CP really needs to do something about that beach

I have ranted about this subject before a long time ago, but here we go. Every time I look at photos of the park, google maps, or when I'm there, it always makes me wish that the park could maybe possibly allow a larger swimming zone.

It's such a pity, as the beach is so beautiful. It is not fair to us adults who want to swim in the lake. That beach is almost a waste of space when the swim zone is the size of my living room and 3 feet deep. as for the sandy strip, it's beautiful in every way, esp. over by windseeker/gatekeeper. EXCEPT the swim zone. I wish CP would read this (I know they come on here) and consider this.

Not everyone going into the water from Cedar Point's beach has your level of experience. For me, it's hard to blame the park for erring on the side of caution.

I didn't know anybody wants to swim in that nasty water.

It is not nasty water, the water is fine. Years ago, the swim area was huge and the life line was over about 6 feet of water. So they certainly went backwards on this. I wish they would make a much bigger swim area also, you can't really enjoy the beach fully when the lake is turned into a kiddie pool.

Lake Erie used to be very polluted and recently there was toxic algae in it. The beaches near Cleveland used to be closed constantly due to low water quality levels.

I know Lake Erie isn't nearly the beach quality as the Lake Michigan beaches, but I agree, a swim zone up to your knees is kind of insulting. I'm sure it's a liability thing but I dunno if it's something that would be solved with more lifeguards or how.

I am just curious as to who determines what part of a Great Lake you can or can't swim in. I was always told that if it's covered by water then it's public. I'm not exactly sure what the rules are.

Usually local ordinances are in place on many public beaches that specify whether or not people can swim off the beaches. Since Cedar Point is a privately owned entity they could easily say no one is allowed to swim off the beach there.

While I understand some would love the swimming are to be larger I am sure CP has good reasons for not doing so. Everything from rip currents, undertows, etc.. are commonly found in Lake Erie and many people drown every year. Not only is it a risk to allow swimming in deeper water for the swimmers, but also the Life Guards that have to try and save someone in trouble.

That opens a huge liability to the park, and quite frankly I agree with them that it simply isn't worth the risk.

Yeah, the swim area is a joke. Hopefully this coming year they get rid of that silly roped in area.

I wouldn't think it is more of a liability that people skiing and snowboarding down snow covered runs. A number of people get killed doing snow sports every year. If the ski resorts can handle it, I think CP can find a way. Matter of fact, they did offer a nice, large swimming area up until sometime in the late 80's or early 90's.

Thabto said:
Lake Erie used to be very polluted and recently there was toxic algae in it. The beaches near Cleveland used to be closed constantly due to low water quality levels.

Cleveland beaches are tested frequently for water quality and they are mostly open all summer long. Lake Erie, in the western basin where CP is, has better water quality than around Cleveland. I swim in the lake often off my boat and I've been going to Lake Erie beaches since I was a little kid. Hasn't harmed me at all and the water is enjoyable to be in.

I've caught and eaten fish out of the lake all my life as well. People can't believe I haven't turned green. *gadz*

Ski resorts primary income is from skiing and snowboarding so they really can't prohibit those activities. Cedar Point however provides swimming in Lake Erie just as a nice perk for visitors. I can guarantee their insurance provider takes this into account and very well may be who is setting the size and depth of the swimming zone. Anyone who has built a pool knows insurance companies consider them a large risk, same with ponds and lakes.

Not to mention how unethical it seems that a resort should find a way to enlarge the swimming area with a greater risk of death, per request from those who love to swim in Lake Erie.

Right, wrong,ethical, unethical or somewhere in the middle providing swimming areas is a risk to a business. Risk management is a huge part of today's business arena. Fact is you usually can't make money without exposing yourself to some risk, so you manage that risk as best as you can. Ways to do this are anti-roll back systems on coasters, over the shoulder harnesses, seat belts, life guards, strict operation policies, and unfortunately for some... reduced size of swimming zones in Lake Erie and shallower ones at that.

Back in the 80's I could also swim in the Seven Seas Lagoon at Walt Disney World. Today, you are not allowed in that water. Whether this is due to amoebas as one rumor had it, or increased risk exposure of swimming in a Lake, the fact is Disney put a rule into place to eliminate swimming. As we learn new information, and more people sue each other... greater restrictions to reduce risk are a fact of life.

Could Cedar Point make it bigger, sure they could. But there is obviously a reason that they don't, and I would bet that reason is definitely associated to risk management and cost of thereof.

Enlarge the available swim area on the beach, remove the lifeguards completely, and post swim at your own risk signs everywhere. Liability removed, little insurance required due to lack of potential for human error. In hotels we have been doing it for years. I guess parents would actually have to watch their kids for a change.

^ Liability removed? No. They will be more liable with a greater chance of someone being harmed and thus CFEC would be help liable in a lawsuit.

^^ I agree that people should be responsible for themselves. Unfortunately today some people simply blame others for their own mistakes and choices. As a parent, it is my responsibility to make sure that my children are safe and follow the rules. Also, as an adult it is my responsibility to deal with the choices I make. Companies should also be responsible for providing a safe environment for their customers and employees.

Unfortunately these days for some people nothing is their responsibility and it is always someone else's fault for their poor judgment and decision making abilities.

Swim at your own risk is a good idea in theory, but in today's world that equals massive lawsuits waiting to happen.

I am not trying to argue that the swim area should be small, I would like to see it bigger as well so those who like to swim could have a more enjoyable time in the water. I am simply trying to point out that I doubt it would be simple, or cheap for them to put the area back to the way it was circa 1980.

I think a major problem with swim at your own risk at a lakeside resort is that a lot of the guest will be people who live nowhere near a lake and because of that lack of experience simply do not know the risks. As much as I understand the frustration I'm willing to bet lots of hotel guests at CP have no idea what an under current is or that we have them in Lake Erie. Plenty of people who live around here don't understand that the water at your feet could be moving in a different direction than the water at the surface.

First of all, the beach is not a ride, where CP has a direct responsibility on a guest's safety. Swimming can be a hazardous activity but usually isn't. If CP provides lifeguards and the lifeguards are well trained and put forth best effort, then they do as much for guest safety as can be done. But, swimming is still an individual activity that is at the risk of the participant. No small swimming area no matter how small and no lifeguard can guarantee safety. People can still drown on the CP beach, especially small children.

Second, how can all of the beaches and resorts along the coasts provide a large swimming area and operate under the same litigious environment as CP? They can be run by municipalities or by resorts but they still provide a large, deep water swimming area with lifeguards. Not only do they have to deal with swimmers, but they have to deal with some hazardous sea creatures like shark and jelly fish. Even the Cleveland Lakefront State Park beaches offer a larger and deeper water swimming area than CP.

I have heard that CP gets life guard training from a company called Ellis. They get the lake training for the life guards. The problem is, Lake Erie is an inland sea that is much larger than your typical lake. Ellis offers ocean training and that is what CP should get for the life guards. Then they probably could open up the swimming area quite a bit.

As it stands now, I enjoy the water at CP when I anchor off shore and swim by the beach. A lot of the local boaters do that and I never heard of any problems. I think CP can certainly provide a large swim area in a reasonably safe environment for guests on the beach.