I’ve signed a lot of release forms for shore excursions in my time. From accepting risk for a coach tour to a Black Forrest cake factory (probably something to do with the cream and cherries) to deep diving with sharks in Malaysia.
I rarely hesitate. Why? Because, without being told of the real risk, I know the forms are legally almost worthless.
The terrible tragedy of White Island, the New Zealand site where a volcanic eruption resulted in the deaths of at least eight, including six Australians, and left dozens from all corners of the world in hospitals in New Zealand and Australia, is now likely to throw those forms into dramatic spot light.
Who knew what about the state of the volcano is now the main debating point as so many families mourn their loved ones.
There were 47 tourists on the island – many from Royal Caribbean’s Ovation of the Seas, which had sailed from Sydney. Did they know GeoNet upgraded White Island’s alert level from a level 1 to a level 2 on November 18, advising increased volcanic unrest on the island?
Level 2 is the highest alert level before an eruption takes place and indicates “moderate to heightened volcanic unrest” with the “potential for eruption hazards”.
Scary stuff. Would you have gone on a shore tour if you had that kind of information? Probably not.
The tragic incident has opened up a long-overdue debate about our dalliance with danger – and how able we are to assess the risks. We are, after all, supposed to be on holiday.
The search for new “immersive” experiences has thrown up all sorts of tours that, perhaps, would not have been offered before. Many involve risks that we may not be able to assess.
Auckland University’s Michael Lueck wrote a provocative piece on the website The Conversation this week pointing out: “The adrenaline rush is paramount for thrill-seeking tourists – but they don’t seriously want to be at risk of injury or loss of life.”
So true. Hindsight is always 20/20. But honestly, do we really think those tourists were prepared to put their lives on the line for a day tour to a volcano?
Channel News Asia carried an interesting report this week which looked at the toll of adventure tourism.
“Volcano tourism is a subset of adventure tourism, and New Zealand has had its fair share of incidents in this sector,” the channel pointed out. “Many will remember the collapse of a viewing platform at Cave Creek in 1995, where 14 people died. After the collapse, New Zealand’s Department of Conservation inspected more than 500 structures, resulting in the closure of 65.”
Japan’s Mount Ontake erupted in 2014 killing 63 people. A year earlier the Mayon volcano in the Philippines erupted killing five climbers. Last year, one tourist died in an eruption of Italy’s Stromboli volcano, which has become a resort island.
New Zealand is keen to present itself as an adventure capital. Adrenaline is in the DNA of the nation’s tourism. But, as many have pointed out this week, it’s a fine balance. Thrill-seekers are looking for risk – but in a controlled way.
So what are the lessons?
We can minimise the risk by checking, thinking clearly about what is on offer and then assessing what the chances of something going wrong are. But we can only do so much. Assessing a volcano takes scientific knowledge.
The questions that will surround this shore excursion for guests of Royal Caribbean is how much they were told – and how much they relied on the cruise line’s reputation.
And whether Royal Caribbean made any independent assessment of the risks to its passengers.
The Australian newspaper said in its opinion column this week: “Better protocols must emerge to avoid another tragedy on this scale…Volcano tourism is a specialist area…scientists are the best people to judge whether it is safe to visit seismic hot spots.”
As we search for more experiences that are different, White Island is a wake up call.
The cruise line is held responsible for the safety of all on board. They are to blame, nobody else. These cruises make money from going on excursions, they are not included in the price of the cruise. I know we are all adventurous, at some stage of our lives, but isn’t it better to come back home from your “cruise of a lifetime,” than not at all.
Hindsight is 20/20 vision. My husband and I with 2 friends visited Mount Etna when it was rumbling, fortunately nothing happened while we were on top and staring at this magnificent sight. Would we do it again? Yes, it was worth it. People go on holidays to see things they cannot see at home. As we all know Cruise companies and other holiday providers need people to do these things to make their money and for their business to survive. We humans as a species live on adrenalin, it’s a fact. Blame the volcano and Mother Nature and the people who will spend money to have these adventures. Oh and yes, if you take your children on a holiday you would of course take them on that tour if you are going yourself. It would be a fantastic experience providing you return safely from it. We take these risks. Cruise lines generally do not want to have these sorts of things happen and would surely take care that nothing like this would happen if it could be avoided. Very sad for those left injured and families who have lost their precious relatives however hopefully we will learn and try to move on and improve.
A harsh call to blame the tourists. I toured volcanoes in Hawaii on a cruise a few years ago and was told to wear solid footwear as the ground was hot. We stood in the steam and looked down into the mouth of the smoking volcano. We had a great day and experienced something not available at home. Did we consider ourselves at risk,no. The tour was organised from the ship as were many tours per week. and we trouped along believing we were safe. At no time did we consider that the cruise line would endanger us. We acknowledged that mother nature is unpredictable but considered the risk to be very very low. Those victims are blameless, they did what thousands of tourists do every day, look for the unusual. Of course they wouldn’t have gone knowing the outcome. Blaming them is like blaming the victims of the Malaysian Airlines disaster.
Your life is presious put it in a situation that is a natural wonder and a dangerous one ,giving off gases and hot mud would put it as no no for me. Go to Rotorua for that less dangerous adventure.
Obviously a very bad choice, but what idiot takes their kids on a tour like this.
One must now ask, who was the idiot who gave the OK for tourists to go to White island in the first place? Because of its likelihood of eruption without warning and the poisonous gases emitted, it had always been a NO GO zone. Even volcanologists agree it was a dangerous and foolhardy decision in the 1990s to allow tourists on the island. One must ask WHY? Obviously there was money in it for the tour companies but the Govt. was raking in the licencing fees and GST so they stood to make millions of $ in passive income by allowing people to put their lives at risk without those people knowing fully how much risk there was. Would we allow people to go to the zoo and play with the lions and tigers? I think we could all agree that would be dangerous and would not be allowed, but walking around inside the crater of an active volcano that could erupt without warning at any moment isn’t dangerous and therefore is OK? Might as well play Russian Roulette, I think you have better odds of staying alive.
A level 2 alert should surely have precluded any excursions to White Island.
At the bottom of the below link is a graph of the activity in the months prior to the eruption. If I had seen this I would not even think of going there.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-12/new-zealand-white-island-volcano-eruption-how-it-unfolded/11789586
I think most New Zealanders are well aware of White Island’s propensity to erupt suddenly so it’s probably not a good idea for tour groups to be landed there. Traveling round it on a boat or a helicopter would be sufficient.