FISC Industry Survey - Best Practice Guidelines for Temporary Traffic Control on Private Forest Roads

1
Your full name* This field is required.
First Name
Last Name
2
Your organisation* This field is required.
3
Your primary role* This field is required.
Forest owner / PCBU
Log transport operator
Harvesting contractor
Health and safety manager, advisor, practitioner
Silvicultural contractor
Forest manager / operations manager
Other (please specify)
4
If your primary role was not specified in the previous question, please provide details of your role here.
5
How many years have you worked in the New Zealand forest industry?* This field is required.
Less than 5 years
More than 20 years
5–10 years
11–20 years
6
How familiar are you with the Best Practice Guidelines for Temporary Traffic Control on Private Forest Roads?* This field is required.
Very familiar — I use it or refer to it regularly
Familiar — I have read it and refer to it occasionally
Aware of it — I know it exists but rarely referto it
Not familiar — I was not aware of it or have not used it
7
In your experience, how well does the BPG reflect the realities of temporary traffic control on private forest roads today?* This field is required.Please select the number that best reflects your view.
1 – Very poorly: significant gaps between the BPG and what we face on the ground
2 – Poorly: more gaps than strengths
3 – Adequately: covers the basics but misses important areas
4 – Well: mostly fit for purpose with some gaps
5 – Very well: closely reflects current operational reality
8
What aspects of the BPG do you find most useful in practice? What does it get right?* This field is required.Please be specific. Examples from your own experience are particularly valuable.
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
9
Where does the BPG fall short? What gaps, ambiguities, or outdated elements have you encountered?* This field is required.Please describe specific situations where the BPG did not give you adequate guidance, or where you had to improvise because it was silent or unclear.
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
10
Have you encountered recreational users (hunters, mountain bikers, trail runners, trampers, or others) at or approaching a temporary traffic control point on a private forest road during an active operation?* This field is required.
Yes, regularly
Never
Yes, occasionally
Rarely
11
If you answered yes to the previous question, please describe what happened and how it was managed. What worked? What did not? Was the BPG helpful in guiding your response?* This field is required.
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
12
The BPG's current unmanned temporary road closure system relies on the approaching person contacting the hazard-causing operator by radio (VHF/RT) or telephone. How effectively does this work in practice for users who do not have radio capability?* This field is required.
1 — Does not work at all: non-radio users regularly proceed without making contact
2 — Works poorly: contact is unreliable or the process is unclear to non-radio users
3 — Works adequately in some situations but not others
4 — Works well with some gaps
5 — Works well: non-radio users understand and follow the process reliably
13
Please add any comments on what improvements would make the communication protocol more effective for users without radio capability.
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
14
What standard of static access control – locked gates, prohibition signs, contact information – do you currently use at forest entrances to notify and manage access to active operational areas?* This field is required.Please describe your current practice. What signage, locking arrangements, and contact information provisions do you use? Do you consider these adequate? What would improve them?
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
15
Optional: Please attach photos showing access control arrangements to show what good and bad looks like. (Good and poor examples both welcome).
Drag and drop files here
Select files to upload
Max. file size: 10.6MB
Browse Files
Cancelof
16
In plain operational terms, what minimum standards should the revised BPG set for managing recreational users at active temporary traffic control points and at static access control points – so that a PCBU who meets those standards can be confident they have done what is required?* This field is required.Think about what signage, barriers, communication options, and contact information provisions would constitute a clear, practical, and achievable standard. What would you expect to see specified? What would be unrealistic or unworkable in your operational environment?
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
17
If you could make one or two changes to the BPG that would make the biggest practical difference to how temporary traffic control is managed on private forest roads, what would they be? Do you have anything else to add?* This field is required.Please be as specific as possible. The TAG will treat concrete, practical suggestions as high-priority input.
Huge
Large
Normal
Small
Ok
Ok
18
Privacy and consent to follow up* This field is required.Your responses will be seen only by the programme manager and used solely to inform the TAG's work. Individual responses will not be shared.
No
Yes – (please provide a preferred contact number or email in the next question)
19
If you answered 'yes' to the previous question, please provide a preferred contact number or email* This field is required.
Should be Empty: