The Lochaber team accomplished an 'incredible' rescue on Ben Nevis's North Face. Photo: Peter CC-BY-SA-2.0
The head Scotland’s mountain rescue organisation has responded to comments made by a team following a dangerous mission on the UK’s highest mountain.
Simon Steer, chair of Scottish Mountain Rescue, said the operation to bring an injured man to safety from high on Ben Nevis on Thursday was one of the most dangerous for years.
Lochaber Mountain Rescue Team said the man faced ‘certain death’ on the route in Observatory Gully as Storm Abigail struck the mountain. Posts on its website and Facebook page made reference to poor radios and level of insurance.
The Lochaber team said: “We volunteer to assist whenever we are asked to. We do this on behalf of Police Scotland who have the statutory duty. In turn they do this for the Scottish Government. The SMR are the body representing the interests of the rescue teams.
“We find ourselves in the situation where police officers on police rescue teams are better insured then civilians doing the same task. We think this is just wrong. Let’s start with parity at least with police.”
Mr Steer, who is himself a volunteer member of a mountain rescue team, said: “It would be hard for most people to fully understand the conditions that faced Lochaber in accomplishing this rescue.
“The team had to traverse lethally steep and unstable ground, in the face of 100mph winds, snow, thunder and lightning. The conditions were apparently some of the worst experienced in a decade and, of course, the whole thing is exacerbated by darkness.
“Keeping yourself alive in these conditions requires exceptional mountaineering skills. Keeping somebody else alive in these conditions is nothing short of incredible, and a testament to the remarkable lengths that Scotland’s volunteer mountain rescue community will go in the service of others.
“The Lochaber team are quite rightly, well known, and their contribution of 130 rescues and around 7,500 man hours this year alone gives an indication of the commitment to others, and the disruption to personal life that mountain rescue requires.
“This also applies to teams across the country such as the Ochils, Tayside, Arrochar, Search and Rescue Dogs, Lomond and Braemar, to mention just a few of the 27 teams, whose volunteers put themselves in harm’s way to serve others in the wildest of weather and the wildest of places.
“Scotland’s mountain rescue teams provide a free, world-class service that is a credit to the generosity of the Scottish spirit and sense of community. We can be justly proud of them all.”
He said Scottish Mountain Rescue benefits from a direct grant of £312,000 from the Scottish Government, for which he said the organisation is immensely grateful. It also receives some additional funds and support from the UK Government for training and equipment. That money is used to directly support the mountain rescue teams who actually do the rescues, he said.
“The reality is, however, that mountain rescue teams are being asked to respond to a greater volume of incidents, and to engage in a broader range of activities to help people, that extends beyond the traditional understanding of ‘mountain rescue’.
“The funding, while a valued contribution, comes nowhere near covering the basic running costs of this essential emergency service. This means that, on top of their actual rescue activities and their training – a major personal commitment alone – teams have to call on their volunteers to spend more and more time fundraising, in an increasingly competitive charity fund raising environment.
“It’s no surprise therefore that, after an incredible rescue effort, teams sometimes question the minimal level of central funding support. We have raised the issue of the level of funding with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, and we are looking to have further discussions to improve the position if at all possible, within the current constraints of public funding.”
Mr Steer said radios used by Scotland’s mountain rescue teams were vital but ageing and in need of replacement. He said: “If you are operating in extreme environments, in the dark, a robust, functioning radio is not just a nice thing to have, it is an essential piece of lifesaving, and life-preserving equipment.
“The reality for all teams is that we urgently need to find a way to replace ageing radios to fit with new operating requirements. As suggested above, teams already have their hands full rescuing people, training so that they can rescue people, and keeping themselves financially viable.
“It is unreasonable to expect us to be able to raise the £750,000 we estimate we require to replace all radios. We have raised this issue with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, and he has helpfully offered the support of his officers in finding a solution. Again we are appreciative of this support.”
On the question of the Lochaber team’s claim about having inferior insurance for its members, he said the umbrella organisation was looking into the matter.
“Scottish Mountain Rescue are currently reviewing insurance provision with Police Scotland. We are aware of the suggestion that there may be a disparity in provision for police officers undertaking rescues, and the provision for volunteers.
“At the present time we are not aware that this is the case and we have asked for clarification from Police Scotland.”
Mr Steer also said discussions were underway on the future structure of Scottish Mountain Rescue. A meeting on 31 October heard a suggestion from three teams, Lochaber, Glencoe and Cairngorm, that the organisation be split, with mountain rescue belonging to a separate group from search and rescue.
The teams argued that, with many teams being asked to carry out wider search operations, the idea of ‘mountain rescue’ was being diluted. The three teams, which are involved in a high number of traditional mountain rescues, said funds were not being allocated in a fair way.
Mr Steer said: “As suggested above, the shape, size and scope of the service provided by mountain rescue teams has been changing and evolving.
“As a representative body, Scottish Mountain Rescue has initiated a review of its shape and functioning to ensure that we can best meet the needs of our increasingly broad membership.”
Lochaber Mountain Rescue Team had not responded to grough at the time of posting.
Colin
14 November 2015It's a real shame that Scottish Mountain Rescue is being distracted by this debate around structure. As Simon notes, huge efforts are required to keep Teams trained and available for rescues, this devisive debate serves no-one.
I have seen the proposal tabled by Glencoe, Cairngorm and Lochaber but do not understand the issue that they feel warrants the splitting up of Scottish Mountain Rescue. In two short paragraphs they complain that they are not adequately represented and so want to split mountain rescue and search and rescue. Why not work as a single unit of 27 teams to agree what modern mountain rescue should look like in Scotland and work together to develop solutions that are in the best interests of our casualties. Nothing else matters.
The three teams in question are in incredibly busy and challenging areas. As a first step, why not make better use of the other 24 teams to reduce the load on them - there are extremely experienced team members throughout Scotland who would doubtless volunteer a weekend or two every year in the 'honeypots' to help out the busy teams.
We do this for one reason, to help people in our beloved mountains when they are in need. Let's focus on how best to do that, not split up perhaps the worlds greatest mountain rescue system.
Daws
15 November 2015With the amount of people taking to the hills for different types of leisure activities, & the amount of call outs increasing every year Is it maybe time to make MRT a full time emergency service & funded as such by the government ?
Ian
16 November 2015Yes, there are many more people taking to the hill.
Commercial interests and governing bodies seem to be in a dilemma between heavily promoting the activity as a sport, while at the same time having to regularly remind people that it is in fact, unlike most sports, a dangerous activity.
The important point here is that there are people taking to the hills without even the most basic level of mountain skill. (See the many incidents here in grough.)
It is traditionally accepted that, in the words of the Llanberis team Chairman, 'The team does not aim to criticise or seek to attribute blame on anyone that it rescues.' However, in the best interest of Rescue Teams, there should be an investigation as to why this problem is increasing.
No need to remind everyone that team members are volunteers, have to undertake fundraising to cover at least some of their costs and into the bargain some, if not all, may lose wages. Therefore, is it unreasonable to expect 'all' of us who journey in the hills to furnish ourselves with at least a basic level of skill and modicum of self-reliance?
As to Daws comment about teams becoming full-time and paid. Perhaps that is the direction of travel!
The use of teams in exceptional circumstances can slowly lead to it becoming the norm to call on a rescue team when assistance is required; after all it must be a great saving for the authorities.
I'm sure teams are happy to help as long as team members don't lose too much on wages, but unintended consequences should be considered - how long before a politician decides that Mountain Rescue should come under the control of Fire and Rescue; who tried a bit of hill rescue on Arthur’s Seat, in Edinburgh a while back, but eventually had to call in a rescue helicopter.
The Next Man
16 November 2015Daws - while fine in principle, the financial commitment to make MRT's full time paid would be prohibitive.
Take for example one day in the Lakes - 17th October, there were 4 MRT call outs in less than an hour - Patterdale, Keswick, Coniston and another for Keswick which was picked up by Cockermouth as Keswick were already heavily committed. Before these incidents were concluded Langdale Ambleside were out on an extended job.
That's 5 almost concurrent jobs demanding say absolute minimum of 10 people, mostly in geographically different areas, so where do you base people and how many? If you look at Fire & Rescue then generally you don't need as many people because you would get support from Police, Ambulance, etc etc. Every penny's a prisoner in these organisations, and the beauty of volunteer MRT's is that by and large they are autonomous and don't have their strings pulled by some Whitehall mandarin that knows nothing about Mountains, MRT's or anything outside their own myopic little world.
Then look at Scotland where the geography is even more of a challenge to cover and where do you put people? Sure Lochaber, Glencoe and Cairngorm would be good places to base people, but then that takes a long time if someone's on An Teallach or in Assynt.
The wider issue is that, originally set up by mountain people to help other mountain people, MRT's are now being used to plug gaps in services that 20 years ago could manage because there were enough Ambulances, police officers and whatever other service you care to mention. From a humanitarian perspective it's not in most MR people's psyche to say "No", but all too often the volunteers are being asked to do stuff that isn't MR.
Just some food for thought...
JimF
17 November 2015Because they do more rescues and more man-hours, Lochaber MRT receive three times as much as some other teams and twice the average award from the Scottish Government Justice Department Grant Aid. That is fundamental to the design of the funding formula that I designed. This is demonstrated in a recent document detailing an additional distribution of funds that appears on the SMR website.
The SMR radios funded by the Justice Department of the Scottish Government, and used by the vast majority of Scottish teams, are now over ten years old but remain generally robust and reliable. The waterproof microphone-speaker unit and antenna are intended to be the only parts of the equipment exposed to extreme weather conditions.
In spite of standards relating to submersion in water, these microphone-speaker units occasionally suffer temporary failure due to water ingress during wet Scottish mountain conditions. Units with damaged cases or seals, or which have been soaked once too often, can be replaced for less than £100 (no VAT is payable). Individual operators often decide upon different methods for carriage and operation of their radio. Those habits of the individual operator can sometimes expose the equipment to additional risks of water ingress and should be discouraged.
Bob Farrer
18 November 2015Just give the MRT teams both the equipment and insurance they need. This is ridiculous in society today and I for one would be willing to pay a surcharge every time I take to the hills knowing that if things go wrong at the very least the brave volunteers are at least equipped and prepared / insured when they put themselves in harms way for the sake of others. In the Alps you are advised to take out separate insurance in case you need airlifting off a mountain... Sounds reasonable to me as American Express travel insurance will only cover you up to a point and then why should others be expected to pick up the bill?
Ian
18 November 2015I think the main problems is that many people (despite attempts to educate) don't realise there are skills they need to learn to allow safe and enjoyable travel in mountain areas.
Voluntary Rescue Teams are under much more pressure than before and have to respond to many situations where, with a bit of simple hill competence and self-reliance they would not be needed.
I'm not sure that the introduction of insurance will necessarily solve that issue - in fact it may simply encourage people by providing another opt-out from gaining basic hill skills. Being able to use a mobile phone, to contact the insurance provider, is not one of those skills.
When taking part in a sport you can usually call it a day whenever you wish; but is that not what many people now do on the hill, call it a day by calling the local Rescue Team.