Risk management

Groups experience risk differently and individuals have different thresholds and perceptions of risk.  These are just my views on risk management based on solo tramping off track - for an authoritative source on risk in the outdoors check out the Mountain Safety Council's website and manuals.

Some argue that a degree of risk is necessary in order to get the reward from feeling you've overcome a challenge.  I tend to agree that risk is an important part of the experience - but you want to think about and manage risk to keep the actual risk less than the perceived risk. 

Definitions 

I use the terms: 

• hazard - some thing or situation that could lead to a consequence (e.g., a river). 
• incident - an event where a hazard could result in a consequence (e.g., losing footing during a river crossing).  If there is no consequence it could be a near miss (e.g., slipping but regaining your feet).
• risk - the probability (or chance) that a hazard results in a negative outcome (e.g., a swift current and slimy rocks will increase the chances of an incident while crossing a river).
• consequence - a negative outcome (e.g., being swept downstream and losing your pack or drowning)  
• actual risk - what the real possibility of an incident resulting in a consequence is - as distinct from:
• perceived risk - what you or someone else thinks the actual risk is.  Where your perception of risk is lower than the actual risk you've got problems.  (e.g., if you've misread a section of river and overlooked a hole in the river bed - the actual risk of crossing is higher than your perceived risk).  
• tolerable or acceptable risk - the level of risk that you are prepared to accept
• risk assessment/ management/ mitigation - 'risk' is also used as a catch-all term for the process of assessing and managing hazards, probabilities and consequences. 
• residual risk - the risk remaining after you've taken mitigation action (e.g., you move to a better crossing point with a smooth bottom and safe run-out and use good technique to cross - your risk is lower than the actual risk had you crossed at the previous point)  

Hazards

Hazards abound in the outdoors (climate, terrain, rivers, livestock, material on slopes ...) and I won't get into describing them here.  Some hazards are managed on your behalf (e.g., a swingbridge over a big river), but in general, you can't control the existence of hazards, rather, you avoid/minimise exposure to and harm from them. 

Below I mostly talk about the human element in groups and in solo decision making that affects your exposure to hazards.  For completeness I'll note here that people themselves can be a hazard, e.g.:

• Hunters that might mistake you for a deer or mishandle their firearm
• People that get violent

I've never experienced the later but once  talked to a hunter the day after he accidentally discharged his rifle in a hut with people present. 

Risk of an incident happening

Having one or more companions can decrease the risk of some incidents that could lead to negative outcomes, for example:

• mutual support crossing rivers
• having others to identify when your decision making is impaired
• ability to draw on combined experience to avoid hazardous situations and hammer out solutions
• more eyes to identify hazards and safer routes
• harnessing economies of scale in critical tasks (e.g., pitching camp in bad conditions)
• Redundancy of critical gear, e.g compass, PLB

But travelling with others can also increase the risk of things going wrong:

• group dynamics and processes can lead to poor decision making, e.g., group think (poor analysis because everyone latches onto the same idea and no-one works it through properly), shifting risk thresholds (where no-one speaks against a decision for fear of being called a wuss), halo effect (not questioning a leaders decision because they're the expert)
• more people = more chance of body and gear failures that then expose the whole group to risk (e.g., getting cold while waiting for a slow party member or failing to make a hut and the whole group having to camp in a less than ideal place).   
• More risks from people, e.g., dislodged rocks, or that one idiot that does dumb things or goes a bit postal.

While a solo tramper can reduce the chance that something goes wrong by building experience and consciously practicing conservative decision making, they cannot replace all the benefits a group can provide in identifying risks and reducing the chance that something might go wrong.  On the other hand, a good leader can manage most of the risks group dynamics can bring. 

So, although it is difficult to generalise, my view is that foregoing the support of a group may increase the chances that a solo tramper will experience an incident, but any increase in probability is not sufficient to say that solo tramping represents an unacceptable increase in the possibility of an incident.  

Self  monitoring 

Without others to check your behaviours, there's a bunch of psychological settings that can trip you up.  

Heuristics is a useful concept. Basically, your brain is lazy and will seek to reach decisions with the minimum effort. This means that you will sometimes make decisions based on incomplete information or analysis because your brain has taken a bit of a short cut and come up with what it thinks is the best course of action in the circumstances. Where you are aware of it, you might see it as applying a rule of thumb, or making an educated guess. However, it can also happen without you being aware - particularly if you are tired. 

Some heuristics are useful - e.g. leaping for the curb when you see a car out of the corner of your eye. some are not so ... e.g.: 

• If you've crossed this river at this point before you may not even be aware that you haven't checked the crossing point as thoroughly as you would for a different river. 
• I've crossed a face that looks similar to this before so I can cross this one using the same techniques (without studying the particularities of this face in this weather). 

The challenge is to identify when you might be applying heuristics in a way that increases your risks and to stop and do the full analysis that a situation requires.  
I'm not sure if all the following are heuristics as such but they are common head space traps:

• Optimism bias - being overly optimistic in predicting a scenario, e.g. looking at a map and over-estimating how much ground you can cover before dark, or over estimating your abilities to cross a river or climb a bluff.  
• Confirmation bias - picking up features of a situation that match your mental model and glossing over those that don't.  E.g., navigating in clag and being too ready to accept that a knob is the knob that marks the spur to the hut (wishful thinking), or seeing a deer when it's a branch (stag fever). 
• Risk homeostatis - where something that we perceive as making us more safe leads us to take more risk.  E.g. Doing gnarly solo trips because you can always pull your PLB.  
• Familiarity breeds contempt - you're familiar with a place or activity and you get a bit cocky - your perception of the risk is less than the actual risk
• Relaxing too early - e.g. approaching a hut and not being as careful with a river crossing because in your head you're already lighting the fire
• Get-there-itis - pushing harder than is safe to get to a goal - e.g., travelling in the dark in bad weather to make the road end rather than camping up.

These things can all effect our decision making and shift the levels of risk we take without being aware just how much additional risk we have taken on.

Prevention: recognise where and when these may come into play and consciously stop and analyse the situation to test assumptions. Look for worst case scenarios and ask yourself questions:

• what if ... that spur is covered in leatherwood, that branch breaks when I lunge for it?
• would I take this risk at the beginning of the day?
• If (name of person you think has good judgement) were watching would I be doing this?
• How bad is the alternative if I don't take this risk? E.g., am I risking injury or death simply to avoid an inconvenience like being late for work or pitching the fly instead of pushing for the hut?
• What would I see if I am not where I think I am? I.e. switch from looking for features that confirm you are on track in clag, to looking for features that indicate you're not, and check your compass frequently even when you're confident you know where you are. 

Consequence of an incident  

The consequence of something going wrong is another thing entirely.  If something does go wrong, as a solo tramper you do not have the resources of a group to help you through.  For example, if you are physically or mentally impaired or lose resources to the degree that you cannot help yourself or make rational decisions, such as being knocked unconscious, becoming hypothermic, suffering significant injury, or losing your gear in a river.  A PLB can mitigate some but not all of these, so the consequences for a solo tramper are likely to be significantly worse.  

A group has more mental and physical resources - it can specialise to manage adverse events (including splitting the party to get help), it can pool gear (including carrying group gear such as tents, cooking and first aid) and it will have some redundancy so gear failure is likely to have less impact (e.g., if a solo tramper leaves their PLB at a campsite).

In other words - if something does go wrong a solo tramper faces the likelihood that although the immediate consequences may be the same as if they were in a group, the ultimate consequences will be more severe. 

For example - travelling in a group will have little influence on the possibility of you slipping in a scramble up a waterfall, or on the immediate consequence in terms of the injuries suffered.  However, if you are knocked unconscious or break a leg your chances of survival with a group is much higher.  The group will manage immediate risks (e.g., drowning), call help, and prevent your condition from deteriorating (e.g., from hypothermia).         

I'll also briefly touch on a couple of other elements of consequence that can be overlooked.  The cost of rescue - let's assume you leave an intentions sheet, fill in the logbooks, and leave signs of your direction of travel, you are still likely to be harder and more expensive to find than a party of four.  The other consequence that solo trampers may sometimes gloss over is the impact on others in terms of worry and emotional harm.  As discussed above, if you are in a group the chances of severe outcome and the consequent emotional harm to others is reduced, and you'll find that your family are a lot less worried if you are overdue in a group compared to when you're on your own. 

That's all very gloomy - however, there’s a bunch of stuff you can do to reduce risk, consequence and to provide some benefit back for the increased costs and harms that others might bear as the result of your choices.

In summary, based on no empirical evidence, when it comes to things going badly, my view is that the chance of something going wrong is probably slightly higher and the risks of negative or expensive outcomes are significantly higher for a solo tramper.

Even if you don't agree with that, it is worth thinking about how you manage risks in terms of actions that reduce the chance of something going wrong (e.g., avoiding a route with river crossings in bad weather) and actions that reduce the consequence if something goes wrong (e.g., carrying a PLB). 

Managing risk

The Mountain Safety Council has some good resources on managing risks in the outdoors.

The following are some risk management practices ...

• Plan your trips - write explicit trip intentions, do a pre-trip risk assessment, do your research (e.g. weather, river gauges, terrain). 
• Be brutally honest about your skills, strengths and weaknesses (err on the side of underestimating your abilities) and plan trips that are within your capabilities.  Look for opportunities to safely develop skills you are lacking. 
• Take the right gear for the trip (for the specific terrain, weather, activities etc), and make sure it is in good condition. 
• Always carry a PLB on you (not in your pack), and usually take a cell phone (but don't rely on it).
• Write in the logbook at every hut passed.
• If your intentions change during a trip, try to make this known (e.g. note in a hut log, call or text, leave a message with another party).
• Reassess the risks constantly through the day.
• Think ahead to identify situations early when your decision making might be impaired (e.g., due to cold or injury, confirmation bias, get thereitis, confusing inconvenience (such as being late) with real risks (falling in the dark)).
• Review when something goes wrong - either on your own trips or on others' (e.g., media coverage of accidents, coronial findings etc). Think about your decision making in terms of those events.
• Check your gear after a trip and address issues before your next trip.
• Use packing lists adjusted for the nature of the trip (tops, season etc). 

What are the options for shelter, water, and exit routes if you don't get as far as you expected or come across an impassable obstacle?   If the weather is good and things go well   Looking at map - impact of terrain, vegetation and fitness on your travel times.

Risk management before the trip

Identifying, assessing and managing risk starts as soon as you start thinking about a trip and continues throughout as you re-evaluate and amend your plans and actions.  Most of it is an unconscious part of decision-making.  

The table in the intentions sheet (see trip planning page) is intended to make me stop and think about the specific mix of hazards associated with a trip:    

• the proposed activities - what you're planning to do 
• the specific environment - weather, terrain, rivers, vegetation ... 
• the gear required - what's needed, has it been checked, and do I know how to use it.  Bearing in mind the consequence of and contingencies for failures - e.g., for long trips gear failure will likely have significant impact on safety and the ability to meet goals.   
• the people - or person.  Being honest about your fitness, experience, ability to deal with the unexpected, fears, strengths/weaknesses, mental state ...

It's not a precise science - it just prompts me to specify the nature of the hazards, roughly which ones are most likely, how serious they might be, how I might reduce the probability or the consequences and, what is the residual risk if I take those actions.  

Risk management during the trip

The initial risk assessment gives you a starting point for what to look out for on the trip.  During each day you will be re-evaluating as situations change: 

• Changes in the environment - signals of changing weather and river levels, unexpected vegetation or terrain variation, unplanned hazards such as wasps.  Hut books can have warnings about the route ahead. 
• Changes in the type of activity - e.g., an unplanned river crossing to avoid a bluff, or more (higher) rock scrambling than you had anticipated.
• Changes in gear - through damage or loss or undertaking a new activity that your current gear is not quite suited to. E.g., breaking your head torch, or a leak in your water bottle 
• Changes in your self - i.e., self-monitoring to identify and manage issues early - health, fatigue, thirst, hunger - including anything that might affect your decision-making abilities including identifying situations where heuristics and biases might come into play.  E.g., identifying developing chaff or sunburn before it gets bad, identifying when you're pushing it to make a destination. 

Thinking ahead

This is more subtle than it sounds, and more important. You want to be looking for the early warning signs that risks are going to change (e.g., mares tail clouds, change in the snow pack), but you also need to apply your imagination to how all elements of the situation will change - including yourself.

For example, if I keep going through a blizzard I'm going to get cold and this will effect not only my physical ability but also my mental state and decision making ability. What is the risk that I will not recognise this at the time? What should I do now to mitigate or avoid that risk?

I admire those that have the self-awareness and imagination to project themselves into a future scenario, do the analysis, set a plan and take initial actions early.

Gear

The consequence of gear failure and loss is likely to be higher for a solo tramper as you don't have group resources to help compensate.  I've touched on checking and maintaining gear but a couple of observations about losing gear ...

I keep PLB (or InReach), compass, map, and whistle on my person.  Usually cellphone too, apart from crossing rivers. I don't carry a survival kit but perhaps should. If I lose my pack in a river I will at least be able to navigate and call for help. 

I try to remember to always do a systematic last look when leaving a hut, campsite, rest spot, or the car. Watch for heuristics, your brain will be all too keen to skip over looking under the edge of the bunk, or consciously stopping to look back at the spot you sat for lunch.  The tiny extra bit of care is worth it given the more significant consequences of losing a key piece of kit as a solo tramper. 

After the trip

I should practice what I preach ... after a trip it's worth systematically reviewing your risk management from planning through to decision making during the trip.  Some questions:

• Did I get the trip plan right? E.g., the right gear, within my fitness and abilities, reading the weather, terrain, rivers ...
• Were there any incidents / close calls, and what can I learn from them? 
• Review key decisions - were they right in hindsight, did I just get lucky, what if they hadn't panned out the way they did?
• What will I do differently next time?