Hikers Rescued on Skyline Trail - Feb 2

[halhiker]

I would vote for making the Skyline a "no rescue" zone. Make all users of the route completely responsible for their own well being. If they get in any time of trouble they are on their own. If in serious need of help, they can call someone they know, or die.

I am opposed to charging for rescues but I am not opposed to allowing for personal assumption of risk. To me, it is a much better option than closing a trail.

[Perry]

I'm sure some people would like to do that, but when somebody dies it would become a PR nightmare. How about a sign with a picture of an ice axe and crampons that says "Do you have these? You'll need them."

[Hikin_Jim]

The problem with the gene pool? There's no life guard.

[asabat]

The problem with the gene pool?

In nature that's not a bad thing - thin the herd. But we're talking humans here, so I guess not <g>. But I agree, I'd rather see a "no rescue" zone than a "do not enter" sign.

[magikwalt]

I have come to accept that given a recreation area, regardless of its type (caves, open ocean, hiking trails, rock climbing, mountain climbing, skateboarding parks, football fields and basketball courts), there will be "accidents" and people will need to be rescued.

In areas of high people concentration there are more rescuers and more rescues than the media finds interesting. When was the last time you heard about a lifeguard saving someone at a beach in Los Angeles? Happens almost everyday during the summer.

[Cy Kaicener]

I think it would be great if we had a fixed rope at the traverse at 7400 feet.
Another good idea is to have willow wands or stakes marking the trail. Better still have a warning sign to turn back if you dont have snow shoes, an ice axe, a belay, and crampons, but I dont think anyone would take notice.

[guest]

Personally,
I'm for not doing anything to the trail, it's so beautiful to have only nature & natural things.
I would not want it to become a Whitney or Grand Canyon, (although those areas have done a good job to minimize the effects, considering the amount of hikers they get).

I just feel the more "available" and doable, in any conditions, the more likely fools will be to attempt it.

This may not be a popular idea, and probably tough to implement, but I like it:
If the tramway can find out that people have hiked it in dangerous conditions, deny them the ride down. Granted, once they make it up, it's done, but I guarantee that if people knew this before, or during, (i.e. people on the trail warning them), they would think real hard before hiking it. If they can't make it back down, they can call a friend to meet them in Idyllwild.
How to tell these from the other serious hikers who have, say, gone to the peak, is the question. How about a camera at Grubb's lookout pointing to the end of Skyline?

It's just a thought, but we need to help SAR's & the Rangers etc. in this manner. Anything to keep it from getting closed!

ss

[Cy Kaicener]

That sounds good to me Scott

[drndr]

I already have a problem with regulating the great outdoors. At some point individuals have to take a personal responsibility. Skyline is already very popular, and the more press it gets, the more people want to challenge themselves on it, experienced or not. The far majority never need rescuing, I say start charging or fining the few who do need rescuing. Unpopular yes, but may make people think a little more, and I find the only thing that really makes some people stop and think is the all mighty dollar.

[cynthia23]

SS's suggestion is radical but worth considering. However, I continue to champion the one proven risk-reduction method: charging people for rescues. This is the only method that has PROVEN to reduce egregiously risky behavior on the part of people whose egos are in inverse proportion to their skillsets. I know people have concerns that "legitimate" people will get charged for their rescues (i.e. unforseen situations that befall responsible hikers, such as Ellen) but my understanding is that when this policy has been put in place, the charges are at the discretion of the rangers. Mostly they don't charge for the rescues; but from time to time, when the rangers think punishment is warranted, they do. This gives them the flexibility to (financially) punish those who have attempted hikes even when warned not to--such as the MORONS this weekend who attempted Skyline with full packs and starting at 9am (perhaps after a leisurely breakfast at the International House of Pancakes?) Sorry, but these f**** should PAY for putting innocent people's lives at risk. To my mind, the analogy is driving drunk--it's unacceptable not because it puts your own life at risk, but because it endangers OTHERS. This weekend's "All-Star Skyline Fools" is just ridiculous. The big issue here is NOT these people but the NUMEROUS rescue personnel they put in danger. Again, I hate to be the gloomy paranoid Phydeux accuses me of being, but you don't have to be very paranoid to shudder at the thought of rescue helicopters flying close to mountains in 80 mph wind gusts or the RMRU members slipping and sliding down Chino Canyon to extricate the Lost Grown-up Boys huddling under the tram. For God's sake, obviously it's only a matter of time before somebody is killed! These rescue and RMRU people are being put in serious danger!!! And for what? So some egotistical macho dolts can brag at parties out at 29 Palms. Granted they're just young and dumb and not thinking and granted I've unthinkingly done most of these dumb things too, never considering the harm I could cause to OTHERS, but still ... It CAN'T GO ON LIKE THIS.