$25,000 fine assessed for teen hiker

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
To repeat what I've said before: that Scott Mason is an Eagle Scout is an interesting but irrelevant fact in this incident.

What is relevant is the fact that he was adequately (if not elaborately) prepared, equipment-wise; demonstrated some resourcefulness in getting through three nights in the woods; and showed persistence (determination) and self discipline in proceeding on his self-rescue plan/route, where he was eventually discovered and met by the SAR people. If he developed those personal characteristics through Scouting, that's that's almost literally a footnote in the story.

G.
 
To repeat what I've said before: that Scott Mason is an Eagle Scout is an interesting but irrelevant fact in this incident.
G.

I believe his family, friends and the news media made it relevant to this discussion by framing his experience in terms of his scouting achievement.

If they’d just said something like “He’s a 48er” or “He’s a 115er” or “He’s climbed Everest in winter”, we’d understand that. But nooooo, they had to muck it up with “Eagle Scout”

Those news folks! :rolleyes:

Present company excluded. :)
 
If they’d just said something like “He’s a 48er” or “He’s a 115er” or “He’s climbed Everest in winter”, we’d understand that. But nooooo, they had to muck it up with “Eagle Scout”
"Eagle Scout" makes a nice sound-bite, whether it is actually relevant is irrelevant.

Besides, what percentage of the intended audience would know what a 48er or 115er is? (And if he had climbed Everest in winter, the authorities probably would have decided that he was exercising sound judgment and not fined him...)

Doug
 
He'd better get it in writing. "reserving the right" to prosecute means this is an unofficial deal that they can go back on for any reason.
 
from article said:
He cited a medical condition "we are not at liberty to talk about." Garabedian said the state is reserving its right to pursue the case.
If he had a medical condition, wouldn't that make him more not less reckless?

They need to drop the case permanently so the facts can come out. Who was it that gave him the bad advice to bail out into the Great Gulf, and why didn't they speak up during the search saving a day or more of grief? If he had gone down Caps Ridge, there would have been no story.
 
Roy I'd love to get the verification as well. By reading between the lines, and making assumptions (which is not a good way to go through life), it certainly sounds like someone at Pinkham Notch:

The report said that when he realized he was falling behind his schedule, "he knowingly chose to descend the Sphinx Trail as a shortcut" and that "this decision was the one that made search and rescue response inevitable" because of its rugged terrain amid a melting snowpack.

Kogut said in a statement that Mason "planned his hike well" and had sought advice from the staff of the Appalachian Mountain Club "about his planned route and planned bailout route," which was impassable because of high water from snow melting.
 
I suspect that perhaps he might have a serious and possible even fatal "medical condition". It could be a new DX, something he did not suffer from at the time of the hike.

It's such a dramatic statement that I don't think teen acne is what they are referring to. It's all guess work because they left it wide open and there is no point it trying to solve the puzzle because it serves no purpose. Hopefully he is not seriously ill and will conquer many more trails and peaks in his lifetime.

I cannot agree or disagree with the decision because I don't know all the facts to the case. Sound like their were "extenuating" circumstances and the state if free to pursue the case in the future.

I look forward to seeing how "charging for rescues" evolves in NH.
 
Last edited:
News from the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department
Phone: (603) 271-3211
Email: [email protected]
For information and online licenses, visit http://www.wildnh.com

CONTACT:
Col. Martin Garabedian, N.H. Fish and Game: 603-271-3128
Capt. Kevin Jordan, NHFG: 603-271-3128
Jane Vachon, NHFG: 603-271-3211
N.H. Attorney General's Office: 603-271-3658
April 9, 2010


REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST WILL NOT BE PURSUED FOR 2009 RESCUE OF HIKER SCOTT MASON

CONCORD, N.H. – The New Hampshire Office of the Attorney General and the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department have decided not to pursue reimbursement of costs for the extensive search and rescue operation on Mount Washington in April 2009 for then-17-year-old hiker Scott Mason of Halifax, Mass.

Mason was missing for three days after leaving the Appalachian Mountain Club's Pinkham Notch Visitor Center alone, intending to complete a 17-mile hike in one day. According to his account, he spent several days in the Great Gulf Wilderness attempting a shortcut of his planned route after spraining his ankle during the morning of his first day out. Conditions in the White Mountains became increasingly treacherous over the course of the search; rain and rapid snowmelt made many small streams impassable, requiring search teams to use rope traverses to cross raging waters.*Helicopters were called in from Maine and Vermont to search for Mason from the air.

On July 10, 2009, Mason was asked for repayment of Fish and Game's costs associated with the Search and Rescue, amounting to approximately $25,235. The case has been under discussion and analysis in the intervening months. While confident of the legal merit of the case, it was decided not to pursue collecting the reimbursement because of Mason's personal circumstances and conditions at this time. The Department reserved the right to bring action in the future, however.

In a letter sent on April 8, 2010, to Scott Mason's legal counsel, N.H. Attorney General Michael Delaney and N.H. Fish and Game Executive Director Glenn Normandeau wrote: "We are happy that Mr. Mason was found alive after what was no doubt a stressful and traumatizing ordeal on Mt. Washington and in the Great Gulf Wilderness. We hope that the publicity about his experience has served as an important teaching moment to others considering hiking in the White Mountains, so they might know that the dangers and risks of doing so should never be underestimated. We wish Mr. Mason and his family well."

New Hampshire has two laws that allow the state to be reimbursed for an emergency response or search and rescue incident. The first law was enacted in 1999.*A second law passed in 2008 lowered the standard of responsibility from "reckless" to "negligent," increasing the number of cases in which costs could be recouped from irresponsible hikers. Search and Rescue missions go through a set review process involving guidelines established by the N.H. Attorney General's Office. The process involves review by the mission's supervisor, the Chief of Fish and Game Law Enforcement and Fish and Game Executive Director and culminates with a review by the N.H. Attorney General's Office for final concurrence.

The*laws allowing Fish and Game to request reimbursement from negligent hikers were intended to deter hikers from heading off into the mountains unprepared, but they are part of a much wider effort to prevent the need for emergency rescues by educating the public about safe hiking practices. Fish and Game has a proactive campaign to help people be prepared and act responsibly when enjoying the outdoors, especially in rugged places like the White Mountains.*This educational program, called HikeSafe, was established in 2003 and is conducted in partnership with the White Mountain National Forest.*N.H. Fish and Game encourages all outdoor enthusiasts to take a few minutes and review the Hiker Responsibility Code at http://www.hikeSafe.com.
 
Last edited:
Search and Rescue missions go through a set review process involving guidelines established by the N.H. Attorney General's Office. The process involves review by the mission's supervisor, the Chief of Fish and Game Law Enforcement and Fish and Game Executive Director and culminates with a review by the N.H. Attorney General's Office for final concurrence.
...
N.H. Fish and Game encourages all outdoor enthusiasts to take a few minutes and review the Hiker Responsibility Code at http://www.hikeSafe.com.

It would be nice if they publicized these guidelines, perhaps on the hikesafe web site. This has long been my objection to the negligent definition - it's not defined.

Tim
 
Good Gravy

We hope that the publicity about his experience has served as an important teaching moment to others considering hiking in the White Mountains, so they might know that the dangers and risks of doing so should never be underestimated. We wish Mr. Mason and his family well.

That should read:

We hope that the negative publicity on a national scale following the state of NH attempting to shake down a 17 year old kid who was given terrible advice at Pinkham Notch and subsequently rescued, has served as an important teaching moment to other states who underfund their SAR organizations, so they might know that the dangers and risks to tourism dollars flowing into their state that may go elsewhere, as well as the additional danger to hikers who, fearful of the cost of reimbursement, put themselves and SAR units at even greater risk. We wish the state of NH well in getting their act together and following the advice of every major SAR organization known to man.
 
Holding My Nose ...

I guess the thing that bothers me most about this “settlement” is closely related to what bothers me about the decision to order Mason to pay up in the first place.

The “pay up” order (and, by the way, I don’t think it was a “request” as spin from the NHFG tries to characterize it) was based on scant evidence despite NHFG and AG claims to having a strong case against Mason. Now the settlement seems equally arbitrary, and the rationale is at best, ambiguous.

What is this crapola about Mason having a health issue, anyway? If the State really had a strong case to begin with, as is claimed, why would the State choose to not pursue it?

This whole thing stinks worse all the time.

G.
 
He cited a medical condition

He was proabably depressed by the way this was handled. He did no wrong and was put through an ordeal. This is just a way for the powers to be let this fad away without saying they are wrong or sorry.

Now leave the kid alone! :mad:
 
As an Eagle Scout he should be preapred n able to make rational decisions in survival situations.

Now if he were a winter 46er n winter 3500, HH 200 and found off trail up to his ass barebooting, would he have been charged for his rescue?

ummmm... I saw so many patches barebooting this winter.
 
Who was it that gave him the bad advice to bail out into the Great Gulf, and why didn't they speak up during the search saving a day or more of grief? If he had gone down Caps Ridge, there would have been no story.

i think the most unsettling thing about this whole story for me is that an amc staffer may have given him the advice to use the great gulf as a bailout route under those conditions. i like to think that those dispensing information at any amc facility have more sense than that. that said, had he done a little research on his own he could have easily ascertained that the water crossings in the gulf may have been an issue given the time of year and prevailing conditions and not had to rely on someone elses advice.
sounds like otherwise he showed amazing self reliance in a situation i certainly hope i never end up in.

bryan
 
Glad he won't be charged.
What a total embarrassment, that they tried to get $25,000 from some kid who had a tough go of it in the mountains.
 
Top