 |
 |
As Janos points out, oil companies tend to take this very seriously, and rightly so. For us this falls under occupational health, and prior to work in the field, in offshore facilities or countries with specific health risks, there exist specific assessments. These assessments normally fall under the name of ‘fit for work’, and they are conducted by specifically trained medical staff. I have not been able to find specific guidelines from the health perspective, but IPIECA (www.ipieca.org<http://www.ipieca.org>) and IOGP (www.iogp.org<http://www.iogp.org>) tend to be refence bodies for this. There are also documents such as British Standard BS 8848 which you might want to check (if your uni doesn’t mind paying for the download). Finally, industry training organizations such as Nautilus tend to have guidelines which you might also want to check: https://www.nautilusworld.com/FieldWorkSafety?category=Home cheers oscar [cid:image011.png@01D39041.0C68B8E0] Oscar Fernandez Bellon [cid:image014.png@01D39041.0C68B8E0]<http://www.repsol.com/> Structural Geology Advisor Structure & Tectonics Group Tel.: (+34) 91 7530954 [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> De: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] En nombre de Urai, Janos Enviado el: 18 January 2018 09:29 Para: [log in to unmask] Asunto: Re: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students I am one of those who actually had a big accident. A student walked off a footpath in the Alps, fell 15 m and was very close to dying. I was lucky to have very experienced first aiders in the group, who helped to keep him alive, arrange helicopter rescue and keep the group safe. I try to take field safety very seriously, especially after working for a large oil company in the past, and at the same time I realise that we in academia do not have the funding to take field safety to the levels large companies require. (the student completely recovered after two months in hospital and 8 operations) kind regards, Janos Prof. Dr. Janos L. Urai Structural Geology, Tectonics and Geomechanics RWTH Aachen University, Lochnerstrasse 4-20 D-52056 Aachen, Germany T: +49 241 809 5723 e-mail: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> www.ged.rwth-aachen.de<http://www.ged.rwth-aachen.de> (The student survived and has completely recovered). On 17. Jan 2018, at 2319:, Richard Styron <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: The safety issues that Elisabeth brings up are pretty important to me. If I was putting together a field camp curriculum, I would have Day 1 (or maybe Day -1, before leaving campus) be an all-day wilderness first aid class—maybe even one that is Red Cross or NOLS certified (in the US, these are usually done in 2 days but can be taught in one longer one). The basics of hydration, dressing wounds, stabilizing joints, CPR etc. are pretty straightforward to apply when the knowledge is fresh. To me, this knowledge should be mandatory for any field geologist, and I would prefer not to do much remote fieldwork with a partner who hasn’t had instruction in this. I would submit that this knowledge and skills are more important and information-dense than any single day of field camp, and are more likely to be used ever again… However, regardless of whether the students actually have to use these skills at field camp (and we surely hope they don’t), these courses increase environmental and self-awareness as well as self-confidence. If you just had a course instructing you on how to prepare against and treat heat exhaustion/dehydration, sprained ankles, and snakebites (what I would consider the big 3 things for students to watch out for in the western US), you might just pack a little more water and look before you leap, but also be less afraid of rough terrain because you practiced taking care of the bad situations instead of just hearing about the dangers. You might even pack a little first aid kit and know what stuff is in it! Oh, and this counts double for professors and TAs, who have actual responsibility to administer care... —Richard On Jan 17, 2018, at 12:48 PM, Elisabeth Nadin <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: I really love this conversation thread, it's a topic I haven't thought about in particular (fitness test or training), but it's very relevant to the field camp that we run. We often have students with poor joint issues, meaning that by the end of 6 weeks they are taking painkillers every day due to bad knees (even the young ones). I don't have an answer, but rather another set of questions, related to safety: how many of you teaching field camp have grappled with safety issues at outcrops? do you require helmets, or have them as an option? how many are rigorously checking that students are wearing eye protection while using a hammer? do you allow sunglasses as a substitute for lab glasses? what other safety issues do you address that I may not have even thought of? Elisabeth On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Douwe van Hinsbergen <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hi all, My two cents: I run a 4 week, 1st year undergrad fieldwork in Spain. Often with temperatures around 30C, bushy slopes, ~400 m elevation differences, and with full day, 10 km hikes on a 6-day-a-week basis. We normally have about 50 participants. We have no compulsory fitness courses, we only mention that we expect that they are physically fit enough to participate. Unfitness of students happens of course and is normally linked to being overweight, or heavy smoking. Our experience is that such students become fitter during the fieldwork. We don’t really see a structural problem with fitness, nor a trend towards bigger unfitness (more the opposite, with decreasing smoking and alcohol intake in the last decade). Students tend to like fieldwork, and know that they’re gonna get sweaty, some more than others. Incidentally, we have students with ‘real’ physical or mental challenges (e.g. autism). We have students always working in the field in teams of 2. Students with disabilities are then typically in teams of 3 (and they design their own teams, we don’t assign this), with their two mates doing the physically more challenging parts. Although this sometimes gives some tension, it works generally very well. Cheers! Douwe -- Dr. Douwe J.J. van Hinsbergen | Associate Professor | Department of Earth Sciences | Utrecht University| Heidelberglaan 2<https://maps.google.com/?q=Heidelberglaan+2,+3584+CS+Utrecht&entry=gmail&source=g>, 3584 CS Utrecht<https://maps.google.com/?q=Heidelberglaan+2,+3584+CS+Utrecht&entry=gmail&source=g> | Room 8.09 | tel. (030) 253 6712 | [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | http://www.geologist.nl<http://www.geologist.nl/> | On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:06 PM, Christie Rowe <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hi all, I think it's important to mention here that there is a lot of difference in attitudes and practices of fitness between students of different cultural and economic backgrounds. In my own field teaching I spend a ton of time trying to help students feel comfortable just being out of doors, learning about hygiene and safety while camping, respect and be very aware of the rattlesnake but don't let fear of it stop you from leaving the trail, etc. Even my mostly Canadian students who have spent lots of time outdoors are not prepared for the desert environment in our Nevada field course and can be caught unawares by the specific challenges. It's been documented that students who don't grow up doing a lot of outdoors activities can find this element of field geology a real turn off, which might be keeping some people, particularly from under-represented groups, from giving us a try. We can't afford to make fear/inexperience in the field be a bottleneck that reduces our talent pool! There is no easy solution to making the boots-and-compass field work accessible to everybody, but there are lots of ways to encourage students and help them ease into it so they can fully enjoy the geology. Fear of the unknown might be a big deterrent, so anything you can do to introduce students with short trips before long trips, tell them when to buy boots and break them in, suggest specific preparation routines, etc. will help the students who didn't grow up in scouts to catch up with their outdoor skills and comfort (and fitness). Christie On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:52 AM, John Wakabayashi <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: This is indeed an interesting subject, so I'll throw in some rambling thoughts (no solutions, though), because I've been teaching field courses for awhile and my main mapping exercise I've taught for the last 13 years is in a moderately rugged area of the Coast Ranges of California with 550 m of relief. Distances covered by a student in one day in the field exceed 10 km for the longer field days with gross cumulative elevation gain of >700m. Many slopes are steep, but not potentially lethal, and there is some bad brush although most of the brushy areas are so bad they are avoided. Has poor fitness of some students made this exercise difficult and unpleasant for them? Yes. Would such students have benefitted from some sort of fitness regimen prior to going into the field? Certainly yes, but the difficult question is how to encourage such a program because it in most educational systems such a program would have to be voluntary. In my department, knowledge of the physical rigors of the above project has prompted several students to do various sorts of training prior to it, but in nearly all cases it has the most physically fit students who done this rather than those that need it the most. My perception is that average level of physical fitness among geology students (in California, USA) has declined over the last 4 decades or so, since I was an undergrad taking my field classes. This seems to mirror national trends in physical fitness, more than it does the decrease in field training in geology departments. In any case, I do not have solutions, but I am very interested to see what ideas folks have about this. I think this is not so much a geologically-specific problem, so much as it is a general question of how one convinces students about the benefits of physical fitness. I would not be getting out in the field at all--in fact I would barely be able to walk-- were it not for fairly intense training that has overcome mild asthma, two knee operations (and many more injuries that didn't end up with surgery), multiple ankle injuries (very bad sprains, and one break), and three decades of back problems (which were more or less erased by a new training regimen begun in my early 50s). On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 7:31 AM, Alan Gibbs <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hello Roger, apart from the obvious students who are physically challenged that Terry mentions I don’t think that what you describe should be a major challenge for students. My gut feel is that the flagging participation level is due to some other cause, maybe they don’t see the relevance, are lacking the group cohesion that often makes field course great fun for students, or just need more beer afterwards. Anyway sounds like boredom rather than a real physical issue and a “fitness regime” would probably add to problem. Take a step back and see if you can see a different picture rather than one of snowflakes. All the very best, Alan Gibbs From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Pavlis, Terry L Sent: 17 January 2018 14:06 To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students This question is an interesting contrast to other discussions in the forum about field work that are the absolute opposite—what do we do with students who are physically challenged and can’t do even a field class where the physical demands are less rigorous? I don’t think there is an easy solution in this case or the other one. We’ve always dealt with these situations on a case by case basis, but it makes a lot of work for the instructor and a lot of agony for students. The worst is to have a student enter a field course thinking they can handle it, but then have to drop out because they can’t handle the physical demands—clearly what you’re trying to avoid here. Were I in your shoes, I think I’d probably do something like develop a student questionare where they could give you an evaluation of their fitness, then meet with those you have concerns over individually. Then develop some kind of alternative for those who you fear might be either a problem, or even in danger, because of their fitness. There are a lot of talented people who have physical challenges who would make spectacular geologists, and we’ve been bad at dealing with this as a profession. I feel your pain about student fitness (I’m almost 65 and still can outwalk most of the students who take my field class) but you might question your own procedures in that the statement “flagging participation levels by students” might reflect a problem in course logistics where the class has gotten a reputation. As an aside, many of us here in NA have 5-6 week field courses that are required. (this is no longer universal, however, as many have lowered this requirement) We actually divide our class into two 3 week segments. In my case, 200m of relief doesn’t really sound all that bad physically—we just ran a 3 week winter course in an area with that much relief and I thought it was a pleasant changef from some classes where we’ve worked in 400-500m of relief. We didn’t have brush though, so the comparison is poor. Hope this is useful. Terry Pavlis Univ. Texas El Paso From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roger Gibson Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 4:40 AM To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students Dear List Members, I am interested in finding out if anyone has set up a required/recommended 4-6 month fitness regimen for students engaging in summer field camps, and whether any input has been obtained from sports scientists or fitness experts about what is reasonable and what range of expectations needs to be factored into evaluation of such a program in terms of individual health profiles of students. I would also be keen to hear from anyone about experiences with regard to incentivising/enforcing fitness compliance; i.e., whether evaluation of pre-mapping fitness is done, and how non-compliance with minimum levels is dealt with. As background, I am interested in developing minimum recommended fitness levels for a ca. 10-day field mapping trip that is a compulsory component of an undergraduate course. The mapping area is relatively small (3-4 km2) but physically very demanding (~200 m relief, with dense thornveld vegetation; daytime temperatures can reach 25-30 °C) and I am trying to address flagging participation levels by students who appear to be experiencing difficulties completing a full day’s work to the recommended levels. I am aware that Summer Camps in the US, which may last more than 4 weeks in remote areas, may set fitness levels and require prior proof thereof, but I think these may be voluntary/optional courses, so one would expect participation to be more enthusiastic. Thanks in advance, Roger Gibson Roger L. Gibson Professor of Structural Geology and Metamorphic Petrology Head, School of Geosciences University of the Witwatersrand P O WITS Johannesburg 2050 SOUTH AFRICA Tel. +27 11 7176553<tel:+27%2011%20717%206553> Sec. +27 11 7176547<tel:+27%2011%20717%206547> Fax. +27 11 7176579<tel:+27%2011%20717%206579> Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. </table<> -- *********************************************** Christie Rowe Associate Prof & Wares Faculty Scholar Canada Research Chair in Earthquake Geology Earth & Planetary Sciences, McGill University 3450 University St., Montreal, QC H3A 0E8 Office: 514 398 2769<tel:(514)%20398-2769> http://eps.mcgill.ca/~crowe<http://eps.mcgill.ca/%7Ecrowe> AVISO LEGAL: Esta información es privada y confidencial y está dirigida únicamente a su destinatario. Si usted no es el destinatario original de este mensaje y por este medio pudo acceder a dicha información, por favor, elimine el mensaje. La distribución o copia de este mensaje está estrictamente prohibida. Esta comunicación es solo para propósitos de información y no debería ser considerada como una declaración oficial de Repsol. La transmisión del correo electrónico no garantiza que sea seguro o esté libre de error. Por consiguiente, no manifestamos que esta información sea completa o precisa. Toda información está sujeta a alterarse sin previo aviso. This information is private and confidential and intended for the recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an official statement from Repsol. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. All information is subject to change without notice. LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT: This information is private and confidential and intended for the recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an official statement from Repsol. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. All information is subject to change without notice. Esta información es privada y confidencial y está dirigida únicamente a su destinatario. Si usted no es el destinatario original de este mensaje y por este medio pudo acceder a dicha información, por favor, elimine el mensaje. La distribución o copia de este mensaje está estrictamente prohibida. Esta comunicación es solo para propósitos de información y no debería ser considerada como una declaración oficial de Repsol. La transmisión del correo electrónico no garantiza que sea seguro o esté libre de error. Por consiguiente, no manifestamos que esta información sea completa o precisa. Toda información está sujeta a alterarse sin previo aviso.