Man survives unprotected plunge over Niagara Falls |

Man survives unprotected plunge over Niagara Falls

Steven Adams
Getty Images
The Horseshoe section of Niagara Falls on June 14, 2012 in Niagara Falls, New York.

A man has survived the drop over Niagara Falls without any protective gear.

The Niagara Parks Police reported that a man “in crisis” was seen climbing over over a retaining wall into the river at around 4 a.m. on Tuesday. He was swept over the 188-foot-high Horseshoe Falls and later found sitting on rocks in the lower portion of the river.

The man was taken to a hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

An estimated 25 people a year end their lives by going over the falls, reports The Buffalo News. This man is the fifth person since 1960 to survive the plunge without being inside a barrel or ball.

“The high water levels may have tossed him over the rocks at the bottom of the falls,” Michael Clarkson told The Buffalo News. Clarkson is the author of “The River of Lost Souls: What We Might Learn From Niagara Falls Suicides.”

Mayor Jim Diodati of Niagara Falls, Ont., told The Buffalo News he also believes record high water levels in Lake Erie and Lake Ontario helped save the man.

“I know firsthand the lake levels are at all-time high levels. When Lake Erie is higher and flowing more robustly to Lake Ontario, there is a better chance of missing the massive boulders under the Horseshoe Falls,” Diodati told the newspaper. “The only way you would ever have a chance to survive that kind of a fall was to overshoot the large rocks below.”

Police did not release the man’s identity because of privacy laws.

Read more of the story at The Buffalo News.

Steven Adams is a Tribune-Review digital producer. You can contact Steven at 412-380-5645 or [email protected].

Categories: News | Top Stories | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.