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  
wfinley

Rescue on Mt Hood

Recommended Posts

It's important to remember that SAR folks are trained to put their own safety above those of they rescue, for obvious reasons.

 

Actually, it is quite the opposite. It is gospel that you are MORE important than your victim. The premise is that you cannot save the patient/victim if you are dead and creating another casualty will complicate the incident and risk the lives of more SAR techs.

 

Now, if this practice is treally applied as it should is up for grabs but this is the doctrine of EVERY SAR group I have worked with and the new National Course taught by the Parks Service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's important to remember that SAR folks are trained to put their own safety above those of they rescue, for obvious reasons.

 

Actually, it is quite the opposite. It is gospel that you are MORE important than your victim.

 

Don't look now, but you two are agreeing with each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you "save" 1 in 20, yes that "sounds good" but how many of those people really need saving if they are unable to orient themselves in the same weather that you are sending rescuers up in?

 

 

How many SAR *volunteers* "need" to save.

 

If volunteers are willing to help out folks who get in trouble, then what basis are you using to complain about their risking their lives? It's their business, not yours.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you "save" 1 in 20, yes that "sounds good" but how many of those people really need saving if they are unable to orient themselves in the same weather that you are sending rescuers up in?

 

 

How many SAR *volunteers* "need" to save.

 

If volunteers are willing to help out folks who get in trouble, then what basis are you using to complain about their risking their lives? It's their business, not yours.

 

Since I am a SAR tech, I suppose it IS my business. SAR techs are told where to go by Incident Commanders; especially in this type of rescue. There are very few SAR techs that are even really true 'volunteers' anymore.

 

True, on a large non-technical rescue, you have volunteers to cover large areas, but in most cases, the rescuers are Parks Service Employees, DOI employees, contracted air assets or military service members; particularly National Guard.

 

Think of it this way. Would you, as an Incident Commander really want a whole bunch of people who you did not know the capabilities of running around on a hill during a rescue who could become an incident within an incident by becoming injured or lost or incorrectly rigging a patient on a litter? No way.

 

Last guy I know that died on a SAR was Nick Hall. Park Service employee and I remember at least 6 off the top of my head and none of them were volunteers.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most SAR missions involve Alzheimer patients who've wondered off and the ever present "lost hiker on Tiger Mt". Spicing it up a bit once in a while isn't necessarily a bad thing for many SAR folks.

 

They're also not necessarily in short supply these days, either. 150 folks showed up for the Green River body recovery (a car went into the drink). I'm not being cavalier here, but SAR exists to help folks in trouble, and most of those folks are going to be in trouble due to inexperience and resultant mistakes.

 

It's, you know, kind of why SAR exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most SAR missions involve Alzheimer patients who've wondered off and the ever present "lost hiker on Tiger Mt". Spicing it up a bit once in a while isn't necessarily a bad thing for many SAR folks.

 

They're also not necessarily in short supply these days, either. 150 folks showed up for the Green River body recovery (a car went into the drink). I'm not being cavalier here, but SAR exists to help folks in trouble, and most of those folks are going to be in trouble due to inexperience and resultant mistakes.

 

It's, you know, kind of why SAR exists.

 

No shit. This doesn't mean that this man's actions are not horrendously dangerous both to himself and the potential rescuers. Only one person here said that he should be left to die. GKK.

 

I have gotten dumber people; one who used their S.P.O.T. to get rescuers to come because their water tasted "funny." Had to hike out to a person on a peak 1.2k away who I could see with my naked eyes on the summit while I was talking to him on the phone (and I was in a 100ftx40ft paved parking lot. I am not saying to let him die, but merely that their actions should be borderline criminal (or at least costly) in their negligence and their potential for harm to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most SAR missions involve Alzheimer patients who've wondered off and the ever present "lost hiker on Tiger Mt". Spicing it up a bit once in a while isn't necessarily a bad thing for many SAR folks.

 

They're also not necessarily in short supply these days, either. 150 folks showed up for the Green River body recovery (a car went into the drink). I'm not being cavalier here, but SAR exists to help folks in trouble, and most of those folks are going to be in trouble due to inexperience and resultant mistakes.

 

It's, you know, kind of why SAR exists.

 

No shit. This doesn't mean that this man's actions are not horrendously dangerous both to himself and the potential rescuers. Only one person here said that he should be left to die. GKK.

 

I have gotten dumber people; one who used their S.P.O.T. to get rescuers to come because their water tasted "funny." Had to hike out to a person on a peak 1.2k away who I could see with my naked eyes on the summit while I was talking to him on the phone (and I was in a 100ftx40ft paved parking lot. I am not saying to let him die, but merely that their actions should be borderline criminal (or at least costly) in their negligence and their potential for harm to others.

 

Actually, GGK favors finding them, kicking them in the nuts, ... then leaving them to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand Kevbone alleges the plan includes throwing him under a bus. Just sayin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand Kevbone alleges the plan includes throwing him under a bus. Just sayin.

I don't know if a bus is a right thing to do, but a good kick to the balls or a shoe up the ass would be a quite appropriate remedy.

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  

×