If you take O'Reilly's position, think of all the sports and hobbies that should be banned because of risk (sky diving, hang gliding, hot air ballooning, football, race car driving, cliff scaling, scuba diving, spelunking... on and on.
O'Reilly was really off the mark on this one.
The cost of the search is yet to be calculated, although it's probably costing Hood River County between $5,000 and $6,000 a day, said sheriff's Sgt. Gerry Tiffany.
"think of all the sports and hobbies that should be banned because of risk (1.sky diving, 2.hang gliding, 3.hot air ballooning, 4.football, 5.race car driving, cliff scaling, scuba diving, spelunking... on and on"
I agree with you in part. The part where the participant is putting only himself at risk. i.e. 1 thru 5. The other activities require rescuers to put themselves at risk when things go horribly wrong.
If, as you state "fellow club volunteer responders (and the rescue equipment)absorb the costs of these rescues", then they should not be banned.
However, if the circumstances are so dangerous and wrecklessly life threatening - can we ask that participants take all necessary precautions to ensure their own survival?
i.e. Race car drivers have to follow safety checks before being allowed on the track. Sky divers have their chutes and the weather conditions checked.
I wish only success for the rescuers and grieve for the families' nightmare.
I'm not sure about banning winter climbing. I'm all in favor of idiots competing for the Darwin Award. But you know O'Reilly, he's got a quick, snappy answer to all the worlds' problems.
But unless they got a bunch of millionaire retired hobbyists with helicopters just sitting around waiting for some excitement, I doubt that the cost of this will fall solely on volunteer effort.
The survivors should have to pay in full for all rescue expenses, and should have civil liability for the safety of any rescuers who may be injured or killed in the process. Let's face it, this situation was brought on by their collective stupidity and nothing else.
This isn't really like skydiving (which I did for 112 jumps), because you need people to put themselves at risk to rescue you in inclement weather conditions. With skydiving, all you need is a clean-up crew with strong stomachs.
Don't ban climbing. Just rescue those who have prepaid for their rescue. Think about it. The participant decides how close to a hospital they will engage in their sport. If they choose to leave the population to go play, fine. Live with the obvious consequences.
There should be a simple insurance policy that climbers could buy that would cover expenses up to $50,000 a day for 10 days.
If there are 3 guys in the group they could split the premium.
I know some folks there, that place lives and breathes outdoor sports and recreation.
Nordic skiing, cross country, wind surfing on the Columbia, hiking and camping.
There wouldn't be more than fifty cents in that part of the world if not for the tourists and sporters.
And btw, I hope only for the best for them, but as it stands now, it would take a miracle.
The thing that surprises me is they were supposed to be experienced, like I said on another thread, you go above 5000 feet or so this time of year, you're playin Russian Roulette.