Begger's Believe

[Shaggysheep]

Below is a message sent by someone to a forum in outdoormagic

"Two weekend;s ago me and a fellow instructor were approaching the foot of Devil's Kitchen in Snowdonia after a leisurly lunch and brew in Idwal only to witness the descent of 42 9year olds comming down from the lake at the top. These youngsters were wearing wellies and t-shirts and comming down in pairs or even on their own. Half way up the Devil's Kitchen we met the first of 3 teachers who were leading the trip... also in wellies and a t-shirt. We were amazed at the lack of organisation involved and potentaily how dangerous this was... It was wet, misty and the youngsters were being told to 'slide down on their bottoms' from the adults who were at the top shouting down, Oh and 3 adults to 42 youngsters on the Devil's Kitchen .. is this not illegal?":eek:

I think the teachers were very lucky that day and I think all schools should be made by law to review taking youngsters out on trips like this. What do others think... would be intresrted to know. Were you there or have you seen something similar

[timmygowalkies]

Hmm, I'd certainly be interested to see their risk assessment for that. I think it's ridiculous how they got away with that.

I am always the first person to criticize anyone on the hill using the wrong equipment or endangering themselves or others for no reason at all.

Ok, I may be a pedant but I think safety always comes first. Safety doesn't really seem to cross the teachers/leaders mind at all in this instance.

[Ollie]

That is absolutely shocking.

I think the appropriate ratio of youngsters to adults there would have been closer to 5:1 than 16:1, and i'm pretty sure one of them should have been a qualified mountain leader - if only for the number of people there.

Wellies and t-shirts? In Wales? In NOVEMBER? Heaven help us.

Ollie

[Scotsmark]

Just an another example of the stupidity of some people who should know better.

If it was me who had seen this, I'd have given the teachers such a bollocking they'd be afraid to leave their own homes. I hope you reported this, it reeks of a similair one a few years ago when kids died, not sure on details but I'll try & find some.

[Marmot]

I think it was a scout troop, also attempting to do the snowdon horseshoe, too many leaders to kids and the poor kid went missing without anyone realising it - as u note it ended tragically.

unfortunately we also rant about people not getting out on the hills and that lack of kit shouldnt be a reason for not enjoying what we have available to us - its a shame that in this case, and others a happy medium hasnt be sought.

i wonder if they got the train up and decided to walk down?

[MariaD]

(Marmot - don't you mean too many children to leaders, rather than the other way around?)

I think a lot of it is down to a complete lack of basic common sense. To start with, November is an odd month to choose to take a group of young children up Snowdon. There are often early snows and any bad weather will be far more serious that it would be in June, for instance. Also, no sensible adult would set off to do the Snowdon horseshoe in wellies, surely? Even a cheap pair of basic hiking boots would be far better, and not that much more expensive.

Aside from the ridiculous ratio of teachers to kids, the main things the children were lacking were appropriate clothing and appropriate footwear. Neither of those has to be expensive - most kids would already own jumpers and a raincoat (or something similar), so why didn't the teachers insist they wore them?

You don't need expensive, 'top of the range' gear to get out into the hills, but you do need common sense and the courage to admit when you've bitten off more than you can chew. I'd rather be wearing cheap gear with a decent head on my shoulders than be kitted out with the most expensive stuff but lack common sense.

[Marmot]

yer i did mean the other way round, cheers!

absolutely concur

[Ant]

I'm glad that my personal tutor Last year had all the nessersary survival kit with him whenever we went on a outdoors trip.

[insane_climber]

i was informed at my leader trainin course that a scout group toook some cubs up snowdon and it it went horibly wrong, they had no qualified peps withem and when the parents took the l;eaders to court the scout assosiation refused to help the leaders and it resulted in leaders, district mosisioner and county comisioner all resigning

[tinkettle]

Muppets! They must have left their brains (and jackets, boots etc) at home.

[Hillwalker]

I remember once crossing a huge, steep ice/snowfield in the Pyrenees, hundreds of feet straight down, we were all roped up using axes and crampons when ...... coming the other way was a party of 30 or so Danish kids with two adults, all wearing trainers and wearing one crampon each!!!! We stood aside as they all bumble past, amazing the didn't lose anybody.

The mind boggles.

[MariaD]

One crampon?!? What happens when you have to take that foot off the ground in order to walk?

The mind boggles...

[Hillwalker]

It was bizarre Maria, very bizarre! One girl did slip a few feet above the precipice as she passed us, I held my breathe, but she recovered her balance and they all got across OK.

Part of life's rich tapestry, but Bizarre!

[MariaD]

Another example:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_west/6213468.stm

[macgl78]

However on the flip side of all this I know of a few schools that wont even consider taking children anywere near leaving the beaten track for fear off a child spraining an ankle or similer and the parents taking legal procedings against them.

[Ollie]

Personally I think this is only going to get worse.

At the moment any element of risk has to be removed before anything can be done - risk assessments filled in, stamped, checked, double checked, and buried in soft peat for three months before being recycled as firelighters.

Risk is no longer something that can be perceived by young people - they can't make their own mistakes and learn from them as the risk has already gone. Whilst this may keep them 'safer', who's going to look after the risk when they're older? I think it's a shame that it's assumed that kids aren't mature enough to at least have some responsibility.


Of course, as the young people of today grow up, all those born before the risk assessment was invented may be gone, and then who will have the right perception of risk to carry on risk assessing!?!? If there's something difficult to 'make safe' like a walk or a scramble or even a trip to the nearby wildlife sanctuary (assuming they still exist) will people still bother trying? Or will they just go back to arts and crafts with the safety scissors that can't cut anything?

Ollie

[tinkettle]

I don't disagree but you have to put yourself in (for example) a teachers position - would you take kids out on trips where if one little thing happens to "dear little Chelsea" you'll be sued to an inch of your life, end of career and a nice new 4x4 BMW for Chelsea's mummy. Ok taking the p**s a bit but you know what I mean. It may not be that they don't want to take kids out and give them the experiences we all had, maybe they feel they can't. Crazy.

[Ollie]

I know, I'm not suggesting the problem is something that's easy to change. Quite the opposite.

I think one of the biggest problem there is with Chelsea's mummy and the fact that she wants to sue the teacher - even if the teacher did everything that he or she could have humanly done to prevent it happening there's still something else that could be found that could have been done, even if it was nearly impossible. People don't believe in accidents any more and always want to blame someone, if only to get some money out of it.

Ollie

[MariaD]

Accidents do happen, and sometimes no-one is to blame when things go wrong.

But can you really say that in the examples given earlier in this thread the teachers/leaders in question did everything that they "could have humanly done" to stop an accident happening? No - they were criminally negligent.

In the last few years there have been a few high profile examples of such negligence, including the Cairngorm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3855259.stm]Cairngorm) incident and the incident where two girls died during a river crossing (BBC article here) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1829686.stm). Granted, there is always a risk to any activity, but some levels are acceptable and some clearly aren't. If a teacher can't tell the difference then they shouldn't be out leading children. Crossing rivers in spate without any qualified/experienced personnel or safety precautions is not an acceptable level of risk by any stretch of the imagination. If your child was killed in circumstances such as those, where the teacher/school had obviously been negligent, wouldn't you sue?

[MariaD]

That's not to say that I agree wholeheartedly with the overly litigious culture that seems to be developing in the UK, just that in cases of negligence teachers & schools should be made to take responsibility for their actions.

[Marmot]

I think the responsibility of losing a chillds life is far more damaging then any monetary deduction

surely people have life insurance to cover these eventualities
- money shouldnt be removed from any orgaisation which cause the loss of the life, but invested into equipment and training to make sure it doesn thappen again

[Hillwalker]

The AALA regulatons were brought into British Law to protect young people and children in outdoor activities by ensuring that anybody paid to take them is appropriately qualified.

The problem is that schools, colleges and charitable organisations (Scouts, Cadets etc) are exempted. The people who need it most are exempt! If we look back at the overwhelming majority of accidents involving young people in the outdoors we can see that it is usually where their own people supervise the activity.

They are just too mean or too stupid to hire a Mountain Leader or two! (Or cave leader etc)

To put things into context, two children die every year taking part in outdoor activities. Compare that to the 2 children killed every day on the roads. Every unnecessary death is a tragedy, but it needs to be seen in context.

[macgl78]

I have to agree to most of what has been said but nothing that is happening is the fault of the risk assesment system and in fact is down to peoples interpratation of the system, my dailywork revolves around risk assesmnts and I have seen it save many lives and prevent countless injurys, people just need to accept that you can document as many risks as you want and you can put control messures in place but accidents happen and they always will.

[insane_climber]

schools dont have to go with an alaa licenced instructor/centre but they must go with a properly qualified instructor, the scout assosiation has very strict rules on what can and cant be do and they are contained in a book call policy, organisation and rules. the cadets will run to mod rules,
where did u get the information about them being exempt

[insane_climber]

went to the london boat show to day and the council had signes that have been there for along time on the dock side to let u know that there is a danger of drowning,
sorry but u dont know that u can drown in water u shouldnt be let out of ur house

[MariaD]

Very true! (although young children wouldn't necessarily understand the danger)

[insane_climber]

but their parent would

[macgl78]

From what I have seen with my limited time on the hills over the last couple of years Its parents that appear to be putting them selves and their off spring at risk. At best the experience will ruin the hills for them and at worst cause injury and death.

[MariaD]

I think, as always, it's some parents and some teachers that behave stupidly - the majority use their common sense!

The question is: How do we stop the minority from killing themselves (and others) while also maintaining a decent level of freedom and self-determination for the sensible majority?

It's not an easy one to solve. One death in the hills is one too many, but it would a great shame for all children to be denied the opportunity to experience the great outdoors just because some teachers/leaders are incompetent.