Wayne County Rescue Fees

[Davewyo]

The Wayne County Sheriff asked Penny and I to spread the word that fees for rescues have been instituted in Wayne County, Utah.

The base fee for a "call out" has been established at $500, with extras added according to the resources needed (ie. helicopters, etc.).

He explained that Wayne County's tax base does not provide for the increase in Search and Rescue costs which are being experienced lately(since 127 Hrs.), and that individual SAR volunteers have expended all the personal funds they can.

In previous conversations with SAR volunteers, Penny and I are under the impression that three rescue/search incidents were carried out earlier this year, and that those efforts consumed the budget which had been put aside for such operations.

Dave

[oldno7]

Sounds to me like they should bill Aron Ralston:twisted:

[stefan]

Sounds to me like they should bill Aron Ralston:twisted:

you're not into the personal responsibility thing?

[mdd]

The general consensus in SAR circles is that charging is a bad idea because it can complicate rescues, which then costs SAR even more, and potentially makes the situation more dangerous. They started charging in Clear Creek Canyon near Golden, CO a while back, someone was charged who then went to the press, and the sh!tstorm was so bad Golden relented. The National Assoc for SAR, Mountain Rescue Assoc, and many local and state SAR groups are opposed to charging, and for good reason. Here are some examples why (pdf file):

http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/Refusing%20SAR%20Help.pdf

I hope Wayne County reconsiders. Or I hope they are at least braced for the bad publicity that will come the first time they charge someone and the media catches wind, as happened in Clear Creek.

M

[qedcook]

I think it's a great idea. $500 is a small price to pay for such quality SAR. Tickets in Zion are worse than that! :haha: Why should the Wayne County citizens have to pay all the expenses for a costly rescue? It's not like SAR is something hikers should be entitled to when they're hiking on farmland. It's a service, not a right.

[stefan]

The general consensus in SAR circles is that charging is a bad idea because it can complicate rescues, which then costs SAR even more, and potentially makes the situation more dangerous. They started charging in Clear Creek Canyon near Golden, CO a while back, someone was charged who then went to the press, and the sh!tstorm was so bad Golden relented. The National Assoc for SAR, Mountain Rescue Assoc, and many local and state SAR groups are opposed to charging, and for good reason. Here are some examples why (pdf file):

http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/Refusing%20SAR%20Help.pdf

I hope Wayne County reconsiders. Or I hope they are at least braced for the bad publicity that will come the first time they charge someone and the media catches wind, as happened in Clear Creek.

M


thanks for posting this, mike. something to think about to be sure

[stefan]

Why should the Wayne County citizens have to pay all the expenses for a costly rescue?

i can't say i know how SAR (wanye county or elsewhere) is specifically funded, but how do you know it doesn't include funding from the state of utah? or whether any of it comes from federal dollars?

anyone know where the money comes from? and did they cut back this year?

i always liked the idea of donations to SAR

[JP]

It seems to be the trend, the cost of doing business is getting higher. Obviously when they came out with their budget for the year, it was sold short. In all budgets, some areas get very little attention and receive very little within a county. They're deemed not as important, as say education. The only way to get more, is to have well, more rescues. This way when they hit the negotiating table for the next budget year, they can say we had an increase in rescues that drained the previous years budget by, whatever percent. There are still funds they can pull from, like the general fund, administers don't seem to like that much. So, they're kind of forced to start charging for service. Sort of like a volunteer ambulance service. Nowadays, if you need more than basic care on the way to the hospital and they call in paramedics, well, it's going to cost you. When in years past, volunteer services were free. Now, the patient can decline that extra care. Sometimes it works, sometimes it leads to death. Who knows, the family that has a person needing rescue may decline the part of the help that will cost money and the outcomes maybe very different.

[Iceaxe]

Here are some examples why (pdf file):

http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/Refusing%20SAR%20Help.pdf



Interesting read. Thanks for posting that. :2thumbs:

[UtahAdventureGuide]

They should institute this policy state wide. I'm sure the cost of the resent rescue in The Subway was in the range of $250,000.00 (Every time I take my black hawk helicopter for a spin it costs a fortune). If those involved would fork over about $50k a piece we could probably get The Subway reopened.

[mdd]

Colorado has a program called CORSAR. It is a SAR fund that counties and SAR groups can use to get reimbursement for SAR operations. It is funded by recreationalists buying CORSAR cards, and also from hunting, fishing, boating licenses, etc.

Details are at (pdf):

http://coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/CORSAR%20Card%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

Does Utah have something similar?

M

PS, if you explore canyons or hike or whatever in Colorado, please purchase a CORSAR card, you get them at just about any outdoor and sporting store.

[ilipichicuma]

They should institute this policy state wide. I'm sure the cost of the resent rescue in The Subway was in the range of $250,000.00 (Every time I take my black hawk helicopter for a spin it costs a fortune). If those involved would fork over about $50k a piece we could probably get The Subway reopened.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of that idea. Those helicopters were partially looking for me and my group, and we weren't lost, we were helping the other people get out!

[darkmatter]

Seems a reasonable policy, to me.

Does anyone know how the Colorado system is working out? A portion of fishing and hunting license fees goes to a SAR cost reimbursement fund. There is also a voluntary CORSAR card one can purchase to contribute to the fund.

[Spidey]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of that idea. Those helicopters were partially looking for me and my group, and we weren't lost, we were helping the other people get out!

In the report it didn't sound like anyone was lost, just stuck. Without the Fabled Canyon man who's to say they wouldn't have been looking for you guys as well.:ne_nau:

I have absolutely no problem with Wayne county charging for rescues, or anywhere else for that matter. Might and I emphasize might get people to think a little harder about whether or not they are qualified or capable of doing what they are about to jump into.

[Deathcricket]

Pay $500 or wait for canyonman to show up? Tough choice! :haha:

[accadacca]

Pay $500 or wait for canyonman to show up? Tough choice! :haha:
:lol8:

[UtahAdventureGuide]

Colorado has a program called CORSAR. It is a SAR fund that counties and SAR groups can use to get reimbursement for SAR operations. It is funded by recreationalists buying CORSAR cards, and also from hunting, fishing, boating licenses, etc.

I purchased rescue insurance with my SPOT. I think it was about $10.00 for an entire year.

[Brian in SLC]

Sillyness.

I don't think most folks will even know there's a fee for SAR services. Or care. Its no deterrent.

If they're going to charge, how much say will the public have in the services provided? Say, I don't want to pony up for a helicopter when the back of my friend's truck will do fine for transport to the hospital. Problem seems to be, once they take over a situation, then, you get no say. And, you can't have friends come help, either.

Sticky situation at best.

Thought there was a federal pool of money these folks tap into? Maybe the volunteer folks have been stretched to the limit? Got to be a local burden.

A situation best viewed from afar, methinks...

[ratagonia]

Sillyness.

I don't think most folks will even know there's a fee for SAR services. Or care. Its no deterrent.

If they're going to charge, how much say will the public have in the services provided? Say, I don't want to pony up for a helicopter when the back of my friend's truck will do fine for transport to the hospital. Problem seems to be, once they take over a situation, then, you get no say. And, you can't have friends come help, either.

Sticky situation at best.

Thought there was a federal pool of money these folks tap into? Maybe the volunteer folks have been stretched to the limit? Got to be a local burden.

A situation best viewed from afar, methinks...

Seems like there was a STATE of UTAH fund, but it probably was defunded.

Tom

[restrac2000]

We can't blame Wayne County. They have a small tax base and historically received a small portion of the state monies for this issue. The State does have a fund but its allocated to higher populated regions or those with more rescues. Its not like the money allocated is large or in proportion to costs. As canyoneers we don't pay into the fund anways. Most of it comes from motorized equipment sales.

Seems we need to come up with a way of funding these programs that is better. They need money to operate (beyond helicopters). Gas cost alone for driving out to a rescue for 4-6 cars roundtrip alone must cost in the hundreds. That can often be out of pocket.

Historically the solution is taxing the gear used for the sport. Its a tradition that goes back to fishing and conservation (Pittman-Robertson Act). Might be time to institute something similar on technical equipment.

Phillip

[restrac2000]

Seems like there was a STATE of UTAH fund, but it probably was defunded.

Tom

I don't think it can be defunded; its a specialty tax collection on equipment. I guess they could have eliminated the tax. But even Grand County, with its plethora of rescues, only got about $30k last year. Thats not much money dispersed per rescue. The state only collected $274k total. Painfully low to support SAR statewide.

http://publicsafety.utah.gov/homelandsecurity/documents/2010SearchandRescueAnnualReport.pdf

Phillip

[restrac2000]

One last thought...

Billing afterwards seems to be a desperate measure. Most folks, including myself, can't afford the bill afterwards. My total for the entire rescue was over $20k since I didn't have insurance; that involved a lot of volunteer help from the company I was working for and no helicopter. I was only able to pay a partial amount to the various agencies involved (hospital, SAR, ambulance). This non-payment seems to put a HUGE burden on the agencies involved. But some of us simply never can pay that amount in a short time (I have a ethical IOU to GCSAR whenever I finally make enough money). In fact, such debt is one of the most common reasons for bankruptcy in the US.

Now, if the greater contribution was upfront for gear, annuals passes, etc that would diffuse the burden on the agencies and individuals. Many folks would never need the services which I suppose is unfair to them. But that said, we all benefit when viable SAR infrastructure is in place and well funded.

But I will also be honest.....it seems a tad unfair when we can pinpoint a specific event, like the production of "127 Hours", to a rise in SARs. Anybody know how to contact the production company to pressure them for a donation of their movie profits. Seems like it would be a fair request. Not holding my breathe though (I have strong opinions about the lack of responsibility he shows to the issues he profits from).

Phillip

[Iceaxe]

I'm against charging for SAR... we already pay for it through our taxes...

NOW... if we start charging for every time the fire department is called out to rescue a cat, every time some fat asshat fondles me while checking in at the airport, every time the police department is called out to break up a party, every time the IRS sends someone out to audit my business, every time the coast guard pulls a boat in..... I'll be happy to change my opinion.

Singling out one specific user group is a slippery slope to start down...

[restrac2000]

I'm against charging for SAR... we already pay for it through our taxes...

NOW... if we start charging for every time the fire department is called out to rescue a cat, every time some fat asshat fondles me while checking in at the airport, every time the police department is called out to break up a party, every time the IRS sends someone out to audit my business, every time the coast guard pulls a boat in..... I'll happy change my opinion.

Singling out one specific user group is a slippery slope to start down...

I agree in principle. :nod: But people do pay for those services in a dispersed manner through appropriate tax rates. On the other hand....

SAR is historically and chronically underfunded. Police and Fire rarely run out of funds during the year. They never require firemen to pay for the gas in the truck or use their own trucks.

I actually think motorized equipment users as subsidizing SAR rescues in general right now. I don't think most non-motorized recreators pay much if anything. Also, you pay local taxes for fire and police only if you live there (i.e. they protect your property with your tax dollars).

The nature of SAR crosses traditional tax boundaries. They rescue you without your tax state dollars no matter where you are from.

Complicated issue.

Phillip

[Iceaxe]

The nature of SAR crosses traditional tax boundaries. They rescue you without your tax state dollars no matter where you are from.

Its not complicated at all and I find your reasoning faulty.... if I get in a car accident out of state the police still show up, the fire department still shows up, the EMT still shows up. So what's the difference?

That SAR is underfunded I don't disagree with. Maybe its time to reallocate some funds. I mean really, there is no way in hell I'll ever ride a bus, so why does part of my tax money go to support UTA? I have two kids, so why does a family of four get a bigger tax break than me, yet they put a much large burden on the system. I could go on and on with similar examples, but I think you get the picture.

[restrac2000]

Its not complicated at all and I find your reasoning faulty.... if I get in a car accident out of state the police still show up, the fire department still shows up, the EMT still shows up. So what's the difference?

Fair enough. I think some of traditional costs are filtered through the vast numbers of incidents. There are far more rescues the police and fire respond to then SAR. Costs are diffused. Not the case in SAR. The situation is boiled down to a different group of stakeholders and the costs are exponentially higher in most cases.


That SAR is underfunded I don't disagree with. Maybe its time to reallocate some funds. I mean really, there is no way in hell I'll ever ride a bus, so why does part of my tax money go to support UTA? I have two kids, so why does a family of four get a bigger tax break than me, yet they put a much large burden on the system. I could go on and on with similar examples, but I think you get the picture.

Totally get the picture. I would gladly donate my federal portion of taxes used for 3 wars to SAR instead :angryfire: but we don't have that choice. Way it works.

Something needs to change. Hope they get some better educated and invested folks then myself. I only have limited information and have to base ideas (more brainstorming then fixations) off of that. Whatever the case, Wayne county seems on the financial short-end of the stick right now which doesn't seem appropriate. But billing folks won't solve that problem if history proves itself.

Thanks for playing along. :popcorn:

Phillip

[ratagonia]

Fair enough. I think some of traditional costs are filtered through the vast numbers of incidents. There are far more rescues the police and fire respond to then SAR. Costs are diffused. Not the case in SAR. The situation is boiled down to a different group of stakeholders and the costs are exponentially higher in most cases.


Wayne County SAR: they don't mind rescuing lost hunters and snowmobilers, and their buddies, since many of these are Wayne County residents.

The do mind doing canyon rescues and body recoveries, for stuff none of them do or understand, and who are from out-of-county almost entirely. Plus, it is only because the county lines were drawn a long time ago that part of the Roost is in their jurisdiction.

Luck of the draw.

Tom

[Iceaxe]

OK, I just recieved this update from Wayne County SAR and here is the deal as of right now... there is some talk of reimbursement of funds. The budget for search and rescue provided by Wayne County is $4,000 per year. The highway patrol helicopter is provided to SAR when available but Wayne County is required to buy the fuel.

Most of Wayne Counties SAR support comes from a demolition derby fund raiser held during the County Fair. The county commissioners have chosen to take this away from SAR this year, and are planning a concert instead.

A SAR costs the individual team members $200 to $300 each personally. As calls become more frequent this becomes more burdensome upon the members.

This is basically the problem SAR members currently face. No decision has been made at this point about charging for rescues. The talk at this time seems to be reimbursement for fuel, especially for the helicopter.

The big fear at the moment is someone will hesitate to call for help because they might be charged.

I've been promised an update when one is available.

[stefan]

:eek2:

[restrac2000]

The data in the report I previously attached doesn't support conclusion about residence. From 1998-2010, only 18 of a total of 141 rescues where for in-county residents. The vast majority of rescues statewide were are for non-county residents. This is a huge burden on them. Especially since SAR teams must apply for funding after a rescue happens.

Also, the motorized crowds are the ones who pay for SAR monies. From the report:

"House Bill 32, creating the Search and Rescue Financial Assistance Program (SAR). The Act, relating to public safety, imposes a Search and Rescue surcharge or fee to off- highway registered or renewed vehicles, registered or renewed motorboats and sailboats, and annual wildlife habitat authorizations."

This shouldn't effect prioritizing rescues, and I have never seen evidence of such bias. But I can see how it might create some bias in the personal opinions of SAR teams.

Phillip



Wayne County SAR: they don't mind rescuing lost hunters and snowmobilers, and their buddies, since many of these are Wayne County residents.

The do mind doing canyon rescues and body recoveries, for stuff none of them do or understand, and who are from out-of-county almost entirely. Plus, it is only because the county lines were drawn a long time ago that part of the Roost is in their jurisdiction.

Luck of the draw.

Tom

[restrac2000]

I've been promised an update when one is available.

Thanks, Shane.

[moabmatt]

When I was on Grand County SAR we billed rescuees, though paying the bill was voluntary.

It does seem a slippery slope to require payment, especially considering that Wayne County's SAR services are provided by volunteers who aren't required to respond to all call-outs. If a rescuee is expected to pay a certain fee for a rescue, they are likely to expect a certain duty of care. Which, and how many, volunteers are able to respond to any given incident may affect whether that expected duty of care is actually provided. This could lead to some uncomfortable legal situations down the road.

I've heard that some parks bill, or at least have toyed with the idea of billing, rescuees if it's determined that the cause of their situation was a result of carelessness (for example, starting up a multi-day big wall climb with a nasty weather forecast with no storm gear - and the rescue was required because of the lack of storm gear and not some other unrelated accident). I'm not sure how carelessness is determined in these cases, but the general concept sounds good to me. However, I could see this getting sticky, too. With regards to Wayne, the accident in No Man's is a good example. Does Wayne bill the stranded partner or do they try and bill the relatives of the deceased?

[ratagonia]

When I was on Grand County SAR we billed rescuees, though paying the bill was voluntary.

It does seem a slippery slope to require payment, especially considering that Wayne County's SAR services are provided by volunteers who aren't required to respond to all call-outs. If a rescuee is expected to pay a certain fee for a rescue, they are likely to expect a certain duty of care. Which, and how many, volunteers are able to respond to any given incident may affect whether that expected duty of care is actually provided. This could lead to some uncomfortable legal situations down the road.

I've heard that some parks bill, or at least have toyed with the idea of billing, rescuees if it's determined that the cause of their situation was a result of carelessness (for example, starting up a multi-day big wall climb with a nasty weather forecast with no storm gear - and the rescue was required because of the lack of storm gear and not some other unrelated accident). I'm not sure how carelessness is determined in these cases, but the general concept sounds good to me. However, I could see this getting sticky, too. With regards to Wayne, the accident in No Man's is a good example. Does Wayne bill the stranded partner or do they try and bill the relatives of the deceased?

Zion NP can bill people if they were illegal. If they do something foolish, they can be cited for "creating a dangerous situation". That would be a ticket that goes before the Magistrate in St George. People could also be cited for canyoneering without a permit. Citation = the rescue is billable. The NPS has a history of not trying to collect too hard. However, if people died on the rescue, they might be more aggressive.

The same applies in some counties.

For those who do not canyoneer with helmets, that would be "creating a dangerous situation". People going into the Subway with high water flow with little to no skills and without full wetsuits and drysuits? "Creating a dangerous situation". Giving lip to the ranger who is just trying to make sure all these people from Mapleton are not one group??? Heck, I'd call that "Reckless Endangerment".

Tom :moses:

[Scott Card]

Giving lip to the ranger who is just trying to make sure all these people from Mapleton are not one group??? Heck, I'd call that "Reckless Endangerment".

Tom :moses:
:roflol: Wait, I am still mad about that..... (Maybe that is why I am on the black list and can't seem to "win" the Zion lottery. )

[mdd]

Also, the motorized crowds are the ones who pay for SAR monies. From the report:

"House Bill 32, creating the Search and Rescue Financial Assistance Program (SAR). The Act, relating to public safety, imposes a Search and Rescue surcharge or fee to off- highway registered or renewed vehicles, registered or renewed motorboats and sailboats, and annual wildlife habitat authorizations."


Just for clarification and to answer my previous question... this is how the SAR Financial Assistance Program in UT is currently funded:

50 cent fee on motorboat and sailboat registration/renewal
25 cent fee on fishing, hunting or combo license
50 cent fee on OHV registration/renewal

It looks like Utah tried to pass a bill last year creating a Utah version of Colorado's CORSAR card (where hikers/climbers/others could buy a card, and the money raised would go into the SAR fund), but it was rejected so that they could resolve some "fiscal issues" with the bill. In the end they just cleaned up the language in the original bill creating the fund. I guess it didn't come up again in 2011, so still no UT version of the CORSAR card, and I would assume it's probably not a priority.

Interesting to note that Wayne County was reimbursed from the fund all of $34.69 in 2010 for 3 SAR operations, by far the lowest of counties reporting SAR operations that year. Rich County, with just 1 SAR, got over $200. Why is Wayne County not getting more?

M

[restrac2000]

Where did you find the specific funding data? Been looking for information all day.

I do know they have to apply for funds after every rescue. They have to justify it on a 2-3 page form. Wonder if they already have the infrastructure in place. If you also look at the funding charts you realize the largest percentage of funding goes to equipment not the rescue itself.

Wayne County doesn't have a SAR site like some. I bet that will change in a few years if rescues keep up.

Phillip

[restrac2000]

The following may help, its from the website (http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r704/r704-001.htm):


R704-1-7. Formula for Determining Adjusted Reimbursable Expenses.
(1) For the purpose of determining a fair and equitable distribution of monies available in the fund, on its first review of applications, the board shall adjust the amount of equitable expenses each county will be awarded by applying the following point system formula:

(a) to award full payment of a county's reimbursable expenses, the county would have to achieve all of the 100 percentage points possible. The formula is based on the criteria set forth in Subsection 53-2-107(7)(c). By applying this formula, the board shall determine adjusted reimbursable expenses by calculating a percentage point value for each county, and shall then award each county that percent of their reimbursable expenses up to the reimbursement cap set under Section R704-1-6. In calculating the percentage, the following point totals are possible:

(i) each county which submits its application packages on time shall receive 25 points;

(ii) there shall be a possible 25 points based on the number of SAR incidents occurring per county population;

(iii) there shall be a possible 25 points based on the percentage of victims residing outside of the subject county; and

(iv) there shall be a possible 25 points based on the number of volunteer hours spent in each county in emergency response and SAR related activities per county population.

(b) The following ratios shall determine the points awarded based on the number of SAR incidents occurring per county population:

(i) 5 points if the ratio is greater than 1:1000 but less than 1:750;

(ii) 10 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:750 but less than 1:500;

(iii) 15 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:500 but less than 1:250;

(iv) 20 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:250 but less than 1:100;

(v) 25 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:100.

(c) The following ratios shall determine the points awarded based on the percentage of victims residing outside of the subject county:

(i) 5 points if up to 20% of the victims are from outside the county;

(ii) 10 points if between 20% and 40% of the victims are from outside the county;

(iii) 15 points if between 40% and 60% of the victims are from outside the county;

(iv) 20 points if between 60% and 80% of the victims are from outside the county;

(v) 25 points if more than 80% of the victims are from outside the county.

(d) The following ratios will determine the points awarded based on the number of volunteer hours spent in each county in emergency response and SAR related activities per county population:

(i) 5 points if the ratio is greater than 1:100 but less than 1:50;

(ii) 10 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:50 but less than 1:25;

(iii) 15 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:25 but less than 1:10;

(iv) 20 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:10 but less than 1:5;

(v) 25 points if the ratio is equal to or greater than 1:5.

(e) The total awarded points shall be multiplied by the reimbursable expenses to determine the adjusted reimbursable expenses for each county. For example, if the board awarded 85 points to Wasatch County, the $40,000 in reimbursable expenses would be adjusted to $34,000 ($40,000 x .85). Since the cap is $7,724.14, Wasatch County would be entitled to only that amount on first review. However, on second review it could receive some or all of the remaining $32,275.86."


Get that :naughty:

[Scott Card]

Alright, enough fun for one day. I'll be serious for just a second. Funding is an interesting question. I am now starting to lean toward a Colorado type card in addition to the small fee additions to hunting, fishing...etc permits. I wish there was a way to target more closely those who are wilderness stupid. Perhaps a tax or a criminal fine on people wearing Hawaiian shirts in the wild or wearing a tablecloth in Zion. I don't know....

What about a donation pole like they have at campgrounds where you self-pay? Put a few up at trail heads? Could bring in a couple of thousand dollars but of course it would probably take a million federal dollars to do environmental impact studies to find the right "earthy" location for the pole, to engineer the pole and to then plant the pole in the ground. Bottom line, there is not an easy solution to funding given the fact that most in SLC or Washington D.C. don't ever really think about this stuff or care about it for that matter. Heck, they have volunteers doing the "heavy lifting" when it comes to rescues.

[mdd]

Where did you find the specific funding data? Been looking for information all day.

Utah Code:

Section 53-2-107, which creates the fund:

(3) (a) The program shall be funded from the following revenue sources:
(i) any voluntary contributions to the state received for search and rescue operations;
(ii) money received by the state under Section 23-19-42, Section 41-22-34, and Section 73-18-24; and
(iii) appropriations made to the program by the Legislature.

Those three sections mentioned in (ii) spell out the specific fees. You can search for the specific sections via http://le.utah.gov/UtahCode/title.jsp.

M

[mdd]

And just for comparison, in 2010 Colorado's SAR fund revenue was $455,149. 84% of that came from hunting/fishing/boat/OHV licenses and registrations (basically the same as how Utah's is currently funded), 15% came from the voluntary CORSAR card ($62,601 in 2010, an increase over 2009), and 1% from interest earned.

M

[stefan]

Perhaps a tax or a criminal fine on people wearing Hawaiian shirts in the wild or wearing a tablecloth in Zion.

wait ... did you really just single out AJ?!? :twisted: (i like this emoticon now, kurt, thanks)

[JP]

The big fear at the moment is someone will hesitate to call for help because they might be charged.
That fear is a reality, I have seen that first hand. :nod:

[Scopulus]

How to pay for it? Easy... Wayne County needs to get rid of this guy. I haven't been impressed with his work ethics. Always just sittin' around doin' nothin'.:haha:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_YUay7Dr_zcI/TctSqbprrGI/AAAAAAAAGnQ/yzoQC4b-p0g/s640/sheriff-fake.jpg

[spinesnaper]

I purchased rescue insurance with my SPOT. I think it was about $10.00 for an entire year.

Hmmm this might be a good reason to use a spot. I personally carry a McMurdo Fastfind 210 PLB with GPS. The reality is that when you fire off one of these babies, (provided you connect to the satellite) it does't take 50 men two days to find you. (That's what you'll be telling yourself waiting for rescue anyway:lol8:).

Avoiding rescue--priceless. I am looking forward to the field video of the injured outdoorsman telling SAR: "Hey, come on bro, please don't rescue me."

Ken

[JP]

:haha:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v654/Zukimog/a1627eba.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v654/Zukimog/Super-Troopers-mf03.jpg

[Scott P]

Does anyone know where you can donate to SAR's for the counties in SE Utah, for example? If we go canyoneering there, I wouldn't mind donating something on occasions (gear or money).

Would it be possible to set up some kind of donation funds activities for the counties?


Wayne County SAR: they don't mind rescuing lost hunters and snowmobilers, and their buddies, since many of these are Wayne County residents.

The do mind doing canyon rescues and body recoveries, for stuff none of them do or understand, and who are from out-of-county almost entirely. Plus, it is only because the county lines were drawn a long time ago that part of the Roost is in their jurisdiction.

If canyoneers were donating to SAR, do you think it would make a difference with the above?

We (canyoneers) all spend a lot of money on our gear and on gas money to get to these places, so it would seem that we could afford at least a little to help SAR out.

[spinesnaper]

How about one of you enterprising Bogley bigshots imposing an actual membership fee for Bogley that includes free rescue insurance. You need an actuary consultant to figure out the finances of this (number of Bogley members, estimated number of rescues, limit rescue area (Colorado Plateau or North America for example), and then perhaps pre-negotiate with area SARS on the rates, a reserve fund and re-insurance would also necessary. To work, this needs to generate a surplus to be sustainable. Carrying a personal locator beacon could be required for full coverage which would substantially reduce the resources needed to find and rescue Bogley member-not that any of us would need rescue. Here is a link to an Oregon mountaineering group that offers rescue insurance http://www.mazamas.org/your/adventure/starts-here/C41/. Just a stray thought.

[Iceaxe]

Does anyone know where you can donate to SAR's for the counties in SE Utah,

Below is where you can donate to Wayne County. I know their SAR fund has been hit pretty hard with the movie 127 Hours and the death of Louis Cicotello in No Man's Canyon (http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?49066). I figure that's a good place to start. At least if you make a donation as noted below they know its canyoneers who understand their situation. I believe it also reflects well on canyoneers as a community. I think its a good idea if technical canyoneers try and distance themselves from searchers of the great lost Blue Pool.




A memorial service for Louis will be held on Saturday, March 19, 3:00 pm, in the Lodge at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs. In lieu of flowers, Louis's widow Millie asks that donations be made to the Wayne County Sheriff's Office Search and Rescue Team in Louis Cicotello's name. Their address is:

Wayne County Sheriff
Search and Rescue
PO Box 219
Loa, UT 84747

Cash or hard copy checks only, please -- the local bank does not have facilities to process credit card donations.

Thanks