The experts committee has drafted comprehensive safety guidelines for land-based adventure activities in Maharashtra. They reviewed the government's draft guidelines, incorporating suggestions from various international organizations. The committee found that worldwide, adventure activities are regulated by independent federations composed of stakeholders, not strict rules. They emphasize the need to establish training infrastructure and raise public awareness about safety in Maharashtra. The committee also identified operational gaps in implementing the guidelines due to lack of execution mechanisms, and recommends that relevant organizations work together to address these issues.

1. Safety Guidelines
Section 15
Closing Comments
By Experts Committee Constituted by Akhil Maharahstra Giryarohan Mahasangh
The Experts Committee (EC) has put together in this Document a comprehensive draft of safety guidelines
for “Land Based Adventure Activities (LBAA)”. In addition to this, it has also reviewed the draft of the GR on
safety guidelines for adventure activities proposed by Government of Maharashtra, which was duly
commented upon and corrected by Indian Mountaineering Foundation, and offered its commendations,
suggestions and objections on the same (for LBAA).
The EC has put together all its notes, suggestions and other comments after carefully referring to, studying
and analyzing various documents from organizations like the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India
(Guidelines for ‘Adventure Tour Operators’), Indian Mountaineering Foundation (IMF), Union Internationale
Des Associations D’Alpinisme (UIAA), British Mountaineering Council (BMC), National Outdoor Leadership
School (NOLS), and American Alpine Mountain Guides Association (AAMGA). The EC has also referred to
the policies on adventure activities being carried out in New Zealand and Australia.
The EC has found that all over the world the adventure activates have only guidelines and codes of
conduct, and are not subjected to rules. As regards to the regulatory mechanism for organizations
conducting such activities it has been observed that, world over, the practice is to have an autonomous
federation / body constituted of representatives of all the stakeholders.
While drafting its draft of safety guidelines, the EC has taken into consideration the following aspects:
•
Current scenario of adventure in Maharashtra
•
Clarity with proper definitions to the context
•
Implementation procedures
•
Adaptation by all the stakeholders
During this process, the EC became acutely aware of the fact that Organizations and individuals having
the potential and willingness to follow all recommended actions and processes may not be able to do so
because of the lack of proper infrastructure, e.g. recognized wilderness first aid courses that issue
certificates with period-validity, and local training courses that offer the variety of skills that are not being
covered by the content of the courses offered by the mountaineering institutes in the Himalaya. In this
context, the EC would like to point out the need of a proper training infrastructure for adventure activities in
15 Closing Comments r 2
Page 1 of 2
Rev 16 11 2013

2. Safety Guidelines
the State of Maharashtra, and suggests that this may well be an opportunity for such an institute to be
established. There is also the need to create awareness in the general public (society) about safety in
adventure activities, and to ensure that safe practices are followed.
The EC has also observed that there are operational gaps in the draft of the GR of safety guidelines due to
the non-availability of the execution mechanisms.
In such a situation, all the stakeholders, viz. Government of Maharashtra (GoM), Indian Mountaineering
Foundation (IMF), Akhil Maharashtra Giryarohan Mahasangh (AMGM) Adventure Tourism Operators
Association of Maharashtra (ATOM) and Adventure Tourism Operators Association of India (ATOAI) could
take cognisance of various comments and suggestions made by the EC here under and take appropriate
steps to overcome the operational gaps.
------------
15 Closing Comments r 2
Page 2 of 2
Rev 16 11 2013