Two Snowboarders stuck on Rainier
 

Snowboarders forced to spend another night on Mount Rainier | KING5.com Seattle

And if you're members of this forum, expect a rash of shit giving once you get out.

Hopefully it was just a cold night and they'll get out today. If they are just a half mile from rescuers and the weather cooperates, it should be an easy evac.

Well it's not Snowolf so the level of shit talking I was about to do just went seriously down.

Do you guys in the US slap people who get lost with rescue costs? It happens so much around Vancouver with the local mountains that the idea has been tossed around.


Personally i love the idea.

It is talked about, but everyone I know who is in search and rescue is against it. Basically because some people will then be afraid to call for help and will needlessly die or suffer because of it. There are programs in several states that you can buy into for a minimal cost to offset S&R costs. In Colorado, you can by the SAR Card. $3 for a year or $12 for five years. If you are involved in a S&R situation, by buying the card you are covered. The S&R Group(s) who come to your rescue will be reimbursed through a general fund. This card is also part of Hunting and Fishing License fees, so those people are covered too. The other benefit is, if you buy one, you don't have to carry it. You're registered in a database that can verify you paid for it.

That said, some idiots who were just plain reckless have been charged with costs because they didn't have the card and they were stupid.

I don't think this is necessarily the case with these guys, though I would have thought they would be able to get down under their own power.

I get that logic, but on the other hand SOMEONE has to pay for the search and rescue. Either its tax payers who were not involved in the risky behavior, or the person who made the choice to take the risk. I get that there is a theory some people wouldn't call because they dont want to pay, so some type of insurance like you pointed out would be great. If they waive the insurance, and waive the call for help in hopes not to pay yet still do something which is universally known as risky and suffer or die...well thats Darwinism or (for you religious guys its gods will) that they suffer or die. :dunno:

In terms of taxes these people cost about 1% , compared to the people on welfare that think they need smart phones and BMWs provided by the tax payer.

Not sure about BC, but in AB you can get charged with fees if you are not in a National/Prov park.

when i looked at hiring a guide last year in europe there was mandatory insurance purchase for rescue.

There is also the point that a lot of stuff people are doing is not considered risky until it becomes that. Going for a hike in the woods, twist, break and ankle, that sort of thing. These guys being on Paradise on Rainier is definitely not out of the ordinary.

Other people yeah, they do really stupid stuff. Going for long hard hikes without food, water, or proper gear, that sort of thing.

I know it's hard when you see so many that are just oblivious to the situation they are in until it hits the fan. I hate that person too. Deciding who is going to pay and not going to pay for their rescue is a slippery slope. One could argue, just by going out there, you are engaged in stupid reckless behavior and that you shouldn't be there. That doesn't really work for me either. Backcountry wilderness is there to be enjoyed in all seasons. Otherwise the only logical thing to do is stay locked up in your house.

All said and done, I like the SAR Card program and more areas should use that model. Tacking it on to Hunting and fishing license alone would be a huge boost for S&R costs. H&F is big business.

re: recovering rescue costs

I had some vague recollection that Vermont bills people for rescue, so I did a minute's searching and found some stuff that said they do have the authority to bill for rescues but maybe do or do not actually do it, depending.