Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Yay - Someone Displayed Some Common Sense

  • 30-05-2010 09:50PM
    #1
    Kintarō Hattori
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,102 ✭✭✭✭


    Do you remember last year some tourists died at Skellig Michael and as a result a report was ordered to look into safety at the site. People were calling for railings and other safety measures as someone also died during the mid 90s as well. We discussed it last year:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055689162&highlight=Skellig+tourists


    So the report has come back and thankfully there won't be any railings going up. The report calls for better signs informing visitors that it is a dangerous trek. I'm delighted that common sense has prevailed. I seriously thought they would end up installing all sorts of safety features that a small number of people cried out for.

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0530/skelligmichael.html


    Woo hoo for common sense.


«13

Comments

  • #2
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    What's wrong with hand railings? I was watching that story on the news and those steps look very dodgy. A sign? Yeah, that'll help


  • #3
    SugarHigh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,265 ✭✭✭SugarHigh


    Collie D wrote: »
    What's wrong with hand railings? I was watching that story on the news and those steps look very dodgy. A sign? Yeah, that'll help
    They look like sh1t.

    If you're worried about safety then just don't go there. Should all natural landmarks be idiot proofed? Railings all along the cliffs of moher in case some idiot slips off?


  • #4
    John Lynch Ph.D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 49 ✭John Lynch Ph.D


    The report probably cost more than the railings, The family's of the deceased should be made responsible for its cost.
    (dead serious)


  • #5
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    SugarHigh wrote: »
    They look like sh1t.

    If you're worried about safety than just don't go there. Should all natural landmarks be idiot proofed? Railings all along the cliffs of moher in case some idiot slips off?

    A wooden handrail hardly detracts from a stairway.


  • #6
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    The family's of the deceased should be made responsible for its cost.
    (dead serious)

    Give me a break


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,023 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Collie D wrote: »
    What's wrong with hand railings? I was watching that story on the news and those steps look very dodgy. A sign? Yeah, that'll help

    Health and Safety overload in this country.
    I feel sorry for those that died there but lets be honest, its a risky heritage site, railings would seriously ruin the place.


  • #8
    Lando Griffin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,952 ✭✭✭Lando Griffin


    Bubble wrap all visitors to these places.


  • #9
    John Lynch Ph.D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 49 ✭John Lynch Ph.D


    Collie D wrote: »
    Give me a break

    Why should I pay for it?


  • #10
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    kippy wrote: »
    Health and Safety overload in this country.
    I feel sorry for those that died there but lets be honest, its a risky heritage site, railings would seriously ruin the place.

    Yet you admit it's risky. I honstly can't see how railings would detract from the site


  • #11
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    Why should I pay for it?

    By that logic families should pay for inquests and post mortems


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    SugarHigh wrote: »
    They look like sh1t.

    If you're worried about safety than just don't go there. Should all natural landmarks be idiot proofed? Railings all along the cliffs of moher in case some idiot slips off?

    I agree with the general principle of what you are saying here- that we can't bubble wrap the world and install handrails on the top of Carauntoohil and so on, because installing artificial mobility aids would take away from the natural beauty of these places. However, the steps leading up Skellig are themselves a form of artificial mobility aid, and installing handrails on the more dangerous sections would be improvong a pre existing artificial structure rather than creating one where none existed before, and I'm sure the monks would have done it themselves had they been able to.


  • #13
    SugarHigh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,265 ✭✭✭SugarHigh


    Collie D wrote: »
    A wooden handrail hardly detracts from a stairway.
    Yes it does if you're trying to preserve a monastery.

    I'd rather there be no signs either tbh.


  • #14
    John Lynch Ph.D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 49 ✭John Lynch Ph.D


    Collie D wrote: »
    By that logic families should pay for inquests and post mortems

    Inquests (If inconclusive or no one found at fault): Yes

    Postmortems: No


  • #15
    SugarHigh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,265 ✭✭✭SugarHigh


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I agree with the general principle of what you are saying here- that we can't bubble wrap the world and install handrails on the top of Carauntoohil and so on, because installing artificial mobility aids would take away from the natural beauty of these places. However, the steps leading up Skellig are themselves a form of artificial mobility aid, and installing handrails on the more dangerous sections would be improvong a pre existing artificial structure rather than creating one where none existed before, and I'm sure the monks would have done it themselves had they been able to.
    Which is not something you should be doing if you are trying to preserve a UNESCO World Heritage Site.


  • #16
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    Inquests (If inconclusive or no one found at fault): Yes

    I can see your mindset...I won't bother replying to any more of your posts


  • #17
    Boxoffrogs
    Closed Accounts Posts: 458 ✭✭Boxoffrogs


    I completely agree with the findings. I've visited, it's breathtaking. Sticking a rail there would totally detract from the natural beauty of the place. It should remain as is, unspoilt, imo.


  • #18
    SugarHigh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,265 ✭✭✭SugarHigh


    Too many people die climbing Mt. Everest, I think they should either build an escalator going up it or knock the fúcking thing down.


  • #19
    Kasabian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,688 ✭✭✭Kasabian


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    Inquests (If inconclusive or no one found at fault): Yes

    Postmortems: No

    Whats the PH.D stand for ?


  • #20
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,023 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Collie D wrote: »
    Yet you admit it's risky. I honstly can't see how railings would detract from the site

    Of course it is risky (so is crossing the road), its a large amount of old steps on the side of a pretty steep drop. Anyone who wouldnt admit it is a risky walk has a: never been there b: feels really comfortable in such an environement.
    Have you ever been there?


    Its been risky for 1300 odd years or so and a site of massive importance. Its also one of the best preserved of its type in europe.


  • #21
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,506 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    It would be pretty cool to install a water slide for the way down.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    SugarHigh wrote: »
    Too many people die climbing Mt. Everest, I think they should either build an escalator going up it or knock the fúcking thing down.

    Since when was Everest a tourist attraction? Mountain climbing is obvioulsy dangerous. Don't be facetious


  • #23
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    Why should I pay for it?
    Because it's your turn.
    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    Inquests (If inconclusive or no one found at fault): Yes
    That's just silly, it puts inquests beyond the reach of common people.


  • #24
    RMD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,662 ✭✭✭RMD


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    The report probably cost more than the railings, The family's of the deceased should be made responsible for its cost.
    (dead serious)

    Why should the family be held responsible? It's not their fault their relative died and the loss is already traumatic enough, the last thing they need is a bill for thousands being given to them for something they had no control over.


  • #25
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Kasabian wrote: »
    Whats the PH.D stand for ?
    Philip, Henry.... Richard?


  • #26
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    SugarHigh wrote: »
    Which is not something you should be doing if you are trying to preserve a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

    I'm glad they're not putting railings up tbh, but artificial improvements/alterations etc have been made to many historical sites, and if done well have negligible aesthetic impact.


  • #27
    Kasabian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,688 ✭✭✭Kasabian


    John Lynch Ph.D wrote: »
    The report probably cost more than the railings, The family's of the deceased should be made responsible for its cost.
    (dead serious)

    Will your family pay for the inquest when the bridge your hiding under collapses


  • #28
    Spastafarian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 749 ✭✭✭Spastafarian


    RMD wrote: »
    Why should the family be held responsible? It's not their fault their relative died and the loss is already traumatic enough, the last thing they need is a bill for thousands being given to them for something they had no control over.

    I don't think he got his Ph.D in a reputable university...


  • #29
    SugarHigh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,265 ✭✭✭SugarHigh


    Collie D wrote: »
    Since when was Everest a tourist attraction? Mountain climbing is obvioulsy dangerous. Don't be facetious
    The walkway is also clearly dangerous because they didn't have the means there was no such thing as health and safety standards when it was first built. Since the point of making it a UNESCO World Heritage site was to preserve it and not to make it comfy for stupid tourists then how is changing the structure a good idea?

    And yes I would call a Everest a tourist attraction.


  • #30
    Collie D
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,587 ✭✭✭✭Collie D


    SugarHigh wrote: »
    The walkway is also clearly dangerous because they didn't have the means there was no such thing as health and safety standards when it was first built. Since the point of making it a UNESCO World Heritage site was to preserve it and not to make it comfy for stupid tourists then how is changing the structure a good idea?

    And yes I would call a Everest a tourist attraction.

    I really don't see how a simple wooden handrail makes it less aesthetic. In what way would it detract from it? And somebody sliping or tripping is hardly stupid, unfortunate or clumsy maybe but definitely not stupid


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    kippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,023 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    SugarHigh wrote: »
    The walkway is also clearly dangerous because they didn't have the means there was no such thing as health and safety standards when it was first built. Since the point of making it a UNESCO World Heritage site was to preserve it and not to make it comfy for stupid tourists then how is changing the structure a good idea?

    And yes I would call a Everest a tourist attraction.
    Croagh Patrick is another "similiar site" in Ireland.
    Do they intend ring fencing the mountain with approved routes only and building an escalator at the top section?

    (I think the mortality rate may be lower but the serious injury rate is far higher than most other sites of importance in this country)
    Also, do the health and safety aficionados plan on FORCING all pilgrims who do this trek in their bare feet to put on some shoes??


    I am all for H and S by the way, but there are some very clear lines that you dont need to cross.


Advertisement
Advertisement