Posted on 12/17/2006 3:43:18 PM PST by ConservativeMan55
When he goes on these trips, he's gone about 3 to 4 weeks...and I know he takes meds along for the altitude...(he's a doctor)...
For all we know, God intended His mountains to be climbed by humans.
I have been on the top of much smaller mountains than you, Long's Peak is the highest altitude I have been. When I was on top, looking around I wondered how anyone could doubt that God exists.
Shouldn't they have to take out some kind of evacuation insurance? I had to do that when I hiked the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu, and that was far less treacherous than this.
"Do you believe that climbers should post a BOND"
Nope. I'd rather the all-volunteer mountain rescue teams which comprise 99.9 percent of the on-the-ground rescue efforts should refuse all public funds and assistance and "organization", refuse to participate in non-climber SAR (to hell with the hikers), and let the state and feds build their own body of mountain rescue expertise at their own (e.g. your) expense.
Mountain rescue will still function as it always did and was intended to be - one climber helping another - but it will be insulated from the penny-pinching whiners and moaners.
I apologize if I've offended the sensibilities of any of you but sheeez. I mean, common people. I do what's right. I work hard, raise my family. Teach them right from wrong and I don't have anyone beating a path to my door to spend millions of dollars on me and that is how it should be. You do stupid **** you deserve what you get.
This is just my humble opinion.
I can't think of anything more frightening that having a cold-hearted witch named "Jezebelle" praying for my family.
Why?
People who climb mountains and those who launch new businesses are different only in the way they choose to pursue their passion.
If you accept this premise (which I don't), then those who shoot heroin, those who choose to live on the street, etc are also different only in the way they choose to pursue their passion. Should society encourage those activities also? I would say no, that what you are arguing is that there is no absolute scale of judgement on activites, and that one activity is as good as another, which to me is moral relativism. There are absolutes. Founding a business in no way equates to mountain climbing.
You could try to prevent risky activities in order to score a short-term gain,
You are assuming a risk of diving in the middle without having read the previous posts. Nowhere did I say that these activities should be prevented - my position is that doing stupid risky things is neither noble nor brave, it's just stupid and risky and if people want to do it let them, but also let them take the responsibilities for their actions. Further, when the stupid risky thing backfires on the risk taker the taxpayer shouldn't have to bail the person out.
The National Park Service pays a total of $3 million annually for SAR activities....most conservatives would agree that emergency response is a legitimate function of government.
I'm sure that the Katrina evacuees who sat there and chanted "when's someone going to do something for us" would agree with you. When I got a ride in the ambulance I got a bill for $250 from the county (which I paid). The same philosophy for these guys should any of them survive (which is looking unlikely) Send them a bill for services rendered.
Third, as to your comment that they were unprepared, the SAR folks on the scene have stated that they were in fact well prepared.
This is an obvious error, since in fact if they were well prepared they would have not been in the trouble they were in.
But perhaps sitting behind your keyboard 2500 miles away gives you some special insight that those on the mountain lack.
And with this personal attack you just lost the argument. I'm quite familiar with the risks of mountain climbing, and a guarantee you that smart climbers don't start out in the face of an incoming storm. (Smart climbers don't do the Eiger wall either)
So the only calculation to be made is to determine whether or not the tiny cost borne by the taxpayer is worth the overall societal benefit.
The "tiny costs" add up and add up until we have the welfare society that we have today. Let me give an analogy: Suppose that you have a friend who is dying, but unlike the real world, the friend can have his life extended by 1 minute if someone else donates 2 minutes of their life. If 20 million people donate 1 minute of their lives, then your friend can get 20 years. Great benefit for your friend, and no one else would ever notice the difference by having their lives shortened by 1 minute. Now suppose the government makes it mandatory that everyone do this for everyone who is worthy. The average life expectance would go down to about 35 years (and aI would die retroactively about 25 years ago), So what the bleeding hearts tout as compassion is really nothing of the sort if is is extracted by force. as far as volunteers go - God love 'em and if that's what they what to do great.
Perhaps that just makes me a "chest pounding phoney macho man".
No it just makes you wrong.
I feel bad for the climbers and their families, but why did the news stations decide to go with this 24/7? There was very little "real" news on this weekend.
That's your first mistake: the SAR teams are volunteer 501(c)3 organizations that do not bill for their time. They do not accept payment.
Go read a few mission statements, beginning with Portland Mountain Rescue and the Crag Rats.
What I said wasn't complicated, but you managed to not grasp it.
I was not advocating any of those things. My point was that climbers should expect rescue attempts unless everyone understands, including the climbers, that no rescue attempt will be made.
It was nothing more than a hypothetical, and I was not advocating a policy change. You read something in there from your own imagination.
Yes, they should......the are engaging in a very dangerous, to them AND rescuers, "sport".
"She really was as looney tunes about it as some climbers were fanatic about climbing. "
Most of the people I've known in EMS are like this.
One lived next door to my condo, you knew she was going on a call with a sudden torrent of bumping and thumping as she gathered her gear (thin walls), followed by her front door flying open and her noisly running across the porch landing and down three flights of stairs.
This happened several time every week.
Because there are a lot of greens that wanted to see "their" government in action. It was "their" hope that the soon to be democratically controlled surfs in the government would be able to pull a few of "their" brethren off the mountain unharmed thereby giving them new spokesmen for "their" future causes.
I just wonder how much of the environment's been trampled and destroyed by the countless rescuers and their equipment while looking for these guys?!
I wonder what new spending bills will be proposed now that this has happened and how many of our mountains will be equiped with hiking lodges ever 500 feet or so so that these types of individuals can get off?
There but for the grace of liberalism go I (NOT).
I suppose the equipment is free too? and that everyone involved is a volunteer? So bill the government workers' time at $20 and you go back to picking nits.
"I don't think trekking is as dangerous."
Maybe, maybe not. Two people died from altitude sickness when I was trekking up in the Everest region (both on Cho La Pass). Another started fading fast from oedema right in front of my eyes at Lobuche (she recovered after going down 500 meters). Two other guys in another region died from cerebral menengitis during that same perdiod.
Those are the ones I know about.
Kili is not a "trek". It's not as technically demanding as other big mountains but has a huge altitude gain and climbers must be careful with altitude sickness (I know people who've climbed Kili).
Ok, I'm just catching up from the weekend, but, SO FAR, I think this gets the award for the best comeback!
Worth repeating .. Nice one!
That $3 million NPS budget (which also includes National Forest Service under Dept. Of Interior) was about 00.13 percent of the overall budget.
Metrics collected in Yosemite from 2000-2004 indicate hikers "cost" three times more than climbers in SAR (and that's at Yosemite!!).
So if we assume the entire budget was only hikers and climbers (which it isn't), that would be about $750K for the entire annual SAR budget used for climbing incidents.
That's less than 1 cent per taxpayer. One penny. To be more precise, 0.75 cents per year.
"he takes meds along for the altitude"
That would be Diamox. I've used it, it's very helpful for acclimitization.
"I suppose the equipment is free too? and that everyone involved is a volunteer?"
Can't you comprehend what I wrote?
All mountain rescue SAR units (aside from military) are volunteers operating under 501(c)3 non-profit organizations. They do not accept payment. They don't request payment. They buy and own their own gear. They don't accept public funds.
Is something so obtuse that you can't understand the above sentences?
The only public SAR unit on the mountain yesterday (and I don't know that they even went up) was a Special Forces SAR team. They were there to help and, yes, for practice.
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.