Lost hiker on Madison

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
P

peakbagger

Super Moderator
Staff member
VFTT Supporter
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
Messages
8,448
Reaction score
596
Location
Gorham NH
http://www.wmur.com/news/missing-hiker-found-safe-in-gorham/39791048

http://www.unionleader.com/Missing-hiker-from-New-York-found-alive-20160530

At least he made it out okay, I expect that this is a billable rescue. Other reports indicate that he was member of the somewhat infamous Hudson Valley Hikers meetup group that had a get together of 150 hikers at Dolly Copp over the weekend. They tend to party late into the evening so their hikes inevitably tend to start later in the day. Its mixed group of experienced and inexperienced hikers so a member not having appropriate equipment is not a surprise.

Here is my guess on the route, the group was heading up Valley Way and the hiker elected to take Watson Path as its a more direct route to Madison, he then summited and decided to head back to Dolly Copp campground via the Daniel Webster trail and then switched to Pine Link as it was shorter distance to a road.
 
Last edited:
Interesting - if he was hiking alone from the start this would have been a non-issue. I took the note about him not having a cell phone as an implication that he should have, which feels kind of backwards from most articles that criticize people for relying on cell phones. How did other interpret that?
 
I am not sure on that, if he was hiking alone with no gear whatsoever and he got to Dolly Copp road after dark, I am not sure if he would have made the correct guess which way to go and if he did guess he would have had to have had the courage to follow that hunch for the 45 minutes to an hour that he would have had to walk in the dark to get to Barnes field.
 
I think calling him a " hiker " is being generous. He was with a group checking out waterfalls on a low land hike and he decided to tackle one of the big four with no gear and no know knowledge. Send him a bill and be done with it.
 
peakbagger said:
I am not sure on that, if he was hiking alone with no gear whatsoever and he got to Dolly Copp road after dark, I am not sure if he would have made the correct guess which way to go and if he did guess he would have had to have had the courage to follow that hunch for the 45 minutes to an hour that he would have had to walk in the dark to get to Barnes field.
Click to expand...

Given that he sheltered in place, then continued on in the morning, I think even if he went the wrong way, he'd had 'made it out' on his own. He didn't call for help. If the idea is a 'fee for service', what service did this person get? I think this could further lead people to wait before calling for help if someone in a party goes missing.
 
Is this even a rescue or more of a search? He was hiking out on his own power in the right direction. Yes he was ill equipped but he did make the right decision to hunker down after dark. Not that I come even close to advocate his behavior but he did make it out on his own power. Maybe a rescue if he had to be lead out. Lots more of these types of hikers out there. We passed at least six hikers on Sunday on The Ridge of the Caps with nothing! One guy even asked us if there was a shorter and easier way back down. Unfortunately this is a situation where the clarification and defining parameters of being "negligent" are going to have to be better regulated when it comes to rescue. If going into the woods with nothing and making it out on your own two feet is going to be charged as rescue revenue for the Fish and Game Dept..... They could make up their budget deficits by the end of 4th of July weekend.
 
Last edited:
I don't want anyone but me or my emergency contact to call for a rescue. I always tell my wife to give me 48 hours. I certainly don't want someone in some group to overreact and call a rescue on me and then somehow get a bill for something I did not initiate.
 
Back long ago while taking a private pilots course one of the key things the air traffic controllers would ask if you were confused or contacted them was "Do you wish to declare an emergency ?" If the pilot did, the ATC went into emergency mode where the emergency took precedence over all other traffic. In this case, someone called Fish and Game at some point. It could have been the hut crew or the hikers in his former group. I expect that a set of questions is asked by Fish and Game before they respond. In this case, its a solo hiker in theory unfamiliar with the territory with no/inappropriate equipment for an overnight.

I expect this brings up the "Let Me Die" argument wherein the subject of the search states afterwards that he or she did not call for rescue and therefore is not liable for rescue costs. I expect in cases like this that if it ends up in court it will eventually establish case law in what is currently tilted to the F&G opinion. As far as I know there is no state law in effect that prevents a totally underequipped clueless individual to go anywhere they please in the whites no matter what the weather. The only law that is on the books is if someone is rescued that the state has the right to collect actual S&R costs unless the person has bought "insurance" via the Hike Safe card or via a hunting or fishing license. Of course even the Hike Safe Card or a fishing or hiking license may not cover the fees as reckless conduct is specifically excluded.
 
peakbagger said:
Back long ago while taking a private pilots course one of the key things the air traffic controllers would ask if you were confused or contacted them was "Do you wish to declare an emergency ?" If the pilot did, the ATC went into emergency mode where the emergency took precedence over all other traffic. In this case, someone called Fish and Game at some point. It could have been the hut crew or the hikers in his former group. I expect that a set of questions is asked by Fish and Game before they respond. In this case, its a solo hiker in theory unfamiliar with the territory with no/inappropriate equipment for an overnight.

I expect this brings up the "Let Me Die" argument wherein the subject of the search states afterwards that he or she did not call for rescue and therefore is not liable for rescue costs. I expect in cases like this that if it ends up in court it will eventually establish case law in what is currently tilted to the F&G opinion. As far as I know there is no state law in effect that prevents a totally underequipped clueless individual to go anywhere they please in the whites no matter what the weather. The only law that is on the books is if someone is rescued that the state has the right to collect actual S&R costs unless the person has bought "insurance" via the Hike Safe card or via a hunting or fishing license. Of course even the Hike Safe Card or a fishing or hiking license may not cover the fees as reckless conduct is specifically excluded.
Click to expand...
Not to nitpick but they have a right to charge if the subject is proven "Negligent" and without a Safe Hike Card, hunting and or fishing License. Just wanted to make that clear in case someone is reading this and is unaware of NH Laws concerning these situations. I think what your saying about The Fish and Game asking questions about a situation when someone calls in is very relevant. Does anyone know if there is a specific policy as when a decision to launch a potential rescue is made. I would assume it is somewhat situational rather than standard policy. Obviously life threatening would have to be at the top of the list. Was this situation life threatening? I'm sure that F&G has to cover there own arses so to speak also. http://hikesafe.com/index.php?page=the-nh-hike-safe-card
 
Last edited:
skiguy said:
Not to nitpick but they have a right to charge if the subject is proven "Negligent" and without a Safe Hike Card, hunting and or fishing License. Just wanted to make that clear in case someone is reading this and is unaware of NH Laws concerning these situations. I think what your saying about The Fish and Game asking questions about a situation when someone calls in is very relevant. Does anyone know if there is a specific policy as when a decision to launch a potential rescue is made. I would assume it is somewhat situational rather than standard policy. Obviously life threatening would have to be at the top of the list. Was this situation life threatening? I'm sure that F&G has to cover there own arses so to speak also. http://hikesafe.com/index.php?page=the-nh-hike-safe-card
Click to expand...

I thought that even with the Hike Safe card, if your proven negligent you can still be charged. That's why I thought it was pointless to buy one.
 
sierra said:
I thought that even with the Hike Safe card, if your proven negligent you can still be charged. That's why I thought it was pointless to buy one.
Click to expand...
Not pointing any fingers here Sierra as I always enjoy, admire, and learn from your posts here.:):D If a hiker/climber of your caliber is misinterpreting the policies of the Hike/Safe Card imagine how confused your newbie Hiker must be. Bottom line....lots more education on how to be safe for all.
http://hikesafe.com/index.php?page=the-nh-hike-safe-card
 
There is fine line between negligence and recklessness which is probably substantially affected by budget pressure.

F&G is spending inordinate amounts of time up in the north country these days keeping up with the almost daily ATV accidents on the Ride the Wilds system. There is definitely a lot of push back on who is actually supposed to be funding the cost to monitor the ATV trail systems. It would be interesting to see if the surcharge collected on ATV fees is covering the cost for rescues.
 
skiguy said:
Not pointing any fingers here Sierra as I always enjoy, admire, and learn from your posts here.:):D If a hiker/climber of your caliber is misinterpreting the policies of the Hike/Safe Card imagine how confused your newbie Hiker must be. Bottom line....lots more education on how to be safe for all.
http://hikesafe.com/index.php?page=the-nh-hike-safe-card
Click to expand...

Thanks for that link. So it's " reckless" not negligent, that still doesn't make sense to me. If your selling a card, people who buy it, should be covered regardless of what happened. Anyway just my opinion, I wasn't to clear on it, mainly because I'm not interested either way. I promote self reliance in the backcountry as well as self rescue. Many hikers seem to have 911 on speed dial and use it before attempting any kind of self rescue. I'm a purist, it would be life or death for me to call. I don't really leave plans with anyone anyway, so I'll have plenty of time to work something out. Kudos to Brambor he at least wants 48 hours before calling in, that shows he is willing to try to extract himself. Not to generalize, but the amount of people calling for help is ridiculous and seems to be a generational thing. The younger folks have much less of a threshold for suffering. A sprained ankle? how long did you walk on it before you called for help? If you go to higher ranges, self rescue is assumed, especially farther out where cell phone reception is thin to non-existent. Oh well, I could go on and on, to each his own.
 
Welcome to summer hiking season. I was talking to my son over the weekend & when we first start, we think of the season starting around Memorial Day & ending Columbus Day, then we realize there is no off season. In time, many of us enjoy the winter so much that if we were to say there is an offseason, we'd probably want to take Memorial Day through Labor Day off.

I'd agree the threshold of suffering has diminished. Not sure it's a bad thing when we are talking ankle sprains & tightening the sneakers because the team needs you for recreational sports, however, when the choice is calling others that may be risking their lives to look for you, people should be a little more self-reliant.
 
peakbagger said:
http://www.wmur.com/news/missing-hiker-found-safe-in-gorham/39791048

http://www.unionleader.com/Missing-hiker-from-New-York-found-alive-20160530

Here is my guess on the route, the group was heading up Valley Way and the hiker elected to take Watson Path as its a more direct route to Madison, he then summited and decided to head back to Dolly Copp campground via the Daniel Webster trail and then switched to Pine Link as it was shorter distance to a road.
Click to expand...

That possible route is a leg pounding few would forget soon....and Pine Link scores another lost hiker.

I am sure many people look to Watson Path as a shortcut on their way up Madison via Valley Way and probably feel like they just discovered some great secret. It's a great trail, but its no shortcut!
 
TJsName said:
Interesting - if he was hiking alone from the start this would have been a non-issue. I took the note about him not having a cell phone as an implication that he should have, which feels kind of backwards from most articles that criticize people for relying on cell phones. How did other interpret that?
Click to expand...

I interpret that as a reminder that F&G doesn't write the articles, journalists do. My guess is the lack of cell phone comment and the implication that this was something "lacking" did not originate with F&G, but came from the reporter.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Pacific Crest Trail Section J Snoqualmie to Stevens Pass
Replies
5
Views
1K
maineguy
maineguy
P
A quick trip to Olympic National Park
Replies
0
Views
750
peakbagger
P
B the Hiker
Hiker asked for a rescue...via Facebook
2 3
Replies
51
Views
7K
Mike P.
Mike P.
Rhody Seth
Foliage Weekend: Mts. Adams, Madison and Hale - October 1-2, 2022
Replies
0
Views
743
Rhody Seth
Rhody Seth
P
Crescent Ridge Traverse
Replies
0
Views
1K
peakbagger
P

Latest posts

Top