Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
steepconcrete

Guy fined at Flachey..??

Recommended Posts

$4k for having to get rescued after going OB, plus a undisclosed amount for using someone else's pass....did I hear this right? What a jackass..and come on at least hide the pass..tell the trollers you lost it or something...now your getting someone else busted too.

 

Where was he??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking out loud...

 

There could be a difference between a private ski area charging for services rather than a public entity (County, city, state, Federal).

 

I think this is one that I don't have a problem with charging for rescue on. Haven't thought it all the way through just yet, but I do see some differnces.

 

The Ski area may ARGUABLY incur some liability if they don't rescue, they do not have governmental immunity like the others. However, because you are by contract (read the fine print) supposed to stay in bounds, and becuase they posted warnings that a fee could be charged, I think charging simply to recoup costs has a valid basis.

 

Remember, this is not a BC skier operating on public land.

 

Just some initial thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So hypathetical, you skin up bachy and desend south west side out of bounds. head on down to hosmer lake and camp for the night. Make your way back to bachy parking lot by way of hosmer lake trail passing by starks lake, just for a fun winter weekend outing... when search a rescue comes to find you and they see you set up at camp drinkin a little hot choculate and whisky. Are you going to have to pay them four thousand dollars because they came to look for you? confused.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have they ever considered just posting signs that say "cut rope at your own risk"? that way if they see some tracks cross the line they don't have to search for the guy. either he's prepared and gets out or he meets darwin.

 

it's always just struck me as contrived and ambiguous that you can't cross the line at a ski area, but you can hike up from the base of any mountain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly, there was an article in the Bend Bulletin a while back that had the president of Mt. Bachelor on there saying they didn't advertise that you can skin up to the summit and ski through the area and out of bounds, but that they had no problems with it if you didn't endanger the safety of guests or disrupt mountain operations. In that situation one would think the sheriff would be called for a rescue, which would almost certainly be free. It must be because the guy rode the lifts I guess, and I'm sure they wanted to nail the guy for the pass violation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how would they know if you rode the lift up or not though? If all they see is tracks headed out into the abyss and none coming back in, then are they gonna send in fifteen patrollers and charge 4 grand every time... even if there was no reason for them to come looking for someone that is on an excurtion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a related note...I was skinning up into Heather Canyon two weeks ago and ran into 2 patrollers who where skiing out checking the coverage on the creek. They were pretty cool and just mentioned that a had a few more creek crossings ahead of me and that the snow pack was pretty stable.

 

I ended up lapping Mercury bowl a few times in perfect untracked conditions. Every time I skinned up to the top where it meets Shooting Star I got tons of crazed stares from the folks trapped on the groomed side of the rope. cantfocus.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The seven teen year old is one thing, cause his parents where probable looking for him and so they sent a rescue team in but don't they need to have some one called in missing to just go out and run a search? I mean what if i'm over on the south side takin a toke break and four patrolers follow my tracks, and claim they had to rescue me and then charge me 4k... sounds a little shisty to me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, either they rescued you, or they didn't.

 

If you are in the BC and they ski or skin up to you and ask if you need a rescue, you just say no. They can't charge you. You don't even need to tell them who you are...assuming it is ski patrollers from the private ski area. This is especially true if you are not skiing lifts and are just touring in the BC and they try to “rescue” you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't even sound like a rescue. A search, Yes. I can see them charging you if you actually had to be rescued. This guy sounds like he could have got out by himself. There was just one track right. How many people to follow one track? 13 fucking patrollers, including snowmobiles and snow cats. Deschutes County Search and Rescue was placed on standby? Why? Send them in.

 

A little shisty indeed.

 

Sounds like someone got mad about the use of anothers pass and then theres the fact that some idoit had to go and ding up the snow cat.

 

Yet another reason not to go to the resorts and pay outrageous amounts of money to ski.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like someone got mad about the use of anothers pass and then theres the fact that some idoit had to go and ding up the snow cat.

That's the part thats a bit much. Charging the rescuee because someone screwed up the snowcat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Twenty minutes before the mountain closed shop on Saturday, a ski patroller sweeping the west catch line noticed a fresh pair of tracks that crossed the boundary. . .”

 

“Less than an hour after the skier's tracks were spotted, 13 ski patrollers began a search of the area.”

 

“By 7:50 p.m., the skier — whose name Mount Bachelor declined to release — was found . . .”

 

“[H]e got lost and was in deep snow, Johnston said. The stray skier was cold but uninjured.”

 

 

Yeah....he'd been out there for a couple of hours....the lifts are now closed....its dark....and he's lost.

 

Sounds to me like he needed to be rescued.

Edited by Rodchester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost?

 

"Apparently he had crossed the boundary three times that day."

 

Maybe he knew where he was? Cold,yeah maybe. That doesn't justify a rescue in my opinion.

 

the lifts are closed...so what?

 

it is dark...so what? When your eyes get adjusted you can still see well.

 

And what with the charge and all, when they could have brought in Deschutes County Search and Rescue which would have been free for the so called lost person?

 

That is why I said "Sounds like someone got mad about the use of anothers pass and then theres the fact that some idoit had to go and ding up the snow cat."

 

and still 13 people, one track?

 

it is suspect...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fejas has got a really good point. True it's not advertised but anyone can skin or hike up Mt Batchy as long as they don't interfere with patrol operations. How do they know who the track going OB's belongs to? I've heard stories of people getting in trouble hiking up to summit and skiing off the back to get to Kwol Butte. It's public land how can they charge you if your not a passholder/ticket buyer? Very interesting point. And yes the kid was a total idiot and was on his way to need a rescue. Hosmer Lk is super flat, the powder is way deep and he might have found the road if he had a compass or GPS, but.....he was probably spending the night. He should be fined, but 4K? That's a little excessive. Just my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the paper says "lost" yes lost. I don't hear him telling the paper he wasn't lost. Hmmm doesn't sound supect at all.

 

If you were him and you weren't lost, don't you think you'd be complaining?

 

I think its pretty clear he accepted the help that they rendered...if not they wouldn't have rendered it.

 

I have been in a situation where a rescue was called when it wasn't needed. When contact was made we laughed at them and asked why they had launched a rescue...(long story and a whole lot of error on someone's part, someone not with us)...to make a long story short after we finished laughing, we declined any help and stayed out another four days (as planned).

 

If you don't need to be rescued, why would you accept rescue.

 

Granted, we don't know all that happened. But from what we know, there is nothing suspect. He was lost and cold.

 

"Apparently he had crossed the boundary three times that day."

 

That doesn't mean he wasn't lost at the time they found him. wazzup.gif

Edited by Rodchester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lost?and still 13 people, one track?

That's pretty much standard procedure for sweep. You think they are going to send 1 person? Mountains have been sued for not finding people quickly enough - they have no idea the skier's condition, or how soon they'll find him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well the paper says "lost" yes lost. I don't hear him telling the paper he wasn't lost. Hmmm doesn't sound supect at all.

 

If you were him and you weren't lost, don't you think you'd be complaining?

 

I think its pretty clear he accepted the help that they rendered...if not they wouldn't have rendered it.

 

I have been in a situation where a rescue was called when it wasn't needed. When contact was made we laughed at them and asked why they had launched a rescue...(long story and a whole lot of error on someone's part, someone not with us)...to make a long story short after we finished laughing, we declined any help and stayed out another four days (as planned).

 

If you don't need to be rescued, why would you accept rescue.

 

Granted, we don't know all that happened. But from what we know, there is nothing suspect. He was lost and cold.

 

"Apparently he had crossed the boundary three times that day."

 

That doesn't mean he wasn't lost at the time they found him. wazzup.gif

 

I wasn't saying that the dood wasn't lost, cause it sounded like he was if it took 3hrs to find and get him out...

 

I was just curious if they would have intentions on doing the same to some one to was out there dicking off that wasn't lost. With the way the signs read, along with the amount of times they have done this all ready this year, it would not suprize me if they would try to charge some one for some of the above mentioned situations...

 

Thats All....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, guys, guys! Under the terms of the Patriot Act, if the Attorney General orders you rescued, he doesen't have to give a reason or give you an attorney after the rescue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell...I think Flatchy should just declare the guy an "Enemy Combatant" and lock the stupid @#$% up and throw away the key!

 

One less gaper in the backcountry messin' up my lines! bigdrink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

backcountry, with a cuppa hot cocoa, your bivy rig all out, and a welcome to SAR folks is different that wallowing in snow without bivy gear or safety equipment. I bet the kid was happy, happy, happy, to get out of the woods that night.

 

If the kid used Bache lifts to access BC, Bache is liable. However, if he was lost inbounds, no charge would have been incurred. When he went OB and crossed the boundary, even though Bache brought him up there, didn't tell him to break the rules, so he now can incur billing for rescue.

 

confusing, but appropro. leaseholders on federal land are liable if they are witting participants in someone's fu--ups, but not if the yahoos break the rules set by the leaseholders, i believe...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×