Also, very good article. It would be nice for people to read this who share the common misconceptions you address. Of course, there aren't many of those people on SP, but maybe you could post this to your blog. or someone else can
I'd love to add up the total cost of stand-by ambulances at football games, to say nothing of trainers, tape and other medical supplies, and all the rest - - in taxpayer-finance football stadiums from middle school through college and up to pro.
And climbers are irresponsible thrill-seekers imposing costs on others?
(in heavy southern accent) "Come on now man, Football is American. Climbing and all that other junk is granola eatin' hippy nonsense. Now where did i leave my Marlboro's, Coors light, and apple pie.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaw!!!!
This article is to make people aware that climbing related rescues are not the source of high rescues costs. My numbers are just ones that I pulled out of the AAC publication.
The cost estimates from the NPS were obtained from the AAC and their publication about rescues. Plus the 3.5 million figure is for Yosemite only, I don't know if that was made as clear as it could have been.
The numbers don't include aircraft used because usually the aircraft are military aircraft that use the rescue missions as training, which the government takes care of through the defense budget.
Chief, thanks for the input from a SAR Operator, I am not one and do not know all of the ins and outs of SAR. This was just an article for the non climbing community to understand simply what we do and that we aren't the only ones out there enjoying the outdoors.
Chief - go back and read the AAC materials carefully (Charley Shimanski's piece). Overall, SAR is .15% of the total NPS budget. Denali SAR ops account for 3.4% of this .15%. On a per visitor basis, the total cost of SAR is $0.015 (1.5 cents).
I agree about the dwindling reliance on self-rescue. In any case, every time you do a one-skid or put someone out on the hoist it is "real", training or actual operation. How it fits into a budget expense category is artificial.
I remember once when i was climbing the East-side of Mt. Shasta, i come across a climber who was trying to call 911 because he was lost. I said WTF and pointed him in the right direction. This guy didn't even try to figure out were he was. I wonder how many times this happens.
"They might not know why they are drawn, but they know that when the come off the mountain, they will be a changed person. One has to understand why we climb before they can criticize climbers as thrill seeking junkies."
You are right. I am just starting my adventure in climbing, and while I barely have a fraction of the experience that most people on this site have, I can relate to that statement. Like most things in my life, I just decided on a whim that I was going to start climbing mountains. I don't know why, but I sure know it was not for a "thrill". I hate thrill seeking activities! You sure wouldn't catch me jumping out of a plane or off a bridge! But once I reached the top of my first mountain, I knew why. I needed a sense of accomplishment, something to work toward, something to make life even more enjoyable-I needed to be at the top of the world. It did change me, but only for the better.
How can climbers not be to blame for the rescues they necessitate?
But that is not why I voted as I did. The article doesn't seem to stick to the point and often bounces from one place to another and then back again. I think O'Reilly's a clown, too, but your title suggests you want to exonerate climbers for the trouble they sometimes get into, yet you never really make that argument a part of this. It seems more like a rant against demagogues like O'Reilly. Maybe the title should be "What Bill O'Reilly Just Doesn't Get."
I agree that climbers should be to blame for what they get themselves into but that is not the point of the article. The point is to show that climbers aren't responsible for all of the rescues that take place. Dayikers and overnighter hikers are responsible for more resuces than climbers but climbers are constantly critized because they are always in the media spotlight. Everyone has to take responsibility for the concequences of their descisions and climbers are often looked at as making the "worst" descisions for climbing mountains. That is what this article is about, how climbers are not to blame for all the rescues and the percieved cost of these rescues to the taxpayers.
I couldn't agree more with your article, or with Snoop Dogg's sentiments. What makes me laugh is all these people bitching about climbers and the costs of rescuing them, when statistically, driving your car is far more dangerous! Why don't we ban driving, then, since we spend way, way more taxpayer money rescuing people from car accidents? Funny, haven't heard any proposals for that one recently. Anyway, nicely written. F--- Bill Oreilly!
avidwanderer - May 16, 2007 7:32 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Stop driving
Probably because driving is essential to our economy, and the risks outway the benefits for the general public.
Great article! It is far from a rant about Bill O'Reiley and his cluelessness. You take an experience like climbing Rainier and put words to a summit experience that can be difficult to articulate. Doing so may allow someone like him to understand that we are mostly far more than just thrill seekers. Great job.
Climb On!
Patrick
Furthermore, I'd like to hear a fool like him go off on people who got into a car accident on the way to an amusement park or the movies. Hey, they were going thrill-seeking, right? Give me a break.
Thousands of TIMES more money is spent on folks with little or no health insurance who are in hospitals. Yet folks want to whine about climbers because we're visible. Like much public debate today, folks who have no no clue what's going on insist upon arguing the facts.
Thanks for bringing up some topics not well understood by the general public. I have similar discussions with many of my non-climbing friends and family members.
As the climbing community continues to grow I feel it becomes increasingly crucial to stress the importance of preparation and personal responsibility. It only takes one missed step, or one popped anchor to take an outing from a routine scenario to an emergency scenario.
I also have the same conversations with my friends and family. It is important that people prepare for climbs and I think that most of the times they don't. If I'm going to an unfamiliar mountain, I'll spend a week or so researching it, trying to learn the mountain even before I step foot on it. You sum it up nicely, "t only takes one missed step, or one popped anchor to take an outing from a routine scenario to an emergency scenario." And how true that is.
The Defiant One - Apr 27, 2007 12:39 pm - Voted 10/10
On a lighter noteSnoop Dogg says it best
Click above and watch till the 30 second mark.
Also, very good article. It would be nice for people to read this who share the common misconceptions you address. Of course, there aren't many of those people on SP, but maybe you could post this to your blog. or someone else can
Cheers,
John
Grizz42 - Apr 27, 2007 6:35 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: On a lighter noteThanks John.
I think Snoop Dogg did say it a little better than I did. If you know someplace that I can sumbit this article let me know.
Arthur Digbee - Apr 27, 2007 2:10 pm - Voted 10/10
Nice articleI'd love to add up the total cost of stand-by ambulances at football games, to say nothing of trainers, tape and other medical supplies, and all the rest - - in taxpayer-finance football stadiums from middle school through college and up to pro.
And climbers are irresponsible thrill-seekers imposing costs on others?
Grizz42 - Apr 27, 2007 6:37 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Nice articleI never thought about it like that, but it is a great point. Plus we are the unconventional thrill seekers that actually leave city limits.
J.J. - May 20, 2007 9:22 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: Nice article(in heavy southern accent) "Come on now man, Football is American. Climbing and all that other junk is granola eatin' hippy nonsense. Now where did i leave my Marlboro's, Coors light, and apple pie.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaw!!!!
God save us.
stevepack - Apr 30, 2007 10:57 am - Voted 10/10
Nice articleExcellent article!
Grizz42 - May 3, 2007 11:43 am - Hasn't voted
Re: Source?This article is to make people aware that climbing related rescues are not the source of high rescues costs. My numbers are just ones that I pulled out of the AAC publication.
The cost estimates from the NPS were obtained from the AAC and their publication about rescues. Plus the 3.5 million figure is for Yosemite only, I don't know if that was made as clear as it could have been.
The numbers don't include aircraft used because usually the aircraft are military aircraft that use the rescue missions as training, which the government takes care of through the defense budget.
Chief, thanks for the input from a SAR Operator, I am not one and do not know all of the ins and outs of SAR. This was just an article for the non climbing community to understand simply what we do and that we aren't the only ones out there enjoying the outdoors.
robk - May 11, 2007 5:27 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Source?Chief - go back and read the AAC materials carefully (Charley Shimanski's piece). Overall, SAR is .15% of the total NPS budget. Denali SAR ops account for 3.4% of this .15%. On a per visitor basis, the total cost of SAR is $0.015 (1.5 cents).
I agree about the dwindling reliance on self-rescue. In any case, every time you do a one-skid or put someone out on the hoist it is "real", training or actual operation. How it fits into a budget expense category is artificial.
Been there done that too.
Wallylongridge - Apr 30, 2007 9:00 pm - Hasn't voted
No RescueI remember once when i was climbing the East-side of Mt. Shasta, i come across a climber who was trying to call 911 because he was lost. I said WTF and pointed him in the right direction. This guy didn't even try to figure out were he was. I wonder how many times this happens.
Theonestar - May 1, 2007 1:10 pm - Voted 10/10
you are right"They might not know why they are drawn, but they know that when the come off the mountain, they will be a changed person. One has to understand why we climb before they can criticize climbers as thrill seeking junkies."
You are right. I am just starting my adventure in climbing, and while I barely have a fraction of the experience that most people on this site have, I can relate to that statement. Like most things in my life, I just decided on a whim that I was going to start climbing mountains. I don't know why, but I sure know it was not for a "thrill". I hate thrill seeking activities! You sure wouldn't catch me jumping out of a plane or off a bridge! But once I reached the top of my first mountain, I knew why. I needed a sense of accomplishment, something to work toward, something to make life even more enjoyable-I needed to be at the top of the world. It did change me, but only for the better.
Josh_Inked - May 2, 2007 12:20 am - Voted 10/10
Very Good ArticleMuch of what you have stated i had heard before, but I liked the way you but it all together. I am forewarding a link to my O'Reilly fanatic father.
Bob Sihler - May 2, 2007 9:40 pm - Voted 8/10
I respectfully disagreeHow can climbers not be to blame for the rescues they necessitate?
But that is not why I voted as I did. The article doesn't seem to stick to the point and often bounces from one place to another and then back again. I think O'Reilly's a clown, too, but your title suggests you want to exonerate climbers for the trouble they sometimes get into, yet you never really make that argument a part of this. It seems more like a rant against demagogues like O'Reilly. Maybe the title should be "What Bill O'Reilly Just Doesn't Get."
Grizz42 - May 6, 2007 9:52 am - Hasn't voted
Re: I respectfully disagreeI agree that climbers should be to blame for what they get themselves into but that is not the point of the article. The point is to show that climbers aren't responsible for all of the rescues that take place. Dayikers and overnighter hikers are responsible for more resuces than climbers but climbers are constantly critized because they are always in the media spotlight. Everyone has to take responsibility for the concequences of their descisions and climbers are often looked at as making the "worst" descisions for climbing mountains. That is what this article is about, how climbers are not to blame for all the rescues and the percieved cost of these rescues to the taxpayers.
alpinedon - May 3, 2007 1:03 pm - Hasn't voted
Stop drivingI couldn't agree more with your article, or with Snoop Dogg's sentiments. What makes me laugh is all these people bitching about climbers and the costs of rescuing them, when statistically, driving your car is far more dangerous! Why don't we ban driving, then, since we spend way, way more taxpayer money rescuing people from car accidents? Funny, haven't heard any proposals for that one recently. Anyway, nicely written. F--- Bill Oreilly!
avidwanderer - May 16, 2007 7:32 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Stop drivingProbably because driving is essential to our economy, and the risks outway the benefits for the general public.
Alpine72 - May 3, 2007 7:44 pm - Hasn't voted
How much money is spenton people who do nothing with there lives but sit around and get fat and unhealthy??
shanrickv - May 4, 2007 12:42 pm - Voted 10/10
Far From a "Rant"Great article! It is far from a rant about Bill O'Reiley and his cluelessness. You take an experience like climbing Rainier and put words to a summit experience that can be difficult to articulate. Doing so may allow someone like him to understand that we are mostly far more than just thrill seekers. Great job.
Climb On!
Patrick
Andinistaloco - May 4, 2007 1:38 pm - Voted 10/10
NIcely writtenBill O'Reilly's an ass clown.
Furthermore, I'd like to hear a fool like him go off on people who got into a car accident on the way to an amusement park or the movies. Hey, they were going thrill-seeking, right? Give me a break.
Thousands of TIMES more money is spent on folks with little or no health insurance who are in hospitals. Yet folks want to whine about climbers because we're visible. Like much public debate today, folks who have no no clue what's going on insist upon arguing the facts.
mrbynum - May 4, 2007 6:01 pm - Voted 9/10
Good things to think aboutI think Bill O'Reilly would tell you to shut up!
Thanks for bringing up some topics not well understood by the general public. I have similar discussions with many of my non-climbing friends and family members.
As the climbing community continues to grow I feel it becomes increasingly crucial to stress the importance of preparation and personal responsibility. It only takes one missed step, or one popped anchor to take an outing from a routine scenario to an emergency scenario.
Grizz42 - May 6, 2007 10:03 am - Hasn't voted
Re: Good things to think aboutI also have the same conversations with my friends and family. It is important that people prepare for climbs and I think that most of the times they don't. If I'm going to an unfamiliar mountain, I'll spend a week or so researching it, trying to learn the mountain even before I step foot on it. You sum it up nicely, "t only takes one missed step, or one popped anchor to take an outing from a routine scenario to an emergency scenario." And how true that is.
Thanks for the feedback.