Jump to content

Ovation passengers caught up in volcanic eruption


Recommended Posts

The thing about this is - I totally would have picked this excursion if I were on that itinerary. Volcanoes are fascinating. I've been up Kilimanjaro twice. It's still active, and there are steam vents. We were repeatedly reassured that it was safe, there was risk involved, but we accepted it. And I would do it again. Yellowstone is amazing. It could blow anytime. It is a risk we accept for adventure. That ship you're on is more at risk of sinking than odds of a volcano eruption during the short period of time you're viewing it. It's a risk, they knew it when they went, but the odds were highly in the direction of safer rather than not, when it comes down to such a short time of exposure. I also cannot predict when a car will crash into mine, or the airplane I am travelling in will crash. But I accept the risk because I cannot control the things I cannot control, and I won't let the fear of the unknown deprive me experiences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ovation is now heading to Wellington and will arrive tomorrow morning. It will then spend the following day in PIcton which was not on the original itinerary. From there is will head back to Sydney. Originally it was scheduled to stop in Dunedin and scenic cruise though Milford Sound but these have now been dropped from the sailing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously not the biggest concern, but I can only imagine what the mood is like on that ship, both for passengers and crew as they're leaving that port and continuing on.  Just a really sad situation all around, I know its a risk and we take risks all the time, but not something you really think about when going on vacation, honeymoon, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Boston Babe said:

Is there any update on any of the injured?

The injured are currently in various hospitals around New Zealand. A number have severe burn injuries including inhalation burns requiring assisted breathing.

It is expected that some of the people with the worst injuries will not survive.

Authorities are also looking to move some of the victims back to Australia to be treated so they can be closer to their families.

Last night New Zealand police took DNA samples from the cabins of the missing passengers to help identify the missing and injured.

Included in the missing is a family of 4 from Sydney.

  • 6 confirmed dead
  • 8 missing, presumed dead
  • 30 are in hospital - 24 are in four regional burns units and the other six will be transferred as soon as possible
  • 3 have been discharged

The police on going onto White Island today to attempt to retrieve the bodies for identification purposes. Due to the injuries suffered it has been very difficult to identify the bodies and injured.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, F1guynz said:
  • 6 confirmed dead
  • 8 missing, presumed dead
  • 30 are in hospital - 24 are in four regional burns units and the other six will be transferred as soon as possible
  • 3 have been discharged

Were all of these “confirmed injured, killed and missing”, from Ovation of the Seas? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Kathleen said:

Were all of these “confirmed injured, killed and missing”, from Ovation of the Seas? 

The 6 confirmed dead include one of the tour guide but there maybe others who were not on Ovation at the the time as no details have been released until formal identification takes place.

There were 47 people on the Island at the time of the eruption and of those, 38 were from Ovation.

The 8 missing includes at least 1 local tour guide and possibly others not on Ovation.

Of the 30 in hospital 25 are in critical condition and the other 5 are in serious condition.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Momof4crazytocruise said:

The thing about this is - I totally would have picked this excursion if I were on that itinerary. Volcanoes are fascinating. I've been up Kilimanjaro twice. It's still active, and there are steam vents. We were repeatedly reassured that it was safe, there was risk involved, but we accepted it. And I would do it again. Yellowstone is amazing. It could blow anytime. It is a risk we accept for adventure. That ship you're on is more at risk of sinking than odds of a volcano eruption during the short period of time you're viewing it. It's a risk, they knew it when they went, but the odds were highly in the direction of safer rather than not, when it comes down to such a short time of exposure. I also cannot predict when a car will crash into mine, or the airplane I am travelling in will crash. But I accept the risk because I cannot control the things I cannot control, and I won't let the fear of the unknown deprive me experiences. 

I understand what you said, but I am not sure that the travelers knew the threat level had recently been raised due to an increase in volcanic activity.  Not sure how informed the consent was given by the travelers on the excursion.  But buses on "safe" excursions crash, too, as recently occurred in Belize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2019 at 4:05 AM, WAAAYTOOO said:

I'm no geologist but I thought there were pretty obvious "signs" when eruptions are imminent.  How could this possibly have taken everyone by such a surprise ?

Actually in most recorded eruptions there was little or no noticeable signs before the eruption. While the risk level had increased recently it was well within in 'acceptable' levels As acceptable as you ever get for an active volcano that is called 'White Island' because it is literally producing white steam almost consistently. It is not unusal for White Island to have its risk level raised and lowered during any given week as different readings are taken.  Like earthquakes it is often easy to predict and eruption after one has happened.

 

Now... should there have been tours there at all? That will certainly be investigated in the months ahead (Far more important things to worry about now like caring for the victims families and those sill in critical condition in hospital. The Police have opened criminal instantiations and I imagine the government will commission a royal commission to look into it etc (A royal commission is an independent body that has powers to look into any aspect of the  issue they have been asked to investigate. Their powers are very very wide and while not binding any recommendations it makes (including laying of criminal charges no matter if it is against individuals, officials or companies) is most likely to be auctioned (It.d almost be unheard of if it wasn't).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For anyone considering a cruise to NZ, please please please don't let this tragic incident put you off. I have travelled New Zealand a few times and it is a magical place. I even experienced some earthquake aftershocks (late 2011) and this has not put me off revisiting in the future.

The Kiwis are big of heart, with amazing natural landscapes and a brilliant culture. I look forward to my next trip there and showing my kids around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KWofPerth said:

For anyone considering a cruise to NZ, please please please don't let this tragic incident put you off. I have travelled New Zealand a few times and it is a magical place. I even experienced some earthquake aftershocks (late 2011) and this has not put me off revisiting in the future.

The Kiwis are big of heart, with amazing natural landscapes and a brilliant culture. I look forward to my next trip there and showing my kids around.

New Zealand has been on my bucket list since before LOTR was filmed there. My dad would regularly fly there for business and had a few friends from there via work. I've wanted to see it (and Australia) since I was a teenager. Not going to find me changing my mind over this or any other incident there, short of all-out war breaking out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly two more people from Ovation lost their lives overnight.

The latest update is:

  • 8 people confirmed dead
  • 8 people missing, presumed dead
  • 28 people in 7 hospitals, with 23 critical
  • 1.2 million centimetres of skin is being imported from the U.S and Australia to help victims

At this point it is still considered too dangerous to return to the Island to recover the missing bodies

Ovation has docked in Wellington today and has had a Maori blessing for the ship on her arrival to Wellington harbour

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been reading through the VABs, Volcanic Alert Bulletins published by GeoNet.  https://www.geonet.org.nz/volcano/vab/

The last VAB issued before the eruption on Dec. 3 can be found here:

https://www.geonet.org.nz/vabs/5gMP3pBjFuQmNOQB89rZT4

It does speak of continued increased levels of activity but it also specifically states:

  • The level of activity is variable and remains within the range expected for moderate volcanic unrest. While the activity is contained to the far side of the lake, the current level of activity does not pose a direct hazard to visitors.

This and the previous VAB contain this notation:

  • Overall, the monitored parameters continue to be in the expected range for moderate volcanic unrest and associated hazards exist. The monitoring observations bear some similarities with those seen during the 2011-2016 period when Whakaari/White Island was more active and stronger volcanic activity occurred. Observations and data to date suggest that the volcano may be entering a period where eruptive activity is more likely than normal.

That doesn't sound like a definitive statement that an eruption is imminent.  It "may be" entering a period ...

If I was considering taking my family to this island I don't think these VABs would have caused me to reach the conclusion it was not safe.  

On the contrary, these two statements in the most recent VAB before the eruption :

  • Explosive gas and steam-driven mud jetting continues from the active vent area at the back of the crater lake on Whakaari/White Island. The level of activity at the vent is variable and when in a stronger phase, some material is being deposited about the vent area. This style of activity has been present since late September, although it is occurring more frequently now. No volcanic ash is being produced.
  • The level of activity is variable and remains within the range expected for moderate volcanic unrest. While the activity is contained to the far side of the lake, the current level of activity does not pose a direct hazard to visitors.

Put the two together and this sounds like this could be very interesting and educational.  We would be able to see an active volcano bubbling mud occasionally throwing some debris from the vent while it does not pose a direct hazard to visitors.  This style of activity has been present for several months. 

Honestly it sounds safe and like something I would want to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
22 hours ago, Fairlynew said:

Has anyone heard how those injured are healing?

 

Latest I heard a couple of days ago was that an American couple have progressed well to the point that they may be allowed to fly back to the States to continue treatment.  That said, they received burns to <30% of their bodies.  The more seriously injured were burned over 90% and it is likely that they will need a lot of further care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
12 hours ago, SpeedNoodles said:

I would think that the local company contracted to lead the tours would hold more responsibility for watching conditions and deciding whether or not to proceed. 

"They were being led by guides from local company White Island Tours."

I think this line towards the bottom of the article explains why they're suing Royal instead of White Island Tours:

Quote

New Zealand has a no-fault accident compensation scheme that means people affected by the tragedy can't sue.

@KWofPerth, @EmersonNZ, do either you have any idea if this covers the tour company, only protects the government of NZ from being sued, or something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Visitors to New Zealand are often surprised to learn that, on arrival, they
are automatically covered by the same universal personal injury insurance
scheme and, in return, they too are barred from suing for compensation.
It is in part because of this that the visitor can enjoy risky activities such
as bungy-jumping and whitewater rafting. Insuring against negligence
claims would be a significant, possibly prohibitive, business cost for
adventure tourism—a field in which New Zealand excels. Nonetheless,
visitors from Australia and the United States often wonder why New
Zealanders deprived themselves of the right to hold a negligent party to
account for one’s pain and suffering and incapacity for work, even though
one can still sue for defamation. The removal of this basic element of
common law rights is particularly incomprehensible to civil litigators who
specialise in personal injury. Moreover, the state monopoly deprives the
insurance industry of a lucrative market—albeit one with long-tail risk.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Big Tule said:
Nonetheless, visitors from Australia ... often wonder why New Zealanders deprived themselves of the right to hold a negligent party to
account for one’s pain and suffering and incapacity for work

Do the people from the land known worldwide as "everything that lives here can kill you" actually wonder about this? ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Below is the principles of ACC

New Zealand's accident compensation scheme provides accident insurance cover for accidental injuries to New Zealand citizens and residents and to temporary visitors to New Zealand.

Most ACC claims involve physical injuries caused by accidents. However, sometimes nervous shock and other mental conditions are covered too (see “Nervous shock and other mental conditions: Sometimes covered”, under “When you're covered by ACC and when you're not”).

Sometimes physical conditions may be covered even though they're caused gradually (for example, through long-term exposure at work to substances like asbestos: see “Conditions caused gradually: Covered only if work-related”, under “When you're covered by ACC and when you're not”).

To make a claim, you don't have to show that some other person was at fault and caused your injury, and so ACC is sometimes described as “a no-fault scheme”. Whether you fell over at home, or twisted your knee playing sport, or were injured in a car accident when another driver failed to give way to you, you'll be covered by ACC.

The ACC scheme has been running since the mid-1970s. When the scheme was introduced, it took away the right to sue in the courts for injuries covered by the scheme. However, if your injury isn't covered by ACC and was caused by someone else's actions, you can sue them in court for compensation (“damages”). For example, you might sue for negligence.

Accident Compensation Act 2001, ss 317, 319

Note: In some cases, you may be able to sue in the courts for what are called “exemplary damages” even if your injury is covered by ACC. Exemplary damages are awarded by the courts for particularly blatant and reckless behaviour that causes an injury to someone. They're awarded to punish the wrongdoer (so they're sometimes called “punitive” damages), and they go over and above an amount that's necessary to compensate the person who was injured.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/28/2020 at 3:29 AM, JLMoran said:

I think this line towards the bottom of the article explains why they're suing Royal instead of White Island Tours:

@KWofPerth, @EmersonNZ, do either you have any idea if this covers the tour company, only protects the government of NZ from being sued, or something else?

Basically it means that since the ACC (Accident Compensation Corporation) pays for all healthcare and rehabilitation from an accident (remember we have free health care) an individual can't litigate against an individual or entity due to an accident. The government can bring criminal charges against any company or individual that has found to be liable under out various health and safety laws (Or others such as various motor vehicles laws) and possibably manslaughter depending on the accident.
If I was to cause a car accident my insurance company would pay for any material damage but not health care of either myself or anyone else another car etc. Agin, health care is free so no one is out of pocket and ACC will pic up any lose of income during recovery etc.
The nice thing is it means we don't have a whole legal industry based on accidents as there are no legal proceedings etc (Again except if you have broken a law and caused an injury in which case ACC will still cover you both but you may be prosecuted for breaking that law by the government...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2020 at 6:32 PM, twangster said:

While you may or may not be able to litigate in NZ it's another matter outside of NZ.  NZ can't prevent someone from litigating in another country and so it goes.  Where it goes and how far is another matter.  

It would depend who you were trying to get damages from and for what. You wouldn't be able to litigate against a NZ individual or company as they would not be covered by the foreign jurisdiction. It would also unlikely you litigate against the activity carried out in a foreign country as  that activity would be bound by the country it takes place (A NZ court can't rule on a murder in the US nor could a US court rule on a murder in NZ. When you travel to a foreign country you are bound by their laws... if you know what they are or not., ignorance of law is not a defense of law (except in some mental capacity defenses which most countries have some form of). OF course if you break a law in NZ and flee to the US you can be brought back to NZ to face trail (And vice versa) and NZ has agreements that means you can be extradited back to the others country for trial under their laws (Though this can take years and years of appeals).

However... you could hold the cruise company liable if they broke their contract or any or broke any laws in the country they sold the ticket (Though some contracts will state which country the contract will be litigate in. Not all counties allow this practice and insist that if you brought the contract in there country then you are covered by laws in that country). Again in this case you'd be suing the cruise line for breach of contract and not the tour operator in a foreign country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

I notice the family from America who are suing Royal Caribbean regarding the injuries they sustained while on White Island have retained MIchael Winkleman as their lawyer for the lawsuit. This lawyer is the same one who worked on behalf of the family whose baby fell from Freedom of the Seas.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12338900

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...