By Zed
From Gotham City
Jan 21, 2008
| Malcolm Daly wrote: 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
I completely agree with this. I think rescues should be viewed as an act of humanity, wherein the rescuers risk their own safety to insure the safety of the person or party in trouble. I believe that the most important aspect of any such situation is that the rescued party should make every effort to evaluate and learn from their mistakes, in order to avoid the same types of mistakes on subsequent outings.
The concept of rescues, and the potential dangers for those conducting them, should never be taken for granted when planning your outing. Plan all of your climbing adventures as though your lives depend on it. That includes trips to the local sport crag. |  |
By Mark Nelson
From Coniferous, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| A minor point of clarification -- having a bad day is a way of saying the shit really hit the fan and someone needs help & needs it now to get the f out.
Having an "epic" is just another part of climbing.
As for Kirra, I guess you'd just have to get to know her. I don't know any climber that isn't a little off-kilter in one aspect or another of their personality. She's just really expressive in her posts/personality. | |
By Richard Radcliffe
From Louisville, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| To paraphrase what Mark just said:
Epic = self-rescue = self-reliance.
Bad day = rescue = aid of others.
One person's epic = another person's bad day.
Many people on this thread have been quick to chastise others for the latter situation, but how do you advance the game without pushing your limits thus potentially initiating an epic or possibly a rescue at worst? Every climber was a beginner at one time and a beginner's epic is often just another fun day in the hills for a more advanced climber. | |
By Brian in SLC
From Salt Lake City, UT
Jan 21, 2008
| Malcolm Daly wrote: A case went to court about 12 years ago where some people had been injured in the Tetons. The rescue was slow to happen (Don't remember why) and one of the parties ended up dying. The parents ended up suing the NPS for "Failure to Rescue". It went to court and the judge found that users in the NPs have no right to expect a rescue, nor is one required. That's good law. I wish I could remember the case #. Any attorneys out there? Mal
Yeah, I dimly recall this one. I think was a party of three, and, they got separated. One hiked out and went to the park to report the other guys as overdue, or some such. The park waited a standard amount of time for them to hike out, then sent folks out. One guy had become hypothermic after falling in some water and died of exposure. I think the family thought that if the park had gone up immediately, that the guy wouldn't have died of exposure. Might have been on Buck Mountain? I think the gist of it was in ANAM.
Felt bad for the families loss, but, at the same time I was glad the park had the courage to take it to court (rather than settle). Set an important precedent if I remember right.
-Brian in SLC | |
By Richard Radcliffe
From Louisville, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| Richard Radcliffe wrote: Many people on this thread have been quick to chastise others for the latter situation, but how do you advance the game without pushing your limits thus potentially initiating an epic or possibly a rescue at worst?
Greg Opland wrote: Um...I probably didn't say it too well, but there are some things that climbers probably are going to have to do before I won't chastise them for incidents similar to this one.
I guess I'd have to back off a little on my original comment. Epics are to be expected, rescues are not. In either case, the victim of the epic/rescue usually made some kind of mistake that could have been corrected and needs to be made aware of it if they're not already. | |
By Mark Nelson
From Coniferous, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| Greg Opland wrote: ... Really just don't want to have any access issues with land managers due to too many rescues. That's really the bottom line. Don't think anyone has any problem with rescues that save a life or a limb.
This is really a good point & why I try to help advocate the mutual aid & the MRA philosophy. Most don't even consider this aspect in relation to access; fixed protection arguments seem to be a detractor.
If backcountry rescue is a real concern (i.e. not a perceived media hyped concern) of closure to the land owner/manager, then the SAR system is not setup properly. Mgt by closure because of this concern is as mis-guided as any other closure brought about by failing to or unwillingness to address viable conservation.
My opinion is that there are only 3 issues that affect recreational access:
Threatening wildlife & wildlife habitat,
Endangering the unknowing general public, and
Destruction of natural resources
There are more issues brought about of which I feel they are derived from, again, mis-guided or special interest policy.
The problem I see with this particular discussion is that it's supposed to be a generalized view of policy & protocol; but some seem to be keep relating the big picture policy issue with a specific example of one small evac that wasn't medical. | |
By David Arthur Sampson
From Tempe, Az
Jan 21, 2008
| Richard Radcliffe wrote: To paraphrase what Mark just said: Epic = self-rescue = self-reliance. Bad day = rescue = aid of others. One person's epic = another person's bad day. ..... Every climber was a beginner at one time and a beginner's epic is often just another fun day in the hills for a more advanced climber.
This is an important point, but one I disagree with. Perhaps others have differing opinions on this but, to me, a rescue is an epic gone bad.
(I promise, hence fourth, to not sling or spray) | |
By Hank Caylor
From Eldorado Springs, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| Mark Nelson wrote: The problem I see with this particular discussion is that it's supposed to be a generalized view of policy & protocol; but some seem to be keep relating the big picture policy issue with a specific example of one small evac that wasn't medical.
I hope this doesn't jump off the climbing topic too much, but as a climber/BASE jumper the two sports frequently take place at the same location, Moab in particular. Since many climbers are starting to BASE jump (I could list a Bakers Dozen high end climbers, especially in Europe that have started BASE jumping) self rescuing is becoming a huge part of the game. Since I know very few jump sites where a cell phone would work or a Ranger would be available, it gets even more important. The biggest difference is, a BASE rescue usually involves some type of injury, on top of the rescue. I think that more jumpers have what is called "emergency Insurance" than climbers. My health insurance is $160.00 or so amonth with a $1,000.00 deductible. I have a rider on my policy that is $20.00 a month extra and covers all helicopter and ambulance rides PLUS all medical on the way to the nearest major hospital. It will not cover the rescue, but if you can rescue yourself at least to the ground they will pick you up one way or the other(helicopter or ambulance) for $20 bux a month.
I guess some could argue the "hey I have insurance, so a rescue is a right" not a privilege arguement. I remember begging my partner for a YOSAR rescue back in the mid 90's when I wrecked my ankles on a climb and he would have none of it. Told me to bite on a quickdraw while he lowered me down 1,000' of rock and then helped me crawl out. I had no insurance at the time and certainly had no means to pay for any rescue.
Short story long is, the jumper in me sees a rescue one way, and the climber in me another. Though I have jumped over the top of climbers on the same piece of playspace. | |
By manuel rangel
From tempe, az
Jan 21, 2008
| Any situation that requires rescue is a bad day, epic, calamity or whatever name we give it. First and foremost, the caller defines the situation as an emergency when calling outside help. This help could be a public organization or folks nearby. If you call 911/public, the law comes into play and there is no question that rescuers will respond. You can hear calls for help when at the crag and choose to ignore them free of any liability. Anytime anyone calls 911 they will get a response, and that's a good thing. What we need to do is educate those around us and be the one at the crag willing to help and set a good example. Of course, it would be nice to get a chopper down from any crag at night so I'm climbing with my cellphone! Just kidding. | |
By phil broscovak
From Boo-older, Co.
Jan 21, 2008
| Two things...
First. Kira said;
Does anyone know if there were charges that resulted from a rescue in ElDo 2006..? It was staged by a Marine on leave from Iraq who was not missing but AWOL
Just to keep it clear that marine was indeed awol but....
He was facing death treats from his own platoon. He is the brave patriot that spilled the beans about the murder of innocent Iraqui civilians by his platoon.
Personally I hope he is safe and can remain hidden until he can testify before Congress.
Second. I see a huge difference between convenience rescues and emergency rescues. I think the first should be charged for and the later should be free.
Just my 2 cents worth. | |
By Tim Stich
From Colorado Springs, Colorado
Jan 21, 2008
| phil broscovak wrote: ...It was staged by a Marine on leave from Iraq who was not missing but AWOL Just to keep it clear that marine was indeed awol but.... He was facing death treats from his own platoon. He is the brave patriot that spilled the beans about the murder of innocent Iraqui civilians by his platoon.
I certainly hope Lance is doing fine as well, but I would have a lot more respect for him if he had just gotten on the bus without all of that bullshit he and Steve perpetrated on the rescue community, his parents and friends, and the volunteers that bought the sob story and went out looking for him. I heard someone got into a car accident on the way to helping out with the search, which is very unfortunate. | |
By Mark Nelson
From Coniferous, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| phil broscovak wrote: ... Second. I see a huge difference between convenience rescues and emergency rescues. I think the first should be charged for and the later should be free. Just my 2 cents worth.
Then you run the issue of what is a convenience vs what is an emergency definition and who makes that definition.
Ok, a person gets themselves into a terrain trap, now they feel the "dumbass, I just screwed myself; that was stupid". So at what point is this incovenience a matter of emergency? Should they wait until they are hypothermic, try to solo & fall, x amount of days until they ran out of food/water; or instead of terrain, they get lost & keep getting more lost?
At some point, they or someone else has to call it in. Really, it should be as soon as possible and the system in place needs to be able to meet this without repercussion even if the reason for the call is for the moron that just didn't know what they were getting into.
Which means advocating a charge for rescue based on circumstances of convenience just won't work. You can also get a system where agencies will only respond when they can charge.
Granted, I understand this is your opinion of how you see things and it's easy to think, I wouldn't have done that; but the system for rescue without charge needs to work, even for the idiots, so that it is guaranteed to work for the ones that desperately need aid. | |
By David Arthur Sampson
From Tempe, Az
Jan 21, 2008
| Mark Nelson wrote: ..but the system for rescue without charge needs to work, even for the idiots, so that it is guaranteed to work for the ones that desperately need aid.
I agree, but I think calling those that make poor decisions "idiots" a bit harsh. | |
By Mark Nelson
From Coniferous, CO
Jan 21, 2008
| I figure I'm probably the biggest one; so I use myself as the lowest common denominator. | |
By j fassett
From tucson
Jan 22, 2008
| Greg Opland wrote: Always really important to remember that rescuers are by and large incredibly giving people who put themselves into uncomfortable, risky, life-threatening situations in order to help those who need it. I'd just like to see their sacrifice given for a good reason.
I hear ya Greg.
I offered a "free" self-rescue course (as a community service,not a shameless plug) earlier on this thread and have little to no interest...go figure?
JF | |
By Jon Ruland
From Tucson, AZ
Jan 22, 2008
| j fassett wrote: I offered a "free" self-rescue course (as a community service,not a shameless plug) earlier on this thread and have little to no interest...go figure? JF
seriously? you're still going to give it right? maybe you should post it on the AZ & NM forum as its own thread. i don't want to miss an opportunity to learn from the masters, especially if it's for free. ;) | |
By James W
From Albuquerque, NM
Jan 22, 2008
| This is a very interesting thread to me. Personally, as a SAR volunteer myself, I'd like to make a couple of points:
1: To someone with years of backcountry experience (I'm no mountain hardman, but I've been around a little), a great majority of rescues we are called out on could be viewed as unnecessary, or at least a result of gross human error. You have no idea how many rescues we get called out for a year for people "lost" in the Sandia mountains (anyone who's been there knows you pretty much just go downhill and you'll hit road or town eventually), and people who head out totally unprepared for weather or minor injury.
2: We, as rescuers, never pass judgement on the "worthiness" of the rescue. We understand when we volunteer for SAR that we risk our safety every time we go into the field, and we accept that we may not always personally find that risk justified by the situation. However, it is not our place to judge such things. If someone feels the situation is dire enough to call for rescue, they deserve every resource available to help them. Whether or not I (or anyone else) feels that "I wouldn't ever be stupid enough to be caught in a situation like that" is totally immaterial. Our priority is to ensure the safe return of people to their families. There is plenty of time after the fact to play "the blame game", but not while someone is in trouble (real or perceived) in the backcountry.
3: Everyone makes mistakes, and nobody deserves to die because they got in over their heads (even if it was negligence that got them there).
"We Go So That Others May Live" | |
By susan peplow
From what day is this?
Jan 22, 2008
| James, thank you for your time, efforts and positive attitude.
Leave it up to us to pass judgement! You just keep saving our asses!
~Susan | |
By Russ Walling
From www.FishProducts.com
Jan 23, 2008
| kirra wrote: Yes, many Thanks to James, Greg and all of the non-spewing people on this thread It's amazing how I seemed to be the only person who got shit for going off topic. Thanks to folks that supported me as David truly does not know what the hell he is talking about David you have a lot of explaining and apologizing to do but def wait till your calm. Remember, one item at a time & copy both sides of the thread. Geir get your chair fixed, learn how to directly answer questions and try to be a nice guy Jeff, too bad you couldn't have wrangled your posse in and taken control over David who indeded was the one who hijaked your thread with spew and negative BS (apologizing doesn't count) To the lowlife out there spreading rumours about me and my family to David (spilled the beans) and whomever, get a subscription to Star Magazine. Your a pathetic SOB - oops another insult from me -sorry- dang it Stay safe all ~ Kirra
ummm... what???? | |
By Zed
From Gotham City
Jan 23, 2008
| Kirra and Russ,
You two need to put this nonsense to rest. It's one thing in pointless threads that are meant for entertainment, but it is just irritating when we are trying to discuss serious issues.
You both are middle-aged adults, but you are acting like adolescent brats. If you can't manage to let this crap go, then attack each other via Email.
A little goes a long way. | |
By susan peplow
From what day is this?
Jan 23, 2008
| ~~~~~~~thread drift~~~~~~~~~pretty sure I've got Jeff's approval~~~~~
Ken, I agree a little would go a long way. Maybe next time?
Kirra as per usual came right out of the chute slinging insults. Then in classic Kirra style started playing the picked on innocent. If she continues to call people names and act poorly she will get called on it. Plain and simple. She quotes rule #1 yet she is the #1 offender of not following the rule.
She calls people names, insults them and then edits her posts or often deletes them later. I'm not sure if it's embarrassment or just to get attention by looking like she's the injured party. Either way, she's a spin doctor.
I've done my best to curb my fingers through this thread and keep it on topic and away from the KB™ Drama-fest but your last suggestion brought me into the fire.
Taking any communication with Kirra offline is not recommended. She is even LESS accountable there then online. In an unprompted email that she sent me directly she actually used the parallel that I (a vacation rental home owner) was the same as, and I quote, "a dog beater" & "child molester". Yes folks, that's a true story.
She spews venom online and off and is best to be avoided. It is she that should give it a rest! And while she's at it... learn to spell. It's "you're", or "you are" not "your" it's "lose" not "loose".
So, it's been established she's nasty and ignorant and if she were stranded up on a wall with all her NooB BS in AZ, I suspect she'd be having a long and cold night.
~Susan | |
By Geir Hundal
From Tucson, AZ
Jan 23, 2008
| wow-
lots of great stuff on this thread since i read it last! i have a couple of broad thoughts:
1) thanks james for your insights. well-said.
2) the main issue i see is that inexperienced folks get into trouble because they don't know what they are getting into. what seasoned climbers can do about this is to offer some guidance and to link them up with people with whom they can get training.
along that line, if you know a climber that could benefit from the free self-rescue clinic, let them know about it. jeff is a fantastic resource.
3) it seems that the rescue that precipitated this thread could have been handled by the climbers in the parking area if the couple in trouble had yelled for help. lots of seasoned folks were there, and it sounds like many of them would have been willing to hike to the top and lower a rope to them.
and finally, which may be a point of contention:
4) if you find yourself watching an epic start to unfold in another party, how about sticking around at the base of the cliff for a bit? i suspect a few seasoned folks do this from time to time, and i wonder if this might help decrease the number of full-on rescues that need to happen. a bit of beta yelled to a party that's having some trouble might be enough to get them out of it without a rescue.
-geir | |
|
[ Forums > Arizona & New Mexico ]
RSS Feed
