Would You Buy a SAR Card?

[Little Rickie]

Would you buy a SAR card for:

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I'm covered by my fishing license. Note that if I was not, I might buy one. It would depend on that mystery character A. Reasonable Person and their definition of negligent and not just the price, but the fine print (conditions.) I do not ever set out hiking believing I am doing so in a negligent manner.

Tim

 

[sierra]

I would buy one as I did in CO, not that I would need a rescue but its a system designed to assign ownership to rescue cost and if it saves someone elses ass, thats ok Ill chip in.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

I personally think a SAR card is a good idea. While I did check all even up to $20 a year I personally think it should be limited to $10 a year at least to get started and until it is better determined what the needed costs would be to make the program program viable.

 

[J.Dub]

They make great stocking stuffers for all your hard-to-buy-for hiking friends!

 

[bikehikeskifish]

They make great stocking stuffers for all your hard-to-buy-for hiking friends!

I so much would prefer a NH F&G SAR-themed T-shirt. XL, please.

Thanks, Santa.

Tim

 

[Stan]

We don't need no stinkin' card!

I would need to know a lot more information before I even thought about buying one of these "cards", which I interpret as an insurance policy to pay for rescues.

First, paying for rescues is not a requirement in most jurisdictions with the exception being rescues due to the negligence or carelessness of the victim. There are some jurisdictions where difficult rescues anticipate a charge and such insurance is available and perhaps recommended or required for certain permits. So I would want to know the regulations of the jurisdiction and the pertinence of such insurance.

Second, does the insurance/card cover just the rescue or just the search or both? How about a recovery ... awww, I'm not gonna worry about that.

Third, what stands behind the insurance/card ... in other words, can they make good?

Fourth, how much does it cost and what is the value?

Simplify this stuff too much and it is just a license to steal.

I don't support charges for search and rescue except in cases of carelessness and negligence which need to be defined for the particular location, activity and related factors. To reduce SAR to a commercialized dollar value across the board demeans and devalues our more noble instincts and humanity.

 

[erugs]

As many have noted, there is a real problem in determing who is a hiker and who is not. Those of us who are viewing this site have been educated about being well prepared and know that just because someone is out walking that does not make them a hiker. Wish the press would recognize that difference.

 

[Little Rickie]

I would need to know a lot more information before I even thought about buying one of these "cards", which I interpret as an insurance policy to pay for rescues.

First,...

Second, ...

Third, ...

Fourth, Simplify this stuff too much and it is just a license to steal.

Sorry to disapoint. It is just a simple fun poll. No more or no less.

The poll does show this forum has several compassionate members.

FWIW & IMHO I think there is a lot more "stealing" in a complicated world than in a simple world.

 

[Paradox]

If an individual is tired of reading this stuff, I would suggest they find another board to read/post on.

 

[Stash]

Interesting. Similar question, though less specific, a year and a half ago. 51% would buy a form of insurance. 11% said current system is fine. 11 % thought Fed or state should cover.

 

[Craig]

Although It’s a popular concept (among hikers in NH ) to be able to buy a hiking card that would exempt you from a SAR charge, I suspect a sceme like that would be illegal.

I suspect the State of NH can not create a law that charges for rescue and then create a law that charges you so you don't get charged for rescue.

Is the Study Committee Report proposing misleading information or are hikers reading what they want to read? You decide.

3. Create a Voluntary Hike Safe Card. The card holder would not be billed for any rescue service unless negligent as long as the card purchase was prior to any rescue services being rendered. Make the purchase of the card on line only to limit administrative costs.

What does this proposal mean? No one gets charged for rescue now. So what is buying this hiker card going to do for you?

 

[dougb]

Compare SAR to hunting fees

Interesting thought, Craig. Compare SAR fee to hunting licenses back in the day. In the "early years," more than now, hunting licenses paid for the conservation departments that then paid for fish hatcheries, etc. Fees, fines, and enforcement were also put in place. And if you hunt without a permit, there's a big penalty - and if you accidentally hit a deer with your car, I've heard of people being charged for a deer tag.

Not an exact comparison, but an SAR fee might fund air search in small communities, provide training, and protect the card holder from liability if some administrator decided the hiker was negligent.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

...and if you accidentally hit a deer with your car, I've heard of people being charged for a deer tag.

I believe this is done only if you want the meat, and I think it varies by state.

 

[Tim Seaver]

I suspect the State of NH can not create a law that charges for rescue and then create a law that charges you so you don't get charged for rescue.

Although that's pure speculation, it would be yet another reason to follow the Colorado model, where nobody gets charged, card or not.

 

[Red Oak]

Although that's pure speculation, it would be yet another reason to follow the Colorado model, where nobody gets charged, card or not.

Having lived on both coasts for years and being a nh native,I am puzzled by your attempts to place a west coast style system on a state as independent as nh .

 

[Tim Seaver]

The Granite Headed Tribe Welcomes You.

Having lived on both coasts for years and being a nh native,I am puzzled by your attempts to place a west coast style system on a state as independent as nh .As most know the east coast is not The west coast[ie;colorado]!

I am in total agreement so far - the East Coast is definitely not the West Coast.

To most outsiders,nh policies and ways of getting things done seems dumb...But...it is the nh way to practice independence and a uncompromising stance when our rights and liberties are infringed upon.

Specifically, what is looking dumb to the National SAR groups is NH's inability to adequately fund their SAR program. Which was all over the national media in the wake of the Scott Mason affair - NH was pretty much getting mocked and derided for shaking down a 17 year old who rescued himself ( after getting terrible "advice" on bailout routes from people who should know better). I don't see any rights or liberties being infringed on - perhaps you could flesh that out a bit for us?

Imagine trying to impose a rescue agenda on a indian reservation?

I think comparing the state of NH to an Indian Reservation is a bit of a stretch, but if you want to use that analogy, I would say that the problem could be looked at it this way:

The Granite Headed Casino seems perfectly happy when lots of gamblers ( hikers, etc.) are spending all their hard earned cash at the bars and slot machines ( hiking and spending money in the mountains), but when somebody hits the jackpot ( needs a rescue) the casino owners balk at the idea of paying out. That's no way to run a casino.

I respect your opinions mr. seaver but in regards to your prior posts you seem to have a issue with nh in general.Therefore I ponder if you can really have a unbiased and fact based platform in which to base your thoughts.One more thought most people who hike are not in the shape of a tim seaver and cant just run down the mountain in 40 minutes[or less] to escape a bad scene such as weather or some physical issue.I hate to see a hiking legend get bogged down on a forum throwing sticks at nh.

Here's where you go off the rails. First off, the viewpoint that I am putting forth is the exact same one endorsed by all the major SAR orgs, so attempting to characterize my opinion as something out of left field is just silly. Secondly, trying to delegitimize my opinion based on some vague theory that I "have a problem with NH" is just weak sauce. A cheap , unsubstantiated shot. I love NH and it's mountains and am participating in this conversation because I want to help find a solution which maximizes safety for hikers of all abilities. Everyone who posts here has a "bias" one way or the other - so let's avoid the amateurish exclusionary tactics, shall we?

One more thought most people who hike are not in the shape of a tim seaver and cant just run down the mountain in 40 minutes[or less] to escape a bad scene such as weather or some physical issue.I hate to see a hiking legend get bogged down on a forum throwing sticks at nh.

This is an odd addition to your post - if I really thought that everyone was capable of "running away" from any SAR needs, why would I be advocating for not charging anyone for rescue? Wouldn't I be on the other side of this issue if I had such assumptions about people ( which I don't)?

No worries about the "getting bogged down" thingie, but I do find usage of the word "legend" more than a bit amusing. I like running, but let's leave the cutting and running to others.

Let the conversation continue!

 

[Red Oak]

I am in total agreement so far - the East Coast is definitely not the West Coast.



Specifically, what is looking dumb to the National SAR groups is NH's inability to adequately fund their SAR program. Which was all over the national media in the wake of the Scott Mason affair - NH was pretty much getting mocked and derided for shaking down a 17 year old who rescued himself ( after getting terrible "advice" on bailout routes from people who should know better).

No worries about the "getting bogged down" thingie, but I do find usage of the word "legend" more than a bit amusing. I like running, but let's leave the cutting and running to others.

Let the conversation continue!

Agree,agree and agree.I guess it was a seemingly sarcastic tone towards n.h.in your numerous post on this topic I found issue with.Your pics display a obvious love for the mountains.Legend was a compliment....peace

 

[sierra]

Having lived on both coasts for years and being a nh native,I am puzzled by your attempts to place a west coast style system on a state as independent as nh .As most know the east coast is not The west coast[ie;colorado]!To most outsiders,nh policies and ways of getting things done seems dumb...But...it is the nh way to practice independence and a uncompromising stance when our rights and liberties are infringed upon.Imagine trying to impose a rescue agenda on a indian reservation?As a hiker and nh resident I do not want to be told what to pay for hiking insurance.I accept the consequences for my actions[or inactions in terms of preparation].I respect your opinions mr. seaver but in regards to your prior posts you seem to have a issue with nh in general.Therefore I ponder if you can really have a unbiased and fact based platform in which to base your thoughts.One more thought most people who hike are not in the shape of a tim seaver and cant just run down the mountain in 40 minutes[or less] to escape a bad scene such as weather or some physical issue.I hate to see a hiking legend get bogged down on a forum throwing sticks at nh.

Do you pay for a parking pass? if so where's your independent will there? As far as not being in shape to get off a mountain in bad weather fast enough or in case of an injury, that is required of you regardless if your Mr. Seaver or not. You dont want to do anything like the SAR card to fix the system? you want your freedom and independence? ok I have an alternative plan that will work for everyone involved, Ive given this subject much thought, I now propose my three point plan for the Whites Mtn.

1. Purchase a SAR card, the funds go to the rescue groups directly and if your rescued the cost of your rescue will be covered period.
2. Do not purchase the SAR card. In the event of an emergency you can decide yourself if you want to be rescued, if yes, you cover the cost of someone saving your ass no questions asked, if you do not want to pay for your rescue then you dont get rescued.
3.Dont buy an SAR card and fend for yourself. Dont call for help, get yourself out period or you dont get out.Keep in mind this option requires you to be fit and take the time to learn the skills needed to both travel in the backcountry and survive any and all ordeals that said backcountry use could throw at you.

For you independent NH people who hate being told what to do, I suggest option 3, actually its the one Ive always chosen, though for the average hiker who is casual in thier approach to the mountains, I suggest choice 1.

 

[erugs]

Having lived on both coasts for years and being a nh native,I am puzzled by your attempts to place a west coast style system on a state as independent as nh .As most know the east coast is not The west coast[ie;colorado]!To most outsiders,nh policies and ways of getting things done seems dumb...But...it is the nh way to practice independence and a uncompromising stance when our rights and liberties are infringed upon.Imagine trying to impose a rescue agenda on a indian reservation?As a hiker and nh resident I do not want to be told what to pay for hiking insurance.I accept the consequences for my actions[or inactions in terms of preparation].I respect your opinions mr. seaver but in regards to your prior posts you seem to have a issue with nh in general.Therefore I ponder if you can really have a unbiased and fact based platform in which to base your thoughts.One more thought most people who hike are not in the shape of a tim seaver and cant just run down the mountain in 40 minutes[or less] to escape a bad scene such as weather or some physical issue.I hate to see a hiking legend get bogged down on a forum throwing sticks at nh.

Actually, I think I'm quite confused about what you are trying to say in your post. Take away the questionable grammar and typing issues, add in that you try to speak against someone like Tim Seaver and multiply that by empty holes in your statements, I think you are not to be regarded. You'll find that most who post here are thoughtful, kind and considerate, and try to back up their statements with facts. Hopefully you will learn some of that skill here.