MOUNTAIN GUIDES

Hokitika Guardian, 5 February 1932, Page 2

MOUNTAIN GUIDES

INTERPRETATION OF THE ACT. ALPINE CLUB PRESIDENT’S VIEWS. WELLINGTON, February 3. /’A statement that the Alpine Sport Club in Auckland had been legally advised that the Mountain Guides Act opens the door to a prohibition of guideless climbing was referred to All A. P. Harper, president of the New Zealand Alpine Club, and the originator of the schem of licensing guides. Mr Harper said it had long been realised by experienced Alpine climb ers that there was grave danger in allowing men to offer their services as paid guides unless they were lolly qualified for the job. “The arguments in support of this,” lie said, “are unanswerable. Thus the Government last session passed legislation authorising the issue of licenses to men qualified to act as guides ana making it an offence for any one to offer his services as a guide for payment unless he held a license. T cannot understand how anything in the Act can be construed as giving power to prohibit climbing without guides. This would be quite ridiculous to attempt, and also impossible to enforce. It would be resisted by every climber in the country. CLAUSE MISUNDERSTOOD. In the first place the object of the Act is defined to make provision for the licensing of mountain guides and matters incidental thereto. In cannot be interpreted to confer any further powers. The clause which is misunderstood gives power to the controlling Board to prescribe the number of guides which ‘may be’ employed on ally expedition. This obviously means that where any guides are to be employed on a climb the regulations can prescribe in certain cases the minimum. To argue that tips gives power to say guides must he employed on any climb seems quite unsound, for where no guide is employed the regulation would not apply. “The reason for this provision is that on certain peaks it is necessary for safety that there should he two men on the rope who are capable of leading. It would he unsafe for one guide to conduct a party unless at least one other of that party was already expert; therefore the power is given to sav that under certain conditions one guide may not act alone. “This really amounts to a limitation of the guide’s powers under his license and does not limit the climbers’ rights to go without guides. It will prevent a licensed guide from attempting certain very difficult peaks with too large or to inexperienced a party. “The whole scheme is based on Swiss practice for the past 50 years', It has never in any way hampered guideless work in Switzerland, where there is as much guideloss climbing as in New Zealand.

APPLICATION OF ACT. “The Act, in my opinion, only applies to guides, or persons wishing to act as guides, and cannot be made to interfere with amateur climbers. Its conditions do not come into operation until a climber asks for a- guide and then it says (a) The guide must hold a license; (b) on certain named climbs or under certain conditions one guide may not act alone.” Mr Harper concluded by saying that any attempt- to prohibit 1 guideless climbing would be opposed by no one more keenly than by the promoters of the legislation.