Hiker lost on San Jacinto

[dhstein313]

I volunteer for SAR in San Bernardino County and the way "WHO PICKS UP THE TAB" was explained to me...... Is if you are a CA resisdent than YOUR county pays the tab. For instance if you are from Orange County and you get lost on San Gorgonio - Orange County picks up the tab.

If you are out of state resident than the county where you got lost picks up the tab. The CA counties have some recipical relationship and honestly it might just be smoke and mirrors. As far as I know our county has never charged the subject for a search even if the subject was negligent.

D

[Cy Kaicener]

The following website says that he was found at the 5500 ft elevation above Snow Creek. That area is really steep.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bossco/1960876732/

[Hikin_Jim]

He's an incredibly lucky person. Did you see the video posted on the RMRU site? He was located in near vertical rock. It's amazing he was able to down climb that far. God must really like this guy. Seriously, there's absolutely no reason he should be alive: no food, only 1 bottle of water (apparently), shorts and a T shirt.

He went from 10,800' to about 5500' if that web site is correct. There's a jpg on the RMRU site that shows his location as well down the mountain. He descended about 5000' feet, and then it appears he cliffed out. Thank God he had matches, even though the dummy started a forest fire. At least he's alive and the fire didn't get too serious. Well, maybe I shouldn't criticize the fire thing too much. There may have been no way to clear a space in that ledge/alcove type area that he was in.

[Jim Bakos]

Yeah, the stuff on our website is correct. Richard made it THAT far down the north face. He was just west of a ridgeline we call “Leatherneck”. We were planning to send teams down that ridge on Sunday – but would NEVER expect them to come back up, they would need helicopter extraction for sure.

Again: I don’t advocate starting any kind of fire in the wilderness. However, if you do decide to start one in a life or death situation, start it on the UPHILL side of your position NOT the down hill side. This little anecdote comes from our Webmaster (who is also our team member that pulled Richard off the North Face). If you haven’t read his write-up on this yet, please do so at:

http://www.rmru.org/missions/2007/2007-022.html

We just finished up another rescue yesterday, and a recovery today. A busy holiday weekend for RMRU…

Hike safe!

--Jim

[Cy Kaicener]

Rmru did a wonderful job. The hiker was disoriented by getting off trail and bushwacking. He may have thought he was on a ridge near Skyline. If he had read about the Snow Creek route he may have been trying to reach the waterfall around 5000 feet which is at the cliff section. Thanks for your report Jim.

[cynthia23]

All kudos to Jim Bakos and RMRU. Without a doubt they are heroes. And the guy who got lost merely seems to have been insufficiently prepared. It's a miracle he didn't die.

However, returning to the overall subject of charging for rescues: I definitely think it should be considered in certain situations of gross irresponsibility and stubborn refusal to listen to reason. For instance, about two years ago as I recall, one of the female rangers encountered a 50ish couple on the trail out of Round Valley, heading for the peak. It was fall, about four, they had no gear at all, and she politely but strongly advised them they could not possibly make the peak and back in the remaining hours of daylight. She told them they should turn around. The man rudely blew her off and he and the (hapless) wife continued on their way.
Of course, by the time they made it to the peak it was completely dark; disoriented and cold, with no flashlight, they wandered off onto the west side. They weren't found for two days as I recall and there were extensive rescue operations. This, to me, is a perfect example of someone who should be charged for every last dime of his rescue, from the fuel for the helicopter to the bandage for his skinned knee. Similarly, we all recall some instances this summer in which people announced on this very board they were heading up skyline with newbies. When strongly advised as to how unwise this was, they proceeded anyway, and just as we'd warned, some of these unlucky newbies had to be rescued via the helicopters. Even in my limited time here, I have heard half a dozen stories of simply inexcusable behavior that led to rescues. God only knows how many Eric the ranger has! When people have been advised and warned not to do something, and then stubbornly proceed to do that very thing, it seems to be quite reasonable to charge them for their rescues--if not actually fine them additionally, for tying up rescue personnel and putting them in danger.

RMRU and other fine organizations are the noble descendents of the self-help organizations that tamed the West. They were to help people who had experienced bad luck in the wilderness--lost hikers, ranchers, boy scouts, and the like--not enable hot-doggers to run their ego trips in a wilderness setting. Our (severely) limited public resources should be saved for the truly lost and needy. I don't ask the government to pay for my Salsa lessons, why should it pay to fly me off the side of a mountain I have been warned not to be on?

As mentioned in another thread, common sense in the wilderness seems to be in increasingly short supply, and I fear money is the only thing that talks to these folks. Charging for rescues has dramatically decreased them in Yosemite, as well as overall deaths/injuries. I don't see why it shouldn't be the same here, at least in situations of egregious irresponsibility.

[halhiker]

Should we only charge stupid people or the merely unfortunate for their rescue costs? And how do we determine who is a "hot-dogger" and who is unlucky?

Some would say we should charge those who take undue risks but then I guess they have never aspired to do something exceptional because doing something great in almost any aspect of life involves risk. And the greater the action, the greater the risk whether it be mountain climbing, business or sports.

If someone is breaking the law, they should be prosecuted. But before we start charging people rescues we should give them the right to waive rescue. I personally would waive rescue before I would pay for one. Self-sufficiency is part of what I enjoy about the wilderness.

As Jim B. said in his post, the fear of having to pay would dissuade a number of lost individuals from calling for rescue until it was too late or when the window of opportunity has passed. Those delays would be dangerous to those lost and rescuers as well.

I've never been lost nor have I ever needed rescue and I've had some epic adventures. But maybe I'm just lucky. But I do appreciate the work RMRU does and am going to make a donation to them for the holiday season. I hope others on the board will consider doing the same. That way rescues can remain "free".

[HikeUp]

Jim B.,

To reiterate halhiker...thanks for the info and the discussion on charging for rescue. I commend the SAR teams for all their efforts.

RMRU clearly will not charge for a rescue. I think you've made that clear

But it is not clear to me, after reading all of the above, whether or not other entities (county of residence, an agency that has to travel out of its territory, the ambulance that takes you from the helicopter to the hospital?...) could charge for a rescue.

Also, this statement confused me even more...

You can be charged for illegal activities (climbing the north face, etc.). But I haven’t heard of any back-charges other than at ski resorts and national parks.

Seems like it depends on where you are and who rescues you. May even depend on whether or not what you were doing was legal.

Perhaps public education is needed in this matter. Maybe it should be clearly stated, posted, made clear, etc. what the charges would be (if any) for a rescue. I don't know...just putting some ideas out there. I know it's not a black & white issue, but any further clarification would be appreciated

[Cy Kaicener]

Sure that he was going to die, Harper was halfway finished with the video recording when he was interrupted by the light from a hovering helicopter. He also got sick from drinking the creek water.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bossco/1960876732/

[Hikin_Jim]

Poor guy; he must have been terrified out of his mind.

He did some smart things though:

Harper made shelter out of leaves and rocks, and said he kept his body
warm by lighting a fire near the rocks and placing them against him.

It says he has liver problems possibly from drinking creek water. What on earth is in the Snow Creek area that could cause liver problems?

Edit: I just looked up the symptoms of girardia and cryptosporidium and those both cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, that sort of thing. Nothing to do with the liver. What the heck is in SJ's water??