First, I must declare that I have a personal interest in what follows. I refer to the controversy surrounding the views of the National Safety Council (NSC), which has said that water sports of all kinds should be banned at Strandhill, Co Sligo. This writer hails from the parish of Coolera of which Strandhill is the natural capital. People of the generation to which I belong and many gone before will remember Strandhill with deep affection and nostalgia. Read John McGahern if you don't believe me.

Enough of nostalgia however. At the moment there are people trying to take away the valuable heritage which has been built up around this proud community.

There is a certain logic in what the NSC is seeking to do. It cannot be denied that people have drowned at Strandhill. Three young men died there during the summer in the saddest of circumstances.

The effect on the local community was traumatic. Deep concerns were expressed and questions were asked as to why there was no official safety officer present to warn the young people involved of the dangers which exist. It is also a fact that the tragedy might have been even worse had some surfers not been present to rescue a number of people who might otherwise have perished as well. In its assessment of the situation at Strandhill the NSC has failed to identify the crucial difference between surfing and swimming. In its report to Sligo County Council it declares that, if a surfer loses his or her board, he or she becomes a swimmer. This ignores the fact that all surfers are attached to their boards by a leash and that, in the event they lose the board, which is seldom in any event, the surfer can regain it quickly by using the said leash. Not only that, surfers all have to pass severe examinations of ability before being allowed to take part in the sport. Young surfers are always under the guidance of senior people.

These limitations do not apply to people who drift down to the beach and decide to go for "a dip" as was the case with the three young men who were playing football, but who drowned when they were attracted to the water to "cool off'.

The council's attitude, albeit dictated by legal advice, that, to put a beach guard at Strandhill, would or could be interpreted as indicating that the beach was safe for swimming seems extremely odd. Surely any precautionary measures would yield dividends?

It could also be argued , of course, that if a beach guard was on duty last June when the tragedy occurred he or she could have prevented the tragedy merely by warning the young men involved of the dangers.

The president of the Irish Surfing Association (ISA), Brian Britton, is at pains to point out that there is a very strong distinction between surfing in the ocean and swimming there. "As a result of the constant emphasis of our safety code, surfers are more aware of the ocean and would normally take into account the conditions, wind rips etc, before entering the water. This may not necessarily be the case for recreational swimmers," he said.

He pointed out that surfers use a technique called "duck diving" to go under water to avoid the strength of incoming waves, a technique which ordinary recreational swimmers would not be aware of.

He is annoyed by the fact that the council did not make any contact or have any consultation with the ISA before releasing its "study" of the Strandhill situation. "It (the report) was carried out by somebody who (seems to have) a very limited knowledge of the sport of surfing," Britton said, adding that it "takes an alarmist view of Strandhill beach as a surfing venue which has hosted 40 national and international events over the years without ever recording a single accident"

On the face of it, and allowing for the declared bias of this writer insofar as Strandhill is concerned, it would seem wise to take a new look at the situation.