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.
"But you know O'Reilly, he's got a quick, snappy answer to all the worlds' problems".
Lighten up Kenton;0
Poor Bill only has an hour to solve the world's problems - he has to make the solutions snappy.
Much like us on FR.
teehee
If you have to be rescued from the Grand Canyon (i.e. carried or helicoptered out), you have to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket. To me, mountaineering (hiking in the most extreme season of the year) is similar to hiking into the Grand Canyon in the summer where temps usually exceed 100º and there is limited water supply. People aren't banned from doing that and I'm sure far more people hike in the Grand Canyon than take off climbing Mt. Hood in the winter.
I could certainly go along with those who need to be rescued having to incur the cost of the rescue.
The way this thing seems to be going, it looks like they're going to pay a steeper price than that. Lighten up.
The problem with a reimbursement scheme is that people won't call when they need help, or wait until the problem is even worse. We don't charge for police and fire service, even when the problem is brought on by the people themselves.