Rescuers fear "Yuppie 911"

[Nessmuk]

Does S&R deliver?
"Hello, S&R? No, I'm all right and I'm not lost, but I'm really hungry. Here's my GPS coordinates - would you bring me a large pizza with pepperoni and mushrooms?".....

I've talked to rangers (locally) who have received cell phone calls like this... "Hey, I think I'm on 'eagle trail', how do I get to 'deer pond' from here?". Better yet, a case in Colorado where a call was received "I just bought a GPS. It's still in the box, how do I tell where I am?".

 

[Waumbek]

I remember reading in an old Paul Doherty column about an incident when a man reported his wife overdue on a summer hike, and was told to go up the trail with a flashlight as she was probably just benighted - it worked but can you imagine that happening today?

Good heaven's SAR would surely be sued.

Yup. All those downstate lawyers who now advertise on the backs of phone books up here are grinning and sharpening their claws over this idea! Doesn't mean they'd win but that's not how the money gets made.

 

[andrewb]

Do I believe Yuppie 911 is a bad thing? Yes! Is there anything we can do about the situation? Not really... I think it truly cheapens the whole outdoor experience for the rest of us when some bozo calls in a chopper when their latte goes tepid. This hypothetical case is obviously an extreme, most people who own one of these things like the idea of having a safety net. I do not, it's my choice to prefer being just a little more cut off. I have always thought that anything less than planning to be totally self sufficient in the mountains is dangerous. For the sake of those who prefer having their safety net, though, we should try to come up with basic rules - otherwise there could be dozens of these things going off at once which doesn't do anybody any good.

Standards for what usage is and is not reasonable can be set and abusers should be fined and also removed (perhaps permanently).

 

[RTSpoons]

Got tired reading all the posts

Look, sometimes people really need to be rescued. Than there are times when the person, like the guys described who called for help three times during the same trip.

The second person should be charged....someone who falls and breaks a leg...needs help and should not be charged.

 

[Tom Rankin]

Look, sometimes people really need to be rescued. Than there are times when the person, like the guys described who called for help three times during the same trip.

The second person should be charged....someone who falls and breaks a leg...needs help and should not be charged.

Also posted to the $25K thread, but related either way...

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/11/21/20091121rescue1121.html

 

[sweeper]

YUPPIE hiking plan:

2. Don't bother to learn how to use a compass.

3. Terrain maps? What are those?

The thing is it's not just yuppies that can't do these. I was continually amazed while in the Army how many people could not learn to read a map, nav with a map/compass no matter how many classes they had.

I met a Thru hiker on the approach to Smarts Mtn, I pulled out the map a told him where we were and what was coming up based on the contour lines. He had no clue what I was talking about. I gave him a quick class and he started to get an understanding. But again I was amazed 2,000 miles of using a map and no clue of was it was telling him.

I don't take electronics to the woods.

 

[Tom Rankin]

The thing is it's not just yuppies that can't do these. I was continually amazed while in the Army how many people could not learn to read a map, nav with a map/compass no matter how many classes they had.

I met a Thru hiker on the approach to Smarts Mtn, I pulled out the map a told him where we were and what was coming up based on the contour lines. He had no clue what I was talking about. I gave him a quick class and he started to get an understanding. But again I was amazed 2,000 miles of using a map and no clue of was it was telling him.

I don't take electronics to the woods.

Who needs a map to follow the white blazes?

 

[RoySwkr]

One of the rock-pile books noted that some hikers broke into the transmitter building during a storm and used a phone there to call the residence building for help. The hikers later were sent a bill for damage to the door, but declined to pay because they said the break-in was necessary to save their lives.

The author's comment was that apparently they didn't think their lives were worth much.

 

[ALGonquin Bob]

This month's Nat Geo Adventure has an article about charging for S&R, mentions the New Hampshire case, and comes right out and says people should just avoid recreation in states that charge for rescue.

 

[sweeper]

This month's Nat Geo Adventure has an article about charging for S&R, mentions the New Hampshire case, and comes right out and says people should just avoid recreation in states that charge for rescue.

And I would agree with that.

Please stay home, especially the 911 yuppies.

 

[Maddy]

I was thinking the same thing!

 

[Tim Seaver]

Bad PR costs BIG dollars

This month's Nat Geo Adventure has an article about charging for S&R, mentions the New Hampshire case, and comes right out and says people should just avoid recreation in states that charge for rescue.

Not good publicity, at all, for a state that relies heavily on tourism. Wedged between other states that also have plenty of interesting mountains, this type of negative press could cost the state and the people employed in the tourist industries a pretty penny, particular coming from a publication like NG Explorer, which is geared towards higher income people. They have choices and are well informed.

This is a bit outdated, but I imagine the stats are about the same today:

At the end of 1998, tourism employment within this region (White Mountains) accounted for just over 31 percent of total covered employment of 25,041.

From the Union Leader, this August.

Search and rescue funds are not keeping pace with New Hampshire's needs to fund emergency efforts in the woods and water.

The fund to pay for such rescues brings in approximately $180,000 annually from boater and off- highway vehicle registrations, but for the last fiscal year that ended June 30, the account was tapped for $237,000, said Col. Martin Garabedian, chief of law enforcement for Fish and Game.

Garabedian said this fiscal year has begun with a lot of search and rescue missions, and he thinks it is likely the department will again outspend that account.

He said there is no plans to seek to increase boater or OHRV registration fees to pay for these missions.

"We're not looking to change the fee structure. We will look to other funding options," he said. Luckily, he said the account structure usually has a delay which allows future funds to pay existing needs.
.....
Several years ago a decision was made to seek payment from those who have been deemed by their actions by the Attorney General's Office as needing to repay a whole or portion of their rescue. But Garabedian said that only brings in about $15,000 a year, on average.

So, to summarize:

1. "We're not looking to change the fee structure" means that NH, for whatever asinine reason, absolutely REFUSES to simply add another DOLLAR, yes, one dollar more, to the fees for registering boats and ORVs.

2. The bright idea to try and collect enough money from people who need rescues to supplement the fund isn't working.

3. There are no plans to implement any other method of collecting fees.

If NH clings to their current bone-headed thinking on this, it will end up costing the state a bunch more in lost tourism. I really hope they get their act together.

EDIT: In 2007 , Bill HB433, to "Provide $200,000 in General Fund dollars to fully pay program expenses for Search and Rescue operations" was deemed "Inexpedient to Legislate" by House Finance, which is a fancy way of saying "Nuh-uh". Real creative thinking, there.

 

[sweeper]

NH has a problem raising money, even before our current economic down turn. Without a Board base tax, (not that I'm advocating one) they have to use creative method to pay for things.

I don't know anything about the reg of Boats and ORVs but doesn't an out-a-stat'a need a reg if they use them in state? If so wouldn't that add to the decline of tourism? Seems to me charging for S&R would have less of an impact on fewer people.

 

[RoySwkr]

This month's Nat Geo Adventure has an article about charging for S&R, mentions the New Hampshire case, and comes right out and says people should just avoid recreation in states that charge for rescue.

I can't find the revised law, under the original it is not just reckless hiking you should avoid but any sort of negligent behavior:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xii/153-a/153-a-24.htm

And if people were ever to give any serious thought to consequences of an accident, they would probably care more about the quality of emergency service than whether they would receive a bill for it.

 

[Chip]

Seems to me charging for S&R would have less of an impact on fewer people.

I'd agree, but the problem with that is all the bad publicity it generates for the state. Something between 25 and 50% of NH's economy depends on, or is impacted by, tourism. Should the tourist's pay more to play ? What about the residents who benefit, even remotely ?

 

[Tim Seaver]

Seems to me charging for S&R would have less of an impact on fewer people.

Charging the "negligent" so far has netted less than $15,000 a year, nowhere near enough to make up for the budget shortfall. What's next - reducing the standard from "Negligent" to "Not Super Duper Careful" so they can charge even more people?

Average Visitor Spending per Day was: $85.24
52.6 million days X $85.24 per day =
$4.484 billion in traveler spending

Is NH really willing to potentially jeopardize even a small percentage of 4.5 billion dollars in tourist spending over the trivial (comparatively speaking) amount spent on SAR? The mind reels.

DTTD Promotional Spending: $5,923,813

6 million spent on promoting tourism evidently is no big deal, but 200k for SAR is worthy of outrage. Wow.

 

[Maddy]

I like this article.

http://www.traditionalmountaineering.org/News_Rescue_Charges.htm

Appears there is no mercy for the out of bounds skier.
"Charging for rescues" seems to be a hot topic no matter where you look. Lots of pros and cons.

Somehow I don't think the tourist trade will be greatly affected by whatever is decided. I look forward to reading what the outcome of all this will be in area of the country which boasts the worse weather/highest recorded winds.

New regs which are * left hand column

 

[sweeper]

Tim I agree that charging for S&R doesn't bring in much but on the other hand I also don't see where it would have much of an impact on where a person hikes.

NH has some of the best hiking on the east coast. So what does a person say from eastern Mass have for an alternative?

Drive 5 more hour into Maine?

Go to VT with limited timberline?

Drive even farther to the Ads?

The 911 yuppies are going to come anyways.

I think if their serious hikers they'd know about the potential of being charged and be prepare.

It's not a prefect solution, but neither is the WMNF parking fees. As long as government is not going to fund the parks something else needs to take the place.

 

[DrJJFate]

So, to summarize:

1. "We're not looking to change the fee structure" means that NH, for whatever asinine reason, absolutely REFUSES to simply add another DOLLAR, yes, one dollar more, to the fees for registering boats and ORVs.

2. The bright idea to try and collect enough money from people who need rescues to supplement the fund isn't working.

3. There are no plans to implement any other method of collecting fees.

On whom would you implement this other method of fees?

It would appear that the state of NH has collected $180,000 so far from registering boats and ORVs. I do not own a boat or ORV. Should they be the only ones subsidizing the state's SAR budget?

How much, if any, of the WMNF parking permit fees come back to the state?

 

[Stash]

Seems NH has a lot of funding issues beyond the inability to cover SAR costs..

AP Article on NH State Park funding (or lack of it)

I'm wondering if this would be more appropriate in the $25k fine thread??