Yet another carry out in the Whites....

[MichaelJ]

Cutting is out of fashion now.

Good to know - thank you, all!

 

[hikerfast]

I know it takes only a moment's inattention, but maybe the more isolated you are on a hike the more likely you are to be attentive and careful.

.
truer words were never spoken. Gene Danielle pointed out to me once, that you are so much MORE CAREFUL when you are alone, that it is very rare for anyone to get into big trouble when alone. Most people are injured when hiking with others. When you are alone(though it DOES rarely happen) you are so much more careful that almost no one gets into an emergency.

 

[Waumbek]

.
Most people are injured when hiking with others. When you are alone(though it DOES rarely happen) you are so much more careful that almost no one gets into an emergency.

Interesting. Are there stats on this or is it anecdotal? (The first gruesome case that comes to mind is the guy who had to amputate his own arm in the backcountry.) Are solo hikers more careful or are they more fit and experienced to begin with? Do group hikers have less experience or lower levels of fitness, etc, hence seek others to hike with, rather than take less care? What is the mean age of the solo vs. group hiker? There are many variables to consider. In any event, here's an epidemiological approach to SAR incidents in NH from 1999-2001. The researcher was surprised that the mean age of SAR subjects was 35, having hypothesized a younger age. This doesn't include the parameter of whether the hiker was solo or in a group.

 

[sardog1]

There are many variables to consider.

Among these would be gender. I've been in the field on more than 100 searches, and have been called for many more, in six states. In that whole array, there have been exactly two instances of a female over the age of 12 who was not mentally impaired and who got lost on her own. OTOH, the corresponding number for males is a few dozen, including several in which a male "led" himself and a female into trouble. (Note that these all started as searches, not as rescues to a known location.)

No, I don't know the actual participation rates in outdoor pursuits for males vs. females. But my gut tells me that males are far more likely to get in trouble even after accounting for any differential rates of participation. And I've never had to chase a semi-evasive female through the woods, just because she couldn't stand the embarrassment of being lost . . .

 

[beverly]

Well...

Among these would be gender. I've been in the field on more than 100 searches, and have been called for many more, in six states. In that whole array, there have been exactly two instances of a female over the age of 12 who was not mentally impaired and who got lost on her own. OTOH, the corresponding number for males is a few dozen, including several in which a male "led" himself and a female into trouble. (Note that these all started as searches, not as rescues to a known location.)

No, I don't know the actual participation rates in outdoor pursuits for males vs. females. But my gut tells me that males are far more likely to get in trouble even after accounting for any differential rates of participation. And I've never had to chase a semi-evasive female through the woods, just because she couldn't stand the embarrassment of being lost . . .

I'm shocked, just shocked Are you suggesting that guys are more likely to get lost in the woods? Now you are opening a real can of worms!

 

[BrentD22]

SAR Missions

It would be cool if Discovery or something similar to that channel did a documentary on SAR Missions.

It would most likely serve as some good TV, plus good education for hikers that have never been part of SAR Missions. Maybe after some hikes watch the show they would relize how much goes into a rescue and be a little more careful in the backcountry!

 

[Raymond]

No, Brent, I haven't ever been part of a search and rescue, on either side.

I don't understand the relevance either way to your disapproval of my post.

And to the anonymous person who also gave me a red square: How do small cars cause accidents by being able to change speed quickly? That's how they avoid them.

http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~hal/people/hal/NYTimes/2003-12-18.html

But you seem to have missed my point, anyway. We were talking about the dictum to carry a cell phone at all times. I was suggesting that just maybe doing things for the appearance of safety may make one less safe.

 

[BrentD22]

It was not a personal thing...

Raymond - Don't worry I don't mean anything personal by it. I'm sure I've given you a green square in the past and most likely will in the future.

 

[Waumbek]

Lt. Bogardus (NH F&G) on Percival incident

Article published Jul 20, 2005
Mtn. rescues, like one in Holderness, common, costly

HOLDERNESS — When 39-year-old Abigail Hambrook of Sandwich slipped and broke her leg on Mount Percival in Holderness on Monday, it took the efforts of more than 20 people to retrieve her off of the 2,100-foot mountain.

Rescue workers climbed nearly two miles up the trail to retrieve her after receiving a cell phone call from her sister and hiking partner.

Rescues such as these are far from uncommon, according to Fish and Game Lt. Todd Bogardus.

"People should always be prepared when they go out for a hike. Accidents do happen and you need to be prepared," explained Bogardus. "Sometimes people think that because it's a nice, clear, 80-degree day that they do not need to prepare. If there's an injury, you could be delayed for several hours."

Bogardus agreed that hiking in pairs was very important for safety, but added the buddy system is only the beginning.

"We promote people hiking in pairs. If there's an injury or something does happen, someone can go for assistance. The key is being prepared to go out," he added. "Technology is great, but it does fail."

Bogardus said rescues, such as the one in Holderness, require a great deal of manpower.

"Usually there's a minimum of 18 people who need to get up there," he said. "You have to carry up the stretcher, package the person and everyone in a team effort will carry the person down."

In 1999, there were a series of high-altitude rescues that rescue workers agreed were preventable.

"That year there were so many incidents, so we tried to figure out what the next step would be," explained Bogardus.

Since 1999, eight people were billed for their rescues, which recouped more than $40,000 for the department.

"Certainly we have spent a great deal of money. We look individually at every instance," he said.

Most people who need assistance in the mountain are not billed, but those who show negligence or recklessness could be forced to pay for the rescue.

In 2003, the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department worked in conjunction with the White Mountain National Forest to come up with the Hiker's Responsibility Code.

"The idea of the code is that it puts the responsibility back on the hikers, to reduce the cost and amount of risk" he said. "We certainly understand that accidents happen and we're more than willing to come get people out of it. But people should have responsibility for themselves."

The Hiker's Code of Responsibility may seem like common sense to many, but Bogardus said the guidelines should be followed to the letter, even in the case of a short day hike.

Authorities remind hikers they need to know in advance about the terrain, conditions and local weather and to have the appropriate gear. Hikers need to tell others where they will be going and when the plan to return, as well as to stick with their hiking partners and to turn back if unexpected conditions arise. They ask hikers to consider the worst-case scenario on any hike, and to learn to rescue themselves.

For more information and to view the Hiker's Responsibility Code visit www.hikesafe.com.

From the Laconia Citizen (July 20, 2005)

 

[MadRiver]

I'm curious if they list the individuals that were billed for their rescue so we can discover exactly why they were billed opposed to those that were not billed for their rescue?

 

[Waumbek]

I'm curious if they list the individuals that were billed for their rescue so we can discover exactly why they were billed opposed to those that were not billed for their rescue?

Outdoors columnist John Harrigan recently wrote this on the matter:

"New Hampshire has a reckless hiking law, and has used it eight times since it was enacted in 1999 to go after negligent and careless people, mainly hikers, and bill them for their search and rescue costs.

The Associated Press story quoted the department's Todd Bogardus, who noted that the department doesn't even think of hassling people over ordinary accidents but only charges in cases of "gross recklessness." [end quote]

It is my understanding that at least several (and probably most) of those hiker prosecutions were for incidents arising from inebriation. I don't know how many convictions resulted. In one case, a group of 'teens took sixpacks up a mountain one night--and cell phones. They called when they couldn't find their way home. The average SAR operation costs $3-4,000, F&G says. The fines do not go into the state general fund per se but to the NH Outdoors Council, which distributes them to volunteer SAR groups for equipment purchase (litters, O-2, GPS, medical kit, radios, etc.).

 

[RGF1]

I'm curious if they list the individuals that were billed for their rescue so we can discover exactly why they were billed opposed to those that were not billed for their rescue?

I am no sure about this but if I recall correctly somewhere i read only 4 or 5 SARs have resulted in people being billed. of thet number I think 3 of them were all involved in a incident on Laffyette a few yaers ago where 3 seprate gruops became lost in a white out on the mountain some how they made thier way inot Walker Ravine. and could not get out due to deep snow . one of the gruops was a youth gruop or school group. that was completely unprepared . They were considered negligent because they did not have snowshoes . If all or even a few of them had snowshoes there would not habve been a need for a SAR . Once again I am going on mememory I think the the national guard used a heliocopter to drop snowshoes to them .
interstingly in many other states this would not have been billed as the national Guard guys consider it training and want ot get out and fly. . I know if I was into that i would want any excuse ot get out and fly aroubnd in a heliocopter.
I can see billing if they are intoxicated or in some other way negilgent IE climbing MT Washington in January with sneaker boots an no crampons or ice axe. or something like that.
I am sure some one has a better memeory of the incidents .
I think the razor might be used to clean hair from a wound site?

 

[SAR-EMT40]

I think the razor might be used to clean hair from a wound site?

My knife is already sharp enough to do that. A dull(ish) knife makes you push harder which is just an accident waiting to happen. Besides, with scalp wounds, you can sometimes use the hair to help draw the wound together.

Keith

 

[MadRiver]

The Lafayette incident was a school in Vermont called Adventure Quest. Mike Dickerman wrote a column about how the “leader” of the group didn’t think he did anything wrong despite the fact that they had a rudimentary map and most of the kids wore sneakers. A couple others I recall “donated” money to the S&R in hopes of not being billed. I was just wondering if there was a comprehensive list detailing why someone was fined.

 

[MrAmeche]

Interesting. Are there stats on this or is it anecdotal? (The first gruesome case that comes to mind is the guy who had to amputate his own arm in the backcountry.) Are solo hikers more careful or are they more fit and experienced to begin with? Do group hikers have less experience or lower levels of fitness, etc, hence seek others to hike with, rather than take less care? What is the mean age of the solo vs. group hiker? There are many variables to consider. In any event, here's an epidemiological approach to SAR incidents in NH from 1999-2001. The researcher was surprised that the mean age of SAR subjects was 35, having hypothesized a younger age. This doesn't include the parameter of whether the hiker was solo or in a group.

You're right, Waumbek, that is an interesting train of thought. 99% of the time I prefer to hike solo, if only because it is one of the few chances I get to be alone and enjoy being outdoors. My fiance isn't too crazy about me being by myself on a remote mountain somewhere, but I always seem to find a way to assure her that I'll be fine.

I consider myself in decent shape at 27, at least fit enough to hike solo, but I also understand the level of caution involved and the need to be a little more careful. This is simply based on experience. When I was younger and hiked with friends, I remember taking idiotic risks with the elements that I wouldn't dare to chance now. But to second your question, does anyone know of any stats in regards to this?

 

[Waumbek]

My fiance isn't too crazy about me being by myself on a remote mountain somewhere, but I always seem to find a way to assure her that I'll be fine. . . . But to second your question, does anyone know of any stats in regards to this?

Now you can reassure her by quoting the doctor who wrote article saying that you're not in the prime age group (30s and 50s-60s) for trouble.

I don't know any stats on solo vs. group risks. Mo Ellozy, who has recently been compiling accident reports for Appalachia might be able to make a fair guess, though.