AAIAC UK Ropes Course Guide 2021 High Res Locked

Ropes Courses - Adventure Parks - Net Parks - Zip Lines - Simulated Freefall Devices
THE UK ROPES COURSE

AND OFF-GROUND
ADVENTURE ACTIVITIES GUIDE 2021
For those involved in the design, construction, operation, inspection and maintenance
of ropes courses and other off-ground adventure activities.
The UK Ropes Course and Off-Ground Adventure Activities Guide - 2021
1. Foreword 6
1.1 AAIAC................................................................................................................................................6
1.2 The European Ropes Course Association (ERCA).............................................................................7
2. Abbreviations 8
3. The relationship between The Health & Safety at Work Act, regulations, standards, ACOPs and
guidance 9
3.1 The Health & Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA).........................................................................9
3.2 Regulations........................................................................................................................................9
3.3 Approved Codes of Practice.............................................................................................................9
3.4 Guidance from The Health and Safety Executive (HSGs)..................................................................9
3.5 Standards...........................................................................................................................................9
3.6 Guidance from the industry...............................................................................................................9
4. What is a European Standard (EN)? 10

4.1 Why use it? .....................................................................................................................................10
4.2 How to read a standard...................................................................................................................10
4.3 BSI, Standards and leaving the European Union.............................................................................11
5. General 12
5.1 EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020 an explanation....................................................................................12
5.2 Low ropes and assault/obstacle courses.........................................................................................12
5.3 Net parks.........................................................................................................................................13
5.4 Key terms / definitions from EN 15567...........................................................................................13
5.5 Levels of supervision.......................................................................................................................15
5.6 Safety systems as defined by EN 15567.........................................................................................17
5.6.1 Assisted belay safety system...............................................................................................17
5.6.2 Individual safety systems.....................................................................................................18
5.6.3 Collective safety system......................................................................................................20

5.6.4 Low ropes (spotting)............................................................................................................20
5.6.5 Zip lines...............................................................................................................................21
5.7 Hazards and risks.............................................................................................................................23
6. Construction 24
6.1 Low ropes courses...........................................................................................................................25
6.2 Temporary ropes courses................................................................................................................25
6.3 New courses....................................................................................................................................26
6.4 Existing off-ground adventure activities course and modifications.................................................26
6.5 Documentary obligations on constructors......................................................................................26
6.6 Documentary obligations on operators..........................................................................................27
6.7 Obligations on participants.............................................................................................................27
7. Inspections & maintenance 28

7.1 Inaugural inspections.......................................................................................................................29
7.2 Periodical inspections......................................................................................................................29
PREVIOUS Page 2 NEXT

7.3 Operational inspection....................................................................................................................30

7.4 Routine visual check........................................................................................................................30
7.5 Tree inspections...............................................................................................................................31
7.6 Maintenance....................................................................................................................................31
7.7 Work at Height Regulations 2005 (WAHR) and inspections............................................................31
8. Operation 33
8.1 Good practice.................................................................................................................................33
8.2 Identification of appropriate instructor competence......................................................................33
8.3 Instructor induction.........................................................................................................................34
8.4 Instructor training............................................................................................................................34
8.5 Identification of group competence................................................................................................34
8.6 Acknowledgement of risk................................................................................................................35
8.7 Identification of element options....................................................................................................35
8.8 Human error accidents....................................................................................................................35
8.9 Equipment.......................................................................................................................................38
8.10 Weather forecast.............................................................................................................................39
8.11 Number of participants per element...............................................................................................39
8.12 Participant’s morphology.................................................................................................................39
8.13 Briefings...........................................................................................................................................40
8.14 Use of adult supervisors..................................................................................................................41
8.15 Assessment of participants’ understanding of the rules and ability to operate their safety system....... 42
8.16 Technical advice..............................................................................................................................42
8.17 Recognised certification schemes and auditing your operation.....................................................44
8.17.1 Adventure Activities Licensing Authority (AALA)................................................................44
8.17.2 Adventuremark ...................................................................................................................44
8.17.3 ERCA – European Ropes Course Association.....................................................................45
8.17.4 Other ways to audit your operation....................................................................................45
8.18 Medical conditions and/or disabilities.............................................................................................45
8.19 Manual handling..............................................................................................................................45
8.20 First aid............................................................................................................................................45
8.21 Emergency action plan....................................................................................................................45
8.22 Off-elements supervision.................................................................................................................46
8.23 Fire risk............................................................................................................................................46
8.24 Individual safety systems and the ‘double unclipping’ problem.....................................................46
8.25 Selecting competent suppliers........................................................................................................48
9 References and further reading 50
Appendix A 16th February (revised 2020) Statement by the Adventure Activities

Licensing Authority in relation to Licensed establishments using ropes courses 51
Appendix B Procedures for submitting comments on this guidance 51
Photo credits 52
Thanks 52
Image copyright is owned by the person and/or company and must not be copied or distributed in any way without prior permission.
PREVIOUS Page 3 NEXT

This guidance summarises key information about:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • construction
• inspections & maintenance
Who is this guidance for?
• operation
This guidance is for those involved in the
design, construction, operation, inspection and • choosing suppliers
maintenance of ropes courses and other off-
ground adventure activities. The intention is to This guidance is not a substitute for relevant
help those involved in this industry to comply UK laws, EN 15567 or the full set of ERCA
with EN 15567 and provide general advice on Standards.
accepted good practice.
This guidance was initially compiled in
2008 and then revised in 2015 by:
About this guidance
• Nick Moriarty - The European Ropes
EN 15567 sets out the standards to be met
Course Association
for the installation of new ropes courses and
the operation of both new and existing ropes In conjunction with:
courses. All operators, designers, constructors
• The Health and Safety Executive
and inspectors of ropes courses and off-ground
adventure activities should have access to a copy • Adventure Activities Licensing Authority
of both parts of the latest versions of EN 15567 and Service
as they contain detailed information beyond the
• Adventure Activities Industry Advisory
scope of this guidance. Copies are available to
Committee
purchase from the British Standards Institute (BSI).
PREVIOUS Page 4 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

This 2021 guidance and review has been

completed by:
• Chris Proud - Adventure Activities Industry

Advisory Committee
• Emma Bell - The European Ropes Course
Association
• Steve Woods - The European Ropes Course
Association
For the scope of this guidance, off-ground

adventure activities are man-made/artificial
structures that have a form of activity system,
safety system and support system. This can
include, but is not limited to, the following in
developmental, educational and pay-to-play/
recreational settings:
• traditional ropes courses

• adventure parks
• net parks
• zip lines
• simulated freefall devices
(i.e. QuickFlight, Powerfan®)
• Bag Jumps
It is not intended for this document to cover

climbing walls, via-ferrata or caving, be this on • Mountaineering Scotland
natural terrain or simulated artificial structures. www.mountaineering.scot
However, the principles within this guidance
• Mountaineering Ireland
may be informative and, in some case will be www.mountaineering.ie
applicable, such as a venue that has a climbing
wall as part of their overall offering or a provider
that offers a via-ferrrata experience that is run in a Caving and Mine Exploration
similar way to an adventure park. If you have these
types of activities then it is recommended that in • British Caving Association
addition to this document you consider contacting https://british-caving.org.uk/
the relevant bodies to seek up-to-date advice on
Compliance with this guidance does not infer
safe operation, best practice, competent advice
approval, endorsement or similar from any of the
and qualifications for instructors. Those relevant
named contributors to this guidance and does
bodies include:
not entitle any organisation to use their logos or
similar identification or to give the impression of
Climbing, Mountaineering and Via-Ferrata
such.
• Mountain Training – The Awarding Body
Network www.mountain-training.org This guidance is updated from time to time in
light of practical experience and feedback from
• Association of British Climbing Walls operators, designers, constructors and inspectors.
www.abcwalls.co.uk Comments on the content are welcome, and the
• British Mountaineering Council procedure for submitting comments can be found
www.thebmc.co.uk at Appendix B.

1. Foreword
Following the publication of the European Ropes Course Standard (EN 15567:2007) in March 2008 and
Working at Height Regulations (2005, as amended 2007), the Adventure Activities Industry Advisory
Committee (AAIAC) and UK Members of the European Ropes Course Association (ERCA) produced a single
document for UK operators, trainers, inspectors and constructors of off-ground adventure activities. The first
edition of the UK Ropes Course Guide was published in 2008, and was reviewed and republished in 2015
following the update of EN 15567 the same year.
The industry has continued to grow and develop with an increase in zip lines (in number, size and
complexity), net parks and recreational and pay-to-play facilities. As a result, AAIAC and ERCA agreed to
update this guide in order to support the industry as it continues to expand.
Although the first UK ropes courses appeared around sixty years ago, the industry has flourished
significantly in the last twenty-five years. Unlike most adventure activities, ropes courses did not evolve
as a sport or a pastime; rather they were a tool for personal and team development. In this respect, they
remain one of the most powerful tools for outdoor experiential learning and are used in this way the world
over. The use of off-ground adventure activities as a recreational/pay-to-play experience has increased
significantly in the last decade.
This guidance has been designed to support both recreational and developmental use of ropes courses and
off-ground adventure activities, recognising that although the activity structures may look similar, how they
are utilised and operated can be very different.
All those involved in the design, construction, operation and inspection of ropes courses and off-ground
adventure activities must comply with the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and all relevant regulations.
Despite the high potential for risk, there is no specific regulation for the operation of off-ground adventure
activities facilities in the UK. EN 15567 is a successful attempt to collate good working practice from across
the European Union. Additionally, ERCA has been instrumental in collating good ropes course and off-ground
adventure activities practice and accident data, and it remains at the forefront of industry developments.
1.1 AAIAC
AAIAC is responsible for the development, and the AUK was formerly known as the Adventure Activity
quality control inspection services for Adventuremark. Advisory Council, which merged with the UK
It oversees the Adventuremark and LOtC Quality Adventure Industry Group in 2019 to form the new
Badge for Adventure Activities accreditation and body, which is made up of relevant organisations
provides expert advice to the Health and Safety within the industry. AUK meet annually to receive
Executive (HSE) on numerous matters. an annual report and to provide direction,
guidance and support on AAIAC’s work plan.
The members are selected and are representative AAIAC has 10 members at any one time, each
of a wide range of stakeholders from the UK serving a minimum of 3 years.
adventure activities sector including mountain
guides, operators, inspectors and suppliers both There are also numerous working groups, looking
from the private and public sectors. The body at specific areas and AAIAC meets quarterly to
came about in 1996 to act as expert advice to the review and plan current and future works.
HSE when the Licensing Authority was formed.
AAIAC has been reconstituted to provide

accountability to a UK-wide range of outdoor
organisations called Adventure UK (AUK) and thus
acts as the working arm on projects convened by
AUK.

1.2 The European Ropes At least once a year, a general meeting takes
place offering the opportunity to set standards, to
Course Association (ERCA) give the working groups assignments, to define
ERCA started in 1998 as a German association new groups and to organise workshops and
to work on standards and provide a platform conferences dealing with our topics.
(networking and exchange) for people working
with ropes courses to increase safety and quality. Since 2003 the UK membership of ERCA has
continued to grow with many taking active lead
The success achieved through standards roles in all aspects of ERCA and the industry here
development resulted in an increase in the in the UK. ERCA and its UK members offer UK
number of international members due in large part advice, support and events specific to the needs
to there being no effective option for professional of our fast-growing industry.
representation in their own countries and regions.
So in 2003 the decision was taken to embrace ERCA has more than 325 members (company
other European countries, and the association members + individuals) from around 26 countries
became known as the European Ropes Course and the community meets once or twice a year.
Association (ERCA).
There are around 50 UK members, and if you
The Association includes operators, trainers, would like to join please visit www.erca.cc
builders and inspectors of ropes courses and
off-ground adventure activities as well as
organisations working with temporary or stationary
ropes courses. The board and working groups
represent the interests of all ERCA members and
aim at further developing ropes courses.

2. Abbreviations
Solely for the ease of reading, the following abbreviations have been used in this guidance.
Full Name Abbreviation Full Name Abbreviation
The Adventure Activities Licensing Health & Safety Guidance HSG

AALA
Authority
Health and Safety at Work HSW
Adventure Activities Licensing
AALR Health and Safety at Work etc. Act HSWA
Regulations
Adventure Activities Industry International Electrotechnical

AAIAC IEC
Advisory Committee Commission
Adventure UK AUK Industry Guidance INDG
Approved Code of Practice ACOP International Organisation for

ISO
Standardisation
Amusement Device Inspection
ADIPS Learning Outside the Classroom LOtC
Procedures Scheme
The British Standards Institution BSI Lifting Operations and Lifting

LOLER
Equipment Regulations
Conformité Européenne CE
Management of Health and Safety
MHSWR
Comité Européen de at Work Regulations
Normalisation - European CEN
Committee for Standardisation Manual Handling Operations
MHOR
Regulations
Comité Européen de
Normalisation - European Mobile Elevating Work Platform MEWP
CENELEC
Committee for Electrotechnical
Off-Ground Adventure Activity(ies) OGAA
Standardisation
Personal Protective Equipment PPE
Construction (Design and
CDM
Management) Regulations Provision and Use of Work
PUWER
Equipment Regulations
Continuous Professional
CPD
Development Reporting of Injuries, Diseases
and Dangerous Occurrences RIDDOR
Deutsches Institut fur Normung
Regulations
- German Institute for DIN
Standardisation Royal Society for the Prevention of
ROSPA
Accidents
Environmental Health Officer EHO
United Kingdom UK
European Norm EN
United Kingdom Accreditation
European Ropes Course UKAS
ERCA Service
Association
United Kingdom Conformity
Health and Safety H&S UKCA
Assessed
Health and Safety Executive HSE
Work at Height Regulations WAHR

3. The relationship between The Health & Safety at Work Act,

regulations, standards, ACOPs and guidance
The status and relationship between the Health & Safety at Work Act, regulations, standards, ACOPs and
guidance has been a longstanding source of confusion in the industry and elsewhere.
3.1 The Health & Safety at 3.5 Standards

Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA) British Standards are
The primary health and safety legislation that not sources of law.
governs what we do, both in relation to employees Consequently, duty holders
and non-employees (e.g. contractors, customers are not legally obliged to
and other members of the public) is the HSWA. follow them. However,
like guidance a standard
may be relied upon as a
3.2 Regulations bench-mark against which
the conduct of the duty
Health and safety regulations (secondary
holder will be measured.
legislation), like the HSWA, impose legal
EN 15567 parts 1 and 2
requirements on duty holders. They are enforced
are not the law, they are standards, but
by authorities like the HSE and local authorities.
ones that you could potentially be measured
Examples of regulations applicable to our industry
against as part of evidence should there be an
include the MHSWR, WAHR and PPE at Work
accident, serious incident or visit from the HSE or
Regulations, 1992.
your local EHO.
3.3 Approved Codes of Practice It should also be made clear that the requirements
of EN 15567 are not the benchmark of good
Information intended to assist duty holders in practice. They are considered the lowest level of
understanding their legal duties can be found in safety or the starting point of safety and quality.
ACOPs and guidance. ACOPs are published by
the HSE. They have a special legal status created Following EN 15567 does not necessarily mean
by the HSWA Section 17 ‘If a duty holder is duties required by law have been met. It does
prosecuted, and it is proved that they have not not absolve duty holders of the need to comply
followed the relevant provisions of the ACOP, with their duties under the HSWA and health and
a court can find them at fault unless they can safety regulations.
demonstrate compliance with the Law by some
other means.’
3.6 Guidance from the industry
3.4 Guidance from The Health Guidance is also published by industry bodies.
Prominent examples are the ERCA Standards and
and Safety Executive (HSGs)
the UK Ropes Course Guide, neither of which are
These documents are headed with the initials HSG published by the HSE. However, if a duty holder
& INDG and are designed to give technical advice is prosecuted for a material breach of their health
and to help you interpret and comply with the and safety duties, the enforcement authority
law. Following guidance is not compulsory. Duty may place reliance upon the relevant provisions
holders are free to take other action. However, of industry guidance to prove the duty holder
if you follow guidance, it is reasonable to assume has fallen short of the standard required in the
that you are doing enough to comply with the law. circumstances.

4. What is a European Standard (EN)?

The following is taken from https://www.cencenelec.eu/;
‘Standards are all around us, even if we are not always aware of them. One example of a widely-used
standard is the A4 size for sheets of paper.
Standards are developed and defined through a process of sharing knowledge and building consensus
among technical experts nominated by interested parties and other stakeholders - including businesses,
consumers and environmental groups, among others.
The formal definition of a standard is a “document, established by consensus and approved by a

recognized body, that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines or characteristics for
activities or their results, aimed at the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context”.
Standards are voluntary which means that there is no automatic legal obligation to apply them. However,
laws and regulations may refer to standards and even make compliance with them compulsory.’
In 2003, Germany initiated the EN 15567 in an attempt to formalise standards across the sector. UK
representation on the committee of experts, was poor initially but by the end of the process the UK had
its interests represented proportionately and the CEN committee elected a UK expert (Nick Moriarty) as
Convenor.
• EN 15567:2008 endeavoured to strike a balance between very different (national) cultures.

• EN 15567:2015 was more comprehensive and accurately reflected, what had become, a united
European industry.
• EN 15567-2:2015 relates to the operations and remains largely subjective.
• EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020 relates to the construction and safety requirements, and is objective
and measurable.
4.1 Why use it? the scope, other standards that are relevant in
their application, definitions, clauses and annexes
Put simply, would you trust a harness or a (Normative and Informative).
karabiner that was not compliant with the
appropriate standard? Apply that same Without understanding all of the standard you
professional approach to your off-ground may be applying it incorrectly and failing to
adventure activities and understand that your fully meet all of your duties. Whether you are
facility conforms with EN 15567 when you have the designer, constructor, inspector, owner or
met all its parts, clauses and requirements. operator, understanding the language within EN
15567 is also important. In order to make it clear,
the following (with some examples) verbal forms
4.2 How to read a standard are used:
EN 15567 is designed to be used by competent
• Requirements – shall, shall not
persons, meaning if you don’t understand it, get
some help and advice. The MHSWR reg7 Health » A.3 Requirements for inspection
and Safety Assistance states that employers must bodies (Type C)
have access to competent persons to assist them
in applying the provisions of health and safety law » The inspection body shall provide
(see section 8.16 Technical Advice). safeguards within the organisation to ensure
adequate segregation of responsibilities and
It is advisable to read and understand all of it, accountabilities between inspection and
not just the main clauses. Read the introduction, other activities.

» b) The design/manufacture/supply/ of equipment designed to limit the

installation/servicing/maintenance and the consequences of falls or collisions. There
inspection of the same item carried out are inherent risks associated with ropes
by a Type C inspection body shall not be courses. These risks, however, should be
undertaken by the same person. (Examples appropriately managed and minimized by
from ISO 17020) the ropes course operator and their staff; it
should be understood that the risks cannot
• Recommendations – should, should not
be eliminated altogether. (Examples taken
» 10.4 Periodical inspection from EN 15567:2015-2)
» Periodical inspections should be carried

out at least each calendar year and with
a maximum interval of 15 months by an
inspection body (type A, type B or type C
in accordance with EN ISO/IEC 17020:2012,
Annex A). (Example from EN 15567)
» A report containing the following

information shall be prepared as part of the
periodical inspections:
» h) a statement that the inspection report

should not be reproduced, except in full.
(Example from EN 15567)
• Permissions – may, need not
» It is recognised that application of every

provision of this standard may not be
appropriate in all circumstances. Any
deviation from the standard should provide
4.3 BSI, Standards and leaving
an equal or greater level of safety. When the European Union
deviating from the standard, a written risk The UK, through the British Standards Institution
assessment setting out the rationale for the (BSI) has been a member of the CEN and
deviation should be provided. (Example CENELEC for decades, playing a lead role in
from EN 15567) designing and influencing harmonised standards
NOTE: The inspection body need not be the for all industries and the safe manufacture and
owner of the facilities or equipment that it uses supply of products.
for the inspection. Facilities and equipment may
be borrowed, rented, hired, leased or provided As the ropes course standard does not carry any
by another party (e.g. the manufacturer or installer conformity or safety certification requirements,
of the equipment). However, the responsibility there will be no change to the standard or how it
for the suitability and the calibration status of the is employed here in the UK. The UK, through the
equipment used in inspection, whether owned BSI, will continue to adopt, work on and review the
by the inspection body or not, lies solely with the standard moving forward.
inspection body. (Example from ISO 17020)
For information on how safety certification is
• Possibility and capability – can, cannot changing in the UK as we move away from the
CE to the new UKCA mark, please visit the
» Safety systems can be collective or government or the BSI website as they
individual. Individual safety systems are publish updates.
classified in categories A to E. However,
these categories do not in themselves
determine the safety of the ropes course.
The various safety devices consist

5. General
Compliance with this guidance and EN 15567 are not legal requirements. However, they may be referred to
by the health and safety enforcing authorities when considering how a company or self-employed person
has discharged their health and safety duties.
Therefore, it is important that those involved in the design, construction, operation, inspection and
maintenance of ropes courses and other off-ground adventure activities are familiar with this guidance as
well as EN 15567.
In addition, if you operate a large zip line, giant swing, bag jump, net park or choose to run your activities
in a similar way to an attractions business or pay-to-play recreational model, then you may also wish to
familiarise yourself with the following health and safety guidance;
• HSG 175 Fairgrounds and amusement parks: Guidance on Safe Practice
5.1 EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020 from the instructor or other group members

and the ground covering acting as an impact-
an explanation absorbing surface. How these 2 safety systems
In 2018/19 there was an amendment requested function together and to what extent they will offer
by the German standards committee (DIN), the protection from a fall with be different at each
German version of the BSI. The committee asked venue and often different for each individual low
for a very small change to the requirements of rope activity. The term low ropes may also include
clause 7.1.2 Inaugural inspection in Part 1 of the an assault/obstacle course and initiative exercises.
2015 standard. One sentence was moved but was
kept within the clause, and there was the addition Initiative exercises are generally single challenges
of 1 new word, which was to document the that require team participation and, as the name
findings of the inspection. implies, the emphasis is placed on participants
using their initiative. Many of these will be simple,
Other than this very small amendment, A1:2020 temporary, ground-based tasks and as such will
is the same as 1:2015 not be covered by EN 15567 or this guidance.
Part 2 was not amended, so at the time of An assault/obstacle course is a series of free
publication of this guidance the two relevant standing or linked elements where the emphasis
parts of EN 15567 are: is normally on it being a physical challenge (team
or individual). With the growth in obstacle course
• EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020 racing and mass participation events, there is work
• EN 15567-2:2015 being carried out to write a set of International
Standards for these type of activities. When this
5.2 Low ropes and assault/ work has been completed it may be better to
obstacle courses refer to these standards and not EN 15567 or
EN 15567 does not seek to differentiate between

high and low courses, but when writing EN 15567,
the main focus was on high ropes activities, zip
lines and adventure parks. Generally, a high ropes
course will rely on an assisted belay, collective or
individual safety system (see Diagram 1 on
page 13).
A low ropes course is the generic term for elements

close to the ground (generally within 1 metre)
that are protected by a combination of spotting

this guidance if you are designing, constructing, 5.4 Key terms /

inspecting or operating an assault/obstacle course.
definitions from EN 15567
Note: EN 15567:2015 specifically included zip Ropes Course
lines, due to their rapid growth, and expansion
and this guide is applicable to these types of Constructed facility consisting of one or more
activities. activity systems, support systems and, if needed,
belay and/or safety systems with restricted access
5.3 Net parks and requiring supervision.
Since 2015 net parks have increased in popularity

and although not specifically mentioned in
EN 15567 are considered by many industry
professionals to be a collective safety system. On
that basis you may choose to apply EN 15567 and Key to diagram 1 below:
this guidance to your net parks.
Activity Systems include:
Alternatively, you may define your net park as a • A1 Elements
playground, and as long as this is the way you • A2 Platforms
are operating it, then BS EN 1176 Playground • A3 Access
Equipment and Surfacing may be a more
appropriate standard to follow. Support Systems include:
• S1 Poles, trees, buildings, rock or other
The decision will depend on many factors and supporting structures
the earlier in the process of designing a new
• S2 Foundations, anchors
net park you make that decision, the better.
Designing, owning and operating a net park as a • S3 Guy Lines
piece of playground equipment is very different to
Belaying Systems include:
designing, owning and operating a net park as a
piece of off-ground adventure activity equipment. • B1 Assisted Belaying System
• B2 Safety line
To help you make these decisions you will need • B3 Individual Safety System
to ensure you have competent advice. Following (categories A to E)
a Design Risk Assessment process early on in the
project may lead you to the correct EN.
Diagram 1: Example of a
ropes course

Assisted belay system
Belay system where the participant is secured by

at least one person. For example, a top rope belay
system.
Individual safety system categories A-E
Component(s) connecting the harness to the

safety line (see examples for each later below).
• Category A - Self-closing device which is not

automatically self-locking. Examples include
self-closing or screwgate karabiner.
• Category B - Self-locking device. Examples
include self-locking karabiners.
• Category C - Interlocking device to reduce
the likelihood of unintentional detaching from
the safety system.
• Category D - Interlocking device to prevent
unintentional detaching from the safety
system. When used in accordance with the
Supervising adult
manufacturer’s instructions this technology
can significantly reduce the levels of training,
Person aged 18 or above who is either the parent/
supervision, information and/or instruction
legal guardian or has the authority of the parent/
required to maintain appropriate levels of
legal guardian of the child participant(s). To
operational safety.
have undertaken adequate training in how to
• Category E - Device that is permanently accompany and supervise the child participant(s)
attached, and can only be opened with a whilst taking part in the activity. They must also
tool. When used in accordance with the be in a position to maintain visibility of the child
manufacturer’s instructions, this technology participant(s) and intervene verbally.
can significantly reduce the levels of training,
supervision, information and/or instruction Critical application
required to maintain appropriate levels
of operational safety. NOTE: appropriate Application where the consequences of a failure
monitoring and rescue arrangements are are likely to lead to a serious injury or death.
still necessary.
Primary brake
Collective safety system
Active or passive braking system engaged
System that can protect at least one person and during normal operation (of a zip line) to arrest
once properly installed or erected, does not the participant.
require any action by the user to make sure it
will work. Active braking system
Interlocking device Braking system (on a zip line) operated by the

participant or another person.
Device with at least two gates whereby an
action on the one gate results in an effect Passive braking system
on another gate.
Braking system (on a zip line) operating without
Mobile off-ground adventure activities manual intervention. Examples are bungee,
gravity, net, water, impact absorbers, impact
Facility that is transportable. absorbent floors, landing mats, etc.

Emergency braking system Inspection body
Passive braking system (on a zip line) that controls A company or individual that carries out inaugural
participant deceleration upon failure of the and periodic inspections. EN ISO/IEC 17020
primary brake without causing serious injury or defines inspection bodies as type A, type B
death. and type C, which are covered by appropriate
professional liability insurance. The classification
Routine visual check A, B, C denotes the level of independence – not
competence.
Inspection intended to identify obvious hazards
that can result from vandalism, use or adverse
weather. 5.5 Levels of supervision
The levels of supervision described in EN 15567
Operational inspection
were originally designed and written for application
Inspection, more detailed than routine visual to ropes courses and adventure parks. However,
inspection, to check the operation and condition the definitions and recommendations on differing
of the equipment. levels of supervision are also deemed to be suitable
and good practice for other off-ground adventure
Periodical inspection activities, including but not limited to, net parks,
giant zip lines, 3G swings and jump bags.
Verification carried out by an inspection body
at least once per calendar year and within a Inevitably there is some crossover between the
maximum interval of 15 months. three levels of supervisions, but as a general rule
those on an assisted belay ropes course will be
Level 1 supervision under Level 1 supervision. The level of supervision
required for other types of safety systems may well
Where an instructor can physically intervene to be set at a minimum level, but the management
prevent a misuse of the safety system or another plan for the operator should have built into it
incident that would otherwise lead to a significant the ability to be flexible on a day-to-day basis
risk of serious injury or death. depending on a range of considerations including
but not limited to:
Level 2 supervision
• The information provided to participants
The instructor cannot physically intervene to
before booking, at point of sale and also
prevent a misuse of the safety system or another
before taking part in the activity.
incident that would otherwise lead to a significant
risk of serious injury or death. However, they are • The experience of participants.
in a position to see the participant and intervene
verbally. Responsibility for safety is shared by the • The needs of the participants.
participant and the instructor.
• Any learning or educational goals.
Level 3 supervision • The experience of the instructors.
Where a participant is in a position to alert an • The complexity of the specific safety

instructor of their need for assistance and where system and the ability of the participants
the instructor is able to respond promptly to to use it competently.
the alert and provide adequate assistance. It
• The weather conditions that day.
is intended that the role of the instructor is to
provide adequate assistance to a participant if • The amount of instruction participants
called upon to do so. This is a largely reactive have received.
role on the part of the instructor; therefore,
responsibility for safety is largely with the • The design of the off-ground adventure
participant. activity.

the requirement for high levels of supervision

may diminish and Level 2 supervision or Level 3
supervision may be perfectly adequate. Similarly,
and by way of example, those who have used a
Category B Individual Safety System regularly may
not, under certain circumstances, be required to
begin with Level 2 supervision. Conversely, for
example, a risk assessment for people with specific
needs using a Category B Individual Safety System
may well identify that increased supervision levels
are required.
In short, one fixed model of how you supervise

the participants taking part in your OGAA may
not be suitable for all and there may, at times, be
the need to be flexible and offer differing levels of
supervision for certain groups or individuals.
Ratios of instructors to participants also needs

careful consideration. Differences in the
experience of instructors, participants, weather
conditions, aims of the session and the demands
of particular courses produce far more variation
than can be adequately managed by a simple
ratio. The only ratio within EN 15567 relates to
those on an assisted belay ropes course activity
where there is a requirement that an instructor
should not be responsible for more than 4 people
at height at any one time. In essence, this means
Safety is achieved through a combination of
that an instructor cannot supervise more than
course design, course maintenance, technology,
four belayers simultaneously under optimum
experience and instruction of the participants,
circumstances of competence, experience, etc. It
supervision plans and competency of instructors.
should be emphasised that this is a minimum ratio
When this is done well, all three levels of
(contained within a minimum standard) and that
supervision can provide for safe and rewarding
for inexperienced participants a more conservative
experiences. However, any compromise in one
ratio (i.e., fewer belayers per instructor) should be
area will require a proportionate enhancement in
adopted. Alternatively, the methods of supervision
another.
and the equipment used may mean that a high
Consider the levels recommended to be the ratio, even with novice belayers, is acceptable.
starting point and minimum requirement. They
Complete a risk assessment and design your
should not be regarded as permission to operate
supervision plan and operating supervision levels
at those levels. As with all operating decisions,
upon this. Use the levels as described in the
the supervision plan should be based on risk
standard as the minimum starting point and allow
assessment.
for flexibility in your plan. Finally, if necessary, seek
To explain it further, there may be crossover competent advice.
between the various levels of supervision. For
If you operate with group bookings of under 18s
example, an assisted belay ropes course activity
and hold an AALA Licence for other activities,
may form part of a school’s curriculum. As a
please refer to Appendix A to this guide.
result, students may participate on the ropes
course every week for an entire school year.
Initially they may be taught how to belay under
very close supervision (Level 1 supervision), but
as their experience and competence grows so

5.6 Safety systems as defined by EN 15567

5.6.1 Assisted belay safety system
An assisted belay system, such as the one in the photo, is simply a system where the participant is secured
by at least one other person. This could be a bottom-top rope system such as those used at a climbing wall
or a climbing crag where the belayer is stationed on the ground, and the rope is positioned above and then
back down to the climber. The advantage of this system is that the climber can climb uninhibited without
necessarily worrying about their own safety, as this is in the control of the belayer on the ground. When
supervised and used correctly, this system offers low risk of a fall to the climber but good opportunity for
learning development, as those climbing will rely on the support, both physical and emotional, from those
belaying on the ground.
You do not need to use belay devices as part of the system. Nor do you need to use ground anchors as a
means to secure the belayer to the ground, either tested or untested. There are many options and all can
be utilised and performed safely. Here are some other options for protecting the participants on an assisted
belay ropes course.
The Australian Belay/team belay method
When choosing an assisted belay

safety system, the questions to ask are:
Has the chosen system been

designed appropriately by a
competent person for your
groups and how you wish to
operate?
Do your instructors know how

to use the system correctly,
including its limitations?
PGL Set up for team belaying
Have instructors been trained
how to teach novice belayers?
Have instructors been trained

how to supervise novice
belayers, as well as the climbers?
There can be advantages to removing a device

that requires specific belaying skills and moving
to a belay system that brings the human element
back into the course programme.
Whatever system you use or wish to consider,

do not just copy what others are doing. Seek
competent advice about how to use the system
correctly, and then ensure your staff team are
trained in its limitations, how to use it safely
and how to teach and supervise novices.

5.6.2 Individual safety systems All categories, when the course is designed
Individual safety systems now have a specific appropriately and well, can be operated safely.
safety standard that was officially published As with a chosen method for an assisted belay
in March 2020. system, you should not simply copy what others
are doing but seek competent advice where
BS EN 17109:2020 Mountaineering necessary.
equipment. Individual safety
systems for rope courses. Safety Understanding the categories will help when you
requirements and test methods.
read Part 2 of EN 15567. However, here is one
clause in Part 1 that is critical to all categories and
You would not be expected
to meeting the requirements of EN 15567.
to purchase a copy of this
standard as an operator,
but you should certainly 4.3.5.3.1 Use of connectors for attachment
insist that any system you to the safety line
are planning to have installed at your facility
meets this standard. It may also be prudent to The use of individual safety systems
seek advice on your current system, and see if it is categories A to D is restricted to the action
possible to update your system so that it can be of change over. All other connectors in
certified to EN 17109:2020. the individual safety system shall only be
openable with a tool. The only exception is
Individual safety systems are not just for when the connector is out of reach of the
recreational operators offering experiences to participants when a triple action connector
those who wish to take part in an adventure at may be used.
height with family or friends. As with assisted
belay ropes courses, the opportunity for self- Here are the categories with some examples:
discovery, trust and relationship building as well
as many other developmental topics can be safely Individual safety system: Category A
explored on a well-designed and appropriately
supervised facility that is employing an individual Self-closing device which is not automatically
safety system. self-locking. Examples include self-closing or
screwgate karabiner. The use of individual safety
The first individual safety systems were often systems category A is only allowed when all
referred to as Cows Tails courses and were in change-overs take place from a stable position of
use over 50 years ago. The participants were balance (e.g. on a platform), or a collective safety
taught how to make their Cows Tails out of rope, system is in place. Examples only:
sometimes even making their own harness. They
would then work together to keep each other safe
at height, after practising at a safe height or even
on the ground. Ropes courses like this can be
managed to meet the requirements of EN 15567.
Their use, when appropriate for the people taking
part, can be safe and in many parts of the world
are still in use today. C.A.M.P. USA Inc HMS -
Compact Lock Carabiner
EN 15567 categorises individual safety systems
in the following way. It is not a list of least safe
(A) to most safe (E). The standard uses the
category system to help the designer or the DMM Spectre
operator of the course to consider supervision – “snap-gate”
requirements/levels, briefing signage and signage karabiner
on the course, ground training facilities for
the participants, time needed for training and
assessing of participants before they start their
adventure.

Individual safety system: Category B Individual safety system: Category D
Self-locking device. Examples include self-locking Interlocking device to PREVENT unintentional

karabiners. Examples only: detaching from the safety system. An ‘interlocking
device’ is a device with at least two gates whereby
an action on one gate results in an effect on
another gate. Example only:
ISC Smart-Snap
CLiC-iT®
Petzl Vertigo
Edelrid Smart
Belay X
ISC Offset
Oval triple action
Individual safety system: Category E
Device that is permanently attached and can only

be opened with a tool. Examples only:
Individual safety system: Category C
Interlocking device to REDUCE the likelihood of

unintentional detaching from the safety system.
An ‘interlocking device’ is a device with at least
two gates whereby an action on one gate results
in an effect on another gate. Example only:
Roperoller®
COUDOU Pro Saferoller®
The Edelrid Smart Belay device

is a category C system that is currently
in use but will be phased out over the coming years.
Nico Ltd Ropes Course Inc.

5.6.3 Collective safety system

Collective safety systems include:
Net parks
5.6.4 Low ropes (spotting)

RockReef at Bournemouth Pier
5.6.5 Zip lines

Zip lines can now be found all over the UK,
from the world famous Zip World, in North Wales
to Bournemouth Pier and inside shopping centres.
Westfield Shopping Centre

Emergency brake (e.g. spring covered by foam)

must be passive
Primary (Passive) Brake. An appropriately prepared

and maintained ground surface can provide the
primary brake.
Primary (Passive) braking system

5.7 Hazards and risks They also inform the participants of the risks on
arrival, during the safety brief and before taking
A hazard is something with the potential to cause part in the activities. For certain operations, all
harm, and a risk is a measurement that takes into or more of these options may be prudent. The
account the likelihood and severity of harm from identification of risks should be clear and allow
that hazard. realistic, informed and uninhibited options to any
participants, who, as a result, may wish to decline
Owners and operators of ropes courses and off- the activity. It is worth noting that, for some, the
ground adventure activities endeavour to create risks may not be truly apparent until a participant
wonderful and life-affirming experiences for their has seen or even started an activity. See section
customers. One would hope that nobody sets 8.6 Acknowledgement of risk.
out to hurt another person; equally, it would be
an impractical task to design an activity, in our In addition to human error, which is covered in
industry, that was without risk altogether. The section 8.8 there are a variety of hazards that
aim is to reduce the risk to the lowest practicable may be found on ropes courses and off-ground
level by taking preventative measures. Health adventure activities. It is important to appreciate
and safety legislation requires us to identify, and that no two facilities will have exactly the same
control hazards and risks in our operations. hazards, and these may also vary with the different
participants. Some common hazards found on
The introduction in EN 15567 details some ropes courses and off-ground adventure activities
of the responsibilities of the constructors and may include, but are not limited to:
operators of ropes courses and off-ground
adventure activities and includes risk assessments. • Connection errors between the harness
It acknowledges that there are some inherent and the safety system.
risks associated with all ropes courses and off-
• Falling from an activity system to the ground.
ground adventure activities, and operators should
make participants aware that these risks exist but • Falling, sliding or swinging into something
through careful management they are tolerable. solid (also common hazards on a low ropes
course ).
When operating ropes courses and off-ground • Falling from one activity system onto another,
adventure activities under level 2 and 3 or another part of the same.
supervision the responsibility for the control of • Objects dropped from a height.
these risks, to some degree, becomes shared by
• Rope burn - which may in turn lead to a more
the participants and the operators.
serious incident such as letting go of a belay
rope.
Operators should provide a well-built facility, safe
equipment, appropriate supervision, information, • Entanglement in a rope or net – there may
instruction, training and assessment of the be a higher likelihood when helmets are worn.
participants’ understanding and ability to operate • Hair, finger or clothing entrapment in nets or
any equipment before they are allowed to take equipment like belay devices and zip trolleys.
part in the activity. When participants have started • Lower limb injuries from bouncing on nets
their experience and are either out of reach or out and when landing on zip lines.
of sight, the responsibility and the control of risk
• Collision between participants on net parks
is now shared. The operator is very much relying
or zip lines.
on the participants to follow the rules and training
they have received, use the equipment correctly, • Zip line brake systems malfunctioning. When
supervise each other and notify the supervising designing braking systems for zip lines
staff if there is a problem or they are in need consideration must be given to mitigating
of help. the consequences of failure. These should
include if the system fails to stop the rider
This shared responsibility of risk should be made as designed and if the system jams and
clear to anybody who wishes to take part no stops the rider abruptly, thereby imparting a
matter what the facility or level of supervision. dangerously high force on the rider and the
Many recreational operators ensure participants equipment.
complete an ‘acknowledgement of risk’ form.

6. Construction
Traditionally, ropes courses were constructed by enthusiastic
outdoor instructors, and the original Outward Bound™
courses were good examples of this. Typically, builders were
climbers and often had some complementary skills such
as a familiarity with sailing and associated hardware
(e.g., rigging materials like shackles and cable). Courses
were generally erected in trees, and the constructor was
invariably responsible for operating the course, so they
naturally understood how it was best managed safely.
As the commercial value of ropes courses became

recognised, so construction techniques became more
sophisticated and considered. Many courses are now built
as freestanding structures, but they can also be found in disused mines and quarries, shopping centres,
cruise ships and on top of skyscrapers.
Inevitably these structures are a far cry from the early courses. They are now highly engineered and use a
diverse range of modern materials and techniques in the construction. Some zip lines can reach up to 1.7
miles long, and there are adventure activity parks with upwards of a 100,000 users per year.
In the design phase of your project, you may want to consider whether you should follow the advice and
guidance of HSG 175 and the ADIPS inspection scheme, in addition to EN 15567 and the ERCA Standards.
This is particularly relevant to operators who would primarily consider themselves to be an amusement
park or visitor attraction. It is beyond the scope of this guidance to fully explain these established routes to
design, construction and inspection. For more information, please use the following web links:
• https://www.hse.gov.uk/entertainment/fairgrounds/adsc.htm
• https://adips.co.uk/
The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015

Whichever route to construction you decide to take, you will always need to consider CDM, as it imposes
specific duties on designers and others during the pre-construction phase of a project. For detailed
guidance on CDM you can refer to the CDM ACOP L153 as well as the short guide INDG 411
Note: It is worth noting that the effectiveness of pole treatment (timber

preservation) has declined since 2004 following the introduction of
various European restrictions that prohibit the use of certain chemicals
and procedures previously adopted. Timber poles that may previously
have provided upwards of 25 years’ safe use may now have a far shorter
‘lifespan’. Meticulous inspection by a competent person is therefore
very important. There have been a number of very serious pole failures
in recent years. It is very difficult to determine how well a pole has been
treated. In the UK, suppliers to the telecommunication and electrical
industries are normally able to provide poles conforming to the highest
standards, but due to issues in the past, most are unlikely to offer any
form of warranty on the poles.
There are also a number of supplementary preservative treatments that
can be applied before and after installation, such as pole-saver sleeves
and a variety of chemicals which can significantly enhance pole longevity.
Additionally, most professional constructors are now mounting poles
above ground or utilizing an all-steel structure. Specialist advice should
be sought.

6.1 Low ropes courses

EN 15567 does not specifically reference low
ropes courses. Appropriate care should be taken
in ensuring that a low ropes course is structurally
sound, that landing areas and surfaces are suitable
and that they are operationally fit for purpose.
It would of course be inappropriate to expect
a constructor of a ‘spider’s web’ to provide
engineering design calculations; however, it would
be very important for the operator of a ‘spider’s Mobile ropes course, erected and in use
web’ to be in possession of instructions from the

Part of a
constructor on how the activity should be run. An temporary low
inaugural inspection as defined in EN 15567 is not ropes set-up
a requirement for low ropes courses, but many
still choose to have this inspection as part of their
safety management system.
6.2 Temporary ropes courses

People have been building and creating ropes
course activities for decades. In order to construct
and use a temporary ropes course you need:
• trees of sufficient size

• the ability to assess the trees you wish to use
• knowledge of which parts of the trees to use
• knowledge and equipment to build the
activities then you can, temporarily, build your
ropes course.
EN 15567 defines a temporary ropes course as
being in place for less than 7 days and significantly
does not consider temporary ropes courses to
include mobile ropes courses.
It also states in the scope that Part 1 of the

standard does not apply to temporary ropes
courses. Part 2 does apply and both parts apply
ERCA UK Training Bodies coming together to train to be
to mobile courses. The easiest way to distinguish
temporary low ropes instructors & constructors
between a mobile and temporary ropes course is
that every time you erect a mobile ropes course it If the idea of building a temporary ropes course
will be essentially (materially) the same, no matter is something you would like to explore for your
where it is located. However, a temporary ropes operation or outdoor activity centre, or you are
course can be different every time it is built. already doing so, then you must ensure you get
competent advice on tree selection, equipment/
Mobile ropes course before it
is erected materials for the build, techniques and tools
needed and finally methods to ensure the build is
safe before use.
To support operators, ERCA has a series of

Temporary Ropes Course Constructor and
Instructor training courses. For more information
on these, contact ERCA at www.erca.cc

6.3 New courses additions should conform to EN 15567. Like-for-

like works do not require an inaugural inspection
The construction of any new ropes course (e.g., the replacement of belay cables, ropes or
and off-ground adventure activities should the replacement of a rotten platform); however,
be in accordance with EN 15567. It may also substantive changes do.
be appropriate for your activity to be built in
accordance with HSG 175. Modifications to a course (that has already had an
inaugural inspection in accordance with EN 15567)
will require an additional independent inspection.
6.4 Existing off-ground adventure This inspection can be carried out by a Type A, B
activities course and modifications or C Inspection Body.
The date when your course was built or
significantly modified, will determine which 6.5 Documentary obligations
version of the standard is applicable. on constructors
• Activities built before 2008 need not In order to comply with EN 15567 the constructor
conform with any version of EN 15567 or the installer of a new activity structure must
provide a product manual containing at least the
• Activities built between 2008 – 2015 following information:
should conform with both parts of
EN 15567:2008 • A technical description of the facility
and its individual components (material
• Activities built from 2015 onwards should
certificates etc.).
conform with both parts of
EN 15567:2015 • Instructions relating to the correct use
of the course are included in Annex B
• Activities built from March 2020 onwards of EN 15567. This should include the
should conform with EN 15567-1:2015 specification for all associated PPE and
+A1:2020 and EN 15567-2:2015 safety equipment.
• A certificate of conformity to EN 15567.
However, it would be deemed good practice for
• A manufacturer’s declaration,
operators/owners, where practicable, to bring an
containing at least:
existing ropes course and off-ground adventure
activities course in line with EN 15567. Where » design calculations
this is not practicable, or historical evidence of
compliance for the whole structure or some of » normative references
its individual components is unavailable, it is
» exclusions of liability, if any
incumbent upon the owner/operator to ensure
that the activities are safe, which may require » instructions for maintenance specifying
seeking competent advice. In the event of an the frequency and method by
accident or serious incident, the onus will be on which equipment is inspected and
the operator to demonstrate that they have carried maintained
out their due diligence and done everything that is
practicable to ensure that the activities are safe to
use. Bringing the course in line with EN 15567 as
it is reviewed and republished will support you in
achieving and evidencing this.
Examples of this may be upgrading a zip line

braking system, updating of individual safety
systems or improving the course for working
at height.
If operators with existing courses decide to

make new additions to their facility, then these

6.6 Documentary obligations • Instructor and rescue training documents

on operators which demonstrate instructor competence
in their role.
In addition to the documentation that is required
under UK Law and Regulations, EN 15567:2015 • Participant safety instructions.
Part 2 requires an operator to ensure the following • Manufacturer’s product manual.
documentation is maintained. This will include:
• Safety and emergency plan.
• Name and address of the owner and • Current tree assessment report
operator. (if relevant).
• Document indicating the periodic • Safety instructions.
inspections carried out by an inspection
body.
• List of the site personnel, their function 6.7 Obligations on participants
and qualification/competence.
The age and experience of participants will have
• Evidence of public and employer’s a bearing on their obligations. Operators must
liability insurance. consider to what extent participants are able to
• Daily inspection records. The daily fulfil their obligations. Adequate provision must
sheets should be kept for three years. be made for participants unable to fulfil their
obligations.
• Accident and incident reports.
• Personal protective equipment Participants must be able to do the following:
inspection register and operation log.
• Comply with safety instructions and briefings.
• Risk assessment and management plan
• Bring any safety concerns to the attention
which shall be drawn up by the off-
of staff.
ground adventure activities operator.
• Be careful of their own safety and the
safety of others.

7. Inspections & maintenance

A comprehensive inspection regime is an essential part of ensuring that any ropes course and off-ground
adventure activities course is fit for purpose.
With older ropes courses and off-ground adventure activities courses reaching the end of their serviceable
life, and many new courses receiving vast numbers of recreational users, a professional approach to the
inspection process is essential. Even with ropes courses and off-ground adventure activity courses at smaller
venues catering for comparatively small numbers of participants, inspection and maintenance needs to be
systematic and on-going.
To help with all levels of inspection and in order to comply with EN 15567, the constructor of the off-ground
adventure activity must provide instructions for maintenance and inspections (including frequency), as well
as a comprehensive set of drawings and design calculations.
In EN 15567 it is required that periodical and inaugural inspections are carried out by an inspection body
that meets the requirements of: ‘BS EN ISO/IEC 17020:2012 Conformity assessment. Requirements for
the operation of various types of bodies performing inspection’.
UKAS is the National Accreditation Body for development, specific to off-ground adventure
the United Kingdom. They are appointed by activities, adventure parks and zip lines.
government to assess and accredit organisations
that provide services including certification, For a full list of ERCA-certified Inspection Bodies
testing, inspection and calibration. At the time of and how the scheme is structured and managed
the publication of this guidance, there is no option visit https://www.erca.uk/index.php/en/training-
for an inspection body to be accredited by UKAS and-inspection/about-certification
for inspecting to EN 15567. Should you wish to engage the services of an
ERCA-certified Inspection Body be sure they are
As a result of the above, the two most common fully and officially audited by ERCA and not simply
routes for inspection bodies to be audited, verified a member of the association. ERCA has a specific
and their qualifications checked are through logo for its ERCA-certified Inspection Bodies, and
ADIPS and ERCA. Following a successful auditing this is what you need to look for on their websites
process, both organisations will designate the and in their documentation.
appropriate status to the inspection body to
carry out either inaugural inspections, periodical Some companies offer and perform inspections
inspections or both depending on qualifications. in the UK that are not part of either of the 2
schemes mentioned above. It is incumbent on
An ADIPS inspection body can carry out the operator to be satisfied that the inspection
inspections to meet EN 15567. ADIPS body’s competency and suitability is sufficient
independently verifies the competence of its and independent enough to meet the needs of
registered inspectors so that owners of off-ground the operator. It would be prudent to check what
adventure activities can comply with the legislation qualifications they hold to be able to inspect the
set out in PUWER 1998, Section 6. ADIPS will audit components of your facility. For instance, and only
against BS EN 1S0/IEC 17020:2012, HSG 175, as examples, are they competent in inspecting
EN 15567 and any other relevant standards or wooden poles, wire ropes, PPE or your specific
guidance. For more information on ADIPS please safety devices, and do they hold appropriate
go to https://adips.co.uk/ training and qualifications for working at height?
Another route is to have an inspection by an Whichever route or option you decide upon
ERCA-certified Inspection Body. ERCA will for choosing an inspection company, the most
audit against a set of ERCA-own quality criteria, important factor to consider is whether they
EN 15567 and any other relevant standards or are qualified and competent to carry out the
guidance. In addition, it provides the inspectors inspection. Further, you must ensure they act
with compulsory training and ongoing professional safely when at your facility.

7.1 Inaugural inspections IEC 17020:2012 details the level of independence

required for all types of inspection bodies (A, B or
EN 15567 requires that when a new ropes course C). It is beyond the scope of this guidance to fully
or off-ground adventure activities course is built, explain these requirements however, no matter the
but before it is used, an inaugural inspection must type of inspection body, all three are required to
take place. This should be done by a completely act with a degree of independence between those
independent Inspection Body. By definition, who conduct the inspection and other parts of their
such an inspection body will have no commercial business. The inspection body may also have a
interest in the construction or maintenance of the maintenance and construction capability.
ropes course or off-ground adventure activities
course, nor any fiduciary interest in the facility The periodic inspection is a good opportunity for
to be inspected or other conflict of interest. the operator(s) to be in attendance to answer and
They must also have their own public liability ask any questions and improve their knowledge.
insurance for such work. Crucially however they Examples of what the process should include are:
must be competent and operators should take all
reasonable care to ensure the competency and • visual inspection
currency of the inspector and inspection body. EN
• functional inspection
15567 recommends that a Type A Inspection Body
(as defined by BS EN ISO/IEC 17020:2012) carries • assessment of the replacement state
this out. of worn components.
The inaugural inspection involves carrying out

and documenting:
• Visual inspection.
• A review to ensure that the design
calculation and / or tree strength
assessment exists.
• A review of the current arboreal assessment
to ensure that all trees used as a support
system have been judged safe to use.
• Verification that the course has been Initial visual inspection would suggest no problems
constructed in accordance with the design with this pole
drawings (e.g., guy angles). This is also
referred to as an Assessment of Conformity
to Design.
• A functional test carried out at height by
an inspector. This means the inspector
must have a comprehensive knowledge
of courses and how they are used. The
inspector should also be qualified and
competent to work at height.
7.2 Periodical inspections

Periodical inspections should be carried out by
a type A, B or C Inspection Body at least each
Scrap away the gravel and fungal growth on the pole
calendar year and with a maximum interval of 15
can be seen and should be done according to the
months. The purpose is to establish the overall level manufacturer’s or supplier’s instructions for maintenance.
of safety of equipment, foundations and surfaces.
Operators should be aware that, whichever
body you choose to employ to carry out your For a full list of requirements refer to 7.1.4 in
periodical inspections, Annex A from BS EN ISO/ EN 15567-1:2015 A1+ 2020

A comprehensive report should be provided as An operational inspection should be as

part of this inspection and as a minimum this comprehensive and thorough as a periodic
should include: inspection – the only difference being the latter
has a greater degree of independence. This
• Date and place of the inspection. requires inspectors to be as competent and
knowledgeable as they should be for a periodic
• Who carried it out.
inspection. For example, they may need to
• A summary of what was inspected. determine the degree of rot in a timber pole and
decide, based on industry standards, whether
• Results of the inspection indicating any
it is acceptable. A thorough knowledge of wire
defects observed.
rope discard criteria is invariably essential for
• Recommendations for any remedial actions. an operational inspection. For some items of
• Any misgivings about further use of any equipment, such as individual safety systems, the
parts of the facility. inspectors may need to attend specific training
from the manufacturer of the device. (e.g.,
• A recommendation on re-inspection. CLiC-iT® and ISC Wales ALF device).
• A copy of the inspection report, which
should be kept with the technical There are now companies in the UK offering
documentation of the off-ground certified training courses in how to complete
adventure activity. operational inspections, and there are also specific
courses available in the UK for the inspection of
utility poles and wire rope.
7.3 Operational inspection
This will be carried by the operator every 1-3 7.4 Routine visual check
months or as directed by the constructor.
Generally speaking, the constructor’s This is done and documented before opening
recommendations should be considered a the course each day the facility is to be used.
minimum; operators may consider more frequent This check involves a visual survey of critical
inspections are required – based on their components and an assessment of the general
experience and on empirical evidence. appearance of the course and the surrounding
environment. Elements to consider can be
Examples of elements to be considered as part of reasonably put into 4 groups:
visual and operational inspections are cleanliness,
condition of ground surface, sharp edges, missing • weather damage
components, excessive wear (of moving parts) and (strong winds, lightning etc.)
the structural integrity of the safety system (e.g., • vandalism
condition of cables).
• animal damage
• wear and tear
The routine visual check is often done by an

appropriately trained instructor. These daily
inspections must also include any PPE and safety
equipment used for the activity. This inspection
must be in line with:
• The maintenance manual provided

by the constructor.
• Instructions for any PPE and safety
devices.
• The operator’s risk assessment.

7.5 Tree inspections 7.7 Work at Height Regulations

In addition to what is written below please refer
2005 (WAHR) and inspections
to clause 4.3.3.3.1 and Annex A in EN 15567- In 2007 the WAHR were amended to include
1:2015+A1:2020. persons instructing climbing and caving.
Note: The ERCA training awards and Standards

alongside EN 15567 can be considered as
equivalent “established good practice” as
referenced in the WAHR.
During routine visual checks and possibly for

some operational inspections, instructors /
inspectors may use the same PPE and practices as
participants would normally use, provided they are
going around or over the facility in the same way
that participants normally would. This assumes
that established good practices are followed.
The requirements of the WAHR apply to any work

at height (as defined in the WAHR, reg.2 below).
If trees are part of or within the vicinity of off-
“work at height” means -
ground adventure activities they should be
inspected prior to construction by a current (a) work in any place, including a place at or
and competent arborist who can undertake the below ground level;
appropriate tree inspections. Thereafter the trees
should be inspected at least each calendar year (b) obtaining access to or egress from such
and with a maximum interval of 15 months. The place while at work, except by a staircase in
species, health, location and age of the trees will a permanent workplace, where, if measures
determine the frequency of inspections and the required by these Regulations were not taken,
level of experience required of the inspector. If in a person could fall a distance liable to cause
doubt an expert arborculturlist (qualified to Level personal injury.
3) should be consulted before the tree in question
is used. However, arborists are not usually
During all other forms of inspections, maintenance
expected to be experts on off-ground adventure
and construction work, practices consistent with
activity courses.
WAHR are required. This may include the use of
Trees may also need to be inspected after a severe industrial harnesses and other industrial PPE and
storm or with the appearance of fungus or obvious may involve the use of dual rope techniques. It is
deterioration in the health of the tree. beyond the scope of this guidance to provide the
details of WAHR and maintenance techniques,
Tree inspection reports should be retained. but inspectors should be conversant with the
WAHR before carrying out their work. Additional
training is likely to be required for those wishing to
7.6 Maintenance fulfil such roles. There are a number of specialist
companies that are able to provide such training.
Inspections and maintenance are intrinsically
linked. Minor maintenance is often best done
It is worth noting that under Regulation 6 of
by the operator during the routine visual
the WAHR, there is a hierarchy of control for
and operational inspection. This may include
determining how to work at height safely. The
replacement of maillon rapides, shackles and small
hierarchy has to be followed systematically, and
ropes. More significant maintenance - for example
only when one level is not reasonably practicable
the replacement of cables, poles and platforms
may the next level be considered. It is not
- will usually be carried out by a professional
ropes course and off-ground adventure activities
construction company.

acceptable to select work equipment from lower

down the hierarchy (e.g., personal fall arrest, such
as harnesses and lanyards) in the first instance.
Wherever possible the need to work at height
should be minimised. This may be achieved with a
carefully designed off-ground adventure activities
course. The method of working at height should
be decided upon by undertaking a risk assessment
and taking into account the work required and
its duration. Where appropriate, collective safety
systems should take priority over individual safety
systems and the use of a Mobile Elevating Work
Platform (MEWP – colloquially known as a “Cherry
Picker”), where reasonably practicable, may be the
most appropriate option to take.
Vertical access, in particular, requires careful

consideration. Please remember that for the
purposes of maintenance, attaching yourself to
staples as a means of fall arrest is inappropriate
because they are (normally) untested, unapproved
and unquantifiable in terms of their security and
dependability as anchors. Generally, an industrial
device designed for use on vertical cables or
rope is required. Alternatively, inspectors can be
belayed (up and down) using a single rope running
through a rated top anchor by an assistant. One
option to gain access to perform an inspection
is to install an industrial fall arrest device for
ascending or descending the activity structure.
These normally consist of cable, rope or rails and
a traveller that locks automatically should a fall
occur.
It should be noted that the WAHR require the

operator to ensure that the planning for any work
at height must include planning for emergencies
and rescue. These plans must take into
consideration participants, instructors and persons
completing construction, maintenance and
inspections. It is the operator’s duty to ensure that
contractors on site, completing any of those roles,
must have sufficient plans and means in place for
emergencies and rescue. This could include them
asking the operator to provide a suitably qualified
and competent rescuer whilst they carry out their
inspection or maintenance on the facility.
Inspector carrying out inspection

8. Operation
This section relates to EN 15567:2015 Part 2 Operations.
New and Existing Courses – Part 2 of the EN is relevant to all operations on both new and existing off-
ground adventure activities courses. All ropes courses and off-ground adventure activities operators are
encouraged to refer to the EN.
8.1 Good practice

Identification of associated risks and the
development of operating procedures is required
by both the MHSWR and EN 15567.
An assessment of the hazards and risks, specific

to your operation and also to each different type
of activity should be done. When carrying out this
assessment you may identify individual sections
or elements of the activity that have their own
specific risks that need to be controlled. These risk
assessments inform the information, instructions
and training provided to employees. They are
also used to develop appropriate operating
procedures that balance the excitement or other
benefits of the activity with their safe use.
Participants have certain obligations. However,

these will vary depending on their age and
experience. You may want to consider participant In some cases, this may reduce the risk of a human
attitude and behaviour when determining how error accident and will likely increase the learning
much self-responsibility will be appropriate. potential.
Participants should be briefed to be careful about No person should take part in any off-ground
their own safety at all times and that of others. adventure activity whilst under the influence of
They should be told to comply with all safety alcohol or drugs. Participants should be reminded
instructions and be reminded when necessary. that certain prescription drugs also inhibit safe
Providing this information at the time of booking participation in off-ground adventure activities.
(website and reception areas) as well as on signs
at appropriate locations at each activity will
strengthen and reinforce the briefings provided 8.2 Identification of appropriate
by instructors. instructor competence
For some types of operation or activities such as This is likely to be the biggest single factor
a developmental or educational programmes, influencing the safety of these activities. There
providers may choose to encourage participants to must be a system of identifying and verifying
be as fully involved in the measures to ensure their the required competence of instructors and their
own safety as the provider feels is reasonable. assistants. Technical competence, including
Where possible participants - even young measures designed to minimise human error and
participants - can be encouraged to carry out as the consequences thereof, are essential, but so
many of the relevant safety procedures as they too are measures in how to supervise participants,
can, with the instructor providing a double, visual how to intervene to prevent an incident or unsafe
and, where practicable, physical check. This may action, how to coach and encourage participants,
well influence what those procedures are and what and where appropriate, how to observe and be
equipment is identified as the most appropriate. ready to conduct a review.

8.3 Instructor induction Instructors should generally wear the same or

similar equipment as participants during their
An induction process is likely to be required. training and when giving demonstrations. Rescue
This would include, but is not limited to: techniques should be practiced regularly, with
first aid and other scenarios included to ensure
• company health and safety policy familiarity.
• roles and responsibilities
Any qualification system for off-ground adventure
• general site safety policies such as activities should address the following aspects of
» fire procedures training:
» emergency action plans
• Those overseeing training are competent
• reporting of accidents, incidents and to do so.
near misses
• Full records are kept of training courses,
• how the equipment is stored, including
including the syllabus/training programme
quarantining procedures
followed.
• course paperwork and documentation
• Full records are kept of instructors’
• participant booking processes
on-going experience.
• participant limitations to participation
• There is a detailed assessment of training
practices and instructor’s competence.
It must be clear who is to conduct this induction,
• There is on-going monitoring and
what it covers, what form it takes, etc. Details of
development of instructor competence
the induction should be retained.
in their role.
8.4 Instructor training For those who wish to follow a recognised training
scheme, ERCA has a process for ERCA-certified
Operators should ensure that instructors are Training Bodies, similar to that of its Inspection
equipped with the skills necessary to deal with any Body Scheme. ERCA-certified Training Bodies are
reasonably foreseeable and relevant occurrences audited regularly and only employ trainers who
on each activity and element used. This will often are qualified to the scheme and follow the ERCA
require training on the elements themselves and training syllabus when delivering a course.
should include at least some practical incident
and accident scenarios and responses. Detailed ERCA trainers meet regularly for
knowledge of each element is likely to be one CPD days and to share
of the major factors in the safe delivery of these good practice.
activities. Details of the training should be
retained. Just like the inspection scheme, there is a specific
logo for ERCA-certified Training Bodies that
enables you to distinguish them from those
companies who are simply ERCA members.
For a list of ERCA-certified Training Bodies and

details of the scheme follow this link
https://www.erca.uk/index.php/en/training-and-
inspection
8.5 Identification of group

competence
Increasingly, ropes courses and off-ground
adventure activities are offered as ‘one-off’
experiences to a wide range of groups, from
primary schools to corporate groups as well as

members of the general public, frequently in a 8.8 Human error accidents

recreational/pay-to-play capacity. When possible, a
policy of identifying the competence, experience, Serious accidents on ropes courses and off-
special needs and physical and medical condition ground adventure activities are still rare. Where
of the participants in advance of their participation accidents have occurred, human error is a leading
is advisable. However, for pay-to-play operators contributing factor. Human error accidents are
this may simply be impracticable. When you can, caused by a wide range of factors including
and as a result of differing levels of participant incompetence, task overload and fatigue but most
competency, it would be equally acceptable to importantly distraction of one sort or another.
either: Distraction may be more difficult to identify than
mechanical failure and therefore more difficult to
• Select the elements on the basis of the prevent.
client group; or
When we refer to human error or human factors in
• Select the client group on the basis of the this guidance, we are referring to ‘environmental,
elements available. organisational and job factors, and human
and individual characteristics, which influence
With no previous knowledge of a participant’s behaviour at work in a way which can affect
experience and competence, operators should health and safety’ Reducing Error & Influencing
assume that neither exists. This is particularly Behaviour (HSG48, 1999)
important in relation to children.
This guidance covers three interrelated areas: the
job, the person and the organisation. Or, quite
8.6 Acknowledgement of risk
simply put:
A policy of informing the participants of the
nature and extent of risks and what to expect • What are people being asked to do
from the activity is encouraged. This is particularly (the task and its characteristics)?
important where the participants may have no • Who is doing it (the individual and their
concept or prior knowledge of this type of activity. competence)?
• Where are they working (the organisation and
It may be unreasonable to expect an operator its attributes)?
to detail the hazards in their primary advertising.
See table on page 36.
However, it may be reasonable, for example, to
leave this information until the point of booking
You can find examples of accidents and incidents,
or even (in some cases) until arrival and within
including human error, that have occurred during
the activity briefing. The identification of risks
ropes courses and off-ground adventure activities
should be clear, and allow realistic and uninhibited
by clicking on the following two links:
options to any participants who, as a result, may
wish to decline the activity. • www.outdoor-learning.org/AALA
• www.erca.uk/index.php/en/publications/
8.7 Identification of element safety
options • https://adventurerms.org.uk/updates/
Following accidents, there have been successful
It may be beneficial to have alternative elements
prosecutions of ropes course and OGAA operators
or alternative start or finish points. In some cases,
in recent years. You can find details on these by
the degree of difficulty or the duration of the
searching the following databases
exercise or both can be determined by varying
these. On the day and through a risk assessment,
https://www.shponline.co.uk/prosecution-and-
the most appropriate elements should be used
in-court/
depending on factors such as the weather
conditions, nature, experience and expectations https://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/convictions.
of the group, the number and experience of staff htm
available, etc. https://www.ioshmagazine.com/categories/
article-types/news

Below, you will find some suggestions as to how

you can reduce human error at your site and for
your activities.
Ensure instructor competence. Competence

should be gained by appropriate training and
experience as specified by the operator’s risk
assessment and health and safety policy. An
appropriate qualification and training record
(or similar) should be kept as evidence.
Deploy staff carefully. It is almost inevitable

that any instructor doing any highly repetitive
task will eventually lose concentration, their mind
will wander, and they will make a mistake. If the
task is safety-related, then the consequences can
be catastrophic. Similarly, deploying the same
Avoid element-specific instructors. Training
instructor to the same element day after day is
instructors so that they can run different elements
likely to result in the same ‘task fade’.
is likely to make the experience more rewarding
as well as safer for the participants and the
Avoid long periods of the same repetitive
instructor. Operating a ‘group instructor’ system
task. Staff should be deployed so as to minimise
means one instructor stays with the same group
excessive exposure to repetitive tasks. One
of participants through their experience. An
solution is to make sure employees have plenty
instructor will learn what participants are like, who
of breaks. However, an alternative approach is to
needs extra encouragement or extra attention,
ensure the instructor moves on to a different task
which participants they can trust and who needs
at frequent intervals. A different repetitive task is
particularly close supervision.
better than keeping to the same one.
Job Factors Person Factors Organisation Factors
System/equipment interface Physical capability & condition Work pressures
Routine or unusual tasks Fatigue (acute or chronic) Supervision/Leadership
Divided attention Stress/morale Communication
Procedures inadequate or
Work overload/underload Manning Levels
inappropriate
Working environment (noise, Clarity of roles

Competence
heat, space, light and ventilation) and responsibilities
Consequences of not
Time available/required Motivation
following procedures
Tools appropriate for task Organisational or safety culture
Communication

Use ‘mental’ checklists. Preparing a participant A-C individual safety systems, these training and
for some activities can be a multi-step process. test areas are a requirement of EN 15567. If this
Part of an instructor training scheme could be to is not possible, then a double check by another
encourage instructors to run through a ‘mental’ instructor may also enhance safety.
checklist.
Avoid task overload and concentration loss.
This could be a sequential check of the safety The biggest single cause of human error accidents
‘chain’, or following some convenient mnemonic. seems to be that the instructor was distracted. This
might be because they were distracted by some
A good example is C.H.E.C.K., which can be used other relevant task or by too many concurrent
before an instructor allows the participant to step tasks, and the risk of this is increased by making the
off the platform or leave the ground: instructor responsible for multiple tasks. However
there have been accidents, some serious, that
C Clothing. (to include hair, pockets, occurred because the instructor was simply focused
jewellery and footwear). on some totally unrelated issue: they were day-
dreaming. Practices and procedures need to be
H Harness/Helmet. Are they correctly fitted? considered in terms of keeping instructors focused.
E Environment. Is the zip landing clear, are Monitor all staff from time to time. An effective
there any spectators about to enter the measure to prevent a wide range of human error
area, is the weather about to change? accidents is for management to monitor staff
C
routinely in their normal working environment.
Connections. Are they safely connected
to the safety system? Respond to poor practice. Individual cases of
K
poor practice that are observed can be dealt with
Knowledge. Do they have the correct
immediately. More widespread cases of the same
knowledge to safely take part in the
poor practice would lead to adjustments to initial
activity?
training or refresher training procedures.
The key thing is to avoid saying “GO” merely
Nurture your staff. The fact that instructors
because the last step in the sequence has been
see management taking a real interest in safety
completed without first checking that all the steps
reinforces to them that their management
have been completed.
appreciates that what they do on a daily basis
Use participant involvement. The participant is important. Conversely, if instructors feel
is the person present with the greatest vested that management do not care, then gradually
interest in their own safety. It makes sense, instructors will not care either. If instructors don’t
therefore, to include them in the process of care, then they will make mistakes, and if they
ensuring their own safety. The participant ‘does’ make mistakes, sooner or later these will result
and the instructor ‘checks’ is particularly relevant in accidents.
to supervision levels 1 and 2. Two brains and two
It is important that adequate consideration is
sets of eyes are invariably better than one: the so-
given to equipment and procedures that minimise
called duality principle.
the likelihood of a human error failure. Avoiding
Be participant centered. The duality principle human error is really about ensuring that:
(above) may require operators to revise their
procedures, the equipment they use and the way » These people;
they use it so that the participant can understand
» with this training;
and play their part in the process. Involving them
in the process makes the activity more satisfying » and this equipment;
for the participant, but it also makes it safer. If you
» can do these tasks;
are including the participant in their own safety
it is advisable to design either procedures or » safely, effectively, satisfyingly; and
specific ground training and practice areas where
they can practice and instructors can assess their » under these conditions.
ability before they start the activity. For categories

8.9 Equipment
This includes both personal and group equipment. Equipment selection will depend on the nature of the
elements, the abilities of the group, the weather and other factors. However, certain aspects may become
company policy, such as whether to use sit harnesses or full body harnesses on high ropes elements or
helmets on low challenge course elements.
In EN 15567 it is a requirement that the constructor of the activity provide, within the owner’s manual, a list
of the equipment required to operate the activity. It may also be advisable to seek competent advice, as the
choice of equipment is vast and getting it wrong can prove to be a very expensive mistake and may also
lead to accidents or other unintended problems. Here is a list of things to consider, but it is by no means
exhaustive:
• The choice between the types of harness as gloves may be considered useful but not
should be carefully considered. In recent years essential.
there has been a move towards the use of • Group equipment may also be affected by the
full body harness on off-ground adventure venue’s proximity to other resources such as
activities; however, it is too simplistic centre buildings, first aid room, etc.
to suggest a full body harness is always
• When advising participants or group leaders,
preferable. The most important consideration
it may be appropriate to list both group and
is that a harness fits well and is secure.
personal equipment under headings such as
• In some activities, there may be an ‘must have’ and ‘may have’.
unacceptably high risk of head injury, which
• Because equipment requirements may vary
could be adequately reduced by wearing a
from day to day and group to group, it will
helmet. The most appropriate helmet may not
need to be clear who decides what clothing
be a climbing helmet. In other instances, the
and equipment is necessary for a particular
risk of head injury may be low and outweighed
session or a particular day. It will also need
by the need for clear communications, visual
to be clear who checks this, when and where
recognition of participants, etc. and so
they do it, and what they need to do if it is not
helmets may not be appropriate. In either
correct or acceptable.
event, the operating procedures should make
it clear if there is an inflexible policy. Similar • Operations must also make provision for
decisions will be necessary about the need for respecting and understanding cultural
particular footwear, outer clothing, and so on. and religious beliefs and distinctions when
it comes to the selection of equipment,
• Other pieces of clothing or equipment such
requirement for clothing and operational
procedures.

PPE and safety equipment should be checked in ROSPA also provides some interesting information
accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations, on lightning strikes:
and a record of this should be kept in line with the
following legislation, where relevant: http://www.rospa.com/leisuresafety/
adviceandinformation/leisuresafety/lightning.
• LOLER - https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ aspx
books/l113.htm
• PUWER - https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ 8.11 Number of participants
priced/l22.pdf per element
• PPE at Work Regulations - https://www.hse.
It may be acceptable to specify this generally
gov.uk/pubns/priced/l25.pdf
(i.e. for the whole course) or specifically (for
• WAHR - https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ each element or activity). Constructors have an
indg401.pdf obligation to provide this information under
Consideration should be given to dealing with the requirements of EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020
participants’ personal clothing. A list of what to (Annex B).
wear will be helpful. You may wish to consider a
plan (or supply of spare clothing/overalls, etc.) to
8.12 Participant’s morphology
accommodate participants who arrive improperly
dressed for the activity. Participant’s size and weight may also be a factor
in determining whether or not they can participate
Equipment should be used in accordance with the in an activity. This is often critical on large zip
manufacturer’s instructions. Where there might be lines, giant swings and free-fall drops, and as a
a requirement to deviate from these, confirmation result it is often recommended to weigh people or
of acceptance of this should be gained from the measure their height in some way before they are
manufacturer or their distributor. allowed to take part.
8.10 Weather forecast

A policy for obtaining and interpreting weather
forecasts may be needed. It must be clear who is
to do this, when it is to be done, and what action
they will take for a range of possible forecasts.
These could include, but may not be limited to:
• modification or selection of the elements

• modification of clothing, footwear or
equipment
• change of venue
• cancellation and / or return of payment
If the addition of another instructor is the

response, then there must be a system whereby
suitable persons can be deployed in the given
time span. Lightning strikes pose a real threat to
off-ground adventure activity users. The following
website provides a ‘real-time’ link to lightning
strikes in the UK.
http://www.netweather.tv/index.
cgi?action=lightning;sess=

8.13 Briefings Here is a summary, but remember you may need

to include more than this based on manufacturer’s
There will need to be a policy on the existence, instructions and your own risk assessments:
content and presentation of safety briefings.
This may be part of an overall safety briefing for • An explanation of the ropes course and
the off-ground adventure activity’s session in its off-ground adventure activities and risks of
entirety, or for each element. serious injury which have been identified in
the operator’s risk assessment. These might
For all activities there will be some information not be limited to the safety system.
the participants need to know, understand and
remember in order to take part safely. This can • Explanation of the safety instructions.
range, depending on the activity, from two or • Identification of instructors and how and
three simple instructions such as “hold here”, when to communicate with them i.e., in the
“keep your head to one side”, or “stay on your event of an accident or where a participant
climbing line”, all the way up to a very large set of requires assistance.
safety rules and instructions, such as how to look
• An explanation that at any time any
after others, how to get help when needed, how
participant shall be within range of sight of
to navigate activities or elements and how
either an instructor or an adult participant.
to manipulate and operate the safety system.
• Explanation and demonstration of the
When designing your safety brief(s) you will correct use of the equipment.
need to ensure you have taken into account
• Explanation of any marking or signage
the instructions for the activity from the
placed at the start of an activity or an
constructor and also specific instructions from
individual element.
the manufacturers of individual safety systems
and other safety devices. In addition to this, the • Information about practical assessment,
level of training and the information provided to if being used.
participants via a brief shall be determined by
• Explanation of the responsibilities of
the operator’s risk assessment. EN 15567-2:2015,
a supervising adult.
6.1 and 6.2 lists the requirements for safety
instructions.

You may also wish to consider when and how this

information is delivered to the participants. For
simple briefings for activities where the majority
of their safety is controlled by the instructors, a
simple verbal briefing just before they take part
may be sufficient.
For more complex activities where the participants

take more responsibility for their own safety and
that of others, you should consider delivering
the information to them in multiple formats
and multiple times. They need to have heard,
understood and remembered the information. 8.14 Use of adult supervisors
They also need to be able to perform any required
skills or methods you are expecting of them whilst For some activities, EN 15567 requires that an
they take part. You should consider the content adult supervises a child at height. It must be
and the delivery of the safety brief(s) as important pointed out that it does not require the adult to
and as critical as your PPE, course checks and all always be up, on the activity with them. It can be
other aspects of your safety plans. Here are some okay, based on a risk assessment, for the adult to
options for delivering this information: supervise from the ground.
What is clear is that arbitrary enforcement of

• On your website at the point of booking.
adult supervision on the activity (mandating
• On signs and briefing points at appropriate that the adult physically take part) can actually
locations at your venue. lead to more problems than it solves. Careful
• Briefing videos. consideration needs to be given as to why
you are asking an adult to take part, who that
• Verbally by instructors before the various adult is, whether they have been trained to
stages of getting participants ready. take responsibility for the child in their care and
• On activity or element-specific signs at whether their ability has been assessed.
specific locations on the course.
Study this table from the standard carefully. Only
where there is a (b) is adult supervision required.
Individual safety systems
Minimum supervision levels 1 to 3 depending on safety categories and the participant’s age
First five change-oversa after

Test Course Rest of the course
the test course
Age in years <6 6 to 9 10 from <6 6 to 9 10 from <6 6 10 from
to 13 14 to 13 14 to 9 to 13 14
A 1 2 2 2 1 2b 2b 2 1 2b 3b 3
individual safety
Category of the
B 1 2 2 2 1 2b
2 b
2 1 2b
3b
3
system
C 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2b 3b 3 3
D 1c
2 c
2 c
2c
2 b
2 3 3 3 b
3 3 3
E 1c 2c 2c 2c - - - - 3b 3 3 3
a For courses using a category D safety system, the first five change-over’s may be included within the test course. In this case
the supervision levels of the test course apply.
b Accompanied by a supervising adult.
c If required under 6.3.3.

EN 15567 also requires the following for adult 8.16 Technical advice
supervisors:
Under the HSWA, an owner and/or operator has
• Training for supervising adults shall include a ‘duty to protect the health, safety and welfare of
the safety instructions. your employees and other people who might be
affected by your business.’ (HSE Website)
• Correct attachment of the safety system
with particular reference to change-overs The HSE is clear that as an employer you must
undertaken by the child(ren) in their care. appoint a competent person or persons to
• Advice on the appropriate method with help meet the health and safety duties to your
which to observe the child(ren) in their care. employees and customers.
• Where there is a conflict in advice, it shall The HSE defines a competent person as someone
be made clear that the instructions of the who has:
instructor take precedence.
• The training shall be assessed ‘sufficient training and experience or knowledge
e.g., by questions. and other qualities that allow them to assist you
properly. The level of competence required will
It also states that the decision regarding whether depend on the complexity of the situation and the
the supervising adult accompanies the child(ren) particular help that you need’ (HSE Website
in their care from the ground or at height shall “A Competent Person”)
be made by the operator based on their risk
An operator may well have appropriately qualified
assessment. The method of observation which the
staff who meet the definition from the HSE and
supervising adult shall use while accompanying
remain current and competent in the relevant
the child(ren) in their care shall also be based on
activities. However, if the activity falls beyond the
the risk assessment.
experience or competence of management, it
will be necessary to get advice from one or more
8.15 Assessment of participants’ appropriately competent person or persons. It
understanding of the rules and may be necessary to determine ‘appropriate’ from
first principles by considering the requirements of
ability to operate their safety system a particular element or venue.
EN 15567 has specific requirements for the
assessment of participants and adult supervisors If an operator does not have this internal
before they can take part. expertise, they can appoint an external technical
adviser (competent person) to advise on the
These assessments can be done quickly via a few safety, industry and operational matters.
questions or through a quick demonstration of
understanding from the participant. This may be
all that is required for spotting on a low ropes
course or before climbing up a belayed activity
such as a leap of faith.
For more complicated systems, or for activities

under level 2 or 3 supervision and for adult
supervisors, this assessment may be more in-depth
including a clear demonstration on a practice or
test course before they can take part. Remember,
you want them to fully understand and to be able
to perform these skills.
If you operate a zip line that requires them to

actively brake, this must also be assessed before
they can take part.

The principal role of a technical advisor is to

help make relevant and informed management
decisions. A good technical adviser can have
significant benefits to an operation by offering
support as well as improving operational decision-
making. Before appointing an external technical
adviser, consider the following:
• Ensure they have extensive practical and

theoretical and technical knowledge of a
wide variety of activities and/or specific
elements.
• Ensure they have knowledge and
experience of the relevant type of off-
ground adventure activities and how they
are run.
• Ensure they have sufficient freedom of
action to evaluate the situation and provide
advice freely.
• Ensure they are currently involved in the
industry and keep themselves abreast of
developments.
• Demonstrate they will be proactive in
their role. training/assessing staff, then they may well be an
appropriate technical advisor.
• Ensure they have proven history in
appropriate client groups and course If you want to appoint a technical advisor to help
activities. with your duties under Health and Safety law and
secondary legislation, including the review of risk
assessments or safe operating procedures, then
You may choose to appoint technical advisors who you need to ensure that they are competent for
hold one or more of the following awards: this role in addition to their activity and technical
qualifications.
• An ERCA-certified Trainer
To help you make this decision, a common
• Currently active Mountaineering and
acronym used to measure if a person is competent
Climbing Instructor and/or Winter
to assist with your Health and Safety duties is
Mountaineering and Climbing Instructor or
SKATE (Skill, Knowledge, Attitude, Training and
• A person who holds a Caving Instructor Experience). You may want to consider what skills,
Certificate (CIC) knowledge, training and experience they have
with regards to health and safety in addition to
their activity and technical qualifications.
However, it is important to remember that
none of these awards train, qualify or assess By whatever process you decide to ensure you
the holder to be a technical advisor and that have appropriate competent advice for your
the standard caving and mountaineering activity operation, if it involves an external
training courses do not specifically deal technical advisor it is recommended and
with ropes courses or off-ground adventure considered to be good practice to have a contract
activities. in place which clearly states their responsibilities
and what is expected from them (and you) and
However, if all you require is a person with greater when it is expected. This will provide transparency
knowledge to help with equipment decisions, and will serve to reduce the likelihood of future
technical questions about the activity or for conflicts.

8.17 Recognised certification 8.17.1 Adventure Activities Licensing

Authority (AALA)
schemes and auditing your operation
Use of the AALA as a safety auditor
The HSE provides clear guidance on how a is often not required or available
thorough and effective Health and Safety system to most OGAA providers. This
should be structured for your operation through its is because the structures and
guidance document HSG 65 Managing for health activities do not come within the
and safety. You can download a full copy here . statutory requirements of holding
an AALA Licence.
HSG 65 uses the Plan, Do, Check, Act Model
shown here. Whilst there are many ways you can However, if you operate AALA licensable activities
meet the guidance and apply the full model, there in addition to your OGAA with under 18s, then
are two well-known external services providing AALA are able to audit the safe operation of these
auditing options specific to our industry that can out-of-scope OGAA as well.
assist you with the requirement to CHECK and
provide you with advice, reports and evidence For more information about AALA and the
that you meet their standards. You can, of course, scheme, visit www.hse.gov.uk/aala/index.htm
provide your own auditing, but for many operators
these services are a good option. 8.17.2 Adventuremark
Adventuremark is a scheme created
Off-ground adventure activities and ropes courses by AAIAC to provide an equal level
are currently outside the scope of the Adventure of oversight, auditing, advice and
Activities Licensing Regulations and so providers/ reporting to that of AALA but for
operators do not require a licence for these type activities and operators who do not come under
of off-ground activities. However, the Licensing the requirements to hold an AALA licence.
Authority and Service also consider the safety
management of non-licensable activities, as a Although it is a non-statutory scheme, it is a
part of the providers culture of safety overall, scheme that is chosen by many operators with
in reaching the decision on whether to issue a an OGAA to aid and assist them in ensuring safe
licence. They will refer to this guidance when provision.
determining whether or not good practice is being
followed. For more information on Adventuremark and how
to apply for it, visit www.adventuremark.co.uk
Planning Risk profiling
Policy Organising
PLAN DO
ACT CHECK
Learning
Measuring
lessons
performance
Investigating
Reviewing accidents/
performance incidents/
near misses

8.17.3 ERCA – European Ropes 8.18 Medical conditions

Course Association
and/or disabilities
Currently ERCA provides no service for a member
to be audited for safe operation of OGAA. There will generally be a need for checking any
conditions which may require a participant to
ERCA does have 2 auditing schemes available for receive special attention, or who may need to
Inspections Bodies and Training Bodies. These can be excluded from the activity. If this calls for
be identified by the 2 logos. additional personnel there will need to be an
appropriate system for making them available.
When an operator is looking
to select an ERCA-certified
Inspection or Training Body, they 8.19 Manual handling
should look for these logos, as
Participants on some activity elements should be
they demonstrate that the ERCA
briefed about manual handling problems. The
member and its services, safe systems of work and
extent of this will be influenced by the age, fitness
quality of service have been audited by ERCA. It is
and prior experience of participants individually
only these Bodies that can provide you with official
and collectively.
ERCA certificates of Inspection or Training.
ERCA does have a plan to 8.20 First aid

implement a scheme for operators
to be audited for their safe provision In addition to having normal first aid facilities, it is
of OGAA, and when this is available good practice to carry out scenario-based training,
it will be announced to the industry. using actual elements, so instructors and operators
can identify the problems as well as the solutions
8.17.4 Other ways to audit your operation particular elements may present and additional
specialist first aid equipment you may require.
In addition to or as a replacement to the above
schemes, you may wish to carry out or complete
For further information in regards to your first aid
your own auditing of your OGAA as a way to
duties, please refer to the The Health and Safety
ensure compliance with UK Health and Safety
(First-Aid) Regulations 1981 (amended 2013)
laws. You can either do this internally with your
and L74 the ACOP .
staff team or externally by using a consultant, or
even both. Whichever you decide, it is critical you
consider the following 3 points: 8.21 Emergency action plan
• Are the auditors free to act in this role without This could be integrated with the scenario-based
fear of reprimand or pressure to overly favour training mentioned in First Aid above. It would
the owner/operator of the OGAA? be normal to include this as part of an induction
procedure. Consideration should be given to the
• Are they competent with proven experience
safety of all participants, not just those injured
in the field of safe operation of the type of
or immediately affected. Consideration should
OGAA you have?
also be given to the evacuation of all personnel
• Are they competent and ideally qualified, and from the site (spectators etc.) and, in some large
can they provide evidence of the training they commercial operations, this could run to many
have in regard to heath and safety systems hundreds. The need for regular (documented)
and law? practice, refresher training and full reviews of
For more information and advice on internal and emergency action plans and rescue systems
external Health and Safety audits please visit cannot be overstated.
ROSPA’s website where there is some good
advice on the topic. Remember to include a plan to cover staff
performing inspections and maintenance on your
activities as well. This may well include rescue or
recovery from locations beyond the safety system
used by your participants.

8.22 Off-elements supervision has evolved that, when properly functioning and
maintained, helps to reduce the possibility of
Participants not involved in an element may ‘double unclipping’. These are categories C and
be harmed in a variety of ways. For example, D which are - ‘interlocking’ devices sometimes
participants ‘waiting their turn’ can wander off or referred to as ‘smart’ karabiners. There are also
try other elements unsupervised. category E devices which are generally continuous
systems that require little or no manipulation from
EN 15567 requires ropes courses and off-ground the participant. If Category B is utilised (Category
adventure activities to be adequately marked for A is not recommended), then the following points
spectators and participants. should be considered:
You may also wish to consider including methods • There is likely to be benefit in ensuring that
of easily identifying instructors (e.g., by wearing participants are initially introduced to the
distinctive uniforms). problem of ‘double unclipping’ and associated
procedures in a safe setting (such as on
8.23 Fire risk the ground). This could be under Level 1
supervision but more likely Level 2.
Due to the flammable nature of many sites, • There is clear benefit from then progressing
a no smoking policy may be appropriate. to some form of ‘practice’ course where the
risk of injury (even in the event of a fall) is
8.24 Individual safety systems and low. A ‘low’ course that simulates some of
the elements of the ‘high’ course, but is only
the ‘double unclipping’ problem 1 - 2 metres off the ground, is likely to be
No single measure seems to have totally advantageous. Participants can demonstrate
prevented incidents of participants completely their competence to handle the clipping and
unclipping both lanyards from the safety system unclipping in comparative safety. This must
whilst traversing sections of a self-belay ropes be under Level 2 supervision (or Level 1 if
course and off-ground adventure activity (Safety appropriate, but this would entail an instructor
System Categories A and B). on each platform). EN 15567 requires a
minimum of 5 changeovers in this practice
A number of measures may, however, be effective section.
in minimising the risk of injury as a result of a • There may be value in using a buddy system
‘double unclip’. A double unclip, where the with some form of “clip!” - “check!” system,
participant remains on the activity structure and whereby the buddy on the ground confirms
does not fall off, is considered to be a near miss the ‘clip’ before the buddy on the element
but is not a dangerous occurrence as defined by moves on. In practice, there is observable
RIDDOR. difficulty in keeping the concentration of
the ground buddy sufficiently active for this
When operating individual safety systems system to retain its usefulness as an effective
in categories A to D, after participants have preventative measure. Careful tutoring and
successfully completed the first 5 changeovers monitoring by instructors can help, as can
the level of supervision may then reduce to personalised initiatives which focus on keeping
level 3 dependent upon the participants’ age. this important communication effective.
Operators should be aware that if this is how
• There may be distractions for the ground
they intend to operate their course then there
buddy. It would be desirable to arrange the
are additional requirements under EN 15567 in
course so that there were, for example, no
terms of the marking of elements, special safety
low-level elements to ‘play’ on instead of
instructions, etc. Constructors may also design in
concentrating on their buddy.
options to take easier routes or provide the ability
for participants to make their way safely off the • There may be advantages to having instructors
activity should they find it too challenging. ‘aloft’ with the group.
• There are obvious advantages to ensuring that
Since the publication of the earlier editions of the a participant is otherwise secure (in balance,
UK Ropes Course Guide, different technology feet secure and both hands free) at the point

of ‘clipping’ out from one element and into » There may be benefit in colour coding other
another. This approach of ‘safe zones’ does parts of the course. For example yellow is
not prevent total unclipping; it merely reduces what you clip to, red can be used for hands
the risk of the person also falling. and feet, whilst black is part of the structure
• Participants may, understandably, become and need not concern the participant.
stressed and confused at height. A general
principle of keeping these two emotional » Choosing the right karabiner is important.
states separate seems sensible so that the It must have a minimum of a double action
more stressed a participant is, the more clear capability (captive eye karabiners are
it should be as to what they need to do. generally well suited). Although EN 15567
Below are some examples of how this could permits a Category A karabiner it should
be achieved. An essential mechanism for be remembered that this a European-wide
addressing this is to be able to see the course standard, and what is considered acceptable
through the eyes of the participant. practice in some countries may not be in
others. Individual safety system Category B,
» Inevitably, there will be many cables, C, D or E should be adopted.
staples, brackets etc., only some of which
• Vertical ascent provides a quite different
need concern the participant. It should be
safeguarding problem to traversing elements.
very obvious what the user is going to clip
Users may find it confusing changing back
to before they unclip. This is an essential
and forwards between systems. It is likely to
requirement of EN 15567. Safety cables
be equally confusing if there are intermediate
should be rigged to avoid, for example,
belay points between cables. Vertical sections
clipping off a low unclip followed by
present a much greater hazard as the risk of a
standing up to clip on to a high clip, or
high fall is often present.
‘clipping off’ whilst out of sight from what
they need to ‘clip on’ to, or having to stretch • It seems sensible to restrict the activity (or
(or climb) in order to reach the clip. selected elements) to those users who have
been judged to have the mental and physical
» As indicated above, there is a very clear capacity to safely be involved and who are
requirement in the standard for the safety likely to benefit from the exercise.
line on each element to be clearly marked. • It is common practice on commercial courses
If the level of supervision is reduced from for accompanying adults to be required to
Level 2 to Level 3, then additional safety assume responsibility for themselves and for
notices and markings will be required. children in their care. See the table below.
Individual safety systems

Minimum supervision levels 1 to 3 depending on safety categories and the participant’s age
First five change-oversa

Test Course Rest of the course
after the test course
Age in years <6 6 to 9 10 from <6 6 to 9 10 from <6 6 10 from
to 13 14 to 13 14 to 9 to 13 14
A 1 2 2 2 1 2b 2b 2 1 2b 3b 3
individual safety
Category of the
B 1 2 2 2 1 2b
2 b
2 1 2b
3b
3
system
C 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2b 3b 3 3
D 1c
2c
2 c
2c
2 b
2 3 3 3 b
3 3 3
E 1c 2c 2c 2c - - - - 3b 3 3 3
a For courses using a category D safety system, the first five change-over’s may be included within the test course. In this case
the supervision levels of the test course apply.
b Accompanied by a supervising adult.
c If required under 6.3.3.

8.25 Selecting competent suppliers diligence in the first instance.

• Do not ask a supplier to volunteer references,
Buying a ropes course and off-ground adventure but instead request a client list with start
activities course is a significant financial investment and finish dates of each project. Consider
and should not be undertaken lightly. Time spent establishing, from the client, the following:
investigating the right product and supplier is
essential. The relationship between supplier and » Was the course built on time?
operator is usually long-lived and selecting the
right partner is therefore important. » Was the course built to budget?
There is also a legal duty placed on operators to » Did the construction process and the
ensure that their suppliers are competent. There finished product fulfil the operators
are some key factors that should be considered expectations?
when buying an off-ground adventure activities
course . » Were the trainers certified by ERCA or at
the very least can they provide you with
• Ensure that you, as the client, are aware of evidence of ropes course and off-ground
your duties under CDM . adventure activities experience? The latter
should not only be in a ‘technical expert’
• Consider websites and marketing material
capacity but actually working with users /
claims carefully. Whilst some claims may
groups on an off-ground adventure activities
be genuine, others may be false. However,
course. There is no substitute for real
the ropes course and off-ground adventure
experience.
activities industry is subject to normal trading
standards regulation, so buyers have a variety
» Was the training good?
of rights that are considered ‘inalienable’ (i.e.,
the purchaser does not lose these rights even » Did the ropes course and off-ground
though they may have signed a waiver to that adventure activities course pass an inaugural
effect). Better, though, to exercise all due inspection in accordance with EN 15567?

» Who carried out the inspection? In particular, Whilst it may seem strange and even unfair,
was the Inspection Body competent and operators have considerable responsibilities for
independent? ensuring that the contractors they engage are
competent. If, for example, the contractor has an
» Was the after-sales service good? accident during construction, operators should
anticipate having to prove their due diligence in
» Would they employ the contractor again for ensuring the contractor’s competence.
future work or would they look elsewhere?
• Ask your prospective supplier if you can • Does the proposed design address the WAHR
visit similar installations to the one you are in terms of instructors accessing the off-
considering buying. ground adventure activities for inspection or
maintenance purposes?
• Ask to see a copy of a supplier’s Public Liability
Insurance Certificate (and if relevant Contract • Ensure CDM regulations are complied with,
Works, Product Design insurance etc.). Check including client duties . All construction is
that the policies are genuine. covered under CDM, some parts of which are
also notifiable to the HSE.
• Request a copy of relevant certificates,
including but not limited to: The same due diligence should be applied to
selecting appropriate Inspection and Training
» chainsaw operators Bodies.
» first aid certificate An inaugural inspection will ensure that you meet
the requirements of EN 15567. The standard
» MEWP (Mobile Elevating Work Platforms recommends that a Type A Inspection Body (as
- cherry picker) and other plant operator defined by ISO 17020) carries this out. Ensure the
licences Type A Inspection Body really has extensive off-
ground adventure activities experience.
» LOLER (lifting certificates) for lifting
equipment (hoists etc.) Thereafter, take care to ensure periodical
inspections are carried out by a Type A, B or C
If in doubt, check with the issuing body of the Inspection Body that has sufficient competence
above certificates to confirm the certificates and integrity.
are genuine.
• Pay little regard to claims of guarantees.
Whilst subsequent redress through the courts
may be possible, the process is inevitably
slow, expensive and highly inconvenient. Ask
to speak to previous clients. It is easy to offer
guarantees but harder to deliver!
• Remember all installations should have design
calculations and engineers’ drawings.
• Don’t underestimate the cost. Always have a
contingency.
• Ensure that suitable terms and conditions
within the contract are in place to rectify
defects.
• Are contractors appropriately trained and
experienced to work at height? What evidence
do you have?

9 References and further reading

For further information about this guidance or for general off-ground adventure activities related matters
please contact either:
• AAIAC https://www.aaiac.org/
• ERCA https://www.erca.uk/
There are a variety of sources of information available for operators of off-ground adventure activities. This
is not an exhaustive list but are primary references.
• Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 • HSG48 - Reducing Error & Influencing
Behaviour (HSG48, 1999)
• Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations

2004 • HSG 65 Managing for health and safety
• Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment • EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020 and

Regulations, 1998 EN 15567-2:2015
• The Health and Safety (First-Aid) • BS EN ISO/IEC 17020:2012 Conformity

Regulations 1981 (amended 2013) assessment. Requirements for the operation
of various types of bodies performing
inspection
• The Personal Protective Equipment
at Work Regulations 1992
• BS EN 17109:2020 Mountaineering
equipment. Individual safety systems for
• The Provision and Use of Work rope courses. Safety requirements and test
Equipment Regulations 1998 methods
• The Management of Health and • BS EN 1176-7:2020 Playground equipment

Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and surfacing. Guidance on installation,
inspection, maintenance and operation
• The Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations 2015 • The UK Ropes Course and Off-Ground
Adventure Activities Guide, 2021 (this
document)
• The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases
and Dangerous Occurrences
Regulations 2013 • European Ropes Course Association
Standards (member only access)
• Work at Height Regulations,
2005 (as amended 2007)
• HSG 175 Fairgrounds and amusement

parks: Guidance on Safe Practice

Appendix A 16th February Appendix B Procedures for

(revised 2020) Statement submitting comments on this
by the Adventure Activities guidance
Licensing Authority in
Comments should be addressed by email or post
relation to Licensed to either AAIAC or ERCA
establishments using ropes Please ensure that comments:
courses
• Are typed or emailed
Ropes courses are out of scope of the Adventure • Include the name and contact details of the
Activities Licensing Regulations, so providers person making the submission
of high or low ropes courses do not require a • Include the date of submission
licence for this activity. However, if licensable
activities are also being offered at a centre, the
Licensing Authority will take a holistic approach
when considering safety management systems.
This means that inspectors may ask about the
management of health and safety in relation to
non-licensable activities as an indicator of the
culture of safety overall.
The information obtained in relation to non-

licensable activities will inform the inspector’s
decision, however if a licence is declined
because of concerns about a provider’s ability to
manage safety effectively, this will not prevent
you from providing non-licensable activities.
Notwithstanding that, concerns about safety may
indicate a breach of the Health and Safety at Work
etc Act 1974, or associated Regulations and AALA
inspectors are obliged to report such concerns to
the relevant enforcing authority.
Ropes courses are currently out of the scope of the

Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations, and so
providers of high or low ropes courses do not

Photo credits Thanks

AAIAC and ERCA would like to thank the following We would like to extend our thanks to the
for the use of photographs in this guidance. following people for their support and advice:
Funcha! Front Cover, Pages 14 and 16 • AAIAC Committee
Go Ape Pages 5, 20, 22, 27, 33 and 40 • ERCA Executive Board

• ERCA UK Board Members
Rockley Adventure (Buddens) Front Cover,
Pages 39 and 43 • James Jevon - DWF Group
• John Ruddock - ADIPS
Zip World Pages 4, 7, 22, 36 and 48
• Meik Haselbach – ERCA
JM Adventure Pages 11, 24 and 41
• Frances Kelly - HSE
Mojo Active Pages 12 and 34 • Sue Kashanski
Vertex Pages 17, 20, 21, 24, 25, 29 and 38
PGL Page 17
DMM Wales Page 18
C.A.M.P. USA Inc Page 18
Petzl Page 19 Publisher and Copyright

ISC Ltd Page 19 AAIAC is the publisher and copyright
holder of this document and the contents
Edlerid Page 19 may not be copied without permission.
CLiC-iT® Page 19
Adventure Activities Industry
On-the-ropes (Roperoller®) Page 19 Advisory Committee
www.aaiac.org
Kanopeo (Saferoller®) Page 19
Image copyright is owned by the person
Kanopeo Page 25 and/or company and must not be copied
or distributed in any way without prior
Niko Ltd Page 19
permission.
Ropes Course Inc. Page 19
COUDOU PRO Page 19
RockReef, Bournemouth Pier Page 21
7x19 Consultancy Ltd Pages 26, 30 and 31
Technical Outdoor Solutions Page 32
Surrey Outdoor Learning

and Development Page 42
PREVIOUS Page 52 RETURN TO CONTENTS

AAIAC UK Ropes Course Guide 2021 High Res Locked

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AAIAC UK Ropes Course Guide 2021 High Res Locked

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AAIAC UK Ropes Course Guide 2021 High Res Locked

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ropes Courses - Adventure Parks - Net Parks - Zip Lines - Simulated Freefall Devices

THE UK ROPES COURSE

4. What is a European Standard (EN)? 10

5.6.3 Collective safety system......................................................................................................20

7. Inspections & maintenance 28

PREVIOUS Page 2 NEXT

7.3 Operational inspection....................................................................................................................30

9 References and further reading 50

Appendix A 16th February (revised 2020) Statement by the Adventure Activities

Appendix B Procedures for submitting comments on this guidance 51

PREVIOUS Page 3 NEXT

This guidance summarises key information about:

PREVIOUS Page 4 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

This 2021 guidance and review has been

• Chris Proud - Adventure Activities Industry

For the scope of this guidance, off-ground

• traditional ropes courses

It is not intended for this document to cover

PREVIOUS Page 5 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

AAIAC has been reconstituted to provide

PREVIOUS Page 6 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

PREVIOUS Page 7 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

Full Name Abbreviation Full Name Abbreviation

The Adventure Activities Licensing Health & Safety Guidance HSG

Adventure Activities Industry International Electrotechnical

Adventure UK AUK Industry Guidance INDG

Approved Code of Practice ACOP International Organisation for

The British Standards Institution BSI Lifting Operations and Lifting

PREVIOUS Page 8 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

3. The relationship between The Health & Safety at Work Act,

3.1 The Health & Safety at 3.5 Standards

PREVIOUS Page 9 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

4. What is a European Standard (EN)?

The formal definition of a standard is a “document, established by consensus and approved by a

• EN 15567:2008 endeavoured to strike a balance between very different (national) cultures.

PREVIOUS Page 10 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

» b) The design/manufacture/supply/ of equipment designed to limit the

» Periodical inspections should be carried

» A report containing the following

» h) a statement that the inspection report

» It is recognised that application of every

PREVIOUS Page 11 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

• HSG 175 Fairgrounds and amusement parks: Guidance on Safe Practice

5.1 EN 15567-1:2015+A1:2020 from the instructor or other group members

EN 15567 does not seek to differentiate between

A low ropes course is the generic term for elements

PREVIOUS Page 12 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

this guidance if you are designing, constructing, 5.4 Key terms /

Since 2015 net parks have increased in popularity

PREVIOUS Page 13 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

Assisted belay system

Belay system where the participant is secured by

Individual safety system categories A-E

Component(s) connecting the harness to the

• Category A - Self-closing device which is not

Interlocking device Braking system (on a zip line) operated by the

PREVIOUS Page 14 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS

Emergency braking system Inspection body

Where a participant is in a position to alert an • The complexity of the specific safety

PREVIOUS Page 15 NEXT RETURN TO CONTENTS