Poll: Would you purchase a yearly Hike Safe card?

[Tim Seaver]

The (possibly inartful) reference in the fiscal note to "exempt from the search and rescue fees described above" is to the flat fees, not the recovery of costs for responding where there's negligence. In other words, the card is no get-out-of-jail card on the negligence aspect, only the flat fees.

Thanks for the interpretation. My eyes glaze over as soon as I see "notwithstanding".

 

[NorthShore]

On a related side note, if I am any indication, then hikers do not contribute very much of the $4 billion in traveler spending. I never stay in a hotel / motel (even in winter I would rather sleep in drivers seat if setting up a tent not practical) - do not eat out after hike except for a $5 sub - and overall spend absolutely as little money as possible.

Not to worry. The past few years I've spent 3 weeks a year in the whites and I tow my family and others along with me on my trips. I spend thousands. I would not buy the card because I do not like the terms and conditions (I'd gladly donate to S&R and have done so in the past).

I think I need to spend more time in the Adirondacks.

 

[Mike P.]

Hmmm. Well, perhaps this will end up being closer to the Colorado CORSAR card in the end - a one-time fee that supports SAR, which buys you a "get-out-of-jail card" ( within some legal definition of "reason", I imagine) if you need a rescue in the back country.
The big difference would be that CO doesn't fine people without the card.

Given the fairly low revenue projected from the fines, I still think the prospect of fining people is going to turn out to be a financial loser, both in the realm of potential tourism lost and the possible scenarios of the larger costs to the state when a slightly hypothermic hiker with a sprained ankle in Godforsaken Ravine decides to try and self-evacuate ( to avoid the fine), ends up going into shock and is immobilized, triggering a $20,000 helo rescue instead of one of the $500 walk-off variety.

OK, that was a terrible run-on but you get the idea. For the record, if I ever need a rescue, I will shower my rescuers with gold doubloons and kiss their feet, even IF I buy this card.

This and your other comments were well said. As a flatlander, I often spend betwen 100 -200 a trip to NH. (on average once a month for 15 years, less lately, before kids 2x a month) Was always gas coming & going, many nights in Gorham, Twin Mt & Conway and many with the AMC. Many meals and usually a stop at the State Liquor Store and beer from Glen or Gorham.

Saranac is just as good as Tuckerman Ale

 

[Remix]

Saranac is just as good as Tuckerman Ale

How has New York handled this issue? Are the number of rescues similar, and do you just get charged automatically? I have not heard of any controversies yet I have seen reports of helicopters rescuing people.

Here in Connecticut a hiker on the Appalachian trail fell and suffered a head injury. Assisted by EMT's and a some volunteers from an SAR unit in Salisbury, the hiker was brought to a clearing and a commercial medivac chopper was called. The hiker or his medical insurance will have to pick up that bill..

Come to think of it, if you break your leg and a chopper is the only thing that will get you out, doesn't most health insurance pick that up? Ill have to check my policy....

 

[RoySwkr]

What if your card came with a bonus feature?

FISH AND GAME AND MARINE RESOURCES
HB 199, relative to expenditures from the fish and game search and rescue fund. MAJORITY: INEXPEDIENT
TO LEGISLATE. MINORITY: OUGHT TO PASS WITH AMENDMENT.
Rep. Jonathan F Manley for the Majority of Fish and Game and Marine Resources: This bill is overly restrictive
to the fish and game department. This bill would have limited fish and game from expending funds from
the search and rescue fund to their officers for search and rescue operations. The bill’s prime sponsor offered
testimony and an amendment to scrap this bill and create an entirely new bill. The committee felt that if the
sponsor wished to create an entirely new bill then that could be done for next year. Vote 12-2.
Rep. John A Burt for the Minority of Fish and Game and Marine Resources: This bill was prompted by an
analysis of the quarterly reports of the search and rescue fund. It was noted that there seemed to be a minimum
charge against the fund of 125 regular hours of fish and game officers whether there were 3 rescues or
20. If the number of rescues went above 20 then the regular hours increased proportionally. This caused the
sponsor to think that here were some inappropriate charges against the fund leading to its deficit. The sponsor,
in an attempt to make the search and rescue process more efficient and self supporting sought to replace
the original bill with an amendment that would require fish and game to explore placing a chip in a hiker
registration card. This card would not be required but could be purchased voluntarily. The chip would enable
fish and game, given the name of the card holder, to pinpoint the hiker’s location in the event of a report that
the hiker was overdue. This would utilize technology with surveillance satellites or aircraft transponders.
The sale of the cards would provide funds to the search and rescue fund. The committee did not consider the
amendment. Either concept presented seemed worthy of consideration to deal with the consistent problem of
shortages in the search and rescue fund.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/caljourns/calendars/2013/HC_18.pdf [see page 363]
[actual text of amendment on page 383]

 

[JCarter]

What if your card came with a bonus feature?

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/caljourns/calendars/2013/HC_18.pdf [see page 363]

A "chip" to be placed in a card? That passively allowed the non-powered card to be located from miles away from satellites of aircraft?

Lord save us from Legislators. If this technology existed, most of us would already own it, voluntarily.

I own a device that will do this. It weighs about 8 ounces, eats a pair of AA Lithiums every weekend I use it, and costs a couple hundred up front plus $10/month for the monitoring service. It can scarcely be described as a "chip".

 

[DougPaul]

A "chip" to be placed in a card? That passively allowed the non-powered card to be located from miles away from satellites of aircraft?

Such "chips" do not exist.

The author may have been thinking of an RFID tag, such devices are cheap, but short range--probably 10m or less in practice.

The closest thing in use that I am aware of is the Recco Rescue System which has a claimed range of 200m. http://www.recco.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RECCO The detector is too big to be carried by backcountry hikers or skiers, but it might be carried by ski patrols or avalanche searchers. The "reflectors"* are often built into outdoor gear. (I have a "reflector" sewn into one of my hard shells--it is about 2 inches long.) Snowbird appears to sell the "reflectors" 2 for $25 which sounds rather expensive to include in a rescue card. http://www.wbrescue.org/blog/snowbird-ski-patrol/european-avalanches-kill-seven-also-lead-recco-save It appears to be in broader use in Europe than in the US.

* The "reflectors" are not actually reflectors... They return the second harmonic created by distorting the incoming signal.

Standard avalanche transceivers appear to be more effective. (These transceivers are battery powered (active).)

Lord save us from Legislators. If this technology existed, most of us would already own it, voluntarily.

Their imaginations often are not constrained by reality...

Doug

 

[NH Tramper]

Such "chips" do not exist.

The author may have been thinking of an RFID tag, such devices are cheap, but short range--probably 10m or less in practice.

[...]

Doug

What do they use to "chip" pets? I thought that was RFID with a greater range, no? I admittedly don't know much about this stuff but I had read something somewhere... or so I thought.

 

[DougPaul]

What do they use to "chip" pets? I thought that was RFID with a greater range, no? I admittedly don't know much about this stuff but I had read something somewhere... or so I thought.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(animal) it is an RFID chip typically injected under the skin between the shoulder blades.

Another reference states that the range is 3--12 inches. This technology is clearly not suitable for searching for lost animals or humans.

Doug

 

[NH Tramper]

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(animal) it is an RFID chip typically injected under the skin between the shoulder blades.

Another reference states that the range is 3--12 inches. This technology is clearly not suitable for searching for lost animals or humans.

Doug

Thanks. Doing some digging I'm finding the same thing. Found one "long range" UHF "chip" that boast 40-feet. Clearly not suitable.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(animal) it is an RFID chip typically injected under the skin between the shoulder blades.

Another reference states that the range is 3--12 inches. This technology is clearly not suitable for searching for lost animals or humans.

Doug

No, but at least when you do find them several months later you'll know who they are...opps (were).

 

[DougPaul]

No, but at least when you do find them several months later you'll know who they are...opps (were).

Sure--they are fine for IDing an animal (or body) that you have in hand, but pretty useless for searching for said animal (or a human).

Doug