- This topic has 73 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by Trekster.
-
Mountain Biking – Club Ride Risk Assessment
-
topangariderFree Member
Morning!
I’ve managed to convince our predominantly roadie club to run an inaugral MTB ride this sunday in the peaks, after a few of the members got talking.
I’ve been asked to complete a RA for MTB rides in general. I’m happy doing one (do them all the time with work), but I was just wondering if this was something other clubs have done (apprently its needed for BC 3rd party insurance) and if so, how detailed have they taken it?
Cheers
TandemJeremyFree MemberIndeed – do they do risk assessments for road rides?
I would do it as s very simple one
Risk – crashing and hurting yourself – level low
Action – ensure everyone is competent to ride
Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition
Latest Singletrack VideosFresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...crazy-legsFull Member(apparently its needed for BC 3rd party insurance) and if so, how detailed have they taken it?
Rubbish, you don’t need to do a formal RA, it doesn’t affect the club insurance at all.
You actually can’t RA a club ride, conditions will change depending on weather, what day it is (ie weekend might be busy with walkers, weekday might be dead). All you need to do is demonstrate that you’ve thought about the level of the group and planned accordingly (bail out route etc) and even that doesn’t need to be written down.Rules: take group of mates out riding, enjoy.
RayMazeyFree MemberDrop me an email through the website – http://www.mountainbikeinstruction.co.uk and I will email you a sample, which should help.
Ray
trailmonkeyFull MemberYou actually can’t RA a club ride, conditions will change depending on weather, what day it is (ie weekend might be busy with walkers, weekday might be dead).
wouldn’t that apply to all rides, be they club or taking a group of school kids out ?
you could make it very hard for yourself by detailing every hazard and feature. instead be quite general and use generic risk and action templates and apply then apply them to multiple places ie:
risk – people taking wrong turn at x in trail @ (grid refs)
action (a) – advise group to wait at cross
action (b) – group leader to be at head of groupkeep it simple.
peachosFree Memberour club has a generic one for rides over 600m or that are in remote area (less than 30mins walk to civilisation). i’m on the committee for the club & was dead against individual route leaders having to undertake risk assessments for rides, but this document that was produced basically just gives leaders worst case scenarios and things to think about in order to prevent these from happening. its really good and very detailed, although most of it should be pretty obvious to more experienced mountain bikers.
pretty sure its in the public domain, so could email it over if you like?
TreksterFull Member^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
RayMazey…..If the OP is not a qualified leader/first aider, which given he is asking the question I suspect not, will the RA be valid re the BC insurance ❓
RayMazeyFree MemberTrekster
I am not a lawyer.
However, as far as I am aware their is no legal requirement to hold a Mountain Bike Leader Qualification to lead groups (unless under certain circumstances when leading under 18 in remote areas, and even then only if a commercial operation).
Also being qualified does not take away the possibility of possible negligence claims. What is important I feel, is to risk assess any given situation and applying controls to minimise risk.
I am not big on ticket collecting, I am more for applying knowledge to minimise risk. Unfortunately, not everyone will have that knowleedge, if they have little exprience of leading mountain bike groups / or have not been trained.
Only my opinion of course.
Ray
TandemJeremyFree MemberAlso being qualified does not take away the possibility of possible negligence claims
It probably increases them as you will be claiming to have specific knowledge – you will be judged to a higher standard
bazookajoeFree MemberAsk to see their road ride RA. If they don’t have one, challenge them on it. If they do have one, check the date on it to see the last time it was updated and challenge them on it if this date isn’t recent.
As soon as you start risk assessing club rides, you’ll have to start deciding who is responsible for keeping them updated and who is responsible for the ride, do they have to be qualified, etc. If the designated ride leader isn’t there, who is then responsible, and do they then carry out their own risk assessment of the ride. Does everyone on the ride (being there of their own free will, being a club) then need to see the risk assessment to appreciate the reasonable risks identified and actions, etc. Idea of generic one is great, however, even it needs updated to take account of newly identified risks/actions – no point having one, if the next time it is checked is way down the line. And who is responsible for updating, storing, checking it? Do the roadies do this for their rides setting precedent?
It’s not a business or local authority, it’s a club. Club members should be aware of the risks of the activity they take part in and responsible for performing their own dynamic risk assessment of a ride/features against their ability.
I could be wrong though
peachosFree MemberRay, I’m with you. Not particularly something that excites me or that I was particularly interested in – ours started out as an exercise to help to prove sufficient care had been taken to minimise risk of serious injury should any liability case surface (don’t think it would though better to be safe than sorry).
however, now it is done and the information is there for all club members to see and think about its surely a good thing.
none of our route leaders have to have any formal training, they only need to confirm they have read and understood a set of guidelines, which this is included as part of.
peachosFree Memberwe also have skill & fitness ratings (1-5) for every ride that is posted which helps keep the responsibility of a person attending a ride firmly with the individual. the club firmly states that the responsibility of the route leader is to plan and show the way, nothing more. they have no first aid (etc) responsibilities.
qwertyFree MemberGenerally speaking as the risk increases the brakes are applied further
Job done
8)
seosamh77Free MemberJust amend your club rules to say something like, we are not liable for any injuries sustained while road cycling or mountain biking, all persons are responsible for their own safety, but here’s a list of precautions we recommend you take…… Or something along those lines.
monksieFree MemberI’m riding in the Peak District at the weekend. I’m going to dive in to the middle of any group who even resembles a club and I’m going to jig about like the lead singer of James and generally cause myself to be a huge unasessed risk just to bollocks up the beurocratic (*I’m dyslexic – OK?) shit that this is all about.
Good grief!* Not really, just can’t spell it
polyFree MemberDoesn’t sound like a particularly outrageous request for someone organising a group activity. If you don’t want to be constrained to such formality then don’t go riding with an official club. It doesn’t need to be OTT but TJ’s suggestion is inadequate.
Risk – crashing and hurting yourself – level low
Action – ensure everyone is competent to ride
There are two reasons for completing a risk assessment: 1. to identify and reduce risk – that is something that most people do mentally anyway as the ride round; 2. to record the findings either as a way of sharing them with others or as a means of proving you took reasonable precautions before you chucked a MAMIL with skinny tyres on a carbon road bike off a six foot drop off!
TJ’s approach opens up the question what is “competent”, who can assess that, how will you assess that, how will you split the group if there are different standards, and of course competent to ride the blue loop at a trail centre is different from crossing the Torridon.
I’d suggest some of the things to consider are:
– route type / grading – technical skill level required. How will it be assessed and shared with the group. What option exist for bailing out if someone had guessed wrong.
– physical hazards, barbed wire, big drops, trees, etc. How will these be highlighted to new riders.
– risk of rider collisions. How will riders be “kept apart”.
– risk of person getting injured. First aid kit, trained people?, ability to call for help.
– risk of getting lost, and consequently cold, wet etc.
– procedure if a group member gets detached from the rest.
– risk that any person is taken unwell (e.g. diabetic, asthmatic etc).There are probably others. Either formally or informally someone has probably done this for road rides too – and there will be a recognised modus operandi for that club and the way it works. Your “risk assessment” is likely to inform some joining instructions, and give advice on kit (spares, waterproofs etc), bike choice, likely distance, and provide some helpful information with contact numbers etc. Its not rocket science but for a group of people who don’t necessarily know each other well is all useful stuff anyway so don’t get het up about it being a risk assessment.
How much of the above applies or is explicitly obvious depends on the environment. If its a ride round a local country park or trail centre then the approach to risk may be different in some regards from real MTB, if it is a bunch of experienced riders again it may be implicit that all this is covered, but if its a bunch of roadies dabbling then maybe they are looking for some guidance. Since its a roady club I’d be highlighting the differences (e.g. 25 miles on a MTB is a lot “longer” than 25 miles on a roadbike; can get colder; tend not to bunch up so much)…
EDIT – oh and weather does affect things so a generic one needs to cover everything from sunburn and heatstroke to ice and snow. In a slightly different world, I have risk assessed stuff so it says: “if the current or forecast weather is >F5, then the leader(s) on the day must make a specific assessment of the current and likely conditions taking into account the experience level of the group, the surface conditions, proposed route, visibility levels etc. They should discuss their findings with the group before departing.” That doesn’t say don’t go – it simply says its higher risk and needs more review by the people on the ground.
BoardinBobFull MemberThis is mind boggling.
Just for my own curiosity, what happens if you don’t complete a risk assessment and there’s an incident on the ride? Potential legal action against the risk organiser by the injured party?
Whenever anyone asks me why I ride my bike, my answer is it’s the closest thing I can get to being a kid again and going out to play and explore with my mates on our bikes.
As far as I can remember, none of us ever completed a risk assessment when we were 10 years old and playing in the woods on our bikes ➡
stevomcdFree MemberWe’ve done this in the past as well. You do sometimes feel a bit of a tool trying to write an RA for taking people on a DH course or some set of horrendously exposed switchbacks in the Alps.
At the same time, it does encourage you to properly think about some things and how you’ll handle them. We got some useful ideas about group management on the trails and things like that out of the exercise.
At the same time we were doing this, the CERN accelerator nearby was just about to switch on. We were thinking about the guys doing the RA for that:
Hazard: Accidental creation of a black hole and destruction of the planet
Who does it affect: Everyone on the planet
Risk mitigation: The guys in the white coats said it would be fine. 😉
TandemJeremyFree MemberPoly – I wasn’t being entirely serious you know.
I have to say I think it is outrageous and OTT to do a detailed risk assessment in this way when it is not a requirement at all.
It raises all sorts of other questions such as who is competent to do the risk assessments? Have they been trained adequately?
A voluntary club is very different from a paid guiding company and IMO Polys suggestions are far more relevant to the latter.
I’d get on to british cycling and see what they suggest but while my not serious suggestion may be too brief a very brief and simple approach is IMO far better.
Graham_ClarkFull MemberFor a generic MTB RA more than one side of A4 would be too long…KISS
gearfreakFree MemberIf you’re a generally responsible and clued up leader, then there probably isn’t a need for a formal risk assessment. IE if you took the group out, they were struggling so you naturally go the easy way. If however you’re a bit of a liability, who would not even think of changing a route, or cutting it short because the weather had turned nasty then carry out a risk assessment as you probably need the discipline of carrying one out to ensure safety. Don’t look at is as a chore, just a great way of making you think about what you’re doing and what decisions you need to make. It can also really help when you are stood on top of the mountain, it’s raining, the group has taken twice as long to get to this point as you thought, half the group want to do the steep technical descent, but the other half doesn’t. If you’ve done a risk assessment you will automatically be reminded of it and take the easy way to the pub.
We’ve not carried out a risk assessment as a club, although we probably should.
IanMunroFree Member– risk of rider collisions. How will riders be “kept apart”.
I’m struggling with this one.
Is the solution to warn all riders not to ride into other riders?StoatsbrotherFree MemberIt does seem – superficially – a load of tosh… and I sometimes help lead club rides…
Until you are faced with:
A mother who wishes to leave her child with you leading on a club ride on a day when it is wet and cold and blowing a gale, and she might not be contactable… (happened to me a year ago)
Someone who turns up without a helmet to ride in the trees (Happens every few months)
Someone (me) who jumps without his bike and lies on the ground unconscious
Someone who sues the club for something that happens whilst a club member is leading ( has happened in the SCGB a few times)At that point you realise that the minute you become an organised body, rather than a loose alliance of mates, you have to do due diligence at some point…
This may mean assessing risks in advance, stating how you would mitigate them (First Aid training, leadership rules, helmet wearing, TCL or BC qualifications, consent forms for parents, ICE cards, Participation statements).
Now you can decide whether this is H&S gone mad and do the minimum possible, or whether you make it a useful and interesting learning exercise which improves your leadership skills. The latter seems to me a better way. But your choice.
crazy-legsFull MemberYou CAN’T formally RA a club ride. There are way too many variables and “what if…?” scenarios.
Best you can hope for is a dynamic RA (basically as you go along) and a bit of “Boy Scout, be prepared”:
“Oh there’s a massive thunderstorm coming, I won’t go over that big exposed moorland with no escape route”
“Oh we’ve had 18 punctures between us, I’ll cut the ride short now”
“The trails are drier than I thought, I’ll include the extra DH option”You don’t even need to write any of this down, it has NO effect on the club’s liability policy with BC. If you’re really seriously worried that some newcomer may attempt to sue if he so much as scratches himself, get him to sign a disclaimer or (my option) don’t take him out! If a parent leaves a child in your care, get some contact details for them, that kind of thing. Basic common sense although you can call it a RA if it makes everyone feel better.
TreksterFull MemberFrom the OP
(apparently its needed for BC 3rd party insurance
OP needs to either read the T&Cs from the ins doc or call BC for guidance if his club are insisting on this.
Then come back and give us the answer pls 😀highclimberFree Memberthe only really effective Risk assessment is a dynamic one being performed by the group leader. Even then it doesn’t preclude someone getting a puncture at 20mph and stoving into a tree as a result, culminating in an airlift to the A and E with a broken pelvis/Femur/Pride.
In short, unless you are acting as the ‘guide’ for the day, I would tell them to get knotted.
RayMazeyFree MemberHighclimber – the only really effective Risk assessment is a dynamic one being performed by the group leader
I will have to disagree with that, if you have already risk assessed the trail which you will be leading the group on.
stevomcdFree MemberSomeone who sues the club for something that happens whilst a club member is leading ( has happened in the SCGB a few times)
SCGB are on VERY dodgy ground though!
Off-piste ski holidays. Booked as a full package through the club. In France. With unqualified* club members guiding. 😯
“But we’re a club, not a commercial operator!” Aye, right!
*Yes, I know, they do have their own training course. It doesn’t really stack-up against ski instructor or mountain guide training though.
stevomcdFree MemberI will have to disagree with that, if you have already risk assessed the trail which you will be leading the group on.
Agree with Ray. If you’re leading a trail you don’t know (which is a risk in itself), then of course a dynamic risk assessment of the specific features of that trail is all you can do. This doesn’t make it the “best” thing though!
If you already know the trail well, then you can do a very effective risk assessment while sat at a desk.
ruscleFree MemberOMG can’t believe the state of the world!!! Just get out and ride, this sounds utterly boring and just goes to enforce why I ride with friends and not an organised group. FFS this sort of crap just infuriates me, I hope to never meet people like this on the trails, and if I did I would pass you very quickly as you would be all stood around looking at a rock or some serious braking bumps!!!
RayMazeyFree Memberruscle – I fully appreciate what you are saying.
However, when you become the responsible person for the group you are leading, it can become a totally different situation with the possibility of added resonsibilities. I guess thats why training courses are provided to address such issues.
stevomcdFree Memberruscle (and ray):
Fully agree with both of you. Would add that when you’re working as a commercial leader (totally different from riding with your mates or even a club), having done all the RA crap in advance should actually make the ride flow better. It means that if you come to a “Oh crap, what do I do now?” situation, hopefully you already know the answer and don’t have to fanny-around.
gonefishinFree Member– risk of rider collisions. How will riders be “kept apart”.
I’m struggling with this one.
Is the solution to warn all riders not to ride into other riders?It’s not quite as daft as it sounds. If the riders are experienced roadies but not experienced riding offroad then they may not be aware of how suddenly riders in front might change their speed of the sheer number of obstacles that there might be. Riding offroad you don’t normally ride in a chain gang (or whatever it’s called) because it’s too dangerous whereas on the road it is fine, depending on cricumstances..
peachosFree Memberi appreciate ruscle’s point of view too – pretty much hate this sort of stuff. in reality, for me and my club, now we have a generic RA and a bunch of guidance that everyone who rides with the club has signed they have read – it actually makes very little difference to what, where and when we ride.
for example i took a bunch of mates (or members if you want to call them that) up ben lomond at the weekend in very wet and windy conditions. i probably did an ad hoc risk assessment in my head at 900m in 70mph winds and decided turning around and getting down was safer than pressing on to the summit. i probably would have done this anyway, but the extra knowledge gained from the RA & guidance certainly helped.
The topic ‘Mountain Biking – Club Ride Risk Assessment’ is closed to new replies.