SAR Who Should Pay?

There has been a long discussion going on in another thread. Now I'd like to see how things add up. Who do you think should pay for SAR?

General Fund.

Reason why = tourists/tourism spent an estimated $10.5 billion in "direct and indirect" dollars in NH in 2010 per Plymouth State University (who is in charge of calculating these things for the state).

Fishermen and hunters, exclusively.

I vote for SAR cards -- I'd rather pay a small annual fee than be subject to the ambiguity of F&G "who gets fined" decision making policy should I ever find myself in need.

It should be absolutely completely 100% free......in other words, the government should pay for it.

If not, then yeah, it should be bikers and fishers and hunters and ichthyologers......anyone but me.

Little Rickie, your poll is missing a choice! Given the vitriol in the other thread, as soon as I saw the title of the poll, before I even looked at the choices, the first thing that popped into my head was "Your mother." I was disappointed not to be able to select that.

Voted for cards and insurance. Either/ Or. Don't think we need both!

The General Fund. It's really not that much money given hikers contribution to NH's overall economy. Meanwhile, they should begin implementing as many other supplemental cash streams and safety programs as fiscally possible.

I was surprised that the committee didn't jump on my suggestion to post signs at trailheads "text xxx to donate $1 to SAR", they just aren't with it yet

Tim Seaver said:

The General Fund. It's really not that much money given hikers contribution to NH's overall economy. Meanwhile, they should begin implementing as many other supplemental cash streams and safety programs as fiscally possible.

Click to expand...

It seems the general fund gets the popular vote by a good margin and this is not a large amount of money. A drop in the bucket compared to the tourst dollars coming in. It seems like a no brainer to me even though I feel the hike safely awareness value of the hiker card has added value.

Seems like a lot of attention over very little $?

I selected general fund. I'm not hugely opposed to other methods, but I think the general fund is the best. I wouldn't be opposed to more advertising for SAR fundraising, but I dislike the idea of the card- sooner or later, you're going to run into the ethical quandary whether or not card-carrying hikers get preferential treatment in a rescue situation.

DSettahr said:

I selected general fund. I'm not hugely opposed to other methods, but I think the general fund is the best. I wouldn't be opposed to more advertising for SAR fundraising, but I dislike the idea of the card- sooner or later, you're going to run into the ethical quandary whether or not card-carrying hikers get preferential treatment in a rescue situation.

Click to expand...

Really? you think SAR teams are going to ask if someone has a card or not before they leave the road? and say if there is two injured hikers they will actually inquire as to who has a card or not? cmon, Ive known a few SAR guys over the years, I assure you that does not enter thier mind and will not in the future.

sierra said:

Really? you think SAR teams are going to ask if someone has a card or not before they leave the road? and say if there is two injured hikers they will actually inquire as to who has a card or not? cmon, Ive known a few SAR guys over the years, I assure you that does not enter thier mind and will not in the future.

Click to expand...

It might not enter the minds of the rescuers themselves, but it will enter someones mind at some point. And there are people who would make an issue out of it.

Take your "two injured hikers" example... sure, the SAR folks probably won't ask if which one of them has the card. But what if the non-card carrying hiker is carried out first? It wouldn't surprise me if sooner or later, a situation like this arose that resulted in the card-carrying hiker, who was carried out second, deciding to sue the SAR folks for not taking them first.

It might be worth noting that in Colorado they do not distinguish between card holders and non-card holders, which I think would be a very good idea for NH to follow:

What happens if I don't have a COSAR card?

If someone does not have a Colorado Outdoor Recreation Search and Rescue Card (or one of the licenses or registrations) the county or its search and rescue team bears the expenses that might be incurred in a search or rescue. If a financially-strapped county or SAR team accrues previous un-reimbursed extraordinary costs, it may be difficult for them to properly respond to your emergency.

.....

County sheriffs and their search and rescue teams will respond to your emergency whether or not you have a COSAR Card.

Click to expand...

Tim Seaver said:

It might be worth noting that in Colorado they do not distinguish between card holders and non-card holders, which I think would be a very good idea for NH to follow:

Click to expand...

I lived in CO for 5 years and this was exactly the foundation I was using for my counter augument, I never heard of such card verses no card issues while out there. To be honest the gem of the CO system is that it infuses money from users into the very fund that said users would need to benefit by in the event of a rescue, can we say that about our current system here in NH?

Tim Seaver said:

It might be worth noting that in Colorado they do not distinguish between card holders and non-card holders, which I think would be a very good idea for NH to follow:

Click to expand...

To continue my previous train to thought: If there's no difference, then whats the point of the card? A "warm fuzzy feeling in your heart" knowing that you have evidence in your wallet that shows that you've given money to SAR groups? Do you get any discounts at gear stores for having one? I'm new to the idea of cards so please indulge me.

The whole idea seems kind of silly- especially since, from that website, it sounds like only 66-75% of the purchase price for a card actually goes to SAR funds. Whats wrong with just soliciting donations where 100% of the donated money goes into the fund?

Why should anyone buy one?

Buying a COSAR Card helps ensure that a county sheriff and the SAR team are able to respond to your emergency: it helps financially maintain their readiness to respond when your emergency call comes in.

Click to expand...

There is probably an element of warm fuzziness in there similar to the reasons people give to any number of good causes. I always throw a few coins in when I pass one of the buckets the volunteer firemen hold in traffic, even if I am somewhere where I don't have a house that could burn down.

Even in another state.

IMO, Warm Fuzziness is highly underrated. YMMV.

The more this goes around in circles, the more confused I get. I must be the freaking village idiot. Maybe I just see too much and have no voice.

Mountain Rescue Services is 100 % volunteer.

AMC, RMC, AVSAR, PemiSAR and many other organized but civilian entities are as-is where-is non-profits, are on-the-spot-as grunt volunteers for SAR missions. MWSP employees, and MWOBS employees who participate in WMNF SAR missions do so essentially as grunt volunteers as able when able when the call comes. USFS folks in the WMNF are typically < volunteers> when the call comes, they go and do.

Heck, most of the MWV ski patrollers and EMT's I know regardless of employer of record become SAR volunteers when the call comes to go find someone. Any bill is generated when the ambulance has to roll.

NH Air Guard doesn't charge for helicopter services. Neither does VT nor ME. Convince me that VT or ME guard crews wouldn't/ couldn't/ won't / can't offer back-up to neighbor states? Their missions are fully compatible.

Many many many if not most boots on the ground or in the air for SAR are not paid anything for their SAR efforts.

Who the heck IS being PAID " EXTRA" during an SAR ? Are there true real-time expenses for NH F&G or are there just fees/fines /fishing for dollars being floated ?

NH F&G bears the NH state legislative mandate which amounts to ( help me out here if I'm so stupid to be over my head ) -- there has to be a ( one) uniformed NH F&G Conservation Officer in charge of every SAR mission.


If that's the mission as legislated it needs to be funded by the same authority that mandated the mission. General Fund by virtue of general legislation.

Breeze

Breeze said:

Who the heck IS being PAID " EXTRA" during an SAR ? Are there true real-time expenses for NH F&G or are there just fees/fines /fishing for dollars being floated ?

Click to expand...

Yes, there is no reimbursement for volunteer manpower. But there are other expenses.

First off, not all SAR folks are volunteers. Not sure how it works in NH, but here in NY, all SAR operations are directed by NYS Forest Rangers, who are "on the clock" during a search. During a major search, in addition to the tens of volunteers who show up, there can be anywhere from 5 to 10 or even more forest rangers involved. The amount of overtime in a single search can really add up.

Secondly, there are expenses for things other than manpower hours. Volunteers are often compensated for damage or wear and tear for their own personal gear. Food is often provided for the rescuers. So and and so forth- the expenses can and do add up.

Breeze said:

NH Air Guard doesn't charge for helicopter services. Neither does VT nor ME. Convince me that VT or ME guard crews wouldn't/ couldn't/ won't / can't offer back-up to neighbor states? Their missions are fully compatible.

Click to expand...

Helicopters are very expensive to operate. Backcountry rescues by the military organizations are considered training missions and are paid for out of the training budgets. (The personnel and aircraft would otherwise fly training missions to get in their training hours.)

Doug