Route Guide - iPhone / Android - Partners - Forum - Photos - Deals - What's New - School of Rock
Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Epinephrine Rescue
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 3 of 4.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3  4   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
By s.price
From PS,CO
Jul 14, 2012
 Morning Dew ,self portrait

Buff Johnson wrote:
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.

So true.


FLAG
By Rob Fielding
From Las Vegas, NV
Jul 14, 2012
Third pillar of dana descent.

Survival of the fittest... We just give handouts to everybody these days! Watch, i'm going to be calling Vegas SAR on my next outing, i'm jixned for lifeeeeee.


FLAG
By Buff Johnson
Jul 14, 2012
smiley face

Dow Williams wrote:
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.


I got dibbs on the climbing gear.


FLAG
By Ben Beard
From Superior, AZ
Jul 15, 2012
roo, my only son, the stare that takes down a herd of 'stock

alexdavis wrote:
And that's why there's a fee for delivery! lol.


Sort of walked into that. Bit surprised this topic went so far into the economics of SAR. My point was while the SAR job is dangerous, the SAR team should be able to recognize the risks and urgency in the situation. I've called for a rescue once that needed a helicopter, which was decided by the SAR team based on what we described the situation as, and they determined it was too dangerous to send a helicopter. It is up to them how they choose to respond.


FLAG
By Dow Williams
From Saint George, UT
Jul 15, 2012
Dow Williams, 2011

One should not be surprised that the economics of this or any other issue is a hot one right now...I believe if I am reading the news correctly, that the economics of our entire lifestyle is being called into question.

I sit here and ponder...when are we going to start prioritizing our resources??? Saving folks who get themselves in trouble or put them selves in harms way to begin with, no matter the circumstances, needs to be way down the list. This coming from someone who spends his entire life in the outdoors climbing, skiing and paddling. I have made mistakes, should be dead maybe, call it luck, I do. I am just saying I don't necessarily deserve a rescue and if a particular community, Clark County, whoever, felt the need to do so...I should have to reimburse same. Why in hell should the folks of Vegas have to subsidize my outdoor activities? I don't get it. This is not about punishing the stupid or careless (although a dose of prevention would be nice---no guaranteed rescues=less folks not prepared to save themselves taking chances). This is about what is economically fair across the spectrum of society.


FLAG
By John Wilder
From Las Vegas, NV
Jul 15, 2012

Human life in danger trumps economic fairness- even if that danger is self-imposed or not all that real. The perception of it alone is enough to make the government act.

A government that does nothing to protect its citizens is a government that isn't long for this world.


FLAG
By Buff Johnson
Jul 15, 2012
smiley face

I don't necessarily think the taxpayer would be subsidizing additionally to the activity.

Volunteers are free, the SAR equipment is donation & grant, advanced medical care is a pass-through, the sheriff and their assets are already under an approved budget, and so are military assets -- meaning whether they are used for training & SAR, law enforcement/mission, or stored in the garage, the money is already approved. If not used, the agency loses the money anyway. In other words, these resources are already prioritized.

If you want to chuck your life off the cliff, then by all means, knock yourself out. That isn't really true to the climbing ethic of respecting life, that's just being an ass. So I don't think we're just going to let someone to their own devices when they ask for help.

As a societal view, the humanitarian aid will be addressed in such a manner that does not charge the individual. This country does not endorse charging for aid as that becomes counter to the purpose for which public service is mandated, to provide assistance to those in need.

I disagree with the standpoint of guaranteed rescue, there already is no such guarantee in this country. Charging the individual would then create that and make it a liability. Is it more that the team is successfully pulling off every rescue? I'm sure they'll be the first to apologize for that.

Charging would also not solve the underlying problem, a disconnect with education. You will then have no regard for education & safety and those so flush in cash will simply get themselves into any situation without gauging acceptable risk and cut a check. It's no problem for them to do that. Or, those without monies, will delay the rescue & evade prosecution. Good climbers are now criminals because they needed help.

Maybe you can say, no problem, we'll just get some friends together and do it ourselves. Someone might end up getting killed because of the loss of situational awareness, the person you try to save doesn't have a positive outcome -- you'd be held liable by the family and law enforcement for not calling it in, or nothing bad happens and you make the save. That's just one call. Can you do a hundred of those in a year? Does everyone now look to you to save them? Can you maintain a safety record to your friends assisting in every rescue? It's not an easy situation.



Overall, I think the actual burden to the taxpayer is being overstated when it comes to seeing a climber rescue.


FLAG
By Colonel Mustard
From Reno, NV
Jul 15, 2012
Colonel Mustard

Dow Williams wrote:
I am just saying I don't necessarily deserve a rescue and if a particular community, Clark County, whoever, felt the need to do so...[...]This is about what is economically fair across the spectrum of society.


Well, if you feel so strongly, get DNR (for "Do Not Rescue" or "Do Not Rescuscitate") tattooed on your forehead. You can play Mr. Charles Rambo Norris all day long without fear of outside help.

It's also great you personally feel such responsibility for the economic situation, but, as others mention, basic medical care for traumatic and/or life threatening sitatuations should rightly trump perceived economic concerns. I mean, how do you determine in a life and death situation what is fair "across the spectrum of society"? Should that be a prime triage concern, and, anyway, is the way our economic system is structured fair across the board in the first place? At least SAR is potentially saving a life, much better to my mind than what our economic system generally promotes.

Largely, I believe the formulation of these issues is part of the blame the victim mentality, an easy trap to fall into when others show weakness or poor thought. Also, those looking out for the bottom line for communities with a large SAR need may forget all the dollars that washed in from those who did not utilize those resources....


FLAG
By Eric-D
From Las Vegas, nv
Jul 15, 2012

Buff Johnson wrote:
Volunteers are free, the SAR equipment is donation & grant, advanced medical care is a pass-through, the sheriff and their assets are already under an approved budget, and so are military assets -- meaning whether they are used for training & SAR, law enforcement/mission, or stored in the garage, the money is already approved. If not used, the agency loses the money anyway. In other words, these resources are already prioritized.


I don't believe any of that is true. Volunteers may be unpaid but they are not free. SAR volunteers expect to spend as much as several thousand dollars a year on equipment, supplies, fuel etc. Initial training and ongoing training operations are incredibly expensive.

Helicopters are ridiculously expensive to purchase, maintain and fuel. Very little of the gear is provided by donation or grant.

SAR is a very small piece of the $250,000,000 a year budget that Metro has but that could easily be spent other items.

The majority of rescues in this country will always be free because you simply cannot have a person be afraid to call for a rescue due to financial concerns. No matter what creates the need for rescue; whether it be lost, injury or stupidity. Many municipalities do have provisions to charge for abuse of the system but I don't think it is done very often.

I'm really surprised by a lot of the responses in this thread. I would not have expected so many people who put themselves into places that could be require rescue to be so quick to judge someone else who required help.


FLAG
By Doug Foust
From Henderson, Nevada
Jul 15, 2012
new toy

John Wilder wrote:
Human life in danger trumps economic fairness- even if that danger is self-imposed or not all that real. The perception of it alone is enough to make the government act. A government that does nothing to protect its citizens is a government that isn't long for this world.


Yeah- I want the government to protect me from my own actions. They should just make climbing illegal.


FLAG
By Buff Johnson
Jul 15, 2012
smiley face

Eric, the point is that while those things cost money, they are not an addition to the taxpayer as an expense when a rescue happens. If someone with an interest in SAR wants to participate and spends that kind of money, that's up to them, not the taxpayer. The heli is more than likely part of the law enforcement budget which I already said is allocated for the sheriff to carry out their duty. Whether it's rescue, something else, or just sitting in a hangar bay, the money is allocated and already approved by the taxpayer. As would also be use of military, though it costs money to utilize, those funds are already in place.

If the SAR team has a budget within this, then those dollars go to equipment & upkeep for an overall time period, regardless of the type of response. Most of what I have experienced is donate and grant for team gear, and we also have a conservation & recreation fund to replace equipment -- which was all that banter on the first page about our dola fund. None of which goes as an extra bill to the taxpayer, rescuee, land-owner, or anyone or any agency; which was the point of the last few posts, what the taxpayer actually seeing when a climber rescue occurs. If the agencies plan it out and support the training of a professional SAR team (paid or unpaid), then it becomes less of a burden, and with more of a benefit as the community is helping each other out through a better use of resources. Answering a concern about prioritization when it comes to a climber rescue. I don't believe that climbers should concern themselves with this as a matter of deciding who does and doesn't deserve rescue response.

Charging for an abuse to the system is open to interpretation. Typically seen "negligence" clauses are actually a poor standard, because anyone requiring rescue is automatically deemed negligent, and that's not the case; as I said, this goes against the public service & humanitarian mandate. However, criminal conduct is typically seen as an accepted charge for rescue practice. This would be something like calling into dispatch and evading just to see the rescue response in the media. Going out for a hike or a climb isn't criminal activity, that's just recreation.


FLAG
By crewdoglm
From TAFB CA
Jul 19, 2012
78 degrees north at 40,000 bearing about 220. Five hour sunset.

I don't suppose our stalwart rescuees have given their side of this here on MP? There is water flowing at the bottom for God's sake and I would love to know if they even took two ropes on an 18 pitch route. If they did, that makes rescue even more apalling because there are fixed anchors all over that thing. Sounds like their only piece of self-reliance was a cell phone. The worst part is that the so called land managers use shit like this to support more government regulation. Their little thirst crisis is liable to wind up in PowerPoint slides with dollar amounts; arguing for restrictions on climbing.


FLAG
By DannyUncanny
From Vancouver
Jul 20, 2012

How is a rescue service different from other government money spent to protect its citizens from themselves? The war on drugs costs billions of dollars and the whole purpose supposedly it to prevent people from being able to make a bad decision.


FLAG
By Zappatista
Jul 20, 2012
Book me, officer.

I love politics. Brings out the best in all of us. Man the torpedoes!


FLAG
By Zappatista
Jul 20, 2012
Book me, officer.

Buff Johnson wrote:
You can't fix stupid and you can't get everyone on the same page when it comes to rescue.


^^^^^^
Buff, this statement is outlandish. What evidence or discussion might you submit as evidence of your claims? :)


FLAG
By crewdoglm
From TAFB CA
Jul 20, 2012
78 degrees north at 40,000 bearing about 220. Five hour sunset.

The Dread Pirate Killis wrote:
^^^^^^ Buff, this statement is outlandish. What evidence or discussion might you submit as evidence of your claims? :)



I hope you are not disputing the claim "you can't fix stupid." That much is supported by overwhelming proof.


FLAG
By sqwirll
From Las Vegas
Jul 20, 2012
Cool snow formation at the base.

crewdoglm wrote:
There is water flowing at the bottom for God's sake


I'll give you a $100 to drink that water. I can't even fathom how many turds are in that creek bed.


FLAG
By Eric Fjellanger
Jul 20, 2012
Me on top of Chianti Spire

The Dread Pirate Killis wrote:
I love politics. Brings out the best in all of us. Man the torpedoes!


You don't man torpedoes.


FLAG
By smassey
From CO
Jul 20, 2012

Maybe we should...


FLAG
By crewdoglm
From TAFB CA
Jul 22, 2012
78 degrees north at 40,000 bearing about 220. Five hour sunset.

sqwirll wrote:
I'll give you a $100 to drink that water. I can't even fathom how many turds are in that creek bed.



People shitting right there are they? I guess times have changed. In the 90's I drank the water in the canyons all the time - at least once a week for 5 years, without a filter and never got sick one time. I guess I would be suprised if people were so cosmically stupid as leave turds in there but then stupid is knows no bounds.


FLAG
By cassondra
From las vegas, NV
Jul 22, 2012
in repose

even if people aren't dooking up the canyons, bighorn sheep care little about where they do their business. I've heard they carry giardia.


FLAG
By Doug Foust
From Henderson, Nevada
Jul 22, 2012
new toy

I'm more concerned about the squirrels and mud swallows than the sheep


FLAG
By Zappatista
Jul 22, 2012
Book me, officer.

Mud....swallows?!?!?

Doug, you have got my gutter mind reeling. If this is actually an animal in the canyons, it's news to me. If not...gross.

How did we get on the subject of poop, anyway? Wasn't it fun enough blasting some stranded poor fuckers without any information about their situation?


FLAG
By Eric Coffman
Jul 23, 2012
mountainlion

Beginners shouldnt be climbing in red rocks...at least those who havent developed a passion for the sport enough to rescue thier own asses. Pass it on not only will it keep the crags clean from gumby's but it will be a financial win for the taxpayer, unless we save money by the few who win the Darwin Awards


FLAG
By Unassigned User
Jul 23, 2012

Man alive where are beginners allowed to climb?


FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 3 of 4.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3  4   Next>   Last>>