“From the engineering evidence it is clear that the proximate or dominant cause of the collapse was that the platform was not constructed in accordance with sound building practice. This resulted in a total and catastrophic failure.” “With regret, I reach the inevitable conclusion that, against that background, a tragedy such as Cave Creek was almost bound to happen. In my opinion, the tragedy represents a symptom of the present conservation dilemma.” Click on this link to learn more about the causes of the Cave Creek collapse:
|
How the Disaster Occurred:
The disaster itself occurred almost instantaneously, when a platform that 18 people were standing on broke loose from its foundations. The platform collapsed, careening 30 meters down a cliff to the resurgence below. (The resurgence was the place where water from the cave returned to the surface.) Later on, it was discovered that there were many causes of the Cave Creek Disaster, however at the time, there seemed to be no clear reason for the random collapse. In the months to follow, there were many investigations which ultimately led to a Commission of Inquiry. This inquiry, commissioned by the New Zealand Government, highlighted many primary and secondary causes. The Root Cause: Firstly, the main cause of the Cave Creek Disaster was the fact that it had not been built or inspected by qualified engineer. This meant that the tough building codes already enforced by the Government were not followed and the platform was essentially built by unqualified individuals with a lack of experience. Because the platform was 40m above the chasm, the legal and common proactive would have been to obtain a geo-technical report. This would have given the builders a clear indication of the conditions and recommendations for designing a platform. These were not obtained. There were four main builders and of these four, none had the proper qualifications. Because of this, they cut corners and only did part of what their job required them to do. For example, they used nails instead of bolts to secure the platform in place. This was because nobody had an appropriate drill to fix the bolts in with. As well as this, in some places on the platform, there was only one nail to connect the planks of wood, with some nails not even penetrating the plank. This lack of experience of the four builders led to these oversights which ultimately led to the dominant cause of the disaster at Cave Creek. Secondary Causes: As well as this primary cause there were other secondary causes leading up to the disaster. These secondary causes did not have a direct effect on the collapse, however they were underlying issues which indirectly caused the disaster. One of the main secondary causes was an incorrect sign next to the platform. This sign said that a maximum amount of ten people would be able to stand safely on this bridge, when in reality five people was the maximum amount. The absence of this sign meant the students piled onto the platform, thinking they would be safe when in reality the weight of the extra people may have indirectly caused the platform to collapse. Another big secondary cause was the issue of staff being over-worked. During the 1990’s staff at the Department of Conservation were working double the hours they were expected to, due to the fact they were under-staffed and under-funded. With limited resources, staff had to work twice as hard to get jobs done, placing strain on the staff and therefore the department as a whole. This, however, was a result of a lack of funding by the New Zealand Government and also the reforms introduced. The Government had reduced the funding it gave to the Department of Conservation. Although the department still had $600,000 available to them within the first two years, most of this money was not received by those at Cave Creek and this had many implications that lead to the disaster. Without adequate funding, the Department could not hire more staff to ease the stress on the workers already at Cave Creek. Instead, these DOC managers had to work twice as hard to keep up and as a result, they cut corners. This meant that not all tracks and structures, such as the platform at Cave Creek, were checked regularly. The Cave Creek platform was never inspected after it was built, however it should have been subjected to regularly checks under the Building Act. While this is in part due to the stress on the Department of Conservation workers, it was also due to the fact that it was impossible to fully inspect the platform once it was built. Because of where the platform was placed-right next to the resurgence, workers would not be able to inspect the structure without removing parts of it to look underneath. This meant that the Cave Creek platform was overlooked and as a result, the weaknesses were never discovered. Conclusion: All of these causes are interrelated, with the Government’s lack of funding leading to stress on staff which lead to major oversights. These causes snowballed and eventually the strain became too much as mistakes were made at Cave Creek. Although these causes are all a result of human error, the Royal Commission of Inquiry found that “no individual or particular collection of individuals was singly or jointly responsible.” This is most likely because these causes are all interconnected and it is difficult to pinpoint one single cause. Footnotes: 1. Nobel, G.S ‘Commission of Inquiry into the collapse of a viewing platform at Cave Creek’ The Department of Internal Affairs, 1995. Pp. 30 2. Nobel, G.S ‘Commission of Inquiry into the collapse of a viewing platform at Cave Creek’ The Department of Internal Affairs, 1995. Pg. 113 |