An Ohio man needed rescue on Mount Washington, and he may get billed for it. But should he?

Mount Washington, N.H. (Wikipedia/Danielc192 photo)

If there is one seemingly unsolvable quandary in the outdoors, it’s whether people who are rescued should be billed by their rescuers.

There are a lot of threads to this narrative. First, search and rescue costs can be expensive – even with volunteers doing most of the work, it costs money to reach remote locations and sometimes fly helicopters to find and extricate distressed hikers and climbers. Many of these rescues happen in rural counties that are strapped for cash as it is. In some cases, they’ll get help from military units (flight time for helicopter rescues goes down as training for the crews involved), but a lot of times you’re also involving county personnel like sheriff’s deputies, firefighters and EMTs who get paid to be out there. Someone must foot the bill at some point.

Federal workers get wrapped up in it, too. As do their resources. They often work alongside state and county rescuers, mostly because the bulk of these rescues are taking place on public lands, and most of those are federally owned.

Some search and rescue efforts that stretch into days, involving air and ground crews, can run up a serious tab.

Another subplot: Those in need of rescue are often at fault for their own predicament. That sounds harsh, but usually it’s true. Dehydrated hikers in the Grand Canyon often underestimate the heat and don’t bring enough water. Alpine hikers and climbers misjudge the terrain, the weather and sometimes their own capabilities in environments that are inherently challenging. Gear junkies sometimes place too much trust in electronic devices that fail when signals are lost, or batteries go dead. Those with emergency locator beacons are, at times, bolder than they’d normally be, either taking greater chances or, in some cases, activating their locators when they are simply tired of the effort.

Given the greater numbers of people who are heading into the backcountry, the costs of rescues are piling up.

This has pushed some states to enact policies that would make rescued parties liable for the costs of their salvation. New Hampshire is one of those states, and a recent story by The Associated Press highlighted one such instance where an overwhelmed hiker might end up getting billed for the trouble.

The hiker, 80-year-old James Clark, was ascending Mount Washington with two of his grandsons when he told them to go on to the summit without him. The younger men did so, then took a different route down, the AP reported. Clark didn’t meet them back at the trailhead, and that’s when search and rescue was called.

“Clark was found Friday immobile in the fetal position with signs of hypothermia hours after telling his two grandsons to go on without him. Clark was treated at a hospital for non-life-threatening injuries and released Saturday,” the AP reported.

Mount Washington and the surrounding peaks can be tricky. Already, two other people died in the area within a week of Clark’s rescue. The mountain is known for having some of the worst weather on the planet. Rescuers said Clark wasn’t dressed for the potential weather extremes seen on the peak, which can be summery and warm at the base and full-on winter conditions on the summit, often with little warning.

That alleged lack of preparation is what might end up being the reason Clark gets socked with the tab.

I’ve got mixed feeling about this. Part of me thinks people should be held accountable for the bad decisions they make. Plenty of information exists, available at your fingertips, that can guide your preparations for the outdoors. Choosing not to be informed is just that: a choice. And in most areas of life, bad choices have consequences. Maybe some of those consequences should hit folks in the wallet. Perhaps a financial incentive would make people more self-reliant, more prepared, and safer.

But my thinking gets turned around when human nature comes into play. It goes something like this:

A hiker gets lost. Or injured. Or something else happens that makes that person think, “I’m in some trouble here.” But before activating that beacon or pulling out the phone for a 911 call, the hiker pauses.

This is gonna cost me. A lot. Maybe I can tough it out.

And then the hiker gets deeper in trouble, maybe irrecoverably.

That’s the fear I’ve heard expressed on forums by people who are part of the search and rescue community. They worry that folks will choose saving money over their own lives when they get in trouble, and that leads to more search and recovery missions instead of search and rescue. Crews will still take risks in recovery missions; they differ in that the ending of a recovery mission is always a mournful one.

As I’ve thought about this, the prospect of saving lives outweighs the irritation I feel about people being dumb. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want people pushing the button on their SPOT device because their feet are tired. I want people to be responsible. But I don’t want people dying in the bush because they were afraid of a five-figure bill coming in the mail.

Will New Hampshire authorities charge Mr. Clark for his rescue? It sounds like they might. But should they? I’d hate to think they’ll be pulling more bodies off Mount Washington because financial considerations won out when a call for help should have been made.

Bob Doucette

8 thoughts on “An Ohio man needed rescue on Mount Washington, and he may get billed for it. But should he?

  1. Yeah, this is an interesting take. The statistics woould e interesting here, to see under what circumstances people call for help. Last year I witnessed a rescue on Monadnock. Guy twisted his knee, unable to walk. But relatively cheap, I suspect. No helicopter needed and got him down under man power.

    • Sounds like a more routine rescue for sure. There are some I’ve heard about (even from friend got got a lift) that were more involved. Helicopters and such after getting stuck in a particularly rugged part of the Rockies. I can’t imagine how much something like that would cost, but also can’t imagine what those folks would have done to get out of an extremely difficult area with an injured climber.

  2. You also missed a thread in this problem. Those volunteers? Often they’re putting their lives on the line to save people who were not prepared for the situation. It’s more than the resources and manpower but also (wo)man lives.

    If I call Mountain Rescue here, it will be my friends and neighbors who are coming to help me in a sketchy situation. I would hate to put them in that place unless it was truly an accident, meaning that I’d done my research and stayed within my expertise.

    • It’s not so much that I missed it, but I’m not sure where it falls in the question of whether the rescued party should pay for it. That risk is there no matter what. If the county, state or the feds pay, the rescuers are at risk. If the rescued party has to pay, the rescuers are at risk.

      That said, your point is solid in that people shouldn’t blithely wander into wild areas. They need to be prepared so they don’t add to their own risk as well as that of the people tasked with helping them.

      • It’s my low opinion of humanity showing. Since people can’t think about their own safety, I assume they won’t think about the safety of others. Yet, somehow they think about their pocketbook

      • There needs to be a gif option on these comments. Words will have to do: You’re spot on. It’s weird what makes people pause, and what doesn’t.

        Meanwhile, in the FB page, I’ve seen three different posts about rescues or a missing hiker: Helicopter rescue on S Maroon, another rescue at Broken Hand Pass and a missing hiker reported to be around Kit Carson Peak. Saddle up!

      • This summer is a complicated one for people—normal 4th of July season stuff isn’t out yet and I’m SHOCKED at how many people are asking questions in FB groups about “what to hike in Ouray” and “I want to do Ice Lakes” when there aren’t many peaks open and Blue Lakes/Ice Lakes are really avalanche damaged.

      • Oh yeah. People don’t understand that what they’ll see on the Fourth — especially after this last snow dump — will be akin to what they might see on Memorial Day. And that’s not even accounting for the avy debris you mentioned. I’m looking at two windows — late July and late August. The late July one will include some careful research on route conditions.

        To your point: I saw a recent pic (June 23) from the summit of Sneffels. Yankee Boy Basin is a sea of white. People need to know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.