Gauging acceptable risk on an excursion..... The Volcano - Rescue from Whakaari

[airboss1998]

So, we had some weather 'bomb' here in the midwest tonight (42F to 10F in two hours) and we were surfing Netflix.  The wife ended up with The Volcano - Rescue from Whakaari.  VERY interesting show.

 

I AM NOT trying to stir up trouble, not pointing at any particular cruise line, but it raises some interesting dialog.  In this case, off the coast of New Zealand, cruise ship passengers, and other tourists, were caught on a small island when an active volcano erupted, 22 deaths.  I assume there were lots of safety briefings, liability releases, etc., but sometimes I wonder if we truly consider the risks.  It makes me wonder if the cruise companies are really responsible or insulated from retribution.  One newlywed couple, the husband spent a month in a coma in a New Zealand hospital.  

 

Last month, in Costa Rica, we drove 2.5 hours in torrential rains, on a busy highway, and I could only think that I hoped our driver was well trained.  I don't live life in fear, but I might do my homework a bit more after seeing this film.

 

Sad story, but interesting documentary.

[GeezerCouple]

1 hour ago, airboss1998 said:

So, we had some weather 'bomb' here in the midwest tonight (42F to 10F in two hours) and we were surfing Netflix.  The wife ended up with The Volcano - Rescue from Whakaari.  VERY interesting show.

 

I AM NOT trying to stir up trouble, not pointing at any particular cruise line, but it raises some interesting dialog.  In this case, off the coast of New Zealand, cruise ship passengers, and other tourists, were caught on a small island when an active volcano erupted, 22 deaths.  I assume there were lots of safety briefings, liability releases, etc., but sometimes I wonder if we truly consider the risks.  It makes me wonder if the cruise companies are really responsible or insulated from retribution.  One newlywed couple, the husband spent a month in a coma in a New Zealand hospital.  

 

Last month, in Costa Rica, we drove 2.5 hours in torrential rains, on a busy highway, and I could only think that I hoped our driver was well trained.  I don't live life in fear, but I might do my homework a bit more after seeing this film.

 

Sad story, but interesting documentary.

 

Yes, "things happen".   It can be scary to contemplate, because the "thing" could be almost anything, and at any time.

 

When that volcano on White Island erupted, we were just off a different NZ/Australia cruise and still in Sydney before flying home.

I don't think that our cruise had offered that particular excursion.

 

However, it did make us think of the bubbling "drive in volcano" in St. Lucia.  We had a chance to see that when no one else was around, which made it a bit more spooky (and the White Island catastrophe had not yet happened).  We were fascinated and also vaguely alarmed to think we were right at the top of a living, breathing volcano, albeit not one that is considered as a "real volcano" by comparisons with volcanoes like in Hawaii.  It was an uncomfortable feeling, and we didn't stay very long for that reason.

 

 

But there is a very short sort of boardwalk, and then one is just about "right there".

The first time we encountered it, it was mobbed, with many big tourist buses, so we didn't stop.  We went back during our next trip to St. Lucia, and our guide arranged a time when there wouldn't be tour groups.  However, we didn't expect to be all alone.  As we were leaving, two other people arrived.  The solitude made it even more eerie.

 

Now, thinking of White Island... I don't know.  I can't imagine we'd go near the place in St. Lucia again.

There had been recent warnings about White Island, with the risk/warning level higher.  Afterwards. there was considerable discussion about whether anyone should have been there then at all.

It was just awful, and it certainly did cast a pall over our immediate memories of our time in New Zealand a week or two earlier (and our later memories, now, as well).

Very, very sad.

 

I think that at our ages, having seen more of life - and death - we have become even more risk averse than we already were.  White Island definitely added to that concern.

 

OMG!   When I just went to find a better photo of the "bubbling", I learned that there WAS ANOTHER ERUPTION IN APRIL, 2021!

NOTE:   This is the volcano a neighboring island, St. Vincent.  Still... much too close for comfort.

(Yes, there was sufficient advance notice, with evacuations, thank goodness.)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Soufrière_(volcano)

https://disasterphilanthropy.org/disasters/la-soufriere-volcano-eruption/

 

photo from https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/04/1089722

 

DH and I are looking at each other now, wide-eyed.

Like I wrote above, it felt uncomfortable when we were there, and we didn't stay as long as we would have liked... (I have not edited my comments above the red text, but... I would have written them quite differently if I had done my homework *before* writing rather than after!)

 

As airboss1998 wrote above, we "don't live life in fear, but [we] might do [our] homework a bit more..."    😱

 

GC

Edited December 23, 2022 by GeezerCouple

[Charles4515]

14 hours ago, airboss1998 said:

I AM NOT trying to stir up trouble, not pointing at any particular cruise line, but it raises some interesting dialog.  In this case, off the coast of New Zealand, cruise ship passengers, and other tourists, were caught on a small island when an active volcano erupted, 22 deaths.  I assume there were lots of safety briefings, liability releases, etc., but sometimes I wonder if we truly consider the risks.  It makes me wonder if the cruise companies are really responsible or insulated from retribution.  One newlywed couple, the husband spent a month in a coma in a New Zealand hospital.  

The documentary was very careful not to point the blame. Probably for legal reasons. The cruise ship that had an excursion on the island when the volcano was Ovation of the Sea. The couple whose lives are ruined for life says they would never have done the excursion if they had been informed of the risk.They claim they were not.  White Island is owned by a private company whose whole business was tourist excursions so the companies  economic interest was to do the tours. The tours were popular and lucrative to the local economy. So I would say the cruise lines responsibility was incidental. In my opinion the private company that owned the island was primarily resonsible. Also In my opinion the the NZ government should have prohibited those excursions. 

[airboss1998]

3 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

The documentary was very careful not to point the blame. Probably for legal reasons. The cruise ship that had an excursion on the island when the volcano was Ovation of the Sea. The couple whose lives are ruined for life says they would never have done the excursion if they had been informed of the risk.They claim they were not.  White Island is owned by a private company whose whole business was tourist excursions so the companies  economic interest was to do the tours. The tours were popular and lucrative to the local economy. So I would say the cruise lines responsibility was incidental. In my opinion the private company that owned the island was primarily resonsible. Also In my opinion the the NZ government should have prohibited those excursions. 

 

I was aware of the ship, and purposefully crafted my email not to point at RCI.   There are a lot of culpable parties, just. wonder if we consider the risks.

 

My daughter and climbed the falls in Jamaica (Ocho Reis, I think).  As I doing it I thought 'if I slip here, I'm going to break something.  Why am I doing this?'

[Hlitner]

Life is a risk and most forms of travel involve some additional risk.  There are folks who hardly every leave their homes because of various fears (i.e. agoraphobia).  Over more than 50 years of extensive cruising we have met many cruisers who are afraid of getting off a ship in any port unless they are on a cruise line excursion (do not know of a phobia name for that issue).  

 

The reality is some folks live their life with the constant anxiety attached to multiple fears and other folks just live their life and accept risks without a lot of thought.  When the world was having a massive phobia related to COVID, DW and I were still trying to live our lives with a reasonable amount of precaution (such as getting vaccinated).  But we never accepted the idea of long term lock-downs or travel bans and posted our belief, here on CC, that folks needed to learn to live with COVID.  

 

When we were on the Big Island, DW and I drove up to Volcano National Park with the knowledge that nobody really knows when, and if, there will be a major eruption of that monster volcano.  We have actually met folks who will not go to those volcanos because they fear being caught in an eruption.  We happily live in Mexico part of the year (where we feel safter than in most parts of the USA) with the knowledge that many fellow Americans avoid Mexico because of their fear of violence.  

 

I mention this stuff because there is no reasoning with the unreasonable!   DW and I simply accept reasonable risk as part of life.  We also are well aware that many of our best travel moments were when we did things that many others would avoid because of their various fears.  Such is life.  Risk tolerance is just part of life, and each person learns to deal with their demons or simply surrenders to their various fears.  As to the OP's comments, I would not depend on any cruise line to properly evaluate the risks associated with an excursion.  The cruise lines do make sure that excursion operators have sufficient insurance, but I doubt if they routinely do an independent evaluation of risks.  Some of us prefer to make our decisions, regarding risk, rather than relying on some third party (like a cruise line) to make those decisions on our behalf.

 

Hank

[Charles4515]

42 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

We have actually met folks who will not go to those volcanos because they fear being caught in an eruption. 

I have been on several volcanos. Although they could have erupted none showed activity like the one on White Island had.  A red flag would be if they had us wearing gas masks like on the White Island excursion. . I would not have gone. 

[Charles4515]

1 hour ago, airboss1998 said:

was aware of the ship, and purposefully crafted my email not to point at RCI.   There are a lot of culpable parties, just. wonder if we consider the risks.

 

My daughter and climbed the falls in Jamaica (Ocho Reis, I think).  As I doing it I thought 'if I slip here, I'm going to break something.  Why am I doing this?'

RCI does have responsibilities although in my opinion they were secondary. The tourists on White Island when it erupted were not all from the cruise ship. There were tourists who drove to the tourist center on the coast and who flew to the island on a helicopter. 

 

I climbed the falls Dunns River falls too but we were informed it was slippery. We also had the option of climbing a staircase alongside instead of the rocks. 

[airboss1998]

53 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

 A red flag would be if they had us wearing gas masks like on the White Island excursion. . I would not have gone. 

 

Probably what I was thinking when I wrote this.  Hindsight is 20/20.  Maybe this thread will provoke others to take a pause before hitting the 'buy excursion' button.  I'm not sage, but my entire (professional) life has been about risk management.

[donaldsc]

There is a risk to doing anything except maybe spending your entire life in bed - and then you will die in bed.  If you leave your home you might get hit by a bus.

 

I would assume that the people who visited White Island had to sign some sort of release and even if they did not they should have known that there was a risk in visiting a live volcano. 

 

Many years ago I did a Grand Canyon raft trip and this was before cell phone or emergency locator beacons.  The only way that the guides had to communicate w the outside world was with a small radio that would hopefully communicate with an airplane that might be overhead.  The release we signed started with "You are not going on a trip to Disneyland.  You could die on this trip" and continued with the other things that might happen to us.   We obviously did not die but we were clearly aware that if an accident occurred it might be a  while before any help could get to us.  

 

In life stuff happens and sometimes really bad stuff happens.

 

DON

[Charles4515]

1 hour ago, airboss1998 said:

 

Probably what I was thinking when I wrote this.  Hindsight is 20/20.  Maybe this thread will provoke others to take a pause before hitting the 'buy excursion' button.  I'm not sage, but my entire (professional) life has been about risk management.

A little research on the internet would have informed the tourists that the Volcano was always active. Always releasing gas. It has erupted often. So to me this cis not a case hindsight is not 20/20. It was a known fact the volcano was active and erupted often. Some people get a thrill out of taking risks. They get high off of tempting fate. To me this excursion was tempting fate. 

Edited December 24, 2022 by Charles4515

[ldubs]

12 minutes ago, Charles4515 said:

A little research on the internet would have informed the tourists that the Volcano was always active. Always releasing gas. It has erupted often. So to me this cis not a case hindsight is not 20/20. It was a known fact the volcano was active and erupted often. Some people get a thrill out of taking risks. They get high off of tempting fate. To me this excursion was tempting fate. 

 

I agree and still, it should not replace the tour provider's duty to inform customers of hazards.  I'm not saying that didn't happen.  For all I know they disclosed it is an active volcano that can erupt at any time.   If that was covered during the documentary, I missed it.  

 

Like you said in your earlier post, those full face gas masks would have been the start of some serous nagging doubts to me.   

 

 

[Mary229]

Eruptions are fairly predictable with modern technology,  more so than earthquakes or tsunamis.   I think someone should have forewarned and not have run the excursion.  I understand from other reports that there were people who were far too close to the flow and were clearly outside of the safety zone.  Of course, a case could be made that the excursion guide should have more rigorously enforced the rules. 

Edited December 24, 2022 by Mary229

[Charles4515]

44 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

I agree and still, it should not replace the tour provider's duty to inform customers of hazards.  I'm not saying that didn't happen.  For all I know they disclosed it is an active volcano that can erupt at any time.   If that was covered during the documentary, I missed it.  

 

Like you said in your earlier post, those full face gas masks would have been the start of some serous nagging doubts to me.   

 

 

The documentary in my opinion is somewhat vague on some matters probably for legal reasons.  I would guess that litigation by survivers and survivers families and possible criminal charges is not settled.  We have to draw our own conclusions. Mine is that the company that owned the island and was also the tour company bares the responsibility for the deaths and injuries. There should not have been land tours.  There was increase gas and mud being ejected in the days before the eruprtion. An eathquake in the area. 

 

The documentary is on Netflix. I will warn that it is very disturbing.

Edited December 24, 2022 by Charles4515

[ilikeanswers]

I haven't seen this documentary but I did see an interview not long after the incident from a cruiser who witnessed the eruption as they were returning to the ship and they said because it was a tour sold through the cruise line their perceived risk of the tour was very low. It got me thinking my perception is kind of similar. Tours being sold through a cruise line I saw as being a stamp of safety, it does lull you into a sense of security. If I was buying that same tour as an independent traveller I would be doing a lot more research. And really isn't the reason most people cruise to have a carefree, think free everything organised for you holiday. We do have an expectation that cruise companies, even land tours or any packaged holiday the leg work is being done for us. And I guess the assumption that these companies would be so risk adverse further lulls ud into a sense of security. So it doesn't really surprise me that people's perception of risk is lowered on a cruise to the point they would accept gas masks on a tour. 

[sanger727]

I haven't seen this documentary, however we had our own experience with an erupting volcano.

 

We were Hawaii in May of 2018. We took an independent tour of Volcanos National Park the day we were in Hilo. Just as a FYI, at the time there was lava flow into the water and over a residential neighborhood in Hilo, but nothing new or spectacular. The ships tour took the same itinerary we did, just a bit later. We spoke with people on the ships tour at dinner. 

 

One of the first stops was the overlook of Kileauea caldera. We learned about the history of the volcano and saw a small amount of white steam coming from the caldera. We went on to the lava tubes. We then stopped at an overlook of a crater - really no idea which one. As I approached the edge, a significant earthquake struck. Then we saw a section of the walls of one of the craters collapse.

 

We left the area and our guide felt that it was safe to continue the tour. Earthquakes are very common there. As we were driving a stretch of roach, all the buses and vans had pulled to the side and stopped. We looked back behind us and there was billowing grey and black smoke coming out of the Kileaua caldera now. We asked our guide if that was normal and he told us absolutely not and we immediately left. I was told at dinner that the ships tour was in the lava tubes when this occurred and didn't leave the park until the rangers closed it.

 

As we headed out of the park there was a scheduled stop at a orchid farm that we decided to make. As we were there another large earthquake hit. We were concerned that the ship might decide to leave early if conditions were too bad. He said he didn't think so unless the earthquakes occurred at sea and there was a tsunami warning. The last stop was a black sand beach. When we arrived there it was closed for Tsunami warnings. We headed straight back to the boat and made it back without issue.

 

Luckily, as far as I know, no one was hurt. But it certainly reinforces that nothing is without risk and unexpected natural disasters can occur without warning. 

[wcook]

Somehow, we all get in cars every day and drive around. From an actuarial standpoint, that’s effing dangerous*. Many of us eat grilled and or processed meat every day, despite it being a known carcinogen. 
 

Volcanos sound scary, but in the grand scheme of things they are nothing. 
 

* as a former actuary, that’s the technical term. 

[Elaine5715]

I don't think the concern for legal liability is that high outside the US.  

[donaldsc]

2 hours ago, Elaine5715 said:

I don't think the concern for legal liability is that high outside the US.  

 

I believe that I read once that some overseas  excursions or tours will not take Americans because of our tendency to try to sue for any problem.  I may be wrong on this however as I tried to find the link on the WEB and could not find it.

 

DON

[Mary229]

6 hours ago, donaldsc said:

 

I believe that I read once that some overseas  excursions or tours will not take Americans because of our tendency to try to sue for any problem.  I may be wrong on this however as I tried to find the link on the WEB and could not find it.

 

DON

It is not because of our tendency it is because our laws allow contingency litigation.  Contingency litigation is not common anywhere else. I don’t see that this affects this situation because if you file suit in another country you must follow the law of that country. 

[K32682]

It is astonishing the amount of trust some cruisers seem to have in the cruise lines. "If it's a cruise line excursion it must be safe!" Personal safety is your concern not the cruise lines. Act accordingly. 

 

I've walked on active volcanoes with a history of eruptions and done many other things the easily frightened would consider foolhardy. I did my research, calculated the risk and made my decisions. When I look back there is nothing I've done that I regret. There are however a couple of things I wouldn't do again. 

[ilikeanswers]

20 hours ago, donaldsc said:

I believe that I read once that some overseas  excursions or tours will not take Americans because of our tendency to try to sue for any problem.  I may be wrong on this however as I tried to find the link on the WEB and could not find it.

 

DON

 

That sounds like an article The Onion would write😂. Some people do get confused that they are satire site not a real news site. There is no way that could be true. Suing overseas you would have to follow those countries litigation laws so I can't see any organisation being afraid of frivolous litigation as most countries are a lot more strict when it comes to suing. The only time I have heard of Americans being turned away was to do with North Korean tours but that wasn't over litigation fears but actual safety concerns.