egilbe
Member
10 minutes to treeline coming down from Lafayette. The post said the runners didn't seem to be in any distress and had a big smile on his face.
Trail Runners Rescued from Mt Lafayette
- Thread starter JustJoe
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
10 minutes to treeline coming down from Lafayette. The post said the runners didn't seem to be in any distress and had a big smile on his face.
SpencerVT
Member
Good discussion and posts, interesting to read.
I subscribe to the Kenny Rogers rule of thumb as applied to summiting: "you gotta know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em."
Another rule of thumb is to remember that even if you do reach the summit in bad weather, the hike ain't over, you're still only half done!
I subscribe to the Kenny Rogers rule of thumb as applied to summiting: "you gotta know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em."
Another rule of thumb is to remember that even if you do reach the summit in bad weather, the hike ain't over, you're still only half done!
"Getting to the summit is optional. Getting down is mandatory." Ed Viesturs
ChrisB
Well-known member
NH's statewide newspaper (Union Leader) has weighed in on this rescue with an editorial. Bottom line is charge these guys if they do not posess Hike Safe cards.
So there!!
So there!!
Mike P.
Well-known member
Does anyone have the editorial without the firewall? Or interest on the first paragraph is that the writer says the winds was gusting to 40 miles per hour. I' pretty sure that was the flatlander weather forecast for that day, the higher summits forecast was for higher winds.
"A week ago, many Granite Staters may have been shaking their heads at the story of two young men who had to be rescued from the slopes of Mount Lafayette near Franconia Notch. The two had headed out on a brutally cold morning (winds would gust to 40 mph) not to hike but rather to run the trail loop while wearing trail-running sneakers. One of the two lost his sneakers in the deep snow. He then pushed on — barefoot.
They also lost the trail they were trying to hike in the blowing snow. They finally had to stop when their hands and feet froze.
The story has a much happier ending but sounds eerily similar to the one featured in New Hampshire author Ty Gagne’s book, “The Last Traverse.” In that case, two well-prepared winter hikers made mistakes in judging the unforgiving elements along Franconia Ridge. One of the two survived, thanks to a daring rescue effort including a N.H. National Guard Blackhawk helicopter. But the other perished.
Last weekend, a Guard helicopter was again employed, getting the two into the chopper by hoist lift shortly before the weather socked in, making such a rescue impossible.
As with the earlier incident, and too many others over the years, New Hampshire Fish and Game officers as well as Pemi Valley Search and Rescue sent teams up the mountain. Had the chopper been called back, those teams would have no doubt effected the rescue, possibly endangering themselves.
New Hampshire Fish and Game does a good job of its work and does well in summarizing rescue efforts such as this one. We wish, however, that it would make it a point to let the public know whether the hikers in these incidents possess a “hike safe” card, the cost of which helps defray the department’s expenses. And if there are no cards, Fish and Game should let the public know the outcome of efforts to recoup the cost of such rescues.
Oh, and it might be wise to make Ty Gagne’s book mandatory reading for people who wish to go off into the deep snow of a winter wilderness in their sneakers."
They also lost the trail they were trying to hike in the blowing snow. They finally had to stop when their hands and feet froze.
The story has a much happier ending but sounds eerily similar to the one featured in New Hampshire author Ty Gagne’s book, “The Last Traverse.” In that case, two well-prepared winter hikers made mistakes in judging the unforgiving elements along Franconia Ridge. One of the two survived, thanks to a daring rescue effort including a N.H. National Guard Blackhawk helicopter. But the other perished.
Last weekend, a Guard helicopter was again employed, getting the two into the chopper by hoist lift shortly before the weather socked in, making such a rescue impossible.
As with the earlier incident, and too many others over the years, New Hampshire Fish and Game officers as well as Pemi Valley Search and Rescue sent teams up the mountain. Had the chopper been called back, those teams would have no doubt effected the rescue, possibly endangering themselves.
New Hampshire Fish and Game does a good job of its work and does well in summarizing rescue efforts such as this one. We wish, however, that it would make it a point to let the public know whether the hikers in these incidents possess a “hike safe” card, the cost of which helps defray the department’s expenses. And if there are no cards, Fish and Game should let the public know the outcome of efforts to recoup the cost of such rescues.
Oh, and it might be wise to make Ty Gagne’s book mandatory reading for people who wish to go off into the deep snow of a winter wilderness in their sneakers."
Folks,
Please don't copy and paste content you do not own the rights to. Taking something from behind a paywall and posting it publicly is denying the content owners revenue.
Thanks,
Tim
Please don't copy and paste content you do not own the rights to. Taking something from behind a paywall and posting it publicly is denying the content owners revenue.
https://www.vftt.org/tos.html said:
Thanks,
Tim
TEO
Well-known member
Mike, I'm not seeing a paywall for the article. Try opening the link in your browser's private mode.
nartreb
Well-known member
Yes, I was hiking that day. I recall a 35-45 mph wind forecast for whichever town(s) I checked (Lincoln? Conway? Berlin?) ; the high summit forecast (I barely peeked, it was obviously not a high summit day for me) was more like 100mph. Actual peak gust on Mt Washington on Jan 23 was 119 mph.
https://www.mountwashington.org/uploads/forms/2021/01.pdf
Didn't search hard for valley-level weather records in the Whites but Portland Maine had gusts to 40mph.
Last edited:
sierra
Well-known member
Having a hike Safe card does not mean you wont be charged. If you are proven to be negligent, you will be charged in spite of having the card. One of the reasons I think this card is faulty, many people don't even understand its concept.
Not true. You have to be proven reckless. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xviii/206/206-26-bb.htm
ChrisB
Well-known member
In the future try erasing your browser history then hitting the site again.
The site in question places cookies on your system to track your visits. Three cookies and you're out. By clearing history you remove the cookies and reset the clock to zero.
sierra
Well-known member
See what I mean, its confusing as hell. I thought reckless and negligent were the same thing.
Agreed. Your not alone. Try looking up the definitions for both "negligent" and "reckless" and that will add clarity.
ChrisB
Well-known member
And what if they just have fishing licenses?!?!?
That counts. I have a fishing license so I don't need a hike safe card. It's a shared-cost model... previous to which the (a)s and the (b)s were paying the bill.
I. Any person determined by the department to have acted negligently in requiring a search and rescue response by the department shall be liable to the department for the reasonable cost of the department's expenses for such search and rescue response, unless the person shows proof of possessing a current version of any of the following:
(a) A hunting or fishing license issued by this state under title XVIII.
(b) An OHRV registration under RSA 215-A, a snowmobile registration under RSA 215-C, or a vessel registration under RSA 270-E.
(c) A voluntary hike safe card.
Tim
DayTrip
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,016
- Reaction score
- 258
So, if proven negligent you pay for rescue UNLESS you do have a hunting/fishing/snowmobile license/Hike Safe Card. You always pay if you are reckless regardless of whatever you purchased. Yes?
That is consistent with my interpretation of the law. IANAL.
Tim
Tim
DayTrip
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,016
- Reaction score
- 258
I'm not very good with acronyms but I am very much hoping this means I Am Not A Lawyer?
peakbagger
In Rembrance , July 2024
BTW, there is some confusion on various F&G websites regarding if a charge is levied
"What is the process for determining if a rescued person is billed?
All Search and Rescue missions go through a review process involving guidelines established by the NH Attorney General's Office. That process involves the mission's supervisor within Fish and Game Law Enforcement, NH Fish and Game Department administration, and final concurrence through a review by the NH Attorney General's Office. All cases are unique and not all will get billed."
I have never seen an administrative definition of reckless comparted to negligent. After one high profile event a F&G official declared that anyone hiking off trail in winter was reckless. In another case when there were multiple high wind rescues in a short period another official made the comment that anyone going out in those conditions was reckless. There are ongoing debates that snowmachine riders who are driving well in excess of the speed limit or conditions and or driving under the influence apparently are given a free rescue even though they are no doubt reckless. This review process for hikers is apparently not required for snowmobiliers and I expect ATVers. IMO this introduces a double standard.
"What is the process for determining if a rescued person is billed?
All Search and Rescue missions go through a review process involving guidelines established by the NH Attorney General's Office. That process involves the mission's supervisor within Fish and Game Law Enforcement, NH Fish and Game Department administration, and final concurrence through a review by the NH Attorney General's Office. All cases are unique and not all will get billed."
I have never seen an administrative definition of reckless comparted to negligent. After one high profile event a F&G official declared that anyone hiking off trail in winter was reckless. In another case when there were multiple high wind rescues in a short period another official made the comment that anyone going out in those conditions was reckless. There are ongoing debates that snowmachine riders who are driving well in excess of the speed limit or conditions and or driving under the influence apparently are given a free rescue even though they are no doubt reckless. This review process for hikers is apparently not required for snowmobiliers and I expect ATVers. IMO this introduces a double standard.
Similar threads
