You can find an incredibly rich set of resources here that includes articles, curriculum materials, videos, Blogs from industry experts, online discussion forums, Job Postings, Training Listings, the most detailed listing of outdoor adventure providers on the Web and more! Thanks for being a part of the Outdoor Ed Community
OutdoorEd.com
OutdoorSafety.org
Outdoor Ed Store
Outdoor Ed Community
The Recreation Law Center
The Outdoor Ed Community is the online Social Networking site for outdoor professionals where you can interact colleagues and peers from around the world.
Outdoor Ed offers the best source for outdoor professionals to find careers and for employers to find great staff. We also host the largest online directory of companies and schools offering outdoor and experiential education programs and degrees. You can search for specific jobs, companies or schools.
From Wilderness First Aid courses to rock climbing certifications, this is your source for finding professional training.
The Outdoor Ed Community is where you can interact with other outdoor professionals.
What’s the most dangerous thing that your outdoor program does?
The answer: Vehicles.
Driving is statistically the most dangerous activity for any outdoor program. Because vehicular accidents can be so serious many programs have specific risk management protocols--things like mandatory driver training, specific vehicle driving protocols, specialized license requirements like a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) or background motor vehicle checks on drivers. Those are just some of the proactive risk management strategies to help reduce the potential for vehicular accidents.
If driving in vehicles is so dangerous, what about other activities that expose your participants to vehicles, like crossing high trafficked roads? Isn’t this a high risk activity? I say the answer is yes. And yet many programs don’t specifically have a Road Crossing Protocol. I think road crossing has been seriously overlooked as a risk management issue for outdoor programs. Why is that?
Let’s take a look at another ‘crossing protocol.’ Most programs have specific protocols for river crossings like unbuckling hipbelts and chest straps to be able to shed the pack quickly. When you come to a river crossing, you assess a whole range of factors to determine if the crossing is hazardous including (but not limited to):
Based on this data you determine if there are significant risks in doing the crossing. If the river is only 6 inches deep and 5 feet across, you may decide that people don’t need to implement a protocol like unbuckling their hipbelts before stepping across. If it’s 3+ feet deep and 30 feet across you’d initiate the protocol to undo hipbelts. There might also be a series of other specific actions you would take to safely cross the river. If crossing a river can be hazardous and need special protocols to reduce the risk, why not specific protocols for crossing roads?
The first reason that road crossing has often been ignored is that not all programs operate in areas where travelers have to deal with road crossings. If you are running your backpacking program in the Wind River Range in Wyoming or the Hundred Mile Wilderness in Maine, roads simply aren’t an issue. If, on the other hand, you run trips up and down the Appalachian Trail for example, road crossings can be a daily occurrence. Having run programs for over thirty years on the Appalachian Trail, I can tell you that there are some significantly dangerous road crossings along the AT.
Here are a few that I’ve come in contact with. The first is on the Appalachian Trail in New Jersey at Route 206 in Culver’s Gap. The AT crosses Route 206, a busy, high trafficked road that can present real hazards to a group at certain times of day. The next is in Harriman State Park in New York. The AT (also called the Ramapo-Dunderburg Trail) in the park crosses the Palisades Parkway. The Palisades is a two-lane divided highway with no shoulder and a grassy median in the center. I’ve crossed it safely with a group in the early afternoon when there is little traffic. At rush hour it is a constant stream of cars traveling 65+ mph in both directions. There is literally no way to get across until the traffic dies down. And these are just some of the examples.
So what can you do to address the risk associated with high speed vehicular traffic on roads?
Sample Road Crossing Protocol
Our trips must often cross roads. This can be hazardous due to the unpredictable nature of drivers and traffic. In order to safeguard all members of the group, leaders should be cautious and use good judgment. The procedures below outline the expectations for leaders crossing roads:
Like river crossings we can identify a number of factors that can increase the risk level of road crossings:
Let me give you an example from the Palisades Parkway in Harriman State Park. At one of the trail crossings there is a curve in the road to the north limiting visibility. In timing the traffic on one occasion I noted that from the time the vehicle was first visible coming from the north to the time it got to the trail crossing was 19 seconds. Timing a person with a full backpack crossing the road at a walking pace it took about 10 seconds. If the car is traveling 65 MPH then the extra 9 seconds is not a lot of leeway. A car can travel hundreds of feet in 9 seconds and even if the driver sees the person and steps on the brakes immediately, the car still requires a significant distance to stop and is coming closer to the person every second. What if the person has trouble getting across the road? What is the driver is distracted or texting? What if the road conditions are slippery or the tires or brakes on the car are bad? Based on this risk assessment I determined that we should implement a Road Crossing Policy (described below).
Now that I’ve explained the protocol, let me go back to the Palisades Parkway example. It was early afternoon so traffic was not very heavy. However the lack of visibility to the north because of the curve meant that a car would suddenly appear with only 19 seconds ‘warning.’ We sent one person down to the corner who could see significantly farther north. When that person saw that it was clear of traffic she raised her arm over her head indicating that it was clear to cross. That allowed people to cross to the grassy median. Then we implemented the same system for the next two lanes of traffic coming up from the south.
Protocols are one thing, judgment is another. There is a famous quote from Paul Petzoldt, founder of the National Outdoor Leadership School. He said, “rules are for fools.” Taken out of context a lot of people have interpreted this statement to mean that Paul rejected protocols. On the contrary. Drew Leemon, NOLS Risk Manager, once asked Petzoldt what he meant. Petzoldt explained that protocols were useful and necessary, for example, a protocol that requires people to wear life jackets on the river is a good thing. What he meant was that you can’t write a protocol/rule for every situation and the person who thinks you can take some huge rule book into the wilderness to just decide how to handle all situations is a fool. In the end Protocols work hand in hand with Instructor Judgment. A Road Crossing protocol (or any protocol) is a tool. It requires judgment to decide when to use the tool to effectively reduce hazards. I don’t use the Road Crossing protocol every time I cross a road, just like I don’t unbuckle a hipbelt every time I cross a stream. The job of the instructor is to assess if the road crossing presents a significant hazard. If it does, the protocol provides a tool to mitigate the hazard.
In order to offer a ‘complete’ risk management perspective on this, you should consult with your legal counsel about the potential liabilities associated both with having or not having a road crossing protocol. This is not (at least not yet) an ‘accepted industry standard’ like lightning protocols are. As a result, you need, with legal advice, to determine if this in your program’s best interest from a legal liability perspective. I believe that it does mitigate many of the hazards of road crossings, but risk mitigation is not necessarily the same thing as liability mitigation. Some legal experts might argue that people (specifically adults) cross roads all the time and are fully capable of making their own decisions about crossing safety so having a protocol places an increased burden on the program to manage an individual’s safety. In this case, the legal advice might be to not have a protocol and assume no responsibility for managing people’s risk when crossing roads. However, if you work with minors then they might be considered not to have the experience to assess the hazard and make appropriate decisions. My personal feeling is that this is fundamentally an ethical issue first and a legal issue second. If I know of a hazard that my participants are not aware of or would not consider (regardless of their age) then it is my moral obligation to inform them of the hazards and, I believe, to take a step further than that which is to provide a protocol for mitigating the hazard.
For more information on managing risk I suggest you read the Risk Assessment and Safety Management (RASM) model which I developed and which is in use by outdoor programs throughout the US and internationally.