Mt Whitney Webcam
Mt Williamson Webcam
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 13 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Steve C #1518 01/04/10 06:39 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Interesting data. I'd be curious what the definitions are of "climbing" versus "hiking" as they roll-up the numbers. Is climbing based on technical routes versus established trails, or do winter conditions come in to play? If you head up the MMWT in January with full winter climbing gear and have to be SARed, is that a hike or a climb? As with most statistics, the devil is in the details. It seems to me that it would be a very fine line in many cases whether a hiker was climbing or a climber was hiking since they're so closely related.

Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Bulldog34 #1520 01/04/10 05:11 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
G
Woodsy Guy
Offline
Woodsy Guy
G
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
Quote:
In reality, most of the rescue services provided to climbers comes from volunteer mountain rescue groups, military units that do not charge for their services or from specialized climbing rangers who are partially funded by climber fees. Thus, the perception that climbing rescues present a significant cost for taxpayers is not accurate.


I in no way advocate charging for rescues of any kind. My only quibble is the possibly increasing use of gadgets to call for help which may be leading to an increase in unnecessary responses by the agency. But, I'm not happy with the above statement -- seems more than a bit disingenuous. A National Guard helicopter does, in fact, cost a lot of taxpayer money whether they "charge" the SAR account or not (I think it's usually figured in most cost accounting, just not payed by the agency). Only a very few parks charge a climbing fee and I doubt they come anywhere near paying for more than 1 seasonal ranger position -- certainly not a SAR effort.

But a really interesting article. Somewhere around here I have a costs by park of SARs. Both Yosemite and Sequoia are near the top in costs, though Sequoia Kings is, I think, only in the top 10 for number of incidents. Since it's so remote, I think there's a higher proportion of helicopter medivacs, which would raise the cost quite a bit.

g.


None of the views expressed here in any way represent those of the unidentified agency that I work for or, often, reality. It's just me, fired up by coffee and powerful prose.
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
George #1523 01/04/10 08:48 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Bee Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Originally Posted By: George
[My only quibble is the possibly increasing use of gadgets to call for help which may be leading to an increase in unnecessary responses by the agency.
g.


I find it interesting that this topic is about to merge with the "Mt Hood to Require Locator Beacons" thread, because I ended my post by expressing my concern that requiring the beacons might give folks a sense of back pocket security.

B


The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.
Re: MRA on TV
Bob R #1529 01/05/10 08:28 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Not shown. Dumped for some celebutard.


Verum audaces non gerunt indusia alba. - Ipsi dixit MCMLXXII
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Bob R #1989 02/01/10 08:40 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 129
B
Offline
B
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 129
The January issue of Meridian, the Mountain Rescue Association's quarterly newsletter is just out. The lead article is by Howard Paul, whom I've quoted before on this subject.

Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Bob R #1991 02/01/10 11:03 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
G
Woodsy Guy
Offline
Woodsy Guy
G
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
Really good article.

Thanks!

g.


None of the views expressed here in any way represent those of the unidentified agency that I work for or, often, reality. It's just me, fired up by coffee and powerful prose.
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
George #1996 02/01/10 02:36 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 660
Rod Offline OP
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 660
Originally Posted By: George
Really good article.

Thanks!

g.


Ditto thanks

Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Rod #2047 02/04/10 05:45 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
G
Woodsy Guy
Offline
Woodsy Guy
G
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
Here's another interesting article. A breakdown of costs and numbers of SARs per park in the NPS:

Dead Men Walking: Search and Rescue in US
National Parks
Wilderness and Environmental Medicine, 20, 244-249 (2009)

Dead Men Walking Article

George


None of the views expressed here in any way represent those of the unidentified agency that I work for or, often, reality. It's just me, fired up by coffee and powerful prose.
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
George #2085 02/05/10 10:07 PM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 18
J
Offline
J
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 18
I believe that statistically driving your car to the trailhead is far more dangerous and therefore far more fool hardy than hiking or climbing. If you are in a car accident driving to the trailhead you would expect the sheriff etc to come to your rescue. The other option is to never leave home. If someone has a heart attack at home they come and take you away in an ambulance. The actual danger of SAR mountain rescues is born by volunteers mostly, who are mostly people who enjoy mountain activities and WANT to GIVE of THEMSELVES to HELP OTHERS who engage in these activities. PS - The number of hiker rescues in Yosemite far exceeds the climber rescues.
just my $.03 worth.
Jim grin

Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Jimshaw #2089 02/05/10 11:43 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
CaT Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
Quote:
The number of hiker rescues in Yosemite far exceeds the climber rescues.

Probably because the number of hikers far exceeds the number of climbers -- just a guess.

CaT


If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
CaT #2097 02/06/10 11:32 AM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 18
J
Offline
J
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 18
CaT
that was the point I was making was abut the numbers. The actual number of hikers needing rescue and therefore the money spent, far exceeds the climber rescues, not only because of the number of hikers and their relative lack of training/knowledge/preparedness, but because climbers can generally effect self rescues as well, so rescuing climbers is a tiny bit of the Yosemite SAR work so why should people get overly upset about it?
Jim

Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Jimshaw #2105 02/06/10 03:28 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 660
Rod Offline OP
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 660
The point is everyone thinks that they can walk up a mountain without training or equipment. Most people are smart enough to not try to climb without training ,experience and equipment.The very nature of hiking being taken for granted as something anyone can do verses climbing which most people know they can't do without the requsite training/experience.That is why there is a huge number of hikers verses climbers.As the saying goes "There are old climbers and there are bold climbers but there are not any old bold climbers."

Last edited by Rod; 02/06/10 10:33 PM.
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Jimshaw #2129 02/07/10 03:45 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
G
Woodsy Guy
Offline
Woodsy Guy
G
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
Quote:
but because climbers can generally effect self rescues as well, so rescuing climbers is a tiny bit of the Yosemite SAR work so why should people get overly upset about it?


I'm not sure I accept that. Both climbers & hikers get themselves out on their own. I don't have a great feel for it, but I suspect there isn't much of a difference and perhaps a slight tilt to climbers needing assistance more (as a percentage of climbers vs. hikers). As mentioned above, there's tens of thousands of hikers out there and maybe only 2,000 climbers per year (in Yosemite).

Still, it doesn't matter. The point of the article, I think, is to show the costs involved with all SARs and that climbers don't account for a dramatically different cost. The problem seems to be that whenever there's some level of seriously technical response (climbing, winter conditions), the newspapers or comments often question the cost based on the "weirdness" of the activity. Also, of course, many hiker rescues are too mundane to receive coverage and the public perception is skewed... .


g.


None of the views expressed here in any way represent those of the unidentified agency that I work for or, often, reality. It's just me, fired up by coffee and powerful prose.
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
George #2146 02/07/10 11:43 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,405
Likes: 87
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,405
Likes: 87
Good points, George.

The interesting thing to me in the article is the inclusion of suicides. Brings back memory of a suicide on the Whitney north fork in winter several years ago. After it was determined a suicide, all the posts and everything written about it was deleted from public view.

Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Steve C #2147 02/07/10 11:51 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Bee Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
That is a very common practice when it comes to suicide, Steve. I have found in the business, that suicide conjures up all things negative: guilt,anger,fear and its bad for business when it takes place in a touristy area.

B


The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.
Re: Who is gonna pay for the SAR?
Steve C #2156 02/08/10 10:15 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
G
Woodsy Guy
Offline
Woodsy Guy
G
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
Quote:
The interesting thing to me in the article is the inclusion of suicides.


Although not statistically significant, another consideration too often overlooked is that a SAR might be a crime scene. In the early days, we didn't even consider that -- distraught family, moderate chaos, trying to get or find person as quickly as possible. Maybe the last 15 years, NPS looks at that possibility a lot more carefully. After investigation, there's been a few (Yosemite and Sequoia Kings) that have, in fact, been crimes. Where a fall was actually a push... .

g.


None of the views expressed here in any way represent those of the unidentified agency that I work for or, often, reality. It's just me, fired up by coffee and powerful prose.
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4
(Release build 20200307)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.4.15 Page Time: 0.048s Queries: 47 (0.033s) Memory: 0.6580 MB (Peak: 0.7874 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2022-05-27 16:25:39 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS