Posted on 12/17/2006 5:20:45 AM PST by Nasty McPhilthy
A trio of climbers, ascended Mount Hood, under adverse winter conditions — to test their survival skills. The intrepid climbers took gear such as food, fuel, bivvy sacks, a shovel and ropes. These men knew they were taking a big risk – or they would not have taken survival gear with them.
Mountain climbing is a sport for the wealthy who can afford to take weeks off from work to indulge in their expensive hobby.
These clowns have been missing for over a week, and the state is expending tens of thousands of dollars in search and resuce operations.
Why is the sheriff’s department and the U.S Forest Service rangers looking for these men who are addicted to danger?
The taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for the foolhardy thrill seekers who knew they were taking a big risk. The families of the climbers should pay for their own search teams; they shouldn’t expect the government to pay for the reckless chance the climbers took.
From USA Today:
“Deputy Gerry Tiffany, spokesman for the Hood River County sheriff’s office, said its office does not charge for its searches.”
I think it’s about time the government starts charging for rescue operations – when it’s a case of adventurers who place themselves in danger.
I’m sick of hearing about the missing climbers; I’m sick of watching the relatives of the missing men on TV praise the courage of the climbers, and I’m sick at the thought that taxpayers are paying for the rescue efforts.
My response was a reaction to this statement by a poster. The climbers made a choice to put themselves in this situation. Climbing a mountain is certainly dangerous and I wouldn't consider it a necessary activity of everyday life like driving a car.
I never said "don't try and rescue them". But now everybody has to react to their situation.
Exactly. I was a starving artist rock climber when I was young, as was everyone I climbed with.
You have taken a 'jaded' thought and stretched it into a truly degraded thought. . .and one that does hold to even a reasonable consideration. . .
Perhaps it was inspired by the jaded observation - if not 'give-away' of this author's observations: Mountain climbing is a sport for the wealthy who can afford to take weeks off from work to indulge in their expensive hobby.
This taints the rest of his conclusions - with a distinctively, crass, Liberal bias.
Well said!!!!!
You said -- "A person who does regular hiking or boating will not be rated up but a person who skydives, cliffdives, mountain climbs etc most definately will because the likihood of a catastophic accident is significantly greater for people in those groups."
In Oregon, they might reconsider. Waves wash you off rocks, logs are thrown into the air at the beaches, people fall off the hiking trails, some with inches to spare for your footsteps, a quick snowstorm comes in and people die of hypothermia, a fishing boat tumbles in the surf and people drown, you rappell down some rocks and have a "failure" of some sort, you drive up to Timberline Lodge and walk around the lodge and find out you're in a whiteout and can't find the lodge to get back, you go see one of the lighthouses, and you stumble off the trail into the surf, you walk along the rocky surf line and the tide come up and traps you, and you finally get washed out to sea, you go viewing Multnomah Falls and a large bus-sized boulder falls down right in front of you, and it goes on and on.
Are insurance rates higher in Oregon? People must be stupid for living in such a high-risk state, I would imagine.
Regards,
Star Traveler
By that logic driving a car is selfish because you might crash and endanger a fireman who tries to rescue you.
'bout time someone saw the only point that I was trying to make.
You said -- " I believe, they have to sign an agreement to pay rescue cost if something should happen."
Well, you haven't been up to Mt. Hood. You can go up to Timberline Lodge and be lost in a whiteout and need a rescue when you weren't even "climbing". In addition, I've never heard of any of the thousands of people going up there having to do that. They don't have to sign a form saying that they will pay for a rescue.
If they started doing that, you would have to designate the entire state a "rescue zone" -- because people are rescued all over the state, all the time. There's a lot of rugged country out there.
Regards,
Star Traveler
I agree. I don't have a problem with people desiring and engaging in dangerous activities. I understand it in this prefabricated, push button world. However, if they want to engage in extremely dangerous activities they should get the full measure of the danger which would include either no rescue or required payment for rescue operations. Personally, I would prefer no rescue as the rescue attempt places innocent lives at risk.
I just finished Krakauer's "Into Thin Air." The rescues on Everest are done by other expeditions that happen to be on the mountain. It is too remote for any state intervention.
Climbing is a high risk adventure, but I didn't see anything that indicates that these guys were foolish. They were caught up in a storm that wasn't supposed to be there for a couple of more days.
If these guys survive they will be touted as hero's. In fact, their family members are already treating them as such.
You said -- "Then they should have trained at Everest."
Why train at Everest when we've got a perfectly good mountain in Oregon?
Regards,
Star Traveler
Courage? Nope.
Handgun hunting dangerous game requires courage. Climbing a rock does not.
You said -- "Second they need to be financially charged for the resources used for their rescue."
While some may agree, I think you'll find a lot of people in Oregon who would disagree with that. The entire state is a "rescue zone" in that case...
Regards,
Star Traveler
"Others would rather sit on the couch, eat cheesey poofs and watch the world pass them by....."
What kind of couch?
.. .perhaps a waiver should be signed that climbers ARE at least potentially vulnerable to paying for their rescue; of course, but then 'what'. . .if someone dies attempting 'their' rescue'. . .
Well, perhaps bottom line is the reality that no one is perfect and we just do not live in a perfect world; and perhaps the 'more perfect' is the desire of good people to help others in needs without prior judging. . .
Insurance companies expend a great deal of money and resources divining the risk tables they use to rate their customers.If you disagree with their assessments, take it up with them.
You said -- "I would hope "my brother" would be wise enough not to engage in self endangering behavior."
There are thousands of people in Oregon who do that, plus the ones who come in from out of state. Mt. Hood is a popular place. They've got a group called the Mazamas, to help you out, doing that, too --
http://www.mazamas.org/
People in Oregon wouldn't consider it a foolhardy endeavor. They would simply try to be prepared. But, it is not always possible to be prepared for everything that Oregon can throw at it. It can get pretty fierce at times. And you never know when it's coming...
Regards,
Star Traveler
Sometimes the things said on here are jaw dropping. Good catch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.