do is grap a hold of you in a panic and pull you under w/them. Not understanding your negativity.

Rescuing a person who is drowning is very dangerous because he or she will struggle with you and push you under in an effort to get above water. These rescuers did risk their lives to save others.

Oops..meant *grab* a hold.

That's why in life saving classes you are taught to dive down under the flailing victim and surface close enough to use a "head lock" from behind and drag them to safety. Do not let them grab a hold of you.

When I was small, I remember my father pulling a young girl onto shore, failing to save her from drowning. But he never taught the eight of us to swim. And there are over 10,000 lakes where I used to live. Many with sudden dropoffs or deep holes near shore. It wasn't until I was a teenager I gained those skills.Then I after being on my high schools swimming team, I had the opportunity to experience the reactions of someone needing help as a life guard. People really will do anything to get to air and Bluelake is correct.

One another note, it's easy to look at those who got into trouble in that lake and judge them harshly.But I bet all of us have done something foolish in our lives that could have cost us our health,a limb or lives at some point. We just got lucky and have forgotten or buried it. Now we point the finger and shake our heads. I imagine one young child slipped down, and out of love, the others ran out to try to help, even though they could not swim. They did what I tried doing once. Anything to save their loved one. I can imagine those mothers panicking, desperate to get to their babies. While in the beginning, those mothers may have strictly told their kids, "Yes, you may get your toes wet for a few minutes, while we unpack the food." It's always easier to judge, then empathize. It makes us feel so much smarter.

wowicantbelieveit: Do you have any idea how many people died this year alone trying to save someone from drowning? You might want to check out the sad statistics. It is far more common than you think. Often the "victim" gets rescued and the rescuer drowns. We have lost many heroes this way.

I am very glad that was not the case this time.

That's why lifeguards have the floats with them they let the drowning person grab the float & not them.

There were warning signs... and free life jackets available... this was ignorance.

signs? really? like what... "look out for water - you can't breath while submerged"? or how about- "this is a lake. it's deep."

Sooo whoever "runs" the lake needed to post warning signs about the drop off?? are you kidding me? People go into a lake, a natural thing, no one knows the bottom terrain. If you are going in, you should always be cautious, undertow, bottom, debris. The only person responsible for you is you. If you cannot swim do not go in, even to your knees, especially when you have no idea what is under the water. I'm tired of everyone expecting everybody else to post some sort of warning about things, from drawstrings on window blinds and HOT coffee, the list goes on and on. We are all responsible for ourselves. Just because it isn't posted that it is dangerous doesn't mean it isn't and if you get hurt, especially at a lake, you have to take that responsibility. Everyone wants less government involved in everything, but keep demanding warnings on everything. Use common sense people. Thank goodness these rescuers were calm and knew how to deal with the situation.

@bluewave

While I find wowicantbelieveit to be an idiotic troll I do have to point out that lakes, much like oceans aren't "run" by anyone other than nature. Your comment was really not well thought out unless of course you live in a desert where lakes are in fact "run by someone".

-cheers

I agree with Beth, they couldn't swim but let the kids wade out into a lake? That is not using any common sense. If most of my family couldn't swim we'd never picnic at a lake and go wading or whatever they thought they were doing. Ever hear of a park or playground, many of them have picnic tables. It's much more fun to spend time as a family without the near-death experience. While i know that hind-sight is 20/20 knowing that placing 8 children who can't swim near water is a recipe for disaster is simple.

But...you're in water, so you automatically float to the surface...as long as you don't thrash hysterically.

As a certified Red Cross lifeguard instructor I can say without fail that is the stupidest post I've ever read.

First and foremost a floating body faces downward, therefore no breathing.

Thank you William! I used to be a lifeguard and swimming lessons instructor. ChestyPuller..the next time you are in water and floating...blow all of the air out of your lungs...you sink ;) Common sense for most..at least I though.

@ChestyPuller Not true ! ! I am a 6ft 180lb man and can/will sink when not "thrashing". If I don't hold my breath or let the air out of my lungs I will sink.. I do not have a lot of body fat. Nothing personal but fat is more bouyant. So not everyone will "automaticlly float"..

BBear77

So right, until I was in my 40's, I was so lean that I didn't float at all, I sank like a stone. I could swim, but 75% of my energy went into staying above water, so I couldn't swim very fast/far.

I used to demonstrate to my family by assuming a "float" position, take a huge breath, and then stop moving, my feet would immediately swing down, then my body would sink to the bottom so quickly when I hit the bottom I would bounce up a foot or two.

It wasn't their family. It was another family along the lake.

You think you'd be embarassed about your lack of reading comprehension.....

Harold, some kids are afraid of water - like I was as a child. My parents sent me to swimming lessons for 6 years and finally I was able to tolerate doggy-paddling by the time I reached the age of 14. Put me in a situation like these kids were in and I would panic. Not everyone can/will learn to swim.

Dear,

If you want to learn to drive-as 95% of teens do- then you had better be able to swim first

Smlfry2: if the kids were that afraid of the water and "refused" or were too afraid to learn to swim, I would suggest not letting them in the water. I agree with many of the posters here. If your kids can't swim please don't let them in the water, ESPECIALLY if you can't swim well enough to save them.

FYI: This WAS a posted area. The life-jackets provided were in many sizes and "the old fashioned" type that really would will work, and were readily available for free.

As many have pointed out, if there is no lifeguard on duty please remember you are "on your own." Kudos to the great people that helped these kids. This was excellent team work, and I am glad that ALL ARE OK. We have lost a lot of people this year in pools, rivers, lakes and dams including some trying to help others. I AM REALLY HAPPY we didn't loose any this time, including the rescuers.

It does if you understand incredibly vague pronouns.

Well, there's no doubt it's poorly communicated. But, I believe Gibson, (a member of the family who did the rescuing), was saying that she and her family knew the conditions of the lake (i.e. the dropoff); but, the other family didn't realize there was a dropoff, and so when one person got in trouble they of course automatically went in to help, but not knowing of the dropoff or understanding that it was what was causing the problem, they themselves each became victims who needed saving. Hope that helps! Or, sorry if I just made it more confusing...

Alas: Nice job! Too bad the journalist wasn't as clear!

Question: Why weren't the children wearing life jackets?

Answer: Because the parents are stupid.

Question: Will these specific parents insist that their children wear life jackets in the future?

Answer: If they grew a few new brain cells as a result of this, perhaps.

Question: Will other stupid parents learn anything from this family's experience?

Answer: No, because stupid parents always assume things like this won't happen to them. By the time it does it's too late to do anything about.

Question: Do I sound harsh?

Answer: Yes, but I'm also being realistic and I'm SICK AND TIRED of children paying the price for their parents' stupidity.

GOOD JOB to the people who saved these people!

They have pictures of kids in life jackets. I think anyone with half a brain could figure it out...

Oh, wait. Forgot who we were talking about--the daisy-chain of irresponsible swimmers.

This is what I was thinking, too! It is 1300 for the ambulance ride for each of them and at least 2000 for the "check up" at the hospital and they are looking at a bill of around $26,400.00 for a single days recreation. What kind of trip to disneyworld would that have provided instead? Or anywhere else for that matter?

This day at the lake is likely to put a family of eight children into debt for a long time to come.

Anyone who was submerged and had to be revived needed to be checked out. They deserve every dollar of the medical bill, and they should consider it a bargain. If you aren't familiar with an area, and you see a life-vest stand operating on the honor system, it really should occur to you that still water might run deep.

I'm happy for their good luck (the great civilian rescuers these people on scene), but I hope they rely more on common-sense precautions in the future.

They needed to be checked out. If they inhaled water, it can act as a blight in their lungs, slowly choking off oxygen supply as tissue dies, long after they're out of the water and revived. It happens all the time. The victim drowns on dry land, and the symptoms aren't always obvious.

This illustrates why we need to have universal health care, so that a family doesn't go bankrupt paying for rides to the emergency room, even if it did result from their own serious miscalculation about water safety. Anyone can make a mistake. Yes, I know this will bring the "we should all be responsible for OURSELVES!" crowd down on me, but I would rather join with every other industrialized country in the world in thinking that being cared for after an accident or medical emergency should NOT ruin your life financially for years to come.

And the water's deeper ...

First off who takes their kids to a freek'n lake when they don't know how to swim?

In the real world, almost everybody. My parents certainly took us to lakes and to the seashore before we could swim.

As for the first thought, MAYBE you should teach your kids how to swim before letting them wade in the water.

The only fault i can find here, is that the parents obviously did not know the area where their children were playing, or maybe that the hazards were not posted, as in "Warning! Sudden Drop-Off!".

A drop from ankle-deep water to a 15' depth a few feet from shore is a death trap, and one which most parents would not suspect.

Yes, lots of parents let their kids go off to lakes to play or didn't watch them well, let them go on in if they couldn't swim. Lots of kids drowned, too.

I can't imagine letting my kids go swim in an unfamiliar lake even since one swims pretty well and the other a little bit. I wouldn't even if they both swam well. I don't get why people do things like that. I don't get it. Why? I stopped swimming in lakes as a teen when I was water skiing and a snake swam up, I swam off and some animal swam by and brushed up against me. Sorry, but I like to see the bottom and what I am swimming with...lol.

But seriously, I know people have been swimming in lakes a long time, but there was no reason for this near-tragedy. Not only could all of the kids drowned, but the rescuers as well.