Just reading about the rescue on the Sheepshead and thought this would be a great topic for discussion.
Is rescue a right or a privilege?

http://www.mountainproject.com/v/arizona__new_mexico/rescue_>>>>>

JF

In skimming the thread you linked, it seems like a reasonable way to sum up the event is a poor judgment call based on a lack of experience. They made a mistake. I've made mistakes in judgment while climbing that got me in over my head, and while lucky enough not to need a rescue, ought I be denied one because I made a bad call?

Also, if we determine that rescue is a privilege, at what point does one earn that privilege or have it taken away? Is it an experience thing? Before anyone throws out the idea of doing something inexcusably stupid as grounds for not deserving of rescue, where do we draw the lines? Stupid and terms like it all have a subjectivity issue.

Also, who wants to be the one to tell that unrescued climber's family that they're still on the mountain because we decided they had lost their right to come home?

Good question, Jeff.

The problem is if you go with privilege, then who is to judge what person is deemed worthy of rescue? If you go with right, then you set responders up to assume risks that they assess might not be acceptable, also open up responders for liability outside of gross negligence, and also allow for the expectation that a recreational participant no longer needs to educate, train, & prepare themselves. From your standpoint as a guide, you probably feel different because of your training & experience; but judging people when they call for help isn't the answer.


I feel the answer should be within a definition of humanitarian mission that allows responders to operate within safety protocols & good Samaritan effort; but also to allow for recreational participants to accept their own fate based on their choice of free expression.

Do you mean right as in are you allowed to call for help whenever you need to? Or do you mean right of passage as in being rescued is something that happens to all climbers eventually?

I think we all have the right to call for help whenever we want. If the responders felt it unnecessary they would not have gone.

I sure hope it is not a right of passage. If never get rescued from a climb I'll be very happy. Still, should the day come that I have utilized all my resources and I need help, I wouldn't hesitate to seek assistance.

Good start, thanks.

Here are a few other words I might throw out there, inconvenience and emergency. Let's be clear here, the rescuers did risk their lives to help these climbers. It doesn't appear to me this was a life threatening emergency. I'm sure the two climbers felt otherwise, nevertheless, who flips the bill for these error in judgments? We have something here in Arizona called the stupid motorist law, get rescued for being stupid and you pay the piper, does this apply in wilderness rescue and should it?
More food for thought,

JF

Jeff, the decision to charge is usually up to the county sheriff. I think the AZ motorist law is for extraction from a monsoonal flow where a motorist makes a decision to gun-it through a flash flood because the motorist doesn't want the inconvenience of finding a different route.

Now, say you have the same philosophy for the backcountry: "Aw shit I just screwed up -- so I'm not gonna call for rescue & try to get myself out on my own." This is a bad way to set up a policy. Because the person can become more lost/in greater trouble & require more resources. Searches are by far the highest in need for allocating SAR resources. Plus, any delay when help is needed sets up badly for rescue personnel. One example, they are working at searching at night instead of a quick evac during the day. Even though a day technical evac looks dramatic on the news, it's not that big a deal. Searches are the big deal.

So, what is usually charged for from the standpoint of the person who needs rescue: criminal conduct & medical/medical transport. Something else also, which has Colorado tourism fired up -- Fire Rescue Protection District response charges.

What is usually charged & how the piper is taken care of from the standpoint of the taxpayer. Really alot of it can be set-up as a non-issue to the taxpayer; maybe excepting sheriff deputy overtime. All the air & ground response can work at no charge to the taxpayer. I don't know how AZ has their SAR system setup; but there is probably something in place for the lost camper/fisherman - 6 year old Johnny that walked away from the RV. The same should apply to climbing/hiking enthusiasts.

i've got some thoughts but i was hoping i could have some things clarified first. most people who perform rescues are volunteers, correct? if that is the case, where did that helicopter for the sheepshead rescue come from and who paid for it? if the rescuees have to pay for the cost of the rescue after the fact then i wouldn't expect anyone to call for rescue unless they really, absolutely, without a doubt, unquestionably needed it. if someone else pays it then it seems like there's a serious flaw in the whole process.

but like i said i don't really understand the process so i'd appreciate some enlightenment.

Sometimes helicopters come from various military rescue squadrons. They often respond to civilian emergencies.

I have a friend who was boarding out of bounds a few years ago. It got socked in and he couldn't see where to go and it was getting dark. He built a shelter in tree well and spent the night. In the morning he woke up, saw where he needed to go and strapped on his board. About that time he heard someone coming up the hill. It was a dude on tele skis with 4 nalgenes hanging from biners on his pack, clanging around. He asked my friend " are you chris?". Chris says yeah, I'm fine and the ride down together. When they got the base he was charged something like $1500 to 2000 fir his "rescue". He was also fined for cutting boughs from pine trees to survive the night. He was able to get out of it eventually, but they tried.

Should have have paid? I personaly don't think so. It wasn't as though there was a massive muti agency search on for him, but gov resources were used. What do you guys think?

Though it's a good, valid question, I firmly believe that rescue is a privilege. Once you're out there, tackling that route or mountain or whatever, you are out there and the only one you can rely on is yourself and your partner. Any climber or mountaineer that expects more on a regular basis is going to eventually be disappointed in the worst way, and likely sooner rather than later. On top of that, to consider the possibility of rescue as a right is to invite inexperienced people to get themselves in over their heads with false expectations of an easy out. I think that, as a general rule, to approach climbing and mountaineering in any other way is a big mistake.

However, from a humanitarian perspective, you could argue that rescue is a right, because if someone calls for help and help is available, they should be helped. I don't think it's valid to differentiate one's possibility for rescue from another's based on anything but the resources available. One life is as valuable as any other.

if he was boarding where he shouldn't have been then i would say yes, he should have to pay it. this sounds like a gray area though. if someone else calls a search for you because they don't know where you are and they think they might be saving your life then this question becomes tricky. if you're just out having a good time by yourself and you get hit with a rescue bill that seems silly. then again, if you told someone you'd be back by nightfall and you're not then that's your own dumb fault.

still, it seems like everyone's been guilty of similar things at one time or another.

EDIT:
very good post nate.

i also want to add that remote settings and the impossibility of a rescue add to the adventure that many people seek in climbing and mountaineering.

Kirra - I think you could probably look to Boulder Cty Sheriff for that info. If I remember correctly, his friend was fined for helping to stage the search & this incident was considered a criminal act.

I'd re-phrase th question. Getting rescued sure as hell isn't a right and calling it a privilege doesn't sit well either. If you get rescued (I've been rescued in Alaska) consider yourself lucky. Everything else is secondary.

Climb safe,
mal

In Phoenix, anyone can call 911 and a crew (sometimes including a chopper) will respond to the call for help. They will determine how a rescue is done but it will be done and nobody will be charged unless an ambulance is required. In town, it is definitely a privilege provided by the city. Most folks seem to take it as their right, and it certainly seems that way from the silly calls responded to. The bulk of Phoenix' rescues seem to be for citizens that are not prepared for walking up a rough trail and they get hurt as a consequence. That's part of the luxury of living in a city. In the great outdoors, it should be a privilege you pay for either up front or post incident.

rescue is completely and utterly a privilege. anybody expecting rescue as a 'right' of some sort shouldn't climb. plain and simple.

Great well thought responses, and then....something from the off topic queen.

A quick note, AZ does have MRA teams in place:

http://www.mra.org/teams/desert.php

The two Regular designated teams do not charge for their services & operate with unpaid professional volunteers to accomplish the MRA humanitarian mission.

I did throw a few other words out there such as "inconvenience and life threatening" which may be better suited. It didn't appear to me that the situation on the sheepshead was "life threatening" that's the difference.
Do we need mountain rescue to go out and risk their lives when climbers are simply inconvenienced? I'm pretty sure Malcom's rescue in Alaska was not one of inconvenience.
Again, I wasn't there and my view is simply based on what I read on the original post. Nevertheless, we as climbers need to be more self-reliant before taking on big routes.

On that note...I'm offering a FREE "self rescue" course on February 10th. from 9:00-2:00 in Tucson. Contact me @ 520.721.6751 or www.climbarizona.com
Space is limited,

JEFF

Jeff, here's one: a person calls 911 because of chest pain while driving on the road; a heli is brought in as well as many responders and gets the person to the hospital where they diagnose angina; not a life threatening condition.

Now, you could argue that person didn't really need all these resources. But you just don't know when the call is made what exactly is going on in every instance.


Absolutely, I agree that climbers need to take on the responsibility of self-reliance and accept the fact that they are assuming risk through their free expression; which I do believe free expression is a right.

Good one, however, that would sure feel like something life threatening vs a cold night out on a ledge. Food for thought.
Thanks for your insight Mark,

Jeff

Malcolm, perhaps the thread name isn't perfect but it has successful in starting a discussion on the necessity of calling for help vs. just toughing it out.

In the case of the Sheepshead rescue, I wouldn't call it life threatening, they had warm clothes, they had a huge ledge AND they never once even called for down for help. (We were listening for just that). They "jumped the shark" so to speak.

Speaking of rescues... you can't compare the your rescue as it's in a different league all together. And thank God you're still with us - you're a gem ;)

Mal's experience......
http://www.trango.com/pdfs/malacc.pdf

I'd like to think that the couple rescued off Sheepshead firmly believed that they were going to die that night if they were not lifted out, and that they believed calling for help was their only option. This judgement was almost certainly wrong, but their perception is all the person on the other end of the phone can go on at that point. (Perhaps if the sheriff could've referred them to someone with climbing rescue experience to try to talk them through it, who could reassure them that they would be cold but live, maybe the unnecessary rescue could have been avoided.)

I'm glad they didn't die trying to do something stupid to try to save themselves, such as trying to climb unroped in the dark on rock that was beyond their abilities.

They must feel terribly humbled by the experience. I imagine that they're hating themselves for not being able to communicate with those on the ground for help, or for not recognizing that there were other climbers below that might have been able to help them.