Iceaxe
12-27-2006, 11:05 AM
Here is a pretty good article on Search and Rescue. Some pretty good info and thoughts included.
Mount Hood climbers' tragedy raises questions
Safety rules and rescue costs are scrutinized after one man dies, and two go missing
By Sam Howe Verhovek
The Los Angeles Times
SEATTLE - As the dramatic search for three missing climbers on Oregon's highest peak unfolded on national television earlier in December, many questions hung in the air.
Who's paying for all this? Why aren't mountain climbers required to carry emergency locator devices? And what were these men doing on Mount Hood in December?
In the wake of the Oregon case, in which one climber was found dead and the other two are missing and presumed dead, the case for regulations that could avert another tragedy might seem obvious.
But as it turns out, a lot of the ideas offered have been around for a while - and some are vigorously opposed by those who perform the rescue missions.
Take the idea of deterring risky behavior by making those who get lost pay for their rescue or, perhaps, making their families pay for recovery of their bodies. At least five states, including Oregon and California, have ''charge-for-rescue'' laws on the books. But the Mountain Rescue Association, which represents about 100 volunteer groups in the U.S., Canada and Britain, strongly objects to the concept.
''If people believe they are going to be charged, especially a big charge, they're going to be afraid to summon help,'' said Glenn Henderson, the association's California regional chairman and a rescue volunteer in Riverside. ''They're going to try and get themselves out of a jam. They will delay - and that delay can make the difference between life and death.
Henderson added:
Mount Hood climbers' tragedy raises questions
Safety rules and rescue costs are scrutinized after one man dies, and two go missing
By Sam Howe Verhovek
The Los Angeles Times
SEATTLE - As the dramatic search for three missing climbers on Oregon's highest peak unfolded on national television earlier in December, many questions hung in the air.
Who's paying for all this? Why aren't mountain climbers required to carry emergency locator devices? And what were these men doing on Mount Hood in December?
In the wake of the Oregon case, in which one climber was found dead and the other two are missing and presumed dead, the case for regulations that could avert another tragedy might seem obvious.
But as it turns out, a lot of the ideas offered have been around for a while - and some are vigorously opposed by those who perform the rescue missions.
Take the idea of deterring risky behavior by making those who get lost pay for their rescue or, perhaps, making their families pay for recovery of their bodies. At least five states, including Oregon and California, have ''charge-for-rescue'' laws on the books. But the Mountain Rescue Association, which represents about 100 volunteer groups in the U.S., Canada and Britain, strongly objects to the concept.
''If people believe they are going to be charged, especially a big charge, they're going to be afraid to summon help,'' said Glenn Henderson, the association's California regional chairman and a rescue volunteer in Riverside. ''They're going to try and get themselves out of a jam. They will delay - and that delay can make the difference between life and death.
Henderson added: