Why Join American Alpine Club?

[iain]

I can say with some certainty that no one is at risk for being charged for nat'l guard or airforce assistance in a SAR operation in the N.W. If a contract helicopter is involved, that could change, as they may bill the county sheriff, and that's a big bill to swallow.

 

Most SAR groups in the states would probably prefer to not charge anything, as they would then be charging for a service and be open to lawsuit in cases where their "duty to act" was not upheld. (Though rescue groups, volunteer or not, are still subject to suit).

[icegirl]

interesting artical regarding rescue costs and such on Denali, and how the park could have recouped money if all american climbers on the mountain had AAC insurance.

 

http://www.americanalpineclub.org/policy/DenaliRescueStudyOfficialResponse032001.htm

 

another good link...

 

http://www.americanalpineclub.org/policy/RescueCostRecoveryTimetable.htm

 

[ 08-13-2002, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: icegirl ]

[icegirl]

I guess in the case I was involved in (not my dive boat, but another group lost a diver - he was blown off a shipwreck and floating around in the strait of juan de fuca) , the divers were found negligent, and the coast guard was annoyed. It was not a SAR issue. It was a scramble directly from the coast guard base. I think the persons diving insurance covered the bill.

[Roger]

Iain, regarding the Oregon statute, it's ORS 401.590 (text below). What I didn't know is that it caps the amount that can be recovered at a maximum of $500 per rescued person. It also applies to hikers, hunters and, at least theoretically, snowmobilers. The interesting bits are at sub (5), where it lists the kinds of things that the state of Oregon considers evidence of "reasonable care," including using a cell phone "when appropriate." Applying the statute to the infamous Lambone Incident, where they used the phone, but thereby triggered a rescue they didn't (at least initially) want, I wonder if he'd get hit with the $500 fine.

 

401.590 Reimbursement of public body for search and rescue by benefited persons; amount; exceptions.

 

(1) A public body may collect an amount specified in this section as reimbursement for the cost of search and rescue activities when the public body conducts search and rescue activities for the benefit of hikers, climbers, hunters and other users of wilderness areas or unpopulated forested or mountainous recreational areas in this state.

 

(2) The public body may collect moneys as authorized by this section from each person for whose benefit search and rescue activities are conducted. The public body may not collect more than $500 from an individual under this section and may not collect more than the actual cost of the search and rescue activities from all of the individuals for whose benefit the activities are conducted.

 

(3) A public body may obtain reimbursement under this section only when:

 

(a) Reasonable care was not exercised by the individuals for whose benefit the search and rescue activities are conducted; or

 

(b) Applicable laws were violated by such individuals.

 

(4) Any individual who is charged a fee for reimbursement under this section may appeal the charge or the amount of the fee to the public body that charged the fee.

 

(5) For the purposes of subsection (3) of this section, evidence of reasonable care includes:

 

(a) The individuals possessed experience and used equipment that was appropriate for the known conditions of weather and terrain.

 

(b) The individuals used or attempted to use locating devices or cellular telephones when appropriate.

 

© The individuals notified responsible persons or organizations of the expected time of departure and the expected time of return and the planned location or route of activity.

 

(d) The individuals had maps and orienteering equipment and used trails or other routes that were appropriate for the conditions.

 

(6) As used in this section, "public body" means any unit of state or local government that conducts or has authority to conduct search and rescue activities. [1995 c.570 §1]

[iain]

Thanks Roger. There have been a good number of "violations" of this statute in Oregon, but no one has been charged yet (as far as I know?)

 

[ 08-13-2002, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: iain ]

[icegirl]

 

 

[ 08-13-2002, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: icegirl ]

[Greg_W]

Good to hear some of this info., but am still undecided. I perused their website to try and find out what groups they support or if they just lobby on their own. I know someone said that they used to work in conjunction with Access Fund, but do they partner with groups like Sierra Club, Earthfirst, WWF, etc?

 

Greg W

[Dru]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Greg W:

Good to hear some of this info., but am still undecided. I perused their website to try and find out what groups they support or if they just lobby on their own. I know someone said that they used to work in conjunction with Access Fund, but do they partner with groups like Sierra Club, Earthfirst, WWF, etc?

 

Greg W

---

oops if they partner with Earth First they just lost Fairweather as a member!

[jon]

If there is one reason to join in my mind is the rescue insurance. If happen to be picked up by a medivac helicopter billed $5000 out of your own pocket for the ride. Most insurace companies don't cover that.

[CleeshterFeeshter]

I joined for the IRS 503© deduction. It works like this: you ask for the sponsorship letter from the AAC. You claim that you are going to Alaska to "explore" the mountain environment. (some remote mountain somewhere) - Naturally, you keep all of your expense records, food, flights, clothing, and you itemize the deductions on your 1040. This is agressive accounting at its best. Also the $75 fee is tax deductible. Let's see, my $75 membership fee returned a tax return advantage of $500 - go figure.

[erik]

cleester did the aliens tell you about that??

 

that is some good beta....and i think i will certainly use it to my advantage......

 

beer when in boise!

 

[icegirl]

This reminds me of something that hit the news a few weeks ago about Harborview. Did anyone see the blurb on the little golf cart they have outfitted to run from the helipad to the ER? Supposed to help curtail some of the ever increasing healthcare costs?

Well, got into a converstion at work with a girl who was airlifted to HMC after a near fatal car accident. her insurance paid for the helicopter and almost all of her hospital bills, but not the $500 ambulance fee from the helipad to the ER (just around the corner of the hospital, like 75-100yds?) Supposedly the golf cart will only cost $5 (not including staffing and such).

 

How do ya like them apples...

[icegirl]

How much does a helicopter ride down from a mountain cost? (or an all out search rescue for that matter?)

 

Just curious.

[iain]

That is a difficult question to answer. Do you include all the work time missed by volunteers? do you count per-hour operational costs of helicopters? do you count medical costs? do you count volunteer-related expenses and risks? you can see why it is difficult to levy a fine on someone.

[Alpine_Tom]

What exactly does the rescue insurance pay for? Does it reimburse the local SAR guys for their time, expenses, helicopter costs?

If you're not getting charged for a rescue anyhow, why buy insurance (or sell insurance) for it? Or is it intended more for other countries where you would get hit for the bill?

[IceScrewed]

I don't think Icegirl's comment about the Divers Alert Network is at all off base. If you read the DAN rescue policy, you'll see it does not at all specify anything about diving related rescue. At least a couple of my friends who climb for a living (now there's an oxymoron--or was it just moron?) have DAN insurance for potential mountain rescues. The AAC policy, as I recall, limits rescues to a certain altitude, where the DAN policy does not.

 

As for the rest, I've belonged for too long and did not renew this year. I will always buy the ANAM to learn what not to do. That plus my DAN insurance plus my Access Fund membership (an advocacy organization doing something for ALL climbers, whether they're paying or not--who helped reopen Peshastin and are working on Index access as well as improving Frenchman's) gets me a very targeted result that costs less than AAC. I'm sure there's a good reason to belong to the AAC--but I couldn't tell you what it is.

[Norman_Clyde]

Regarding the question about the cost of transporting the body of a deceased climber back to his or her home country: when my dad climbed Kilimanjaro in 1993, he was required to purchase insurance to cover the potential expense of shipping his body back just in order to get permission to climb. He was part of a small group guided by Eric Simonson. I'm sure this is not required for all mountains in all nations, but I guess Kilimanjaro is notorious for precipitating altitude-induced deaths among gung-ho European gapers. One middle aged German client (not in my dad's group) dropped dead from a heart attack the day my dad summitted. I'm sure a poor country like Tanzania doesn't need the expense of sending deceased Europeans back to their respective Dead Letter offices.

[Chode-A-Boy]

hell, i don't see the big dealy-o. None of you losers has the two years climbing experience to join!

[Rodchester]

"i hear lynn is tough on her men and burns through an average of 2 per year... im certain her new bio written by greg child has more info on her love life..."

 

Come on....tough on men? Only two a year? That’s not tough!!

 

Anyway......the AAC is an all around good organization. It is a true non-profit 501©(3) WHICH enables you to write off dues and any other donations. (US tax payers on that one. Sorry to our Canuck Bros).

 

Agree the rescue insurance is a good thing. Most foreign govts look at membership as a guarantee of payment so they will launch rescue. In fact, many foreign govts required membership until recently (this usually manifested itself in the need for a AAC approval before you could even get a permit. This was true until this year in Nepal). Anyway, point is that many foreign govts see AAC membership as a guarantee of payment, so they will launch a rescue.

 

Also the AAC is active in congress. It is not as active locally as the access fund....a break-off from the AAC.

 

The cost per year is not cheap.

 

Also I would point out that they AAC does actively support climbers by running the hut system. The includes the AAC Teton Climbers Ranch. This lets you stay I a very cool cabin with great facilities at the base the Tetons for a mere $8.00 per night. (with showers etc.) Other faculties (in the park) cost between $90.00 and $200.00 per night in GTNP. Imagine going to Rainier and staying above Paradise for only $8.00 per night.

 

I have my criticisms of the AAC…but for the most part it is a great organization.

 

[ 08-17-2002, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: Rodchester ]

[Jedi]

I like the AAJ that I get every year. 400 pages of routes done in counties all over the world. Sometimes, great stories on some of the routes put up. Not full of advertisements like the climbing mag's. I wish I had every journal.

Accidents in North America. Another wealth of knowledge. Learn from others mistakes.

The insurance, hey I hope I never need it and forget I have it. I don't really care about that.

 

If my membership helps give the AAC a voice in anything that will benefit the climbing community, even just something small, right on.

I did go to a meeting a couple years ago and hear many great climbers tell their tales of adventure, sorrow and triumph. It was worth every penny. Just sitting around watch cool slide shows talking with the likes of Tom Frost, Joe Terravecchia, Conrad Anker, etc...

Living on the east coast, I am going to bump into this guys often.

This board is great and I enjoy reading what you guys write. Good source of info but the AAC is another resource for climbing inside and outside of the Northwest.

Jedi