We've had this discussion a lot...who should pay for rescues of hikers and folks that get in trouble in the mountains? Especially when the person is reckless or negligent?
http://www.wcax.com/story/26358439/nh-officials-to-hold-hearing-on-hike-safe-card
NH is considering a "Hike Safe" card that would be $25 for an individual per year and $35 for a family that would prevent the cardholder(s) from the possibility of having to foot the bill of rescue. It would be voluntary with funds going to fund search and rescue.
I think it might be a good idea in order to help defray costs. But I fear that what may happen is that there will be MORE folks in trouble because they might feel as if they pay the money that it doesn't matter what they do. They don't have to pay for the consequences of their actions. They may not try to be as careful in their decisions. So it might have the reverse impact. Other than that maybe it is a good idea. I know that SAR teams in NH are generally volunteer or from multiple agencies and have been stretched thin.
http://www.wcax.com/story/26358439/nh-officials-to-hold-hearing-on-hike-safe-card
NH is considering a "Hike Safe" card that would be $25 for an individual per year and $35 for a family that would prevent the cardholder(s) from the possibility of having to foot the bill of rescue. It would be voluntary with funds going to fund search and rescue.
I think it might be a good idea in order to help defray costs. But I fear that what may happen is that there will be MORE folks in trouble because they might feel as if they pay the money that it doesn't matter what they do. They don't have to pay for the consequences of their actions. They may not try to be as careful in their decisions. So it might have the reverse impact. Other than that maybe it is a good idea. I know that SAR teams in NH are generally volunteer or from multiple agencies and have been stretched thin.