UKC

A great essay by Freddie Wilkinson on the annual AAC Accidents in North American Mountaineering.

Some interesting stats on accidents, deaths and their immediate causes, in mountaineering and climbing USA 1951 - 2013

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/02/150206-mountaineering-accid...

It's about time the BMC stepped up to the plate and did something like this in the UK.

Yes there are challenges, but none insurmountable.

I believe it will be incredibly educational and will reinforce good practice and save lives.

And it would be self-funding.

Mick

In reply to Michael Ryan:

Fairly sure there used to be something similar in the Scottish Mountaineering Club Journal

In reply to Michael Ryan:

Could you try and lknk to a site that doesnt involve a subscription (or cut and paste).

We have been here before. I believe the BMC does enough for safety already with its limited budget and would only support such an expensive effort here if it were heavily sponsored. I even suggested you do it yourself with your keeness and fundraising expertise. The US is not like the UK: it involves huge mountains and big walls and having been out there and read up on this I think the reduction in death stats is misleading and the analysis would likely have much less benefit here. The numbers of climbers involved at the serious end in the US (where most deaths occur) hasn't increased much at all and will have been influenced by better kit and the removal of clear bad practice; serious terrain retains very high risk. The accidents these predominately experienced climbers face are mostly bad luck (unexpected weather changes, rockfall etc) or lack of focus on easier terrain (easy to warn about but hard to fix when tired and under stress). Deaths and accidents in the UK would be more like the situation on US crags, small mountains and ice climbs (very few deaths and many more accidents involving begginer errors)... the gunks for instance had no deaths that year.

In reply to Michael Ryan:

Agree 100%,


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

OK, why not do it with Mick rather than getting on a high horse yet again, and giving the job to someone else. Mick knows the BMC have discussed this and decided not to do it. Mick's a climbing entrepreneur of sorts and you work for Rockfax (who are big enough to link with sponsors and the rescue organisations to take it on). The most important area for risk in the UK is Scottish winter stuff which requires the BMC to be partnering as a minimum.

In reply to Offwidth:

Hi Offwidth,

Chris is very busy producing award winning and best selling climbing guidebooks with the small but motivated Rockfax/UKC team.

I'm very busy producing award winning and best selling photo-location guidebooks with the small but motivated fotoVUE team. (In fact after a bit more editing I'm out doing location visits - weather is incredible again).

I reckon this is a job for Grimer at the BMC - it will make more money than climbing guidebooks and will have a very positive effect.

Climbing and mountaineering has risk and you can die or injure yourself whilst doing it as we all know. It is better if you are prepared for the risk and can increase your skill and knowledge by experience, mentors and learning from the mistakes of others, the latter is what Accidents in North American Mountaineering is all about.

The UK needs one, the BMC is the organisation to do it.

Mick

In reply to Offwidth:


Is that true? Where are the figures? How many people got seriously injured/killed in Scotland last winter compared to on the Grit? What were the causes of the deaths/injuries? Do we actually know, and if we don't how can we educate?

Chris

In reply to Michael Ryan:

These "BMC ought to collect accident statistics" threads are always such fun, makes me all misty eyed for past classics of the genre such as:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=304737&v=1#x4504590
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=307994&v=1#x4549739
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=261199&v=1#x3846661
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=243934&v=1#x3587246
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=598988&v=1#x7890009

In reply to Michael Ryan:
Nice of you to completely redefine someones job spec into something we have no idea if they have any interest whatsoever. Grimer in my opinion is a majestic influence on the quality of the BMC guidebooks he is series editor for but has never shown me any enthusiasm on this subject, let alone anything like the repeated loud calls you have made. Too busy to put effort where your mouth is but not too busy to stir eh?

The BMC do loads of safety education already with the winter safety lectures, safety DVD's, safety booklets/downloads, equipment failure analysis, links to mountain training, rescue and the scottish organisations. I used to go to the co-sponsored winter lectures every year with the beginners in my old club which (were informative in areas not directly related to safety and were very entertaining and) got the saftey message over brilliantly. Yet only a small minority of proto-winter climbers saw these. On our annual week trip in Scotland, 'lemmings' ignoring SAIS advice were always visble in numbers (so keen were they to tick their lists) which helped us and our guide push the importance of following good practice (on a similar subject a guide is seemingly too expensive for many, so keen are they to learn whilst maximising risk and time wasted... that a guide's experience would avoid). I've read/watched most of the BMC safety publications and am seemingly almost as rare as unicorn shit in this. So my experience is too few are interested enough for any extra such safety work and (like in the US) despite the excellent useful information available, most climbers don't bother reading, watching or attending what already exists and it sadly follows too many make the same old mistakes. In contrast lots of climbers do love to rubberneck and pontificate about safety, without doing the background work.

I support this idea of national accident analysis only if its not from my BMC subs as I know how good the stuff they (and others) do in this area is already and how time consuming (and hence expensive) it is to centrally analyse these accidents in order to distill any additional useful lessons (that are not already obvious from mountain rescue and other reports and the summaries of these which do exist). I'm nervous about donations for this activity as it could take away from the donations made to mountain rescue. A commercial sponsor would be an ideal solution.

In reply to Michael Ryan:


There sure are, 31 deaths and about 100 injured out of a climbing population of 1-2,000 back in 1974. Makes one wonder how the Americans managed to muster an Everest expedition. Or wonder about the accuracy of the reporting system.

In reply to Chris Craggs:
You know its not so hard if you actually look rather than complaining in ignorance. Some examples:

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/how-dangerous-are-climbing-and-hill-walking

http://www.mountain.rescue.org.uk/information-centre/incident-statistics


http://www.mcofs.org.uk/research.asp

In reply to Offwidth:

Was one of those links supposed to be to the Scottish stats?


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Sorry I double pasted one link instead of the Scottish one: fixed above now.

In reply to Offwidth:


You are welcome Steve.

I'm gathering that you don't think an annual Accidents in UK mountaineering and climbing is a good idea?


In everyone's opinion, that's a given..

Yes, very talented indeed. But producing lovely guidebooks that don't sell in large numbers can't be very rewarding!

How much time and money has been spent on the BMC Peak limestone guidebook that won't sell, as there is a perfectly good one just published that serves the minority that climb on Peak limestone well?

Accidents in UK mountaineering and climbing would be an annual blockbuster, would serve all climbers (not just those who climb on Peak limestone or grit for that matter, but all of us) and would help climbers be more aware of what can go wrong.

Mick

In reply to Michael Ryan:

if it would be an annual 'Blockbuster' then why is the market not providing?

In reply to Dr.S at work:


Who is this 'the market' person you speak of?

In reply to Michael Ryan:

dunno - I was brought up in the 80's and he seemd very popular then, but I've never met him.

In reply to Michael Ryan:
Whats good and whats good value are not the same thing. My working life is beset by people telling me I have to do things because they are useful and good (but I think are terrible value) so I just don't want that as part of my climbing free time. I know you say the BMC guides are poor value but maybe there is a sneaky jealousy there. I gave my time freely and did my best to celebrate gritstone and help make these and the YMC guides as good as they could possibly be without regrets (and Grimer was one of many joyful partners in crime in all of them). It's a nice bonus to hear people say they really enjoy reading and using them (or occasionally even that one of them is their favourite guidebook ever) rather than just finding them solidly utilitarian. You seriously want me to think I should ignore that panoply of experience: physical poetry, people, prose and photography and plaudits, because due to human complications it didn't always run on time and some others think the BMC should be doing something else. These books are all heading to reprinrts (Roaches and Burb infinity already done) so how you think they suffer the same chronic sales issues of some past volumes is beyond me. I cant speak much to Peak Limestone as I'm only a small cog helping out on the odd chapter but if you are going to do definitives the less popular areas with more risk and more access problems always take longer (and usually longer then than you think).

You must be on drugs if you think an annual accident book would be a blockbuster in the UK, even if its free. I did 'safety' (and dealt with the twaddle from Student Union 'safety experts' thankfully with the gracious help of the BMC) for 15+ years as a Uni club gear sec and had to work like a jobbing coordinator/compere/comedian to get students to listen to the amount they did. They wanted to climb and party, not read accident stats. So yes thanks partly to me and the BMC they did more on sensible safe practice than most clubs but facilitating proper climbing for the competent was always my most important task.

In reply to Offwidth:


Never said that ever. The BMC guides are incredibly good value for money, useful and good. Their quality is not in doubt, nor is the head work that goes into producing them. But.........


Tea Steve, which does have caffeine in. Thank goodness you don't make any publishing decisions.

In reply to Michael Ryan:

Mick,

What makes you think it will make more money than guidebooks?

Dan

In reply to FreshSlate:



Once the system is set up they will be easier to compile and write.

Wider appeal to more climbers and non-climbers.

Printing costs and compilation costs off-set by a major sponsor.

It has to be done right though.

This isn’t just a book of statistics, this is stories of how we mess up, with analysis and advice from the experts.

It has to be well illustrated (no not with accident photos).

It has to have a dedicated website.

Sales through subscription, direct sales and retail.

Most sales of traditional guidebooks are nose diving. In fact the traditional guidebook publishers in the UK are in crisis mode; they are losing money hand over fist. Because of this there have been hastily convened meetings attended by those who have made the mistakes that caused the situation to come up with new ideas.

Alternative publishing revenue streams especially by the BMC have to be put in place and more creative use of existing assets - some guidebook assets. Another golden opportunity is the archive of the Mountain Heritage Trust.

M

In reply to Michael Ryan:


Is money the best measure of something being rewarding?

In reply to krikoman:


for a commercial publishing venture you need....

personal satisfaction, critical acclaim, and good sales

take the last one out and it is a vanity project

Didn't there used to be an annual report from whatever committee/association co ordinates the mountain rescue teams ? (I have a dim memory of a small, A5 (or thereabouts) orange paperback)

There was also some analysis done of Scottish statistics in the 1990s paid for by the Scottish Sports Council ( I later shared an office with the author). I suspect a revision of that work might be useful, but is unlikely to be a best seller (more likely to be a downloadable PDF)

In reply to Michael Ryan:
Mountain Training are now cataloging and publishing incidents. A step in the right direction I think.

http://www.mountain-training.org/latest-news/2014-incidents-and-near-misses

In reply to Michael Ryan:
To be clear I meant overall production value for the BMC (the latest BMC & YMC grit guides are as guidebooks simply the best value for money I've seen, excepting freebies). I always thought the extra time needed to get the quality to where it came out was important and why I agreed to help. You clearly think it's pushed the balance sheet too far down on profit levels (but without actually knowing the numbers and ignoring some of the non-finance benefits). The BMC definitive grit sales are clearly fine if books are being reprinted, especially given the very strong selective competition in the area from Rockfax and VG (thats regarding selective as a rather loose term in the hot spots: on Stanage, Froggatt main section and Roaches Upper and Lower, Rockfax must include around or over 3/4 of the definitive - in EG and PDB combined). The two YMC publications are also doing very well, also against Rockfax competition.

I don't make publishing decisions but my advice has been said to have helped in publications in areas including: climbing guides, climbing books, academic, fiction and non-fiction. Quality in publishing is about fitness for purpose... on your caffeine subject imagine how well 'Ulysses lite' would be regarded. I guess for a marketing man, caffeine is enough for massive exaggeration: the accident book might indeed sell reasonably well for a climbing book; a 'blockbuster' would be approaching Touching the Void sales levels.

In reply to Michael Ryan:

I can't really understand why you think it would be a blockbuster. Who would buy it? The AAC guide is provided free to members, so the costs are presumably covered by membership subscriptions. Does anyone else buy it? Does the BMC have sufficient funds to undertake a similar activity?

In reply to tony:

" I can't really understand why you think it would be a blockbuster."
Exactly. It´s worth considering that the publisher has not considered it financially worthwhile to translate into English the definitive three volumes on mountain risk and accidents, written by a full-time professional mountain safety officer with 32 years experience, backed by the painfully accurate accident statistics and investigation work by the German and Austrian Alpine Clubs Safety Commision (and their seemingly endless wealth) which is currently in it´s 8th edition. Since Rother publish translations of many of their other titles perhaps they feel either the market isn´t interested or the sales are not financially worthwhile.
I´ll bet the AAC don´t find sales exactly swell the coffers!

In reply to jimtitt:

Absolutely. As a related point, and since you live in Germany as well: How many DAV or ÖAV members do you know that hold a subscription to Berg und Steigen (a magazine published by these two clubs that is solely dedicated to accidents and safety research)?

I know exactly one. There simply doesn´t seem to be a big market, and publication is certainly subsidized by the two alpine clubs. For my levels of interest the digests in the monthly DAV magazine are detailed enough.

CB

In reply to tony:

Two reasons. People like reading about accidents and it is in every climbers interest to learn from the mistakes of others. The first reason alone would drive sales.

Like I said, it has to be done right though.


Uh, climbers; those new to the sport and existing climbers. As gifts from non-climbers. Non-climbers as a good read. It would get plenty of national media coverage each year.

I'd start off with a run of 5,000 and take it from there. Print costs would be sub £1.50, possibly around £1 (and that's full colour). It could sell for £12.95, mainly direct as discounts to distributors/amazon are around 60%

In reply to Michael Ryan:


People like reading about accidents when it's free, or when they're major epics. Accounts of VDiff Punter popping a bit of gear are a slightly harder sell. It might be every climbers interests to learn from the mistakes of others, but that doesn't mean they'd pay for it. How about some genuine evidence - how many copies do the AAC sell of their booklet?


Off you go then, you start with your print run of 5000. I don't know how many publishing meetings I've been too (quite a lot, over the years), but I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't have got anywhere with that as a proposal.

In reply to tony:


I just publish books Tony and have for 25 years. Never published a duffer yet. Let's say I have a gut instinct about this that sitting in a meeting doing a cost-benefit-risk analysis wouldn't give you.

It would be a gift horse to the BMC and goodness knows they need it.

In reply to Michael Ryan:


Get it as 'essential reading' on all the various courses out there and you have it sewn up!


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:



Exactly Chris, and climbers are meant to be 'risk takers' I ask you!

In reply to Michael Ryan:


Me too.


Off you go then. The only thing stopping you is you.

In reply to tony:


The BMC have the people power and the resources to do it right and with authority. If it is to be done, they are the right organisation to do it.

In reply to Michael Ryan:


So, pitch it to them. You've volunteered Grimer to do the job - what does he say about it?

In reply to Michael Ryan:

I don't understand your logic...'its a blockbuster' ...your a publisher...of critical acclaim...make your living off it etc...why would you not do it to make all that lovely profit?
Of course a good start would reading the existing and detailed reports from MR...for example a bit of that journalistic acumen would have you at the consolidated reports and analysis of the busiest area in MREW the lakes (11 teams)...
http://www.ldsamra.org.uk/accidents.aspx
This is free to access ...and includes the analysis of the causative agents, activity, nature of injury, location etc and includes analysis.
Each incident log that the report draws upon is summarised and then compiled for free all done by the volunteers who respond to the incidents...usually the team leader or the deputy team leader get to do this the morning after. Of course the details of many incidents may be restricted until the coroners report...and the vast majority are alarmingly dull...not many Disasters and Doom in the British mountains really. oh and I think its copyrighted so it would require a bit of investment negotiating with the primary source providers.
While you are there...how about making a donation Mick ? http://www.ldsamra.org.uk/donate.aspx

In reply to cb294:


>Well I know one but he´s something in the Bayerische Wald Mountain Rescue so probably feels he needs to keep up better than most.
Berg-und-Steigen is published as a joint venture by 4 clubs, DAV, ÖAV, SAC and ATS with a combined membership of ca 1,683,000 and they print 22,500 copies so uptake is 1.3%. For the BMC this means the uptake would be 975.

In reply to jimtitt:

Thanks, I did not have these numbers at hand.

CB

In reply to jimtitt:


No it doesn't. Like me Jim it would be a poke in the dark guessing what sales would be, despite your stats. How successful it would be depends on its content and design, and incredibly important its marketing.

In reply to simondgee:


A slip at Stanage can be made interesting Simon. On that subject...

I was talking to James at Outside in Hathersage and he was saying that each autumn when the university clubs descend on Stanage, Edale MRT get called out each weekend, both days and that James explained that most incidents were short falls by inexperienced climbers, often because as they are so keen to climb - they have often travelled far - they climb when the grit is wet and peel off usually braking legs...

"Having managed one weekend off from Stanage, we were called to RV at Dennis Knoll end to assist a climber from London that had fallen 6m. ".........."Team called to Stanage for the fourth consecutive Sunday, " from the Edale MRT blog ( http://www.edalemrt.co.uk/cgi-bin/createIncidentMap.cgi?mapMode=Year&ma... )

Stuff like this can be briefly analysed and good advice given ..

• don't climb when the grit is wet, give it some time to dry after rain
• choose routes that have good gear especially low down
• make sure your belayer knows how to belay, stands close and pays attention
• wear a helmet

That is just one small example.


Shouldn't be a problem as all MRT's should benefit from such a publication.

Yes the data is out there, it needs collating and presenting in an interesting and engaging manner. It also needs to include walking incidents.

M

In reply to Michael Ryan:

Sure, it speculative. But you said it WOULD be a blockbuster.
But for basic market research it´s hard to avoid looking at the most influential publication of it´s type produced using resources the BMC can only dream of and seeing how well it sells in a safety and training concious part of Europe for an indication of how sales might go. Exactly how many copies of the AAC´s work are sold to the ca. 300,000+ climbers in N. America?

"How successful it would be depends on its content and design, and incredibly important its marketing."
You don´t seem to have included selling price, whether anyone actually wants to buy it or production costs in your success plan. Your 5,000 copies making perhaps £10 a copy hasn´t covered the costs of employing a skilled accident investigator let alone one who is also an editor to say nothing of all the other expenses.

In reply to jimtitt:

Agreed Jim it would need to be researched thoroughly and you'd have to gather all the information out there; but even then at some point you just have to go for it. BMC guidebooks aren't making money, the CC have majorly messed up and maybe out of guidebook publishing altogether. The new 'Wired' select guidebooks the BMC and the clubs are working on are doomed to failure for several reasons unless the buck up their ideas. Maybe its is time they looked seriously at other forms of publishing revenue.

In reply to jimtitt:

Re sales, I guess something like "a chance in a million......" Might be a good marker publication - is there any way of knowing what it's total sales have been?

In reply to Michael Ryan:

Blockbusters for accident analysis books, alongside the BMC and CC definitives doomed and we are suppossed to take this nonsense seriously?

In reply to Offwidth:

What's it like in that dark room Steve?

In reply to Michael Ryan:

I think Jim is correct. Even doubling or trebling the take up, you simply don't have the market for them. It's not viable. If you want, go hire a team to do it and get BMC to rubber stamp it with that authority. Make a killing. What's stopping you?

In reply to FreshSlate:

I have no statistics, but my sense is that the majority of the AAC's ANAM go to AAC members as one of the membership benefits. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they don't sell all that many.

As for the report itself, it is primarily a voluntary-response survey with very little in the way of standards for reporting, an utter lack of uniformity of information, and no guarantee of expert or even meaningful analysis, so I'd be very cautious about embracing any "statistic" coming from it.

That said, I've learned a thing or two from it over the years, and know of some occasional accidents that probably would not have happened if others had learned the same things.

Cheers, you've just saved me £12.95!

JW

In reply to Michael Ryan:

I buy ANAM on the kindle. Its an enlightening publication, though I've slowed down a lot. After reading 400 pages of accidents, its became a case of diminishing returns bordering on tedium at times.

I don't live in the US or the UK, I don't know of an equivalent domestic publication - but I don't at all mind. The mistakes occurring in ANAM and the lessons to be learnt are applicable world wide. A local publication doesn't add much, other than familiar locations.

Rather than spawning a AUKM I'd rather ANAM expanded to represent the English speaking world. These sorts of ventures need awareness and inertia, and ANAM already has that.

I do think all climbers should read a few accident reports.

Also I see ebooks as the dominant form of books in the future.

In reply to rgold:
I do not mind needverts suggestion that there is no need for a local publication, perhaps putting a few UK stories in the ANAM with a BMC endorsement would be just worth the effort.

Why not just ask UKC to create a moderated forum called 'Climbing Risks' like the Risks Digest for computer security risks ( http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/ ). People submit reports to a volunteer moderator who edits to avoid duplication and potential legal issues and imposes a standard format. A regularly updated searchable forum is a hundred times more useful than a big paper book.

Whoever volunteers to moderate the forum will become the national expert on risks and be able to monetise that by consulting. They might choose to hold back some information from the public forum to provide a chargeable service to industry.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Yeah this works for me. Though any suggestion of Rockfax/UKC doing something is met with "i'm too busy", "it's a job for someone else". If there's real belief in this, particularly as something commercially viable then just get on with it, self-funding means that you can hire people to get it done if necessary, so "I'm too busy" doesn't actually wash does it? Just sounds like a lot of hot air to me.