Another case of billing for a rescue...

[mdauben]

who do we charge. I want to see Person "A" charged, because they were negligent in prepping for the outdoors and strayed past clearly marked boundaries.

I do NOT want to see Person "B" charged because he was well equipped , filed a flight plan, has the wilderness skills and gear etc etc.

Clearly, Person "A" was both negligent and foolish and he certainly deserves to be penalized (charged) for needing to be rescued.

With Person "B"... he did nothing wrong, he took all reasonable precautions and was adequatly prepared, yet still he needed a costly helevac because he chose to go rock climbing in the back country. I still see it as his responsibility.

Certainly, under the "Idiots Pay" program, "A" should pay and "B" should not, there is no quesiton there. The question to my mind again comes down to personal responsibility. As far as I am concerned, the government has done enough by creating and supporting the SAR infrastructure. I'm not sure I should expect other people (i.e. taxpayers) to bear the cost of my individual rescue.

 

[LMT66]

This will open up a can of worms. Police departments could now start sending bills for responding to calls. Pay for service.

 

[STAGE 2]

As other have said, this is just a way to generate revenue. I'd bet my hat that the funds recovered won't even go to the SAR teams. It will be funnled to some assemblymans pet project or some other stupid state slush fund. Thats why its BS.

If the SAR people are state funded then your taxes already pay for them. If they are volunteers, then no one put a gun to their head to be there. Either way, charging for a rescue is wrong.

 

[PrimitiveMan]

100% agree with that reasoning.

 

[dougo83]

As other have said, this is just a way to generate revenue. I'd bet my hat that the funds recovered won't even go to the SAR teams. It will be funnled to some assemblymans pet project or some other stupid state slush fund. Thats why its BS.

If the SAR people are state funded then your taxes already pay for them. If they are volunteers, then no one put a gun to their head to be there. Either way, charging for a rescue is wrong.

EXACTLY. It's not the SAR teams doing the billing IIRC. It's the government slime that controls whatever AO they have. If it went to the SAR teams, it wouldn't cost me $150 for FUNSAR, $60 for WFR, $25/mo for a pager, $60/yr in team member dues, $50 for SAR Tech III, plus whatever cost is associated with Mapsco maps, team uniforms, backpacks, GPS units, flashlights, FRS radios, compasses, dog search vests, etc.

 

[Don Rearic]

Now everyone is thinking. Blow all the smoke away, smash the mirrors and take a shovel to the piles of B.S. around you.

There will be no "idiots only pay" system because the politicians consider all of us to be idiots because we have not kicked them to the curb yet.

 

[x39]

If the government is going to make people pay for rescues, I'd say it is time we made food stamp/welfare recipients pay back the money they are given once they gain employment.

 

[Thomas Linton]

"Maybe the human population would greatly decline if there was no such help? I wouldnt mind seeing the weak gone."

Let us say some hypothetical person posted this. Certainly not a member here. If that person had a child born with a disability or an elderly parent, would they do the "right" thing according to the quote and expose the baby or mom or dad on a rock to die as unfit? If that hypothetical person himself lived to get old, might his opinion change?

And weak in what sense? Mental? Ethical?

I remember the backcountry in the 1950's. There were no padded waist belts, no padded shoulder straps, and no ultralight gear. The only folks there were there despite the pain at the base of their neck from the pack and having to walk all hunched over for an hour at the end of the day when you took the "stone" off. Those folks were, on average, more skilled. Now the backcountry is full of people 'cause it's far easier to get there. On average, they know less and expect more help from others. But there was still steady business for SAR by 1961. Poor judgment is not a new thing.

As for the main topic, I can imagine (as examples have been posted) cases where I think the "victim" clearly should pay and cases where they clearly should not pay. Trouble arises in who gets to decide the the cases in the middle. Knowledgeable? Fair? Objective? Any right of appeal? The current setups seem very unlikely to pass the smell test.

 

[randomlooker]

Once rescued and back in the parking lot, the idiots hide their faces from the camera or tell the RCMP and SAR to F******** and shy away from any media on scene. Completely disrespectful of the people that risked their lives for them.

Luckily, I've seen very little of that behavior south of the border in Washington. Been on two of my county's 3 SAR callouts over the last 24 hours, and all the subjects and families were gushing thanks that all these people came out to help them.

If we got the sort of reaction you describe on a regular basis (I've seen it, but it's rare), I'd stop going on missions.

 

[Fonly]

Luckily, I've seen very little of that behavior south of the border in Washington. Been on two of my county's 3 SAR callouts over the last 24 hours, and all the subjects and families were gushing thanks that all these people came out to help them.

If we got the sort of reaction you describe on a regular basis (I've seen it, but it's rare), I'd stop going on missions.

thats the same with me, the only time things happen is when a search is going bad, and we arn't doing the things that the family thinks we should be doing.

Its kinda hard to put a diver in a river when the water is running fast enough to take a rhino 1 a mile down, and is so thick you can see your hand in front of you.

 

[Fonly]

EXACTLY. It's not the SAR teams doing the billing IIRC. It's the government slime that controls whatever AO they have. If it went to the SAR teams, it wouldn't cost me $150 for FUNSAR, $60 for WFR, $25/mo for a pager, $60/yr in team member dues, $50 for SAR Tech III, plus whatever cost is associated with Mapsco maps, team uniforms, backpacks, GPS units, flashlights, FRS radios, compasses, dog search vests, etc.

but the thing is it CAN be, not allways, but can be. I've heard talk of it happening in voulenteer groups, but its usually gets shot down just as fast as it comes up. The thing is, if you start charging people for the search, they're not going to use it, and whats the point?

I have to buy my gear, I can use whats on hand, but its nothing like having something that is taylord to me and isnt everything I need.

The only thing I dont buy is the ATV, Gas, and radios.

 

[Fonly]

Clearly, Person "A" was both negligent and foolish and he certainly deserves to be penalized (charged) for needing to be rescued.

With Person "B"... he did nothing wrong, he took all reasonable precautions and was adequatly prepared, yet still he needed a costly helevac because he chose to go rock climbing in the back country. I still see it as his responsibility.

Certainly, under the "Idiots Pay" program, "A" should pay and "B" should not, there is no quesiton there. The question to my mind again comes down to personal responsibility. As far as I am concerned, the government has done enough by creating and supporting the SAR infrastructure. I'm not sure I should expect other people (i.e. taxpayers) to bear the cost of my individual rescue.

Thats a good way of putting it. In essence, everyone who is looking for the SAR teams help is at fault. if your old and go out with no one and need rescue because you fell, maybe you shouldn't be doing that type of thing alone.

If a group of kids go out on a river, and get stuck because a storm came in, its still their fault. They didn't check the weather.

if your traversing a rough spot, its your fault you put your self there, if your trained, you will have less of a chance, but you still put your self in that situation.

With all that said, thats the point of SAR. You dont walk down the street at 3pm in the afternoon expecting to be hit by a car, or stabbed and mugged on a good side of town. yet you still get charged for the ambulance ride if someone finds you in time and you dont bleed out.

 

[dougo83]

but the thing is it CAN be, not allways, but can be. I've heard talk of it happening in voulenteer groups, but its usually gets shot down just as fast as it comes up. The thing is, if you start charging people for the search, they're not going to use it, and whats the point?

I have to buy my gear, I can use whats on hand, but its nothing like having something that is taylord to me and isnt everything I need.

The only thing I dont buy is the ATV, Gas, and radios.

Down here this is how it is...these costs are what kept me from finishing the application process for now. I have gone out with a few SAR folks that I know when they let me and I enjoy it, but that ends up being a lot of money for a college kid to fork over for a volunteer position...

 

[PrimitiveMan]

You just described the new healthcare reform.

Healthcare will be doled out on a curve on the basis of age and ability to give to society.

I don't like that idea for healthcare or rescues.

 

[Fonly]

Down here this is how it is...these costs are what kept me from finishing the application process for now. I have gone out with a few SAR folks that I know when they let me and I enjoy it, but that ends up being a lot of money for a college kid to fork over for a volunteer position...

I know, its what Im trying to do right now.

I will tell you one thing though, It is well worth it, and the satisfaction you get from it is indescribable.

But with everything thats going on right now, it would be smart to hold off and see which direction things go. Im a little too far in now, and with the size of our group, one less would make a huge difference.

 

[Don Rearic]

"Maybe the human population would greatly decline if there was no such help? I wouldnt mind seeing the weak gone."

Let us say some hypothetical person posted this. Certainly not a member here. If that person had a child born with a disability or an elderly parent, would they do the "right" thing according to the quote and expose the baby or mom or dad on a rock to die as unfit? If that hypothetical person himself lived to get old, might his opinion change?

And weak in what sense? Mental? Ethical?

Thomas,

Of course it was someone here! Here, I'll remind you.

Maybe the human population would greatly decline if there was no such help? I wouldnt mind seeing the weak gone.

I mean, it might just be me, but I wouldn't mind seeing the strong ones that are demonstrably stupid or overly aggressive "gone."

Everything in todays society is about making $$$.

Correct.

Think about this...its illegal to kill yourself!!...why? because with every person who dies, thats less money they make! Wear your seatbelt...because we care about you..BS!!!

Correct again.

Broken clock is right twice a day, I guess this was both times. OK, so, three times.

 

[Thomas Linton]

Someone here is not a pro football fan.

 

[dougo83]

I know, its what Im trying to do right now.

I will tell you one thing though, It is well worth it, and the satisfaction you get from it is indescribable.

But with everything thats going on right now, it would be smart to hold off and see which direction things go. Im a little too far in now, and with the size of our group, one less would make a huge difference.

For the time being, I am gonna go VFF instead. I can still get rescue trained and all, but I don't have to pay for the privelege of risking my neck for someone else.

SAR may come after I graduate.

Someone here is not a pro football fan.

Yea..me...

 

[Don Rearic]

Someone here is not a pro football fan.

You mean I'm not a team player or something? I never did like baseball, football or basketball very much. I was always more of a hiker, hunter, camper, fisherman and boater type of person...but never got enough of any of it!