wayno wrote:msc divested themselves of all their volunteer instructors. the Federated mountain clubs were pretty scathing about them, they get govt money, but what they do is often duplicated already from other online sources. they called for them to have their funding taken away,
That's only partly fair, I think. MSC looked at what it was doing and decided that courses were of low value because they weren't reaching so many of the people at the most risk, or something like that. How many of the people whom you read about in serious incidents would
ever have considered going near an MSC course?
The decision was rightly controversial because the it crippled a whole structure of amateur trainers and low-cost ways to build expertise, but there was reasoning behind it. There's plenty of logic in arguing that some of the funding MSC received towards running low-cost courses, researching safety and producing materials to upskill people who want to be upskilled could be diverted to another organisation which actually wants to do those things, like Outdoor Training NZ, which formed from the remnants of disgruntled former MSC instructors.
MSC does produce stuff that's not simply duplicating other sources, though. As part of its work in trying to invent a useful purpose for itself, someone noticed there's a void of useful comparable data about outdoor accidents. That's where the There and Back report came from, which makes a fairly good initial attempt at consolidating all the data on outdoor incidents into a clear report that'll hopefully be updated again and again over time to help figure out if and how things are changing.
https://www.mountainsafety.org.nz/insig ... -and-back/The report includes many circles.