Just a note about people saying they should have just sucked it up and waited til morning. From the SAR story: "At one point, sleet came down on the team followed by heavy rain." Even though it is normally pretty warm at night this time of year, I get the feeling the SAR team may have been more familiar with the forecast and saw this as more urgent than normal.
True, it did rain fairly hard most of the day on the 4th. Although, imo the SAR here is waaay too overzealous with their rescues. I've seen them short haul people in Calico Basin a couple times when the victim is a couple hundred yards from the parking lot.
"At one point, sleet came down on the team followed by heavy rain."
OMG, not sleet and heavy rain. Just another reason to take responsibility for yourself and not endanger the SAR members. If people knew they were gonna be hit in the pocketbook most would make an effort to extract themselves from the situation they put themselves in. If your talented enough to get yourself into trouble you should be talented enough to get yourself out.
Wouldn't the sleet and heavy rain make the rock especially brittle, thereby making a self rescue or continuation of the climb in the morning more dangerous and potentially detremental to the route itself? I'm not defending the rescue or the climbers, but if i were in that situation that thought would cross my mind. Doesn't rule out leaving a few pieces and descending I guess.
And more people would end up dead because of they're anxious, hungry, thirsty, foolish attitude, while trying to manuever on wet, unfamiliar territory.
The best thing for people to do is just stay at home on the couch and enjoy a little American Idol. I've recorded all the seasons on cassette if anyone needs a copy! Just paypal enough to cover shipping.
Wouldn't the sleet and heavy rain make the rock especially brittle, thereby making a self rescue or continuation of the climb in the morning more dangerousand potentially detremental to the route itself?
Kbobby: Examining the validity of a call for aid is counterproductive at best. As a policy it is downright dangerous. Charging for response is even worse. If you think it is best to not perform rescues for individuals who are able to walk out on their own, you should talk to some SAR professionals. You have obviously never worked for the government or have been associated with a job that has, otherwise you would see it from a different perspective. Negligence, incompetence, and "the unedumacated" is where most of your "tax payer" money goes to. At least from a medical perspective. What you're saying is exactly the problem that fuels the people. Where do you draw the line? If you don't have a medical/trauma life threatening emergency, SAR should not be called and here is why. Every single time that helicopter responds into a canyon it puts all of the SAR members at life threatening risk with the possibility of death. If the people being rescued are not in "life threatening" danger, then it does not equal out in the equation. Criteria should be met, but there is liability concerned with that matter. Where do you draw the line? Any free service is always taken advantage of. If a person initiates SAR response and is a situation they could have manage on there own, then all means they should be charged. If it was a unnavoidable emergency, then that is a different story. The only benefit I see is training for the SAR team, but every time they go out there is risk involved. Most of the SAR Vegas team is compiled of Volunteers, not paid police officers. SAR Vegas has 8-10 employed officers and only 2-3 work in a given shift, the rest is volunteer buddy. The volunteer staff is the majority responding to the call.
And every single time you're order pizza to be delivered you putting the delivery boy at "life threatening risk with the possibility of death."
I'm sure the SAR team is trained and qualified to modify any rescues when they recognize any hazards to themselves.
And every single time you're order pizza to be delivered you putting the delivery boy at "life threatening risk with the possibility of death." I'm sure the SAR team is trained and qualified to modify any rescues when they recognize any hazards to themselves.
If people knew they were gonna be hit in the pocketbook most would make an effort to extract themselves from the situation they put themselves in. If your talented enough to get yourself into trouble you should be talented enough to get yourself out.
This is just not true. What occurs is that people make the situation more of a problem, possibly exacerbate an injury for themselves or their partner, by not calling it in.
The whole charge thing works in a different part of the world for two reasons, there's an economic base & a general population that supports the activity so you can insure, and there isn't a litigious process. In this country, there is a heavy amount of liability and a overwhelming opinion that anyone out in terrain/backcountry is a problem, regardless of experience, talent, or education. Thereby, charge for rescue will open up liability, the result to you will be a loss of access. Saying a climber isn't "good enough" won't solve anything.
Talent of the climbing team only goes so far in the case of an injury, or some decision made that sanfued the team. "Real climbers" are just as apt to be the rescuee as anyone else. Like I said before, shit happens. So what do we do, let a climbing team hang and die on the wall?
I'm a big proponent of self & buddy rescue tactics and education, but there are limitations to what a climbing team can do versus what an organized rescue can do to get someone off the wall and out of the backcountry.
If you don't need rescue, fine, nobody should have a problem with resolving your own problem. Hitting a PLB when you don't really need help is one of the biggest problems in SAR; pisses everyone off. But, if you need help, why shouldn't the professional response be assertive to get to the person in need, get them stabilized, and transported out?
Keep in mind, nobody really knows the extent of a medical condition when a climber is on the wall and requesting aid. Simply looking at a rescue after the fact isn't good enough to say a certain type of response was or wasn't necessary. I've dealt with many calls where the information was downplayed only to find a person was actually in a life threatening situation.
Buff, I agree with some of the things your saying.
I don't think there could possibly be any criteria defined on whether or not you're going out to rescue climbers/hikers. It's just frustrating that many problems that arise by the rescued could have certainly been avoided.
And for those certain people... there should be some serious public education. Chopper has a few words to say. Dow, i'm sure you'll enjoy this one...
good timing Rob...I just posted this on SP in a similar thread I got going over there...when all else fails, HTFU..uncle Chopper is the man
My suggestion: stop worrying about other people and their situation(s). You simply cannot know the full set of details of any situation. What looks benign to you, standing on the sidelines, may be something far more serious. Seriously, when a rock slides and breaks a guy's ankle, is it "his fault"? Tough cookies to him?
I realize that is how many with their head in the sand approach figure democracy works.....reality is a discussion needs to be had as to who is responsible for the poor bastard's ankle. I say he is. Society needs to start saying he is and quit worrying about being politically correct. We need to start setting priorities and admitting there is not perfect nirvana where everyone gets tapped into such luxurious resources such as a helicopter rescue for example. We need to all start facing reality when it comes to how we budget and distribute our limited resources, search and rescue, police, medical, fire, education, etc.
Harden the fuck up folks, yes it is "tough cookies" to him or I. We put ourselves in that situation. I just made the second ascent of 1500' of 5.10d on the worst fucking rock this planet has. I am an idiot by most city dweller perspectives and can't say I blame them. My partner and I both considered part of this climb Russian roulette, particularly rapping the damn thing. If I die and the citizens can collect from my estate to clean up the mess I caused by venturing onto this piece of shit face, then they damn well should. If a piece of rock gets dislodged on rap and breaks my ankle and my partner and I are too big of pussies to get me down and out (maybe I don't like the pain or maybe I went up ill prepared withput prescrip pain meds in case I broke a bone) , then yes, we can pay for a rescue, sure, why not. But the expense sure as hell should not be borne by the citizens of Alberta. If in the National Park, then I already paid for it, that part makes sense. I believe all national parks should budget reimb SARS cost into the park admission fees. I believe all local governments who operate SARS should seek reimb from each and every recovery in the wilderness, no matter the circumstances.
While I have shaken my head at totally gumby mistakes. It seems a bit premature to pass such harsh judgement on these guys. Not knowing the total story. Also different people have different thresholds for risk and different levels of experience to deal with things. As for all the talk of useless risk of the rescuers? Being somewhat familiar with helicopter rescues (as one of the people in the helicopter) though by no means an expert. I have to mention that I and most people I know love picking people up! It's really fun. That is why we get into it, fully aware of the risk. Just like climbing. But in rescue you get to help someone too. How cool is that? As for the cost? You burn most gas training for the real thing. Better to do it for real.
The previous post I tried seemed to derail things more than to offer a point of view in discussion. Nobody really has a perfect solution that will work for everyone. You can't fix stupid and you can't get everyone on the same page when it comes to rescue.