Administering safety: challenging courses and climbing walls - camping - includes related article

"You want me to do WHAT?" is a question often asked by challenge course participants. Before the course is established, many camp directors ask themselves the same question. The financial planning, construction options, maintenance, inspections, staff training, medical screening of participants, liability releases and waivers, and accessibility issues can be overwhelming. Deciding that a challenge course or climbing wall even fits into the goals and objectives of the camp program can be a challenge.

Once you make the decision to implement such a program, your top priority should be to acquire the products and level of training that reflect the same quality and attention to safety evident in your other camp activities.

Financial planning

There are several factors to consider when conducting your financial planning. The costs of professionally installing a challenge course or climbing wall can vary from $200 to $40,000 or more.

Low challenge courses, such as Spider Webs, generally run $400 to $550 per element.

High ropes courses average $1000 per element if built in trees. In most parts of the country, utility poles (an extra cost) average around $600 each to have installed, but the cost could be much higher depending on the availability of the proper type of poles in your region, soil conditions, transportation, and topography.

There are too many factors involved to provide an accurate cost average for climbing walls and towers.

In addition to installation fees, identify and budget annual post-installation costs for things like equipment, extra wood chips, staff training, and inspections. A general rule of thumb for annual budgeting is to set aside between 10 and 20 percent of the original cost of the challenge course or climbing wall for annual training, inspections, equipment replacement, and maintenance.

Selecting a contractor

The professional contractor you consider to build or inspect your facilities or to train your staff should be willing to demonstrate qualifications through validated documents. Check resumes and references. Find out from the references if they were satisfied with the work and what, if any, problems arose.

Ask the contractor to provide a certificate of insurance. Prudence requires seeking a recommended minimum policy limit of $1 million with suggested limits of $3 million. Lacking insurance may not disqualify all companies, but you need to know if some exposures might be transferred as part of the camp's risk management plan.

Be cautious about a firm that subcontracts the construction or training job; you may be saddled with a subcontractor who is unfamiliar with or who is inadequately trained or supervised to meet the current industry standards. In other words, the originating firm may be more than qualified to conduct the contracted services, but the subcontractor could be less qualified. How do you find out if the work is being sub-contracted? Ask before committing a signature or money.

Have a certified engineer review the construction design for indoor or unusual climbing walls before and after construction to insure the construction meets safety standards.

Don't be afraid to shop around, but make sure the price quotations are for comparable (quality of service, reputation of firm, timely response, etc.) services. In addition to a written contract, have what you are purchasing (be it a construction project, a training program or an inspection) fully explained so that you can implement any recommendations provided by the professional.

Standards for construction

The builder should be very familiar with construction standards for challenge courses and climbing walls. Standards for challenge courses are available from the Association for Challenge Course Technology; standards for climbing walls are available from the Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America. Ask that the builder's contract contain a clause that states that the challenge course or climbing wall will meet the applicable industry construction standards. You can also ask that the contract include a guarantee that the company will return and fix anything (preferably at no cost to you) if the challenge course or climbing wall fails to meet the standards in effect when it was built. If you ask for such a statement to be added, and the builder responds with "what standards?" or "how do I get a copy of these standards?" warning bells should go off in your mind.

Specific fall protection guidelines are listed in the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's Handbook for Pubic Playground Safety. You can lessen or avoid severe low-ropes course accidents by providing adequate fall protection such as uniform wood chips or bark mulch. Generally, a minimum depth of six to twelve inches of uniform wood chips, bark mulch, or raked sand should be used out to a distance of six to eight feet beyond the fall zone of the activity. Many utility companies or tree trimming services will donate wood chips upon request. Be aware that wood chips degrade relatively quickly and will probably need to be replenished on an annual or semiannual basis to maintain adequate depths. While sand can be kept at depths for adequate fall protection, be aware that sand tends to become compressed, often collects animal feces, and should be raked frequently. Many professional inspection companies suggest fall protection materials in their inspection reports, but directors often let this slide if the mechanics of the course pass.

Inspections

American Camping Association standard D-27 and the ACCT standards call for annual inspections of challenge courses and climbing walls by a professional firm or qualified person with documented experience in constructing and maintaining such elements. This allows for upgrades to maintain the course at the current industry standards and also verifies that equipment has not degraded or failed. Perhaps a bolt has become bent, a cable clamp loosened, or a tree fell against a cable. Even with redundant safety systems, any of these problems could easily turn into "proximate cause" and should be repaired immediately.

Ask for a narrative inspection report to keep on file with proof that you followed up on recommendations. ACA and Association for Experiential Education visitors should ask to see the documented inspection and verify follow-up work (as reflected in ACA standard D-27 and AEE standards 13.F.04 and 18.F.06). Many health departments are becoming knowledgeable about this activity and may ask for a copy of the inspection report. This documentation also shows insurance companies that the camp director is providing a safe program.

Staff training

Technical training standards for challenge courses are currently being developed through ACCT. Future professional challenge course training programs will probably start with a 40-hour basic skills course. Additional training will be necessary for specialized populations or for advanced skills such as training others. While 40 hours may seem like a lot of training to some directors, keep in mind that even 40 hours of training does not mean a person is immediately qualified. Sending staff through a professional training program is not enough! Compare this activity to that of a lifeguard, for which we have numerous outside resources (Red Cross, Ellis & Associates, YMCA, Boy Scouts, Bronze Medallion) providing aquatic certifications and information. In-service training is an expectation for lifeguards today, as it should be for challenge course and climbing wall staff. There should be a documented apprenticeship program for verification of skills appropriate for your camp's unique setting, with periodic quality control reviews. Training should be comprehensive so that staff know how to conduct the activity properly and how to identify problems that may develop.

CPR and first aid should be the minimum medical certifications kept current, and the staff member should be familiar with the first aid kit contents and the equipment use, as well as how to fill out near-miss and accident reports. If we consider the job qualifications of challenge course staff to include "emergency response, medical treatment, or public safety personnel expected to render first aid in the course of their work," then the employer is required to offer the Hepatitis B immunization series to staff members in accordance with OSHA regulation 29 CFR 1910.1030. Video taping an emergency simulation with the cooperation of the local rescue squad can be an excellent source of in-service training and could establish greater commitment in the staff to perform their jobs safely. Reviewing the video tape with the rescue squad critiquing the staff performance should focus on identifying unforeseen problems and omissions in the emergency plans. There should be a formal process for investigating, evaluating, and disseminating the results of near-miss and accident reports to the staff. If corrective actions are identified by the administration, preferably in consultation with a professional firm, these new actions must be effectively communicated to the staff and patrons.

Screening participants

The use of medical screening forms is strongly encouraged. There have been some recent articles, including one in the Journal of Experiential Education, about stress in participants on high ropes courses resulting in heart rates frequently exceeding 180 beats per minute (and, in a couple of cases, heart attacks). There may be other reasons to screen out a participant such as pregnancy, certain types of medication, suicidal tenancies, or recent physical injuries (particularly joint injuries). Wilderness Medical Associates recently developed a medical screening guide (it's expensive but could be worth its weight in gold) for Outward Bound programs that can be adapted to challenge courses and climbing walls.

Some challenge courses and climbing walls are designed or suitable for persons with almost any type of disability. This opens opportunities for many recreation programs to offer unique and rewarding experiences to a wider population. Consult with more than one professional firm to discover the variety of activities available. Additional training may be necessary for the staff. Consult with therapeutic recreation professionals familiar with integrating persons with specific disabilities into outdoor settings.

Conclusion

The process of documenting and verifying the credentials of those who work with your program (be they staff or professional contractors) can be educational and may avert wasting valuable financial and staff resources. Take a close look at the practices used on your challenge course or climbing wall and compare them to the industry standards. Your expectation for safety will be an illusion if the administrative challenges of operating a challenge course or climbing wall are not met through proper and consistent actions. Challenge courses and climbing walls can be exciting, socially rewarding, and financially beneficial, but they do require a commitment from the administration to be operated safely. Are you meeting the challenge?

References

Bunting, C. J. (1995). Physiological measurements of stress during outdoor and adventure activities. Journal of Experiential Education, 18 (1), 5-11.

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (1991). Handbook for Public Playground Safety. Washington, D.C.: Author.

RELATED ARTICLE: The effects of modeling in adventure education

A study was conducted at the Mankato State University high ropes course to examine the effects of modeling (encouraging participants to observe another person perform an activity and then asking them to perform the same task) during an adventure education setting.

The research found that group members who were able to watch a number of people attempt the course needed less assistance than those who attempted the course first. This indicates that the participants had learned by observation.

The study also found that observation of competent models does not ensure that all participants will be successful in the activity. In addition to observing the model, participants must retain what they have seen, be physically able to reproduce the model's movements, and be sufficiently motivated to attempt the activity. If any of these ingredients are missing, the participant may struggle with the activity, no matter how competent the model.

Observers must feel that they can relate to the model. According to McCullagh, Weiss, and Ross, "One of the key model characteristics, especially in research with children, is the similarity of the model to the observer, which could include such factors as age, gender, status, and competence."

Camp staff need to be aware that the models they select can have a significant impact on the outcome of the activity. They should also remember their own roles as models. Offering campers effective role models is an important part of giving them a world of good.

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

McCullagh, P., Weiss, M.R., & Ross, D. (1989). Modeling considerations in motor skill acquisition and performance: An integrated approach. In K.B. Pandolf (Ed.) Exercise and sport sciences reviews (pp. 475-513). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.

Tholkes, B.F. (1994). Anxiety and outdoor adventure: A study of state anxiety and activity performance. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Ben Tholkes is an assistant professor in Western Carolina University's Park and Recreation Management department.

Will Evans is the Loss Control Specialist for Markel Insurance Company.

COPYRIGHT 1996 American Camping Association
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group