OMM - The wider issues

[FellJunior]

BACKGROUND.
I decided not to enter this year's OMM for a variety of reasons. However, number one son was entered with a colleague from Outward Bound in Long Score. In view of the weather forecast we discussed extra preparation for the event. After a very difficult traverse of the Corridor Route due to the volume of water draining down the slope, they returned back to Seathwaite and retired. In trying to monitor their progress on the OMM website I of course discovered that the event had been cancelled. I then watched the fiasco unfold.

The safety arrangements for the event are straightforward; be appropriately equipped for a night on the fells, report to the overnight camp or start/finish if retiring, radio points and marshals are available to summon help. To this can be added, keep an eye on your fellow competitors.

As a "Dad" level of competitor, I have been known to bumble along at the back of a fell race. I always carry body cover in a bumbag in anticipation of the wheels coming off, or stopping to assist another runner. Just trying to be realistic.

MY VIEW.
Competitors have a responsibility to comply with the event organiser's safety arrangements. If the situation demands, the organiser may agree/decide to pass control to another body e.g. Mountain Rescue. In this instance, there has to be some way of informing competitors that they now need to follow instructions from that organisation if required. This is our duty.

MY POINT.
Ignoring the irritating media coverage, the aspect of the OMM, which worries me, is how a third party intervened/interfered in the safety arrangements, primarily by transporting competitors out of the area. This person persisted even after the organisers had asked him to stop. Further confusion ensued with the role of the police and MR at Honister Pass in turning competitors back to Gatesgarth. Poor communication undoubtedly played a part.

GENERAL POINT. (And the reason for this new thread)
How can we maintain the good safety record in fell running?
I know there have been fatalities, but they do not seem to have been the result of inadequate arrangements.
Most importantly, how do we prevent unauthorised outside intervention of the scale seen at the OMM?

IMHO this is where the real threats to our safety and responsibilities lie.

[Deek]

This is a very good post. I can't develop it any way except it tells me subconciously again , that for a few key reasons, organising an event that attracted the numbers it did into the upper reaches of Borrowdale was probably innapropriate. People say, 'how would you limit numbers etc', that is separate point.

[skennaugh]

The boys obviously knew what they were up against. I would like to know are they going next year?

[FellJunior]

"My" team of 2 lads are in their mid / late twenties. They were particularly pleased with the way their professional training kicked in, when they needed to make decisions. They both had concerns about the possibility of hypothermia, which they discussed. Keeping quiet being the worst tactic. They also had to repeatedly assess the problems of the massive amount of water on the Corridor Route, rather than blithely wade through.
They certainly weren't put off by the conditions, just circumspect. I'm sure they will be back.

However, they retreated before reaching Honister or Gatesgarth. Thus they did not suffer outside interference, and were able to continue making their own decisions in line with the event regs.

The acid test is that my wife was not at all worried; we know they are both good at making decisions, and have no qualms about retreating. My son has abandoned solo training trips in Cairngorms, Glen Coe, and Snowdonia rather than overreach himself.

The conditions on the OMM required co-operation by everyone, and to repeat myself, I am appalled that someone with no remit or knowledge of the event took it upon himself to interfere. By all means, contact the organisers and offer help, or escalate with the appropriate authorities, but don't bypass what is in place. One chief only, please.

This thread is not intended to be yet another inquest into the OMM, but a debate on how we as competitors can co-operate with organisers to control our own destinies without curtailing freedom. Common sense should dictate that retired competitors must contact the organiser, but it still happens, hence the rule.

Ideas (preferably not more restrictions) please.

[Mark G]

Perhaps the issue is a lack of knowledge or understanding among the wider world about fell runners capabilities and competence. Outside agencies and individuals may not see much beyond the scope of what is reasonable to 'ordinary' fell walkers exacerbated by what they perceive to be inadequate kit. They dont realise that on any weekend, dark winter night or whatever in the Lakes and elsewhere regardless of weather there will be numerous runners on the hill, equipped to a much lower level than for a MM safely negotiating the fells and making sensible decisions - they certainly didn't realise that everyone in the OMM set out not only prepared but actually intending to spend two days on the hill. What is an exciting and pleasurable and safe run to us would probably be a major and frightening epic to 90% of the population. If this message could have been put across at an early stage perhaps some of the 'drama' could have been avoided. At some point during the weekend this went from being an uncertain but controlled situation with no reason (except in a very few specific cases) to think 'rescue' was necessary to becoming a 'major incident' - once that happens these things have a habit of running away with themselves. I suggest the key to solving this would be to find out how and why that happened.

[Martin Brice]

i was there. there are 2 issues.

1. outside interference: competitors should in future ignore all outside attempts to derail such events. what happened is a scandal, in my opinion. about 1,500 people ignored attempts to send them back to Gatesgarth, and walked over the Honister Pass and back to their cars as they were told, waited for the stream to drop and then drove home. i suspect the police and local authority are pretty embarrassed about the way they started up a major incident programme - the same as they after the Grayrigg train crash according to the local papers - on the sayso of one ill-informed member of the public. i suspect that lesson has been learnt. it cost the ratepayers a lot of money to get those people into cockermouth, open the school, and give them breakfast in the morning then bus them back. I can't see that happening again - not to people who had lots of overnight equipment with them.
2. the media: the organisers might think of making statement to the media much earlier, but then of course they had their hands full with the event. other organisers will look at what happened and have a plan in place.

[andy k]

basically agree with Martin

FRA / race organiser should make it clear that it is the competitor's responsibility to always ensure personallythat their safe retiral is communicated to the race organiser.
never leave the race without doing so
never leave it to someone else
never assume it has been dealt with
whatever the circumstances.

It needs to be communicated and understood that this is in the interests of
the organisers
any rescue organisation
the sport in general.

Perhaps one action could be to ensure that the organisers contact numebr is carried by all competitors.
This could either be printed on the race number if they are being produced specifically, or written on in waterproof marker. (it doesn't have to be the organiser's job - supply pens and a sign with the number on and don't let the runner past registration until they have written down the number on their race number....
Perhaps applicable to A long and medium races ?

[Margarine]

And make everyone carry a mobile phone?

[Richard123]

There's always an 'emergency telephone number' printed on the map. I've always assumed it would be OK to call this number to let the organisers know of your retirement??

[Pudgy]

There's been a bit on the news recently about the OMM, as Cumbria council and the emergency services met to learn lessons and see what could be done better. This was BBC Cumbria's take on it
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7750755.stm

and BBC North West's

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7751420.stm