Brian Rudman nails it:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11502806
"Twenty years ago, a DoC-built viewing platform at Cave Creek, near Punakaiki on the West Coast, collapsed, causing the death of 14 people. Key points in the subsequent commission of inquiry report are eerily relevant.
Judge Graeme Noble wrote: "No government department can do its job without adequate resourcing. In my opinion, it is up to governments to ensure that departments charged with carrying out statutory functions for the benefit of the community are provided with sufficient resources to enable them to do so."
He added, "The root causes of the collapse lie in a combined systemic failure against the background of an underfunded and under-resourced department employing (at least at grassroots level) a band of enthusiasts prepared to turn their hands to any task."
Wow. Hard to sum it up any better than that is it?
perhaps we were fortunate that it wasn't people who died this time around...
... except - if DOC/govt actually listen to that opinion but do not get/provide more resources, it would mean the end of our ability to take over track-cutting and hut maintenance ...
well track cutting isn't going around shooting with a loaded weapon at random objects you shouldn't be shooting.
national are full steam ahead with engaging private enterprise sponsorship and volunteers they'll review their shooting operation and the rest could be business as usual..
"it would mean the end of our ability to take over track-cutting and hut maintenance "
Yes that is a concern - but one that can and should be addressed with a bit of organisation, training and supervision. It doesn't have to be too onerous or difficult a process - just some simple agreements and a setting of clear expectations for both sides.
I'm all for volunteer maintenance of tracks and huts. It's a great way to give back to something we all love and appreciate deeply.
But equally DoC have formal and legal responsibilities as well - and if we are going to work with DoC it's essential we understand what the standards and requirements are.
This post has been edited by the author on 26 August 2015 at 11:08.
someone posted this on the alpine club facebook group. looking for volunteers for dangerous alpine work with DOC.
interesting job description..
NZ alpine rock wren (Xenicus gilviventris)
VOLUNTEERS WANTED - For coming field season for monitoring nesting success of Rock Wren in South Westland and Fiordland. Searching for birds in the alpine zone, locating nests, setting up camera systems, trapping predators, bird observation and bird handling.
These are demanding, challenging trips, which require:
* High level of fitness - able to walk 8 hours per day, carrying a load of up to 15 kilos.
* Experience travelling off track in the alpine zone, traversing unstable boulder fields, safely negotiating bluff systems and route finding in foggy conditions (volunteers must be able to demonstrate this).
* Able to navigate using map, compass and GPS.
* Basic bird identification and observation skills.
* Be able to commit to a 5 or 10 day field trip (or longer), with some flexibility around weather (due to helicopter flying conditions)
This is a great opportunity to see the most stunning parts of the south island, working with one of NZ's rarest and least studied birds. Full training and safety equipment will be provided. DOC will pay for all helicopter flights plus basic accommodation (or bring your tent) and all food while in the field.
@waynowski
Subtract 40 years and that's my job description :-) Well it was geology field work in Dusky Sound.
And the loads were more like 25kg +. The trouble with geology trips is that instead of your pack getting lighter as you eat food - it gets heavier with rock samples!
Phil did you ever know any of the track cutters on the Dusky?, prison service guards supervised prisoners cutting tracks
"Yes that is a concern - but one that can and should be addressed with a bit of organisation, training and supervision."
As far as I can tell it's a combination of risk assessment with appropriate response.
Want to re-cut an existing track? Want to build an access-way around the outside of a bluff? Want to paint a hut? Want to build a new bridge? Want to shoot hundreds of Pukeko on an island sanctuary also inhabited by Takahe? Sure. What can go wrong? How serious are the consequences for that going wrong? Could someone fall off a bluff? Could native plants be accidentally massacred? Could they lose an arm? Could they paint it the wrong colour? How easy and quickly is it to recover from those possible consequences should they occur? Do they even need recovering from?
Does everyone doing the work need to be fully qualified? Or does only one person need to have qualifications? Does everyone need to be supervised all of the time? Is it enough for a qualified person to go and inspect the work afterwards, so as to tidy up what would probably only be minor issues?
Maybe there's a risk of getting bogged down in bureaucracy if it's overdone for simple things, maybe it'd seem like pointless paperwork sometimes depite forcing people to assess and think about possible issues, but the answers to those types of questions should help to determine how much pre-planning might be necessary, how important qualifications might be for people doing it (irrespective of them being volunteers or staff), and so on.
This post has been edited by the author on 26 August 2015 at 17:29.
