NH , new laws regarding incompetent hikers

[woodsy]

People needing rescue and found negligent need to pay up or lose driver license, possibly other licenses.
More than 1 million has been spent on rescues in the last decade with only $25,000 recouped.
Needless to say, the situation has gotten out of control and costly.

story here

[Pokey2006]

Sure, some of the 911 calls are needless. And there are a lot of unprepared hikers out there. But doing something like this is only going to discourage people from calling for help, even if they really need it.

There has to be a better way.

[jrwiesz]

There has to be a better way.

Leave them out there, survival of the fittest.

All S&R that is "requested" should have a minimum service charge, nation wide.
Require community service time if they are unable to pay.
Jail them if they don't pay, charge them for jail time also.
Funny how persons jailed for failure to pay child support, suddenly find the monies to pay that arrearage.

[warraghiyagey]

If you need to be rescued in NH just tell them your trail name is Woodsy.

[zoidfu]

Leave them out there, survival of the fittest.

All S&R that is "requested" should have a minimum service charge, nation wide.
Require community service time if they are unable to pay.
Jail them if they don't pay, charge them for jail time also.
Funny how persons jailed for failure to pay child support, suddenly find the monies to pay that arrearage.

pfffft Some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

[Pokey2006]

I don't disagree when it comes to truly bogus calls. Calling 911 and saying I'm lost and launching a massive search. But who decides what's bogus and what's legitimate? Where do you draw the line?

My concern is the effect it would have in cases where help is legitimately needed. I'd hate to have someone hesitate to call for help when it's needed just because they're worried about the tougher new laws.

And if you think ALL calls should come with a charge, well, that's like saying people should be charged for calling the fire department when their house is on fire. People do dumb things to set their own houses on fire all the time, most are cases of real negligence and stupidity, and you don't see them being charged for the fire department's services.

[Feral Bill]

Has anyone out there never done anything stupid that could have resulted in a rescue?

[jrwiesz]

And if you think ALL calls should come with a charge, well, that's like saying people should be charged for calling the fire department when their house is on fire.

I was talking about S&R calls.

Citizens that own "real property" in a municipality pay, through assessed property taxes, a fee for such services [fire, police, etc.], should the need arise. If, I never need these services, I am still required to pay for the likelyhood that I may need them.

[zoidfu]

I was talking about S&R calls.

Citizens that own "real property" in a municipality pay, through assessed property taxes, a fee for such services [fire, police, etc.], should the need arise. If, I never need these services, I am still required to pay for the likelyhood that I may need them.

That sounds like the residents of New Hampshire. They pay taxes for a service they may never need. If they don't like it, they're free to leave.

[Pokey2006]

I was talking about S&R calls.

Citizens that own "real property" in a municipality pay, through assessed property taxes, a fee for such services [fire, police, etc.], should the need arise. If, I never need these services, I am still required to pay for the likelyhood that I may need them.

Then maybe the solution is to charge a "hiker tax." Actually, someone on WB has mentioned that before, I guess some places out west do it? I just don't think this "let's get tough" attitude is the right way to approach the issue.

And I don't see how S&R calls are all that different from calling your local police and fire departments for help. Granted, funded in different ways, but still the same basic thing. When someone needs help, they need help. They shouldn't have to worry about how they're going to pay for it.

[celt]

Sure, some of the 911 calls are needless. And there are a lot of unprepared hikers out there. But doing something like this is only going to discourage people from calling for help, even if they really need it.

There has to be a better way.

I think the average person who tends to get in over their heads won't even know the laws have been beefed up.

I hope those who are more informed about rules and regs will take a closer look at their skills before they go out if they don't want to risk a costly rescue.

[jrwiesz]

Then maybe the solution is to charge a "hiker tax." Actually, someone on WB has mentioned that before, I guess some places out west do it? I just don't think this "let's get tough" attitude is the right way to approach the issue.

No, if one pays income tax, funds are allocated out of the federal budget for upkeep of our public lands. So, if I choose to enjoy our public places, I already have paid a "hiker tax", so to speak. That's not to say I don't/won't pay "backcounty" fees where required.

I'm not really saying, "let's get tough". I'm saying, "if you do the crime, pay the dime". We need to get away from the "entitlement" mindset in our society. The, "I got my hoverround, and didn't have to pay a dime", mindset. Somebody had to pay for that hoverround; the taxpayer, with Medicare/Medicaid funds, somebody paid, as they don't give them away for free.
If you were to go to your favorite ski hill, there is a disclaimer on the lift ticket, "skiing is a dangerous sport"..."not responsible for your injuries from your ineptitude". If you were to fall and break your leg, you would have to pay for the ambulance ride and medical bills. Same goes for ineptitude on public areas. You do something stupid, you cannot "expect" society to pay for your blunder. Choices equal consequences. Choose bad, pay up.

And I don't see how S&R calls are all that different from calling your local police and fire departments for help. Granted, funded in different ways, but still the same basic thing. When someone needs help, they need help. They shouldn't have to worry about how they're going to pay for it.

If they want help bad enough, they'll pay for it. Maybe, if this were tried for a while, one might see wiser choices, less "help me I made a stupid choice"..."bail me out, out of the kindness of our nations/states/counties already limited resources".

Rights equal responsibilities.

[mudhead]

That sounds like the residents of New Hampshire. They pay taxes for a service they may never need. If they don't like it, they're free to leave.

Ah, but they really want to build a fence.

It needs to be socially unacceptable to go out at 230PM, then punch 911 because it gets dark.

[woodsy]

Its about money sure but lets not forget the human element.

The $1 million does not include close to 20,000 hours of volunteer work by 13 affiliated search and rescue teams in the state, who work with the department through the New Hampshire Outdoor Council

These selfless volunteers are giving their time and all hours of the day and night and taking risks because of sometimes incompetent adventurers seekers.
I would have to believe that these people are getting pretty put out by some of the calls they are sent out on too... getting out of a warm bed in the middle of the night to go look for someone(s) who is in the mountains with little to no gear except a cell phone.

[Lone Wolf]

I would have to believe that these people are getting pretty put out by some of the calls they are sent out on too... getting out of a warm bed in the middle of the night to go look for someone(s) who is in the mountains with little to no gear except a cell phone.

they shouldn't be in the volunteer business then

[yaduck9]

Then maybe the solution is to charge a "hiker tax." Actually, someone on WB has mentioned that before, I guess some places out west do it? I just don't think this "let's get tough" attitude is the right way to approach the issue.

And I don't see how S&R calls are all that different from calling your local police and fire departments for help. Granted, funded in different ways, but still the same basic thing. When someone needs help, they need help. They shouldn't have to worry about how they're going to pay for it.

A couple of years ago the forest service put out self service kiosks at the more popuar trail heads. You would put your 5 dollars in and you would get a one time pass that you would put on your dash. a ranger would come by and ticket anyone who did not have the permit on the dash.

They are now gone. Don't know the whole story. Usually stayed away from the more popular trail heads and avoided the crowds.

[Two Speed]

True, but there are folks that really shouldn't be in the hiker business, either.

[yaduck9]

I don't disagree when it comes to truly bogus calls. Calling 911 and saying I'm lost and launching a massive search. But who decides what's bogus and what's legitimate? Where do you draw the line?

My concern is the effect it would have in cases where help is legitimately needed. I'd hate to have someone hesitate to call for help when it's needed just because they're worried about the tougher new laws.

And if you think ALL calls should come with a charge, well, that's like saying people should be charged for calling the fire department when their house is on fire. People do dumb things to set their own houses on fire all the time, most are cases of real negligence and stupidity, and you don't see them being charged for the fire department's services.

It would be interesting to determine if most rescues are for out of towners or tourists. Folks who are not fully aware of what they are getting into. Just wondering because those folks bring money into the local economy and a solution could be created based on that. just my 2 pennies.

[woodsy]

they shouldn't be in the volunteer business then

Those that volunteer in the White Mountains area are probably starting to feel that way too.!

[superman]

This issue was hotly debated before making these changes. The problem is that people have come to mistake carrying a cell phone for being prepared. Some folks have raised stupid to an art form. Yes, it is a matter of cost. The number of easily prevented rescues has increased while the cost of each rescue has increased. Something had to be done...NH was forced into this action. I'd like to see a lot more public awareness go with this change. I'd like people to know in advance that “stupid” will cost them. This change does not impact at all on prepared "**** happens" rescues.