So, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough has decided to charge people for backcountry rescues. I have mixed feelings about this sort of thing. I understand that times are tough and budgets are austere. However, I don't think we want people who are lost or are in trouble to avoid seeking assistance because they fear being charged a great deal of money.

I for one wouldn't want my wife to call for my rescue if I'm overdue for a few days (as I was in September) and then have to pay a few thousand dollars.

I'm also concerned about what effect such a policy might have on those who are called out to perform the rescues. People will naturally delay calling for a rescue if they think they will be hit with a big bill. This could cause delays for searchers and rescuers and make it all the more difficult to finding the lost person.

What are your thoughts on the idea of charging for rescues?

Here is the article from the Anchorage Daily News.

http://www.adn.com/outdoors/story/1079035.html

I see it as pretty lame. Not sure why it's necessary, the borough is doing just fine money-wise. Heck, the guys that go out there and pick the people up are for the most part getting only seven to ten dollars an hour. Any fee over a couple hundred dollars would pay for the entire event, man-hours, gasoline, and all.

I don't know about the worries that a fee will make people put off rescue though. Most people already think there is a fee.

Read the posts at the following link to see that people really do hesitate to call for help if they think it will bring them financial ruin (compiled by a search and rescue association in Colorado).

http://rec-law.blogspot.com/2009/08/giv ... k-for.html

In part:

Victim says "I can't afford help"
Summit County, Colorado, 2005
A climber on the south side of Quandary Peak (14,270') got stuck. She called 9-1-1 and the on-call SAR team coordinator made contact with her by cell phone. She repeatedly refused assistance and said she just "wants to be talked out of this area." This particular area of Quandary is quite dangerous and it was after dark when she called. After going back and forth with her for some time, the SAR coordinator finally asked why she didn't want help and her answer was "I can't afford it". Once he explained to her that there would be no charge she instantly changed her tune and SAR went in and assisted her out.

Man miles from shore refuses rescue from lake
Utah County, Utah 2003
A man and a woman were stranded in the water at night 2-3 miles from shore in Utah Lake. Either their boat sank or a watercraft quit. We found them at around 23:00, and as we pulled along the woman and prepared to help her into the boat, the man, twenty feet away, shouted "DON'T TOUCH HER!" It wasn't until he was assured that we didn't charge for rescue that he allowed us to give them a lift. Both were both coherent; hypothermia would have set in within hours and they likely would not have survived the night.

Snowmobiler first calls family, not 9-1-1, for help
Boise County, Idaho c.1997
A stranded snowmobiler called, first, his wife for help. She then called the SAR team. When the wife told her husband that she was talking to SAR, he told her to hang up. This was after recent media coverage of the local ski area charging for "out of area" rescues. After assurances that the SAR team does not charge, they finally asked for help. The marine/backcountry deputy that reported this instance said he is regularly asked by the reporting party if there will be a bill for SAR.

Los Angeles County, California, 2000
A rescue of a 20-ish man involved a technical rescue of 150'-180' to raise him up to a dam access road. The person was "borderline hysterical" because a county FD helicopter was present and he was afraid of being liable to pay for it. It was not until the rescuer with the person convinced him that there would be NO costs that it was safe to work with the victim on a 40°-70° slope.

Lost runner hides from SAR
Tucson, Arizona 1982
A gentleman went for an evening run with his two dogs in the desert near his house. He had minimal clothing and took only a water bottle. He became lost and hunkered down with the dogs. One of the dogs ran off and was found by searchers, which led them back to the subject, who was now moving - to avoid searchers. The man said he heard searchers during the night, however he was afraid he would be billed for the search, so he did not respond. The next morning he deliberately tried to avoid searchers while trying to sneak back to his house.

Women fears large bill, searches herself for hours, dangerous weather arrives
Mt. Evans Wilderness, Colorado, c. 1994
A newly married wife dropped off her new husband for some high altitude hiking and he failed to return to be picked up. She said on their way to the mountains, they had joked about which of their bank accounts would pay for "the $10,000 rescue" if anything happened to him. Instead of calling for help, she drove the road for three-four hours looking for him, worried about the bill she anticipated. She finally called, but the search began late at night and by then the peak was enveloped in clouds. Searchers had visibility of a just a few feet and risked walking off the top of 600' cliffs.

That's what I mean, everyone we go out after (in the MSB) already thinks we charge a fee, and therefore hesitates to call for help already. Won't make a difference if there's a fee or not, most people already assume there is.

Most people in the community also assume the Mat-Su Borough has a full-time fire department (Especially in Wasilla) with staffed rescue crews as well, and are surprised when they learn otherwise.

How about the folks that get in a little bind then start calling for help? If a person needs help but has to question if they can afford it, then after thinking about it decide their life is not worth the money, well then I say get your butt out. I think if I got into trouble (which is likely because of my choice in hobbies) I would be more concern in putting the rescuers in harm’s way before it was a concern for money
Come on, people need to be responsible for their actions, from the climber to the fisherman out at sea to the man who gets behind the wheel of a car drunk. Step up to the plate and pay the price for the results and consequences of your action

Thanx Steve

I've seen it both ways, people actually needing help, and others not needing it. Last year the dive team responded for a rescue of some folks stranded on a sand bar on the Knik River. We didn't know exactly where they were, so we go our jetboat up on step and ran up a channel about six inches deep in their general direction until the boat ran aground. While the four of us worked at getting the boat picked up and turned around, one of Butte's officers walked over from the riverbank and told us that sure enough, we made it to right where they were stranded. Butte's responders had already walked them right back across the ankle-deep creek to safety.

On the flip side this year I (personally, not on the job) helped a guy head back up Knik Valley to retrieve his hunting gear and meat after he shot a sheep and it headed down a slot canyon, where he followed it, dropping down a few waterfall chutes to get there. He finished taking care of his meat and spent the rest of a day trying to get back out again, then spent a night huddled under a bush and tried some more in the morning before he called the troopers who choppered him back down to his truck (for free). We hiked back up to help him get his stuff back and followed the same path down into the gully with climbing gear, and contrary to what I had expected, this guy was actually stuck. I climbed something like 5.8 to get us out again, and the other guys learned how to jug.

Obviously some people should probably be a little more responsible for payment than others. I personally wouldn't want to make anybody pay for my services that really NEEDED them. As rescuers we really do want to help people, not make money, but sometimes our time and expense is just wasted, and that's when we feel rather used.