Calling out CRO - Protocol

[Peter Burgess]

I have on many occasions heard the comment in OFD that there is no need to worry about getting out before the ticket time as you always get an extra hour. The people underground might not be worried, but there is scope for those outside to start getting concerned in those last 60 minutes. Using the hour as a useful contingency to carry on a bit further or take a few more photos is acceptable to some.

 

[CatM]

I (and pretty much everyone else I cave with as far as I'm aware) have always operated by the philosophy that a "call out" time is exactly that - it's when you make the call. At that time, on the dot, I would be ringing the police and I would expect anyone being call out on my behalf to do the same.

When setting a call out time, I will always take delays for route finding/tiredness/general faff into account, and the amount added will vary depending on the cave, people, chances of getting lost, flood risks, etc, etc. It will usually be generous (but realistic) unless the latter is likely to be an issue. If someone is injured, someone will go out and seek help early.  If something less critical happens (eg getting a bit lost or freshers getting tired), as long as people have food and the means to keep warm, an extra couple of hours isn't going to harm, and I'd rather that than have cave rescue called unnecessarily cos of being a bit slow/faffy/whatever.

Essentially, the BPC/SWCC systems are not that different - at SWCC I just make the ETO an hour earlier than I normally would have done. The important thing is that everyone knows what procedure is being used.

 

[molerat]

My worry about the BPC approach of a strict adherence to 'out times' is that it leads parties to add lots of extra time to their ticket 'to be on the safe side'. In the event, then, of a mishap which delays an entire party there's an extended delay before a call-out starts that would not occur if a realistic time for the trip had been used.

The people who are best placed to determine how long a trip is likely to take, anticipated delays and therefore callout time are the cavers going underground. The difference between expected time out and callout time can vary significantly depending on the trip and the cavers involved. These cavers are the only people in a position to know what this difference should be.

I would be livid if I, or any of my friends, had a necessary rescue delayed because some strangers on the surface waited an arbitrary period of time before setting things in motion.

 

[kay]

My worry about the BPC approach of a strict adherence to 'out times' is that it leads parties to add lots of extra time to their ticket 'to be on the safe side'. In the event, then, of a mishap which delays an entire party there's an extended delay before a call-out starts that would not occur if a realistic time for the trip had been used.

I'm not sure I understanding what you're saying here. I can see that with a "BPC approach" one might say "we'll be out by 6, but to be on the safe side, let's say 8.00". But using the SWCC approach, that would be replaced by "we'll be out by 6, so to be safe, say 8 ... but they want call cave rescue till an hour after we say, so we'd better say 7.00". In other words, it should only lead people to add one extra hour compared to what they'd have added otherwise.

The downside comes when a person used to the BPC approach caves somewhere where there is the hour extra delay for call out, so when they expect a call-out at 8.00, it doesn't happen until 9.00.

 

[Tony_B]

The downside comes when a person used to the BPC approach caves somewhere where there is the hour extra delay for call out, so when they expect a call-out at 8.00, it doesn't happen until 9.00.

My point was that, in my experience, the SWCC approach is commonly used elsewhere and that the BPC approach is unusual.

 

[Tony_B]

I have on many occasions heard the comment in OFD that there is no need to worry about getting out before the ticket time as you always get an extra hour. The people underground might not be worried, but there is scope for those outside to start getting concerned in those last 60 minutes. Using the hour as a useful contingency to carry on a bit further or take a few more photos is acceptable to some.

I disagree, I'm afraid. Returning to the SWCC cottage after your ticket time is routinely frowned upon, and I don't believe that parties that do return late have gone 'just a bit further' or taken a few more photos, they have usually had some routefinding or tiredness issue that has genuinely delayed them. On the other hand, knowing that you have an hour's grace does remove the need to rush on your way out, something which in itself adds to the potential for mishap.

I reiterate: time and again parties return within that hour window.

 

[cavermark]

I got lost with a group coming out of OFD2 early in my caving career - Someone drove up in a landrover to see if we were out as soon as we were overdue - Had we not made it to the entrance shortly after they arrived they would have called for people to start gearing up to search. This seemed a very sensible response.

The callout protocol for my student dales trips, when staying at the Hill Inn, was often " if you're not back at closing time we'll call rescue".  This meant you knew how long you had to wait underground (if you had a watch). The trouble was that the Hill Inn didn't always close....

 

[kay]

The downside comes when a person used to the BPC approach caves somewhere where there is the hour extra delay for call out, so when they expect a call-out at 8.00, it doesn't happen until 9.00.

My point was that, in my experience, the SWCC approach is commonly used elsewhere and that the BPC approach is unusual.

Yes, but you also made the point

that it leads parties to add lots of extra time to their ticket 'to be on the safe side'

and I couldn't see why it led anyone to add anything other than the hour's "grace" that they'd otherwise get by the SWCC approach. Are you saying it's a psychological thing - if you know your club adds an hour, you regard that as the contingency time, whereas if they don't add an hour, you feel you have to add much more than an hour?

 

[Tony_B]

Yes, but you also made the point

that it leads parties to add lots of extra time to their ticket 'to be on the safe side'

and I couldn't see why it led anyone to add anything other than the hour's "grace" that they'd otherwise get by the SWCC approach. Are you saying it's a psychological thing - if you know your club adds an hour, you regard that as the contingency time, whereas if they don't add an hour, you feel you have to add much more than an hour?

Exactly. With the SWCC approach, you appreciate that there is flexibility in the system. I've often been present when there are tickets overdue. We look at the trip, the time quoted, the potential for cock-up, and often seek opinions from other members of the same club who have done other trips and are already back. We ask about the individuals involved, their knowledge of the route, experience in the cave and so on. You'd be amazed how often we get answers like: "none of them have been out through Cwm Dwr before, they thought they'd find it OK". In those instances you send a party in to look before the 'hour' is up 'cos you know there's going to be a problem.

You would also be amazed at the variance in times given for particular trips. I've seen tickets on the board that say, for example, "OFD II to Cwm Dwr via streamway, in 12 noon, out midnight". Twelve hours? For that trip? In those circumstances you could justify sending a search party in before the 'time out' is up and this has happened, particularly if it starts raining.

The problem with an inflexible system, such as that mentioned above, is that if you know your 'time out' is going to instigate a 999 call and a CRO shout, then you add more than just the odd hour to allow for mishaps, you add several to avoid any possibility of an unnecessary rescue.   

 

[Tony_B]

I got lost with a group coming out of OFD2 early in my caving career - Someone drove up in a landrover to see if we were out as soon as we were overdue - Had we not made it to the entrance shortly after they arrived they would have called for people to start gearing up to search. This seemed a very sensible response.

In that instance, no doubt a thought process similar to that described above took place. Whoever was in charge looked at the trip, the time quoted and so on and made a decision that it was worth sending the Land Rover up the hill. 

 

[Tony_B]

And going slightly OT, but worth mentioning in this context...

I was once at SWCC when a ticket passed its one-hour grace period. Someone looked at the names, and the leader's first initial and surname mirrored almost exactly that of a well-known cave photographer who will be familiar to many in this parish. The verdict was: "oh, it's just XXXX faffing about taking photos" and they were given a bit longer. As it turned out, the leader concerned had a different first name and a slightly different surname to the renowned cave photographer and was in no way even related. His party had had a genuine problem that was fortunately not serious but had delayed them. Beware of jumping to conclusions...

 

[Burt]

The cave rescue and, indeed the mountain rescue, can ONLY be authorised to initiate a rescue by the police.
But if you had to call them out and also you knew the number of the person who organises the rescue team, its probably worth giving them a "heads up" call AS WELL as the official call via the police.

Not quite sure what you mean by authorised. Covered by third party insurance when called out by police yes but neither cave or mountain rescue needs to be authorised.

I have informed the police that the SMWCRT has initiated a rescue from information indicated on the call out board at Penwyllt or from a phone call direct to a warden. It goes along the line "We have a incident in ??? and are responding. Can we have a incident number please?" In my experience there has never been a refusal to give a incident number. A SMWCRT callout warden will always try and contact the police before calling out any team members but sometimes you just have to act.

It is right that the police should be called and asked for cave rescue and the time given for out should be the actual callout time - although I do confess that we have looked at a overdue ticket and decided to either wait a while (giving wardens a heads up) or act immediately. It depends. Is the overdue party experienced and could be slow or are they known to be experienced?. In the latter we would always act soonest. In 40 odd years of being a warden I cannot recall a bollock and now I have retired it's for others to decide

Jopo

Jopo, you've pretty much answered your own question! We (Avon & Somerset Search & Rescue - or, to most folk, mountain rescue) had exactly this situation at the weekend where, until we were given a police log number, we were uninsured on the callout. As soon as we got the log number - as authorised by the police - all was ok.
Human nature as it is though, there are very few people who would sit on their hands and wait for the "paperwork" when they knew someone was in need of help.

 

[Jopo]

Jopo, you've pretty much answered your own question! We (Avon & Somerset Search & Rescue - or, to most folk, mountain rescue) had exactly this situation at the weekend where, until we were given a police log number, we were uninsured on the callout. As soon as we got the log number - as authorised by the police - all was ok.
Human nature as it is though, there are very few people who would sit on their hands and wait for the "paperwork" when they knew someone was in need of help.

What I was querying was not the fact that with a incident number a team is covered by TPI but 'authorisation' as in permission to either exist or operate, which of course is not needed. Cave rescue teams who are affiliated to the the BCRC are recognised by local police authority and therefore are accepted as a competent team and will insured automatically once a incident number is issued. But many teams, mine included, undertook hundreds of rescues long before TPI insurance was provided by the police.  Indeed there have been years when we are pretty sure that some of the police areas we operate in did not have a valid TPI for civilians who go to the aid of the police when requested - which I believe is the route teams are insured and of course you are right - we never refused a call and if memory serves me well we did some pretty big rescues during those years.

For a new cr team to become members of the BCRC they are subject to peer approval by the existing teams and may that always be the only 'authorisation' a team will ever need.


Jopo

 

[Burt]

 

[HardenClimber3]

A call out time should be when rescue services are called (obviously one of their options is to wait a bit).

How about recording an expected time out and a call out time.

If people have to give both they should then grasp that the call out time is the call out time...

 

[PaulW]

two times just complicates things

one time, if i am not out by this time then take action, simples

 

[HardenClimber3]

That's what I'd have said, but from the above discussions one time might mean two (very) different things.

 

[CatM]

As long as its clear from both sides what is to be done at the stated time, I don't think it's a problem.

Incidentally, I've always known about the "hours grace" at SWCC but thought that after that hour is when rescue is initiated; to hear that might not be the case is a bit worrying in my eyes. Initiating a shout early in case of poor weather etc is all well and good and commendable, but the comment that ""oh, it's just XXXX faffing about taking photos" and they were given a bit longer"..... if I was in need of rescue and someone didn't bother to come to look for me cos they thought I was faffing about, I would be pretty pissed off. If I was nearing call-out, I would not be taking photos. If knew I wanted to take lots of photos, I'd have added more time to the call out sheet. As someone else said earlier - the people who have the best idea of how long a trip is going to take are generally the people doing the actual trip.

Contrary to an earlier statement, I think the "BPC approach" of [call-out time is rescue time] IS the most common, and replies on here seem to reflect that. If anything, I would say a flexible approach is more likely to lend itself to problems - either people pushing close to call-out cos they think they can get away with it, or actually adding less time to the sheet in case people don't come to find them when the allotted time is up! Experience might show otherwise, and I appreciate it's a very different situation when the cave is on your doorstep and you can easily go check out the entrance, etc, but that's just my thoughts. And in think in most cases, the "BPC approach" does work best.

 

[potholer]

On the general issue of callout times and how people decide what they should be, I wonder how often (nationally) there are rescues initiated:

a) as a result of someone being reported overdue
b) where a rescue was actually necessary
and
c) where response time would make a meaningful difference to outcome

For example, if a group is uninjured and wandering around trying to find their way out of somewhere relatively benign, even if they do need help finding their way out, it may not make a huge difference to them if they had decided to leave a callout for N+1 hours rather than N hours.

The problem is that when a party fails to exit a cave when expected, those on the surface - both the "responsible person" and the resue teams - don't know what is going on down below.  Thomas, Richard and Henry might just be an hour or so late coming out because of the time spent posing for photographs.  Or a rock might have fallen - as sometimes happens - cracking someone on the head and causing serious injury...  And if you are the one lying at the bottom of TFD or wherever with a cracked skull, you won't be happy if the CRO say "Time for another pint or two, lads.  An extra hour or two on the callout time has been show to make no difference in 82.36% of cases."

I wasn't really considering variable CRO response times, more wondering how likely it is that someone leaving a more generous callout time is actually going to find that is a problem even if something does happen.

That is, what actual risk is there in choosing to leave a later callout time, given a particular expected/target trip time?

 

[Fulk]

On the general issue of callout times and how people decide what they should be, I wonder how often (nationally) there are rescues initiated:

a) as a result of someone being reported overdue
b) where a rescue was actually necessary
and
c) where response time would make a meaningful difference to outcome

The answer to part (a) above for the CRO is roughly 14% (i.e., being reported overdue and not needing assistance).