Lost Cypress snowboarder found alive - Page 5 - ClubTread Community

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #61 of (permalink) Old 12-20-2012, 08:13 PM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Kid Charlemagne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: BC
Posts: 1,486
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by sgRant



While all of the non-government SAR groups are volunteer, many of the volunteers are paid through provisions in collective agreements. Similar to compensation for jury work.
What do you mean by 'non-government SAR group'? Groups like North Shore Rescue are provincially regulated entities. While they are staffed by volunteers, I think referring to them as 'non-government' is misleading, as they are part of the provinces emergency framework.

And this idea that "many of the volunteers are paid through provisions in collective agreements" simply isn't true. What are you basing that on?
Kid Charlemagne is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of (permalink) Old 12-20-2012, 08:26 PM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: north van, bc, Canada.
Interest: hiking / camping
Posts: 1,093
Default

he probably means non gov employed sar. army sar, coast gaurd, etc.
smac is offline  
post #63 of (permalink) Old 12-20-2012, 08:34 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: , , .
Posts: 175
Default

When you are injured in a car accident, regardless of blame, you are treated and transported by ambulance. Each individual treated is sent a bill for those services. The bill is a nominal amount, no where near the actual cost. If SAR was just another government arm, members of the BCGEU, there would be no hand-wringing call-out decisions, just regular paid employees doing their regular daily job, providing rescue services and billing each individual for services rendered. Why not?
Justa is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #64 of (permalink) Old 12-20-2012, 08:37 PM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Kid Charlemagne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: BC
Posts: 1,486
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by smac

he probably means non gov employed sar. army sar, coast gaurd, etc.
But those are government employees.....
Kid Charlemagne is offline  
post #65 of (permalink) Old 12-20-2012, 10:02 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: , , .
Posts: 320
Default

http://www.globaltvbc.com/north+shor...555/story.html

<i>Private company Talon Helicopters, based in Richmond, also spent two nights looking for Boucher. The company bills B.C.'s Provincial Emergency Program, but not the search subject directly.

The cost for flying Talon's helicopter on Monday and Tuesday was $30,000, said office assistant Jeanette Lim, who does the invoicing. “It's not cheap,” she said.

Boucher went missing Sunday morning and was found late Tuesday night by volunteer crews in a remote location on Black Mountain, which is part of Cypress Provincial Park. Boucher was airlifted by a RCAF Cormorant helicopter, and an estimated 50 staff from Cypress ski resort had also participated, providing support to the numerous people dispatched to the chest-deep snow and difficult terrain to hunt for Boucher.

“We are very pleased that he was rescued but we find nothing heroic about Mr. Boucher's reckless adventure, especially after requiring the expenditure of so many resources and impacting so many people over the past two days,” marketing director Joffrey Koeman said in a statement.

....

Meanwhile, a family of tourists from Sweden spent Wednesday night on Mount MacKenzie after skiing into an out-of-bounds area at Revelstoke Mountain Resort.

The father and his three sons were rescued by helicopter Thursday morning from the Montana Creek area, according to the RCMP. No one was injured.

</i>


wasnt there a case where some a couple went out of bounds, someone dies ... and they sued people because they werent saved? ....

Do what you want, as long as there isnt the EXPECTATION you will be saved if you do something stupid ... they may save you if they can, or they might not in time

bearbreeder is offline  
post #66 of (permalink) Old 12-20-2012, 11:33 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver, , Canada.
Posts: 326
Default

If this guy needed rescue after ascending Disbrow creek from the road should he be treated differently by SAR? Other than whatever contractual relationship he has with Cypress for buying his lift ticket what difference does it make that he came off the ski hill?
Coastal is offline  
post #67 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 12:05 AM Thread Starter
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: , BC, Canada.
Posts: 2,463
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by bearbreeder


wasnt there a case where some a couple went out of bounds, someone dies ... and they sued people because they werent saved? ....
Yes.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...t-defence.html

http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/whi...nt?oid=2264708

http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/whi...nt?oid=2274596


SAR debates are as old as time and often as polarized and passionate as debates about politics. That said, this is a very specific sub-set of SAR and it's going through a period of flux. Discussion is warranted about what should happen before, during and after a search for front-country skiers that go out-of-bounds and can't find their way back.

It feels like these specific types of searches are increasing in frequency but I don't have any data. Does anyone know if there is a trend?


Subjects suing searchers:
I think the case with the out-of-bounds skier at Kicking Horse is the first time that a search subject successfully launched legal action in BC against RCMP and/or SAR (I can't figure out who actually paid the subject,) with respect to a SAR operation that involved an out-of-bounds skier. That agreement was reached in 2011.

My initial response to the case is very negative. It sounds like this could open the door to endless lawsuits that will make many lawyers wealthy and extract money from the SAR system that needs to be used to save people. People need to take more personal responsibility.

Reading deeper, there are some important questions to be answered. If a subject activates an SOS signal from a satellite beacon or calls 911 from a cell phone, do they have any rights to damages if the authorities decide to ignore the call for help? What if it was just SOS stamped out in the snow? Do the subjects lose all of their rights if they crossed an out-of-bounds rope and it was their own fault for getting lost?


Searchers suing subjects
Going the other direction, it sounds like this case in 2012 is the first time that Cypress is fining/billing an out-of-bounds skier for expenses related to a search.

Although I'd like to see that subject make a generous donation to NSR, I am opposed to Cypress giving him a bill for two reasons:

1) I have a seasons pass with the mountain and the conditions of sale include a number of fines ($200 if someone else uses my pass, $60 if lose it,) but the contract does not give them permission to levy a fine against me if they are involved in a search to find me. If they succeed to fine this snowboarder, it would set a dangerous precedent.

2) As outlined elsewhere in this thread, SAR organizations are against fines because it makes it harder for them to do their jobs and to achieve successful outcomes.



As described above, this issue is in a state of change at the moment. It could be argued that maintaining the status-quo isn't really a valid option. Is that equivalent to allowing the courts to set the precedent?

Options include:
1) Do nothing
These cases should be treated the same as all other SAR operations; it doesn't matter how you get into the predicament. No changes are needed to any rules or systems.

2) Establish clear regulations about the ability of a subject to be fined
The rules might say that subjects can't be fined or it might say that they will be fined.

3) Charge a fee to all front-country skiers
This is a very specific type of SAR operation that sucks up a lot of resources. Perhaps a $0.50 fee should be charged on every lift ticket sold in the province (similar the 911 access fee for phones.)

4) Increased consistency across the province with respect to out-of-bounds skiing.
Should skiers have to exit through gates? If they have used the lift to get up, should they be required to carry certain equipment before they cross the boundary?
Take a look at what Mt. Baker does:
http://www.mtbaker.us/index.php/mtn-...ountry-policy/

and so on...




Edit:
NSR has such a large objection to the use of fines that they will not accept a donation from Cypress if the money originates from applying a fine or bill to the subject.

http://www.globaltvbc.com/north+shor...555/story.html

The story also states that other resorts in BC do apply fines in similar scenarios.


Steventy is offline  
post #68 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 08:50 AM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Whitehorse, YUKON, Canada.
Posts: 2,197
Default

Keep this civil, friends. I don't want my beach time to be interrupted with emails from upset people!

Currently 33 here in Costa Rica!
darren is offline  
post #69 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 09:18 AM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: , , .
Posts: 127
Default

Just my thoughts:
Skiing out of bounds was and will be, how about made mandatory ski-touring skis and split-boards with skins if you are skiing out of bounds, it will safe at least 50% of all rescues. And if you don't have and ski of bounds you will get a fee.
Maxim is offline  
post #70 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 09:20 AM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver, , Canada.
Posts: 326
Default

Cypress may have a hard time enforcing that bill.
Coastal is offline  
post #71 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 09:27 AM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver, , Canada.
Posts: 326
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Maxim

Just my thoughts:
Skiing out of bounds was and will be, how about made mandatory ski-touring skis and split-boards with skins if you are skiing out of bounds, it will safe at least 50% of all rescues. And if you don't have and ski of bounds you will get a fee.
The problem with that is that most "out of bounds" is just crown land that anyone has every right to be on. It's a basic freedom that all outdoor enthusiasts rely on. I'd rather not have anybody regulating what I carry in my pack.
Coastal is offline  
post #72 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 09:44 AM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: , , .
Posts: 127
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Coastal

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Maxim

Just my thoughts:
Skiing out of bounds was and will be, how about made mandatory ski-touring skis and split-boards with skins if you are skiing out of bounds, it will safe at least 50% of all rescues. And if you don't have and ski of bounds you will get a fee.
The problem with that is that most "out of bounds" is just crown land that anyone has every right to be on. It's a basic freedom that all outdoor enthusiasts rely on. I'd rather not have anybody regulating what I carry in my pack.
I can say just for Cypress as I worked there for 3 years, coming back for chair lifts you are using summer hiking trails, that's where probably a good idea to put signs regarding rules and fees.

They do check your backpack if you are going to ski out of bounds in whistler
Maxim is offline  
post #73 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 02:01 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver, , Canada.
Posts: 326
Default

My problem is that the legal basis for the "rules" and "fees" that you suggest be posted is totally unclear and potentially non-existant. It's dishonest to post rules that you have no authority to enforce or send invoices for fees that you have no basis to collect.

Is there anything in the fine print on the back of a lift-ticket about paying for your rescue? I'm sure it's in the season's pass waiver but it would be harder to make stick on a day pass.
Coastal is offline  
post #74 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 04:51 PM
Off the Beaten Path
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: , , .
Posts: 563
Default

I'm pretty sure the fee is punitive and is not particularly related to the rescue costs.
trick is offline  
post #75 of (permalink) Old 12-21-2012, 07:12 PM
Super Moderator
 
KARVITK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Abbotsford, B.C., Canada.
Interest: Hiking, Snowshoeing, and Photography. Enjoying the outdoors fresh air and fitness experience.
Posts: 17,919
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by trick

I'm pretty sure the fee is punitive and is not particularly related to the rescue costs.
less than 10% of total search cost\
K
KARVITK is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1