Search and Rescue / Personal Responsibility: Balance

[mondo joe]

Under Oregon law, Search and Rescue agencies have the authority to charge subjects of search and rescues when "reasonable care" was not used and when "applicable laws were violated" up to a cap of $500 each.

This law:

[annabanana]

1. other. . they should take out SAR insurance.. . n/t

[mondo joe]

2. They SHOULD - or they should be required to?

And in the event that they don't, then what?

[panader0]

3. Here in Arizona there is a "stupid motorist " law that is used when

people drive around barricades to cross flooding arroyos. I think experienced climbers should check the weather before setting out on a trip like that.

[mtnsnake]

4. This subject has long been discussed in the Adirondacks where I hike

and so far there seems to be no easy answer. Each year, there are numerous SAR missions for lost or injured hikers in the mountains. Most of the searching is done by volunteers. The biggest cost is usually the helicopter, if used to evacuate an injured hiker or to look for a lost one. The helicopters often come from military bases, though.

In almost every case where hikers got lost, it was because of something that could've been avoided, such as misjudging time to get to the top and not having a headlamp after getting stuck in the dark. Injuries are different. Shit happens. I really feel for those hikers on Mt Hood no matter what happened, and I know you do, too, from your previous posts. Just tragic.

[TriMetFan]

5. There is nothing wrong with being.......

Responsible Humans for your actions? Like these guys here in Oregon that have put other peoples husbands and wifes in danger because they didn't go rent a 5 dollar beacon, that could have saved their lives.

[jilln]

6. I was wondering about that...

I don't understand the difference between that and GPS technology (if they are different), but why wouldn't all cell phones have this in them? I mean the one guy called but they couldn't pinpoint him from the call apparently... seems like there's no reason for this kind of tragedy anymore. Why don't they build those beacons into climbing gear and scuba gear and anywhere else it might be useful?

[TriMetFan]

7. Lets see if I can answer this.....

I don't think there is a big difference between the Beacon and GPS. May-be with the Beacon the signal is stronger.:shrug: Now with cell phones the ping can bounce from different places. And that is why it is some times hard to find people on MT. Hood. Hell when we are at our friends Condo up on MT. Hood the only way we can use our cell phone is to stand by the window. Now I don't know why they don't build beacons in the climbing/scuba gear. May-be it comes down that people like to take risk with their own lives and don't think ahead about the consequences. But still for 5 buck, the cost of a meal at any hamburger joint, these guys could have rented out a Mountain Climbing Beacon.

May-be some one here that is a Mountain Climbing person can help us out on the difference between the Mountain Climbing Beacon and GPS.

[jilln]

8. I'm sure it comes down to money somehow...

Just seems crazy that if they can do surveillance from space and recognize faces on Earth there should be some reliable solution to THIS problem.

[karlrschneider]

10. A GPS is just a receiver that tells the user his location. The locator beacons are

transmitters (think of a bear wearing a 'radio collar' so it can be located and tracked.) It's just basic radio technology, cheap and readily available. Our airplane (as do nearly all) has a similar device, the ELT (emergency locater transmitter) that automatically activates in case of a crash.

[TriMetFan]

14. Thanks for your help.

Now we know the difference between the 2.

[Trajan]

15. GPS is a multi-channel transceiver

It both transmits AND receives .... It needs to communicate with at least two GPS satellites to be able to obtain a positional fix ... the more satellites, the higher the fidelity of the locational fix ...

Beacons only transmit, and to be located, receivers must 'triangulate' towards the transmission, either through relative power measurements while observing direction, or through real 'triangulation' using two or more receivers ....

To find location of cellphones: the location is based on a mathematical algorithm using the received power measured from the phone to local cell towers .... stronger power readings from one tower would move the cellphone nearer that tower .... the result is an inexact 'possible' location extrapolated from the various tower measurements ... usually given with an error value as a radius ....

The problem here is: no matter WHAT location they had by whatever means they obtained that location: it was impossible to retrieve the climbers because of the conditions on the ground ...

The beacons would NOT have saved their lives .... They would have only aided in recovering the bodies ....

[One_Life_To_Give]

17. Thats why the 406MHz system is better

Takes your current GPS position and includes it in the transmission to the SARSAT. Will give your position accurate within a few hundred meters with typical accuracy much better than that.
General monitoring of the old 121.5MHz system used in most ELT's is slated for discontinuation in a year or 2.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. This is monday morning quarterbacking.

I suspect the little avalanche beacons they rent out to skiers have neither the range nor the battery life of cell phones. The one climb did have a cell phone and it was used to pinpoint his location, the problem was rescuers couldn't get to him. I suspect the other climbers had cell phones as well, but the speculation is that they were swept off a cliff in the winds and the avalanche beacon would have been pointless.

[One_Life_To_Give]

9. $500 is an very low cap.

IIRC a Coast Guard Falcon Jet is $6000/hr to operate. And if you make a false distress call and are caught. You will be charged up to the full amount for each and every resource utilized in the false distress.

The level of deterrence achieved with a $500 penalty is not consistent. The average minimum wage worker will be deterred but what about a Bill Gates and similar.

[karlrschneider]

11. That sounds a little high unless it includes amortization of the purchase price

which isn't generally figured in.

[mondo joe]

13. Because there are a lot of millionaire pranksters?

Really, just wondering.

[One_Life_To_Give]

16. Range of Incomes and degrees of culpability

A Licenced Captain fishing off the eastern seaboard called in a heart attack onboard his vessel. The purpose of which was to divert a Cutter and it's helicopter. Lets say the cost of the diversion was $1500. What do you hink would be fair to charge this individual?

How about a half a million dollar pleasure boat. Broken down and costs $30,000 to find them because they didn't have a $1000 EPIRB on board.

Concider the recent expedition on Mt Hood where the same $1000 EPIRB would have transmitted there position within 50yards?

And of course the kid who wanders off into the woods and gets lost?


I think a court could much better determine what might be an appropriate economic penalty or even if one should be assesed. Rather than just a single cookie cutter approach. In the first case $500 likely have been less than the potential fines that would of been levied from illegal fishing of another vessel had the cutter not been diverted. In the second someone can spend 500k on a toy but not an extra 1k for safety? The third, if BOATUS can have a rental program for EPIRB's I don't see why we can't get something similar setup for the more adventurous climbers.