So Who SHOULD Pay for the Backcountry Rescue of a Hiker or Skier?

[riverc0il]

I don't think $25k is going to deter any one. I don't think $100k would deter any one. We all have to keep in mind that people being either "reckless" or "negligent" are not doing so intentionally. These are not people that wake up one morning and hatch up a plan that they think is beyond their means or so difficult that if they screw up they could get killed. The people that do think like that are the thrill seekers that are going to do it any ways. Excessive fines are not deterrents for people that think they are not doing anything dangerous. There is a major perception problem that some people have regarding the outdoors when they have "just enough information to make themselves dangerous."

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

When someone is rescued in their home by paramedics who pays for it?

 

[ccskier]

Your health insurance usually covers ambulance, ect...

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Your health insurance usually covers ambulance, ect...

well then shouldn't people who visit the backcountry on a regular basis purchase search and rescue insurance..I know it exists..

 

[billski]

I don't think $25k is going to deter any one. I don't think $100k would deter any one. We all have to keep in mind that people being either "reckless" or "negligent" are not doing so intentionally. These are not people that wake up one morning and hatch up a plan that they think is beyond their means or so difficult that if they screw up they could get killed. The people that do think like that are the thrill seekers that are going to do it any ways. Excessive fines are not deterrents for people that think they are not doing anything dangerous. There is a major perception problem that some people have regarding the outdoors when they have "just enough information to make themselves dangerous."

Tru dat. Then again most people don't believe they will ever be faced with needing to call for rescue. The recent fine draws attention to the issue, which is really the objective of the fine. It will be quietly reduced or elliminated IMHO. I felt that way, even though I was prepared. I always figured I could self-rescue. Ostrich-thinking in hindsight.

If they began issuing a boatload of 25K fines, you can be certain there would be a class action lawsuit and it would be thrown out. They're not stupid, I'm sure they know that.

 

[Geoff]

If they began issuing a boatload of 25K fines, you can be certain there would be a class action lawsuit and it would be thrown out. They're not stupid, I'm sure they know that.

A class action suit against the state of New Hampshire? That would have zero luck of going anywhere. You can't have a class action suit for individual cases of negligence.

 

[Connecticut]

Live Free or Die...

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Live Free or Die...

reminds me of New Hampshire..

 

[thetrailboss]

reminds me of New Hampshire..

Way to go....

 

[thetrailboss]

As cited in another thread, a hiker who injured his thumb requested a helicopter rescue. :blink: Cases like these indicate why NH is charging people for such wilderness rescues. And the comments from rescuers confirm that resources are thin:

"I let them know that our resources are spread pretty thin and that an injured thumb does not preclude him from self-rescue," Holmes said last night.

"It's just prior to 7 p.m.," Holmes said. "Who knows what else we may get tonight?" and he did not want to risk spreading thin volunteer groups who are vital in mountain rescues.

Over the years, hikers have called for emergency service, including to help carry a dog off Mount Jefferson, to two men years ago requesting a helicopter rescue on Mount Washington in 125 mph winds, as they were hunkered under Cog Railway tracks. Last year, a woman requested a rescue when she could not find her shoes.

 

[billski]

As cited in another thread, a hiker who injured his thumb requested a helicopter rescue. :blink: Cases like these indicate why NH is charging people for such wilderness rescues. And the comments from rescuers confirm that resources are thin:

Touche'. The real risk here is that the SAR teams are off tending to a thumb and can't quickly get to a life-threatening injury, where time to rescue is crucial. So someone may die while they tend to a thumb. Matt made the right call.

 

[thetrailboss]

Billski also posted this in another thread...which also explains why NH does charge for rescues now:

"On March 12, 1992, an 18-year-old Connecticut man and a friend commenced an ascent of the Tuckerman Ravine headwall area. One fell, slid and was unable to continue the ascent. He returned to Pinkham, reporting the incident at 4:00p.m. The other man continued on. Both were dressed in jeans and sneakers, with no hiking gear or experience. Summit temperatures were below zero, wind speeds eighty-five miles per hour with gusts to ninety-five and visibility intermittently 200 feet.

A massive search was started, involving five organizations, eighteen searchers and a thiokol. The subject crossed the Alpine Garden to the auto road, descended to the Glen House in the dark, and secured a ride to Pinkham, arriving at 8:40p.m.

Analysis: Most people in similar circumstances do not survive such a risky venture. The man put eighteen others at risk. Sixty-eight unecessary man-hours were expended. Some rescuers were so incensed they were pushing the Fish and Game Department to prosecute, under the reckless hiking law. Since no one was injured, it was deemed there was insufficient evidence to prosecute. To date no donation has been received for the search.
AMC Committee for Search and Rescue"

Source: "Appalachia" Journal, AMC, December 15, 1993.

 

[billski]

I think it's fair to say that if you do something stupid which requires a rescue AND someone from the SAR team gets seriously injuried/dies, or another potential rescue victim dies because they were tending to you.... , you open yourself up to a huge culpability or liability. I'm no lawyer, but that's how I'm reading things.

 

[billski]

Interesting data from NH. Clearly we have a broken SAR funding process with no easy fix. And as Steve says, a fine isn't a deterrent. Many (unusually) thoughtful reader comments. I kind of like the notion that hunters and fishermen deserve rescue because their permits have an embedded fee. Interesting also is that the average SAR cost to the state is $3000. Does not include the true cost of volunteer SAR groups, who make up the majority of the effort.

I also agree that cell phones have dramatically changed the SAR paradigm for good and bad. Time to consider a new model.

 

[Connecticut]

The Trailboss's example from a post from Billski in #72 above is a great example of my point that there are more clueless untrained and negligent people surviving dangerous wilderness encounters than the trained and prepared. This is because the untrained go into the wilderness in much greater numbers.

Even though the cost of such ridiculous rescue attempts can be high and result in nothing but frustration, such is life.

I agree with Billski's realization that the model needs to change. First off, the best way to lower the cost of a rescue is to not have a rescue at all. This means the funding going into education needs to be ramped up. The next step should be to cut down the time of actually finding the victim. The search is the most costly part. Sometimes it takes hundreds of people days to locate somebody. There needs to be more accurate ways to determine location. The coastguard uses a variety of high-tech sensors to locate people at sea. This may be a transferable method to mountain rescues. Also, the arrival of the SPOT Rescue device is a hopeful candidate to decrease search times.

I am a firm believer that unless the model for search and rescue changes, the wild-goose-chase scenarios will continue.

 

[Connecticut]

FYI-

Laurence Gonzales wrote a Deep Survival article for the Dec 2009 issue of National Geographic Adventure about this exact subject. He is a survival expert and blasts the very idea of charging for a rescue with a host of other S&R professionals.

 

[ctenidae]

Interesting article, but misses an important point- where should funding come from? If teh state budget gets slashed, how does the difference get made up?

I like his point about the military choppers- they would be flying, anyway, and there's no better training than reality.

 

[billski]

Interesting article, but misses an important point- where should funding come from? If teh state budget gets slashed, how does the difference get made up?

I like his point about the military choppers- they would be flying, anyway, and there's no better training than reality.

Lots of hikers support paying a fee. Hunters and Fishermen/women already do with licenses, which fund state SAR costs. Have an analogous annual hiker license. Got license? Get out of jail free, get rescued. Problem is it is often the ill-equipped that get hurt. I'd still pay for a license, especially after what I went through - once in 44 years the odds might catch up with even the most experienced..

 

[Trekchick]

I just watched the movie put out by the Jackson Hole Air Force - Swift Silent Deep.
This brings a whole new element to back country responsibility.
If there is a movie that ranks high in my ski porn reviews along with Edge of Never, its this one.....

 

[Connecticut]

Interesting article, but misses an important point- where should funding come from? If teh state budget gets slashed, how does the difference get made up?

I like his point about the military choppers- they would be flying, anyway, and there's no better training than reality.

At least 45 other states already have this figured out. Don't reinvent the wheel, find out how the others are doing it. Isn't NH's motto "Live Free or Die?" Maybe they should change it to "Live as Long as You are Insured."