In reply to previous posters:
Yes well it's easy to slag off the man in particular, and to criticise his website (I had a website once it was crap, because, hey I'm not a website specialist). Perhaps an instructor/guide he doesn't understand all the complexities of html, or employs someone cheap.
He's certainly got a polarised veiwpoint. Is he right though? There are enough clients and outdoor professionals on these forums, to comment surely?
How does the BMG balance the position of "climbing's dangerous we're not liable" with "you should only use our professionally trained guides". Surely diametrically opposite viewpoints? If you insist on a standard of training then those trained people should be liable for errors.
If you can't prove negligence then clearly they are not liable, but I find his accusation of the restriction of information about number of accidents/deaths worrying. Simple H & S for every company demands an incident book. The BMG affiliated guides should have one of these. The BMG should be able to access this data and publish as a service to their members. (A principle of H & S is that you learn from past errors).
Surely this is so? Any BMG members care to comment?
How about the subject of this thread himself? (who's not necessarily a dodgy mountain guide - misleading thread title). You've an opportunity to raise the profile of this issue here, why not take it?
