The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: tombogan03884 on October 27, 2009, 11:14:16 AM

Title: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 27, 2009, 11:14:16 AM
just found this in the local paper

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091027/GJLIFESTYLES/710269875/-1/citizen

Tired from a tough hike? Rescuers fear Yuppie 9-1-1

By TRACIE CONE
AP Writer
Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Last month two men and their teenage sons tackled one of the world's most unforgiving summertime hikes: the Grand Canyon's parched and searing Royal Arch Loop. Along with bedrolls and freeze-dried food, the inexperienced backpackers carried a personal locator beacon — just in case.

In the span of three days, the group pushed the panic button three times, mobilizing helicopters for dangerous, lifesaving rescues inside the steep canyon walls.

What was that emergency? The water they had found to quench their thirst "tasted salty."

If they had not been toting the device that works like Onstar for hikers, "we would have never attempted this hike," one of them said after the third rescue crew forced them to board their chopper. It's a growing problem facing the men and women who risk their lives when they believe others are in danger of losing theirs.

Technology has made calling for help instantaneous even in the most remote places. Because would-be adventurers can send GPS coordinates to rescuers with the touch of a button, some are exploring terrain they do not have the experience, knowledge or endurance to tackle.

Rescue officials are deciding whether to start keeping statistics on the problem, but the incidents have become so frequent that the head of California's Search and Rescue operation has a name for the devices: Yuppie 9-1-1.

"Now you can go into the back country and take a risk you might not normally have taken," says Matt Scharper, who coordinates a rescue every day in a state with wilderness so rugged even crashed planes can take decades to find. "With the Yuppie 9-1-1, you send a message to a satellite and the government pulls your butt out of something you shouldn't have been in in the first place."

From the Sierra to the Cascades, Rockies and beyond, hikers are arming themselves with increasingly affordable technology intended to get them out of life-threatening situations.

Situations of this type have occurred in New Hampshire. This past August a hiker from Texas asked to be rescued by helicopter because he had injured his thumb. Authorities told him instead to hike down the 3,251-foot Mount Crescent in Randolph.

While daring rescues are one result, very often the beacons go off unintentionally when the button is pushed in someone's backpack, or they are activated unnecessarily, as in the case of a woman who was frightened by a thunderstorm.

"There's controversy over these devices in the first place because it removes the self sufficiency that's required in the back country," Scharper says. "But we are a society of services, and every service you need you can get by calling."

The sheriff's office in San Bernardino County, the largest in the nation and home to part of the unforgiving Death Valley, hopes to reduce false alarms. So it is studying under what circumstances hikers activate the devices.

"In the past, people who got in trouble self-rescued; they got on their hands and knees and crawled out," says John Amrhein, the county's emergency coordinator. "We saw the increase in non-emergencies with cell phones: people called saying 'I'm cold and damp. Come get me out.' These take it to another level."

Personal locator beacons, which send distress signals to government satellites, became available in the early 1980s, but at a price exceeding $1,200. They have been legal for the public to use since 2003, and in the last year the price has fallen to less than $100 for devices that send alerts to a company, which then calls local law enforcement.

When rescue beacons tempt inexperienced hikers to attempt trails beyond their abilities, that can translate into unnecessary expense and a risk of lives.

Last year, the beacon for a hiker on the Pacific Crest Trail triggered accidentally in his backpack, sending helicopters scrambling. Recently, a couple from New Bruswick, British Columbia activated their beacon when they climbed a steep trail and could not get back down. A helicopter lowered them 200 feet to secure footing.

In September, a hiker from Placer County was panning for gold in New York Canyon when he became dehydrated and used his rescue beacon to call for help.

With darkness setting in on the same day, Mono County sheriff's deputies asked the National Guard for a high-altitude helicopter and a hoist for a treacherous rescue of two beacon-equipped hikers stranded at Convict Lake. The next day they hiked out on foot.

When eight climbers ran into trouble last winter during a summit attempt of Mt. Hood in Oregon, they called for help after becoming stranded on a glacier in a snowstorm.

"The question is, would they have decided to go on the trip knowing the weather was going bad if they had not been able to take the beacons," asks Rocky Henderson of Portland Mountain Rescue. "We are now entering the Twilight Zone of someone else's intentions."

The Grand Canyon's Royal Arch loop, the National Park Service warns, "has a million ways to get into serious trouble" for those lacking skill and good judgment. One evening the fathers-and-sons team activated their beacon when they ran out of water.

Rescuers, who did not know the nature of the call, could not launch the helicopter until morning. When the rescuers arrived, the group had found a stream and declined help.

That night, they activated the emergency beacon again. This time the Arizona Department of Public Safety helicopter, which has night vision capabilities, launched into emergency mode.

When rescuers found them, the hikers were worried they might become dehydrated because the water they found tasted salty. They declined an evacuation, and the crew left water.

The following morning the group called for help again. This time, according to a park service report, rescuers took them out and cited the leader for "creating a hazardous condition" for the rescue teams.
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 27, 2009, 11:24:34 AM
I am all in favor of EPRBs as they do save lives in a real emergency (a capcised boat a broken leg, two days lost etc.). The article is right though it does make it too easy, and leads wimps and idiots to overuse. It seems to me there is a simple solution.
1) charge a hefty fee, $500-$1000 for ANY use of the thing. Legit or not. This should make folks ask themselves "Can I get ot of this my self"?
2) If it is not deemed to be a real emercency, "Here's the bill, along with an easy installment plan". Maybe tack on an Arbitration panel of experts for anyone who wants to appeal (loser pays costs).
That should discourage overuse.
FQ13
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: Timothy on October 27, 2009, 11:25:55 AM
A wise man once said.....

'Ya just can't fix STUPID!'
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: tt11758 on October 27, 2009, 11:50:18 AM
Quote from: fightingquaker13 on October 27, 2009, 11:24:34 AM
I am all in favor of EPRBs as they do save lives in a real emergency (a capcised boat a broken leg, two days lost etc.). The article is right though it does make it too easy, and leads wimps and idiots to overuse. It seems to me there is a simple solution.
1) charge a hefty fee, $500-$1000 for ANY use of the thing. Legit or not. This should make folks ask themselves "Can I get ot of this my self"?
2) If it is not deemed to be a real emercency, "Here's the bill, along with an easy installment plan". Maybe tack on an Arbitration panel of experts for anyone who wants to appeal (loser pays costs).
That should discourage overuse.
FQ13


The only issue I take with your idea would be the person who might genuinely need assistance but hesitate to call for it because of the fee.  Instead, why not simply assess a HEAVY fine for those who use the system in a frivolous manner?  That way, if somebody needs it they don't need to hesitate to use it, but the buffoons who activate the beacon because their little thumb hurts get to pay for the privilege.  And, as you suggested, anybody cited for misuse can appeal the citation.

Seems reasonable to me.
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: MikeBjerum on October 27, 2009, 11:58:01 AM
I think that the people just need to pay the actual cost of the response just as they would if they called the fire department or ambulance at home.

This is the type of thing that irritates me about my very own generation.  When I was young my grandfather taught me how to get around in the world; when I was a Cub Scout and later a Boy Scout we were taught how to navigate using a map without a compass, with a map and compass and how to stay on track using the sun and stars.  Today our youth, and idiot explorer wanna be adults, are told all they need to do is buy electronics and the exchange of $'s will replace actual knowledge.  I teach people, young and old, every year in the basics of firearm safety and hunter education as required by the State of Minnesota, and parents are reinforcing their children's idea that all they need is a gps and a cell phone.

To make all of this worse is the fact that it is easier to find maps with nothing but an outliine and gps references than it is to find an actual detailed topo map.  I have asked for both lake and forest maps with topo on it, and I have been told either they are not available or that the store no longer carries them because no one wants them ... I  WANT  ONE!!!
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: Timothy on October 27, 2009, 01:25:08 PM
Quote from: m58 on October 27, 2009, 11:58:01 AM
To make all of this worse is the fact that it is easier to find maps with nothing but an outliine and gps references than it is to find an actual detailed topo map.  I have asked for both lake and forest maps with topo on it, and I have been told either they are not available or that the store no longer carries them because no one wants them ... I  WANT  ONE!!!

Mike, check this site.  I've used the ones from the State of CT and MA on occasion.  Don't know the extent of what your looking for.

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/maps/tomo.html
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 27, 2009, 01:41:47 PM
M58
Check out this site, they are the source for all official maps and charts.

http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/

As a note, the NH incident resulted in a bill of several thousand dollars.
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: jnevis on October 27, 2009, 01:43:54 PM
m58 is right, yet again.  It isn't going to get any better.  I may be a little rusty when it comes to land nav but I could do it.  Would I try a trek I wasn't TOTALLY prepared for, electronics or not, NO.  My oldest on the other hand, can't even think unless she has an MP3 player in her ear and a cell phone in her hand.  The more we tell her to figure it out and leave the phone alone the more entrenched she becomes.

As an emergency repsonder there is a very fine line when it comes to rescues like these.  On the one hand you're pissed because this jacka$$ is wasting your time and resources are out of service for someone that might REALLY need them.  On the other a bogus call breaks the boredom and is good "training" time.  I "what if" the hell out of trainees after easy calls.  Hard calls you're usually to physically/emotionally drained to.

Now I think charging these morons is a good idea, like TT says, after they activate it not for the legitimate emergencies.  Hell, a taxi ride in an ambulance when I worked in Fresno was $600, if they had to work you $800+, God forbid you needed a helo $2K+.  Sure most of that was paid by insurance (or the state for those without, lucky us huh?)  Where I'm at now the ride is free and we have a lot more BS calls. (oh wait "Every call is an emergency to SOMEONE!"-bad medic ;D)
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: MikeBjerum on October 27, 2009, 05:20:40 PM
All this talk reminds me of a long camping weekend we took with a group of friends.  We went to Taylors Falls on the MN/WI border for a weekend of family, fun and entertainment.  Among the things we did was get out all the equipment and do a little climbing (not much rock climbing, but rope climbing on the rock face), rappelling and just about anything you can think of with ropes (yes, there were a few stories about that kind of fun too ... some day I'll share my favorite hotel trick I still do to this day).

One of the geographic features here are holes in the solid rock floor that go down anywhere from five to 50 feet and are about 15 to 20 feet in diameter.  These holes were made by the swirling waters of the river eroding the solid rock.  I was lowering myself down the center of the hole ... head first when at the 25 foot mark I came face to face with a ranger taking a group on a tour.  I smiled, waved, said hi to everyone ... the kids loved it, a few mothers freaked, and the rangerette wasn't amused.  I finished my way to the bottom and climbed back up using Prusik knots. 

About an hour later a group of rangers came to us at another "play" site and started chewing us out.  We asked if what we did was wrong, and they said yes.  We apologized, because we had not seen the postings and promised to quit.  They stated there were no signs, and that we should just know better.  At this point our fearless leader asked if it was really a rule or they just wanted to throw their weight around.  They hemmed and hawed, admitted there was no real rule, but that it was idiots like us (we had been noticed all day) that caused their volunteers to risk their lives to have to come and rescue us when we got in trouble ....

This is when the fun began ...

We all started laughing ... and laughing hard.  Ranger Rick turned beet red and blew up.  At this point fearless leader, 35 year firefighter, and lead instructor for firefighter training in SW MN informed them that they were addressing the team that trains their volunteers.  Yes, we were Southwest Minnesota Technical College's Confined Space, High Angle and Specialized Rescue training team.  It didn't hit us right away, but how did they miss the red Suburban with emergency lights and 16' enclosed trailer in the lot of the group camping area  ::)

He then told them that we would be there for two more days and we would welcome any of their volunteers that wanted to join us.
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: crusader rabbit on October 28, 2009, 02:19:02 PM
EPIRBs are wonderful devices when truely needed.  But, just for grins think about this possibility.  What if we posted signs at the entrances to wilderness areas that said something like: 
This is a wilderness area. 
By entering this area you agree you are on your own. 
Rescues will not be attempted. 
In this area your EPIRB is useless. 
Lives of first-responders will not be put at risk if you get into trouble. 
If you do get into trouble, you must self-rescue. 
Have a good day.
Smokey Bear

Now I know that this smacks of some sort of right wing attempt at personal responsibility, but I think it just might encourage people to prepare.  It might make them aware that the big brown bear is not some sort of audio-anima-tronic thing from Disney and that personal actions do have consequences.

Nah.  I'm just dreamin'.......
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 28, 2009, 07:41:12 PM
 Seems to me that the whole point of going to a "wilderness area" is that you "are on your own" and the challenge of that is if you screw up you die.

If I were the dispatcher some of those calls would be answered with, "sucks to be you".  ;D
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 30, 2009, 11:58:03 AM
Just saw this in today's free Paper

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/LaconiaPDF/2009/10/30L.pdf

Hikers must be prepared – or pay for rescue

CONCORD (AP) — Stranded with
a sprained ankle on a snow-covered
mountain, Eagle Scout Scott Mason
put his survival skills to work by
sleeping in the crevice of a boulder
and jump-starting evergreen fires
with hand sanitizer gel.
He put plastic bags inside his boots
to keep his feet dry as he sloshed
through mountain runoff hidden
beneath waist-deep snow. After three
cold days last April, rescue crews spotted
him hiking toward the summit of
Mount Washington, the Northeast’s
highest mountain.
New Hampshire officials praised his
resourcefulness. So grateful was he
for his rescuers that Mason, 17, sent
$1,000 to the state.
Sometime later, New Hampshire
sent him a bill: $25,734.65 for the cost
of rescuing him.
New Hampshire is one of eight
states with laws allowing billing for
rescue costs, but only New Hampshire
has made frequent attempts to do
so — even strengthening its law last
year to allow the suspension of hiking,
fishing and driver’s licenses of those
who don’t pay, according to an Associated
Press review.
National search and rescue organizations
insist just the possibility of
being billed is dangerous policy. Hikers
may delay calling for help while they
think about the cost, and that could
put them — and the mostly volunteer
corps of rescuers — at greater risk.
Other states with laws allowing
them to recoup costs rarely, if ever,
enforce them, largely for that reason,
the AP found.
“If it had happened in Colorado, he
would have been applauded for being
able to survive for three days,” said
Paul “Woody” Woodward, president of
Colorado’s Alpine Rescue Team. “New
Hampshire is way out on their own on
this one.”
New Hampshire officials counter
that being properly prepared — not
the size of the scout’s bill — should be
the message about visiting wilderness
areas. And, fish and game officials
say, many of the state’s trailheads are
posted with signs warning hikers they
may be billed for rescue costs if they
aren’t properly prepared.
Mason, now an 18-year-high school senior, from Halifax,
Mass., has hired a lawyer to try to negotiate a settlement.
Officials said he was found to be negligent because
he veered off the marked path, was unprepared for melting
snow that made a shortcut perilous and went up the
mountain with an injured ankle, not down.
The bill included more than $24,000 for a helicopter
and labor provided by state fish and game offi-
cers. Volunteers provided their time at no charge.
Three states besides New Hampshire — Hawaii,
Oregon and Maine — have general laws allowing
agencies to bill for rescues. Only Maine has
attempted to recoup money a handful of times and
the bills were never paid. California, Vermont, Colorado
and Idaho have laws allowing state agencies to
bill in limited circumstances, but the laws are rarely
enforced — and when they are, draw a firestorm of
protest from search and rescue groups.
Two years ago, the fire department in Golden,
Colo., rescued a hiker from Kansas who had sprained
his ankle and later billed him for $5,135. The outcry
from national search and rescue groups influenced
the city to change its policy and settle with the hiker
for 10 percent of the bill.
Only New Hampshire has consistently billed people.
Last year, lawmakers increased the likelihood of being
billed when they lowered the legal standard from reckless
to negligent to make it easier to collect.
Records obtained by The Associated Press from a
Freedom of Information Act request found that New
Hampshire spent $413,543 on 275 rescue missions
over the past two years. The state issued 16 bills for
rescues totaling $41,435 — with Mason’s $25,000
bill the largest. The state spent far more, $59,426, on
a December 2007 search that was not billed. In that
case, the body of the 70-year-old hunter was found
four months later. His family was not billed.
“We’re not going out there with the intent to bill
everyone,” insists Fish and Game Maj. Timothy
Acerno.
Policies vary across the country on penalizing
people who ignore weather warnings, don’t carry
flashlights on long hikes, fail to leave itineraries, ski
out of bounds or are otherwise unprepared or act
irresponsibly.
If Mason had gotten lost in a National Park, his
rescue would have been free, said David Barna, chief
of public affairs for the National Park Service.
New Hampshire officials stress they only bill those
who are negligent.
Acerno said that experienced search and rescue
volunteers and fish and game staff consider what
a reasonable person would have done and measure
the person’s actions against a hiker responsibility
code that calls for knowing the terrain and conditions,
taking proper gear, leaving an itinerary and
turning back if conditions change. The attorney general’s
office makes the final determination.
Hannah Groom, a 21-year-old college student from
Cumberland, Maine, learned the hard way.
While grateful for rescuers’ help, Groom said the
$3,360 bill sent to her and a friend was steep for
one night on New Hampshire’s Baldface Mountain
in May. The two had planned a day hike, but took
a wrong trail. She blames confusing trail markers.
“I do not believe that charging two young adults such
a high fee for a mistake caused by poor trail markers
is warranted,” she wrote The AP in an e-mail.
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: 1911 Junkie on October 30, 2009, 01:08:53 PM
I say give the kid a break. He didn't call for help. If he was still moving up the mountain to make the summit, he couldn't have been that bad off. Somebody just freaked and sent a rescue team. Bill them.

Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: fightingquaker13 on October 30, 2009, 01:14:30 PM
This does seem a bit extreme. What bothers me is the shifting of the standard down from "reckless". If you do something that a reasonable, and well informed, person would consider assine, then bill away. If you just made a mistake, and did your best to overcome it, as this kid did, then I think ten cents on the dollar is fair. $2500, he can pay for. $25,000? Thats two years of college. Too much in my opinion, particularly since he didn't make the call.
FQ13
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: MikeBjerum on October 30, 2009, 02:08:00 PM
Quote from: crusader rabbit on October 28, 2009, 02:19:02 PM
EPIRBs are wonderful devices when truely needed.  But, just for grins think about this possibility.  What if we posted signs at the entrances to wilderness areas that said something like: 
This is a wilderness area. 
By entering this area you agree you are on your own. 
Rescues will not be attempted. 
In this area your EPIRB is useless. 
Lives of first-responders will not be put at risk if you get into trouble. 
If you do get into trouble, you must self-rescue. 
Have a good day.
Smokey Bear

Now I know that this smacks of some sort of right wing attempt at personal responsibility, but I think it just might encourage people to prepare.  It might make them aware that the big brown bear is not some sort of audio-anima-tronic thing from Disney and that personal actions do have consequences.

Nah.  I'm just dreamin'.......

Up here we would say that it was the tree hugging left wingers getting carried away trying to protect the Boundary Waters.  By the way, this is one area where I part from the general right wing crowd in that I prefer to have a quiet place to go and get away from modern convenience and metro noise over the economic gain of opening the area to snowmobiles and jet skis.  But basically, in our neck of the woods the lefties would let you die rather than save you ... the righties would make a profit off you, and fq would open debate on what is best  ;)
Title: Re: Yuppie 9-1-1
Post by: tombogan03884 on October 30, 2009, 02:20:00 PM
Quote from: fightingquaker13 on October 30, 2009, 01:14:30 PM
This does seem a bit extreme. What bothers me is the shifting of the standard down from "reckless". If you do something that a reasonable, and well informed, person would consider assine, then bill away. If you just made a mistake, and did your best to overcome it, as this kid did, then I think ten cents on the dollar is fair. $2500, he can pay for. $25,000? Thats two years of college. Too much in my opinion, particularly since he didn't make the call.
FQ13

The rescue was initiated because his return was 12 hours overdue, I do not know for sure why he continued UP the mountain, but I presume that he considered the Weather station on the summit the closest place to get help.
Also, contrary to the impression given in the article Mt Washington IS in fact located with in the White Mountain National Forest.
As to the standard, my understanding is that the basis of the LOWER standard is what "a reasonable, and well informed, person " would consider reasonable.