Hi all
Continuing with my reasoning on what I understand to be a sports club and as I would like the club of my city, which sadly is oriented toward tourist-recreational activities for certain socioeconomic elites, so that those who seek sporting activities based on sportsmanship, we have no place in it.
I know this was my opinion that made me more enemies, since there is so blind as those who "do not want to see" no more deaf as those who do not want to hear.
Safety First Module Based on Professional Conduct specific FP groups in the Natural Environment is a set of practices or rather the lack thereof affecting or may affect the increased risk in the activities of the section
Hiking-Backpacking
For the usual practice, the vocal work of the section is merely echoes the will of him who decides to do an activity:
" who want to prepare something in January (or February, etc)? One says "for me." The voice says "it goes." That's all the organizing work. Then, who will prepare the activity, where does he pleases and how he pleases ("I do this for the sake of art, which, as I do, I do as I go inside ")
Although later from Secretary will call the bus, or take the list.
There is no effective supervision over the activities of the vocal.
what is not commonly done and what can be improved?
- Some "monitors" lack any basic knowledge of using maps and counseling skills. It would be desirable that such activities were provided with support in the field of another charge to such knowledge.
not discovered during the preparation, which is supposed is done in the field, environmental conditions which might pose some risk for the development of the activity during the time that will be done to have provided possible variants, escape or rodeo. It is customary to prepare several months and have no vegetation growth, the growth of channels and have not provided alternative wading. There is no control of the risks associated with meteorological phenomena that are not deemed unusual in the area. That is not as a rule, and safety is neglected.
should stress the need to have alternative escape routes.
OVER is hoped that the boom time fill any gap.
- Explain in time characteristics of equipment and essential materials and the desirable. It would be highly desirable to indicate " before" that the participant point
- Develop a comprehensive information on the route and its risks and make available in advance. I do not think sufficient time to give it in the bus is not acceptable the admission of such participants with vertigo if you go through corners or passes, or recently operated a route from one day because it is a path "easy". .. just because they pay .... It could affect the participant's responsibility to not join in activities beyond their capabilities, but it is necessary to give prior information that is not now da.
- Do not give any importance to the pursuit of comfort features for participants in the itinerary, how the possibility of eating indoors or sheltered from the wind, rain or shine.
improvisation is not understood in this regard in the last activity (June), where the site is not monitored in the days before (but months before) and was unaware of the lack of shelter to get there, despite weather forecast for that day. It is understandable that not seek another location (in the days before) that met the requirements for the development of security activity.
- Be scrupulous in complying with the laws of the natural spaces that are crossed. Having knowledge of the specific legislation or Park area and implement it. I can give examples where this is not done (this is not the time) and camped in prohibited areas.
- still will not walkis activities. Or not go distributed monitors in the group (go before), or without necessarily waiting at intersections. (And if you get angry when you see that the group will split!)
It usually goes without phones usefulness of certain services in the area to visit (taxi, ambulance or hospital, local police (in people is not the 092!), day of the park ...). It relies too heavily on mobile coverage.
- Lack of any general protocol knowledge (written) on the proceedings for the resolution of the potential hazard to safety or health of participants. Ignorance of who warn (the club of the Federation, insurance .... in case of accident) is left to chance or good to the organizer. Is trust (or distrust ) only by subjective criteria of the ability of the organizer. Does not apply the criteria equally. Lack of training of some organizers basic security issues and rescue.
has not even a basic medical supplies (dressings, bandages, disinfectant, analgesic, anti-inflammatory ointments, insect bites or plants, anti-inflammatory .....) " similar" to mutual giving to the workplace. It is not doctors but do not address anything outside the activity as a sudden toothache, or menstrual, etc or a major rash from a fall or a cut, or tackle a wasp sting (unless it is allergic).
- During the activity, except to decisions affecting the physical integrity of the participants, I think Voting has not "place." Any senior partner or manager is a participant, and in any case, as such must be subordinated to the decision of the organizer. It is not uncommon to propose alternatives (*) and even vote for them. Something different is when a risk (like going late) affects the choice of route and is required to compare opinions with other experts in the group.
(*) How to stop a restaurant to eat the "responsible", without being provided initially. Or shorten an activity to go to a SPA!. With total disregard those who wish to continue the activities originally planned.
Not given enough importance to the earlier work of organizing and planning activities.
despises the fact I have to maintain a critical attitude to work, but I do both with staff and with the group.
I can indicate the shortcomings identified in the latest activities in which I participated, detailed, always with an eye to correct them on future occasions. Unless considers that there is nothing better, of course.
The last remark may be what led to more discredit and slander, because, despite the evidence, considered that there was nothing improvement.
I go to the head that does not want to do anything to risk prevention.
Greetings
