PDA

View Full Version : What Search and Rescue Costs



Don H
08-12-2012, 07:10
While searching for some information on the two people who went missing last March on the AT at Newfound Gap I came across this article discussing the cost of these two searches. Interesting reading.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2012/apr/06/steep-costs-in-smokies-search/

Derek Leuking and Michael Cocchini have still not been found.

WingedMonkey
08-12-2012, 07:42
Interesting that neither of these two were actual hikers as far as we know. I've tried to do some searches on number of suicides in the GSMNP. Seems to be quite a few. Would take more effort than I'm willing to put into it.

But I would like to know how much of the money spent is looking for people that go to the park to "end it all"

They sure seem to pick an extremely busy place to "disappear"

Spokes
08-12-2012, 09:39
I believe all this "cost of rescue" mindset is the result of the Supreme Court ruling that public safety agencies do not have an obligation to act. Therefore, if you do act, you have the right to charge for your services. Ludicrous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

Oh, and the is no obligation to rescue either:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

moldy
08-12-2012, 09:54
I live in Tennessee, this story is a constant theme these days. The newspapes and politicains beat the drum, howling about tax payers footing the bill for services that "support the general welfare of the people". Is it no small wonder that we have the worst schools in the nation? This is a state that attempts to support itself with a 10% sales tax. This attitude about not paying taxes is so ingrained here that any politician that mentions raising taxes is immediately voted out of office. Heaven forbid that we can get a cop on a Sunday, or pay the teachers a living wage, or form a search party for a lost person.

3_dogs
08-12-2012, 10:03
I used to have a bloodhound. We trained for mantrailing. It was at my expense. Anytime we were called out it was at my expense. It was all at my expense, but it was something I enjoyed. I'm sure the search and rescue crews from the article trained on their own dime too, but it was because they wanted. It their way of giving back to society.

The $70,000 from the article didn't cover the costs the volunteers paid from their own pockets. It did mention cost of food for the search participants, including the volunteers. On larger searches I was on the Red Cross or Salvation Army food truck usually appeared to provide food at their expense. The cost of the search was way more than the $70,000, that was just the portion paid with public funds.

BTW, most people that go into the woods to commit suicide usually choose the highest point around or a place with a pretty view.

kayak karl
08-12-2012, 10:05
I believe all this "cost of rescue" mindset is the result of the Supreme Court ruling that public safety agencies do not have an obligation to act. Therefore, if you do act, you have the right to charge for your services. Ludicrous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

Oh, and the is no obligation to rescue either:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

doesn't your links have to do with being sued? they both seem to deal with domestic violence.
does a fire company now have a right to stand there and say "if you want water on it, sign this contract for payment"?

,but getting back to the AT. does anyone of an actual case where someone WAS charged for rescue on the trail?

Another Kevin
08-12-2012, 22:17
but getting back to the AT. does anyone of an actual case where someone WAS charged for rescue on the trail?

New Hampshire has done it, or at least presented the bill. (http://www.backpacker.com/eagle_scout_fine_rescue/blogs/1177) (The kid got off with a $1000 donation and community service - plus the state reserves the right to bring suit again once he comes of age!)

And it's not an isolated incident. They did it again this past winter. (http://www.conwaydailysun.com/index.php/newsx/local-news/89430-rescuebill-041312)

And again just a few weeks ago (http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120702/NEWS07/707039895), from an incident last fall where a guy tried to bushwhack around a closed section of trail and was found negligent for not simply returning the way he came. Make sure you never stray from the trail in New Hampshire, guys!

And this climate of "make sure that all government functions are offered on a fee for service basis" has led to a number of incidents (http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/Refusing%20SAR%20Help.pdf) in which the survivors have gotten into altercations with rescuers, hidden out from rescuers, or lied about their companions' need for help, for fear of the costs - and to delay calling in the cavalry until conditions worsen, greatly complicating the search.

But I suppose that we won't encourages people to be responsible for their actions unless we confront survivors with financial ruin. It's a hard-hearted world.

Spokes
08-12-2012, 22:32
doesn't your links have to do with being sued? they both seem to deal with domestic violence.
......

No. There is no "duty to rescue" even though some states have amended the common law provision (along the AT Vermont and Massachusetts have new laws but back it up little) and there are caveats to boot.

See here:

http://lawandthemultiverse.com/2012/04/02/superheroes-and-the-duty-to-rescue/

I still contend this moron mindset is the cause of the "pay for rescue" mentality.

Bronk
08-13-2012, 00:24
doesn't your links have to do with being sued? they both seem to deal with domestic violence.
does a fire company now have a right to stand there and say "if you want water on it, sign this contract for payment"?

,but getting back to the AT. does anyone of an actual case where someone WAS charged for rescue on the trail?

There have been cases in the media within the last year or so of fire departments standing by while homes burn. One case I remember is where people lived in a township outside the city limits and the city fire department sold annual memberships to people outside the city where there was no fire coverage...everybody got a letter in the mail every year telling them if they didn't buy a membership then the fire dept would not respond in the event of a fire unless someone's life was in danger. The fire department responded when the fire was reported but after determining nobody was in the structure they stood by and watched the home burn. They remained on the scene to put the fire out in case it spread to neighboring homes that had paid the membership fee.

Regarding SAR costs, most of the cost is probably born by volunteers whose costs are not formally reported. You're talking not only their time, transportation and food costs but also the cost of their training, which again includes time, transportation and food cost above and beyond the price tag on the course they take.

Bronk
08-13-2012, 00:30
In Missouri under state law a volunteer fire department can bill homeowners up to $500 per hour for fighting a fire unless they have paid an annual membership fee to the department (usually $50 or something similar). However if you live in a fire district where property taxes are collected to support the fire department they are not permitted to bill this hourly fee. Some rural areas with poorly funded volunteer departments thought that the taxing authority of a fire district would solve their financial problems, but they found that once people began receiving a tax bill they stopped donating the membership fee every year and the department ended up with less money than they had to begin with because the taxes were far less than $50 a year.

fredmugs
08-13-2012, 10:12
I live in Tennessee, this story is a constant theme these days. The newspapes and politicains beat the drum, howling about tax payers footing the bill for services that "support the general welfare of the people". Is it no small wonder that we have the worst schools in the nation? This is a state that attempts to support itself with a 10% sales tax. This attitude about not paying taxes is so ingrained here that any politician that mentions raising taxes is immediately voted out of office. Heaven forbid that we can get a cop on a Sunday, or pay the teachers a living wage, or form a search party for a lost person.

Tennessee has the eleventh lowest per capita income in the country. Residents of the state pay just $1,851 in taxes, the second lowest amount in the U.S. The state's business climate is average, but other taxes are relatively low. The sales tax of 7% is one of the highest in the country, but food purchases are exempt from all but 1.5% of that. Dividend and interest income is taxed in the state at a rate of 6%, but there is no other personal income tax levied. Tennessee collects no state-level property tax, one of just a few to do so.

4th lowest tax burden = you don't get what you don't pay for. Your schools cannot be worse than Mississippi.

AggieAl
08-15-2012, 19:18
In most parts of the US Search and Rescue is done by volunteers. National Parks do have professionals. When you read about wilderness search and rescue teams, those are almost always volunteers.

In New Mexico we come under the State Police, but pay all of our expenses and provide our own gear. Our team meets or trains twice a month.We keep full packs ready to go with one hour notice. We get little or no government support, just like the clubs that maintain the AT trails. We do it for fun and to give back to the hiking community.

There is no charge. If you start charging people will wait until they are in really deep trouble, which just makes it more dangerous for everyone.

It is better to have a false alarm than a dead person.

Due to forest fires in southern New Mexico it has been very slow this summer, so come out and get lost. We need the practice. Weekends are best.

Marta
08-15-2012, 21:16
There's just been a huge S&R effort on Glacier NP to find a kid who left on a very risky off trail hike from Logan Pass to Avalanche Lake. A couple of the rangers who were involved in the search said it was very dangerous for the searchers. The boy (aged 19) left without leaving an exact route plan, etc. so the search are was huge. An awful lot of the cost must be borne by the Park Service.

Snowleopard
08-16-2012, 15:32
In most parts of the US Search and Rescue is done by volunteers. National Parks do have professionals. When you read about wilderness search and rescue teams, those are almost always volunteers.
There is no charge. If you start charging people will wait until they are in really deep trouble, which just makes it more dangerous for everyone.

It is better to have a false alarm than a dead person.

Due to forest fires in southern New Mexico it has been very slow this summer, so come out and get lost. We need the practice. Weekends are best.
Volunteer SAR is also the case in New England and upstate NY. You have my gratitude even though I haven't needed rescue, yet. From reading reports of rescues in upstate NY, a lot of the rescues are confused elderly people just wandering off or elderly hunters getting lost or having a health emergency in the woods.

Reading reader comments in the NH papers when there's a search or rescue, I'm always shocked by how vicious some of these readers are. I'd like to think that if I get confused and lost when I get old, the half century of taxes I've paid would cover the government expenses of finding me.

Home owner insurance goes up when you don't have good fire fighting capabilities; some companies charge by the distance from the nearest fire station. It doesn't take much of an increase in insurance prices to cover the tax cost of paying for your fire department.