Hikers who carry cellphones take extra risks
posted April 5th 2005 6:19PM
The Honolulu Star-Bulletin has a news story about how hikers in Hawaii are subconsciously taking needless risks and
hiking trails they're not ready for or carrying necessary supplies because they figure that they can always use their
cellies to call 911 and get help (and it gets worse, reportedly some people are calling for emergency help because
they're too tired to walk back the way they came). Now the Hawaiian state legislature is considering a bill that would
consider charging hikers who take unnecessary risks for their own rescue. Jeez, now we feel really bad about calling in
that helicopter to airlift us out of Yosemite after the batteries on our iPod died (you don't expect us to hike back
down without Bloc Party, do ya?).
[Via textually.org]
nice attempt at being hip, you fing hipsters.
How in the world can they really do a study on this? It's like saying when wearing a helmet you have a false sense of security on a bike.
I think the idea of calling because they are too tired to walk back is a study enough right there. Geez! Have we all really become that lazy? This reminds me of in AZ where they charge you if you take risk when you get stuck in high water or something. Anyone want to help me here on that. Might have been New Mexico.
Easy way to fix this: charge these people the full cost of a rescue. Why try to figure out who is taking "unnessessary risks"?
Ha! You guys made me laugh out loud again. Maybe I'm a simpleton. Still, I laughed.
By the way, here in L.A. you have to pay for your rescue even if you weren't taking undue risks, but at least they take credit cards.
Yeah, I know it's here in Arizona, but it might only be in Phoenix (or Maricopa Co.). Reminds me of the night my wife's brother called us at midnight after he got stuck while off-roading in the desert with no flashlight, wearing flip-flops and without his inhaler and he was starting to feel his chest tighten. I got literally 45 minutes of sleep that night. Took us four hours to find him.
I know in Yosemite they charge you for your rescue is they deem it was your own fault you got into whatever predicament. I don't know how they determine that though. Consider the standar question:
"Sir, why were you climbing that mountain ?"
Consider the standard answer:
'Because it's there!'
How do you weed the completly frivolous 'Because it's there''s from the essential 'Because it's there''s ? :)
(In case anyone is confused this is not at all a bite against hiking or climbing. Just a little humor and a different perspective...)
Heheh, that's about right for me. I go hiking alone quite frequently and carry my cellphone just in case. I usually check for a signal before I make an off-trail excursion and I even transfer the phone to my pocket just before taking a long leap across some ravine. But more often than not, just the idea of spending extended times stuck inside with a broken ankle is enough to stop me from taking huge risks.
Having hiked trails in Hawaii, I have to say 'how stupid can you be?' And yes, I did bring my cell phone with me, but I did know that I would get NO coverage where I was going (Kauai circa 2002); in fact I only got coverage on about 30% of the island at that time (sprints' fault, verizon covered the rest of the inhabited parts of the island). But these trails go to some of the most remote places that you can imagine. In the winter you can't bring a boat in for rescue in because of the waves, it's physically impossible to drive any motor vehicle to those places, and the only possible way to reach these trails is by helicopter or hiking. I did know SOME people that were capable of making complete hikes in and out in a day with no cell phone or food, only water. But these people had been doing it for years. It's equivalent walking up a mountain side to 1000 feet, back down, and back up and down, until you've walked 22 miles. Would you do that?
Having said all of this, if you go prepared, you're in to witness some of the most beautiful places on earth.
It's here in Tucson, AZ as well. It's known as the "Stupid Motorists Law". If you drive your car into an overflowing wash and get stranded, you will get charged a fine for having the fire dept rescue you.
Bloc Party is okay but nothing special. Try Kaiser Chiefs, same genre but much better album.
I live in honolulu.
There are a lot of dumb tourists here.
There are a lot in california too. I love hiking up a big hill reading through one of those mailbox journals and reading, "I can check my mail on my treo here." That just made me sad.
Living on Oahu I can probably add a little perspective. I hike a lot. The trails here are much different than on the mainland. Our trails can go from wide, dry and level to almost non-existent very quickly. The mountains are steep. In many cases almost a cliff. Many hikers, especially tourists, start a hike wearing only shorts, t-shirt and slippers (flip flops). Basically, many folks get in over their head very quickly. The trail quickly becomes narrow, slippery and steep. It’s easy to fall and get hurt. I once carried a tourist with a broken ankle about two miles to the road (patting myself on the back for a job well done). Some people just do stupid acts. A prime example is the young guy who stood over the blow hole. There were “danger” signs posted but ignored. He fell in and drowned after the wave came. Because the state perceives that too much is being spent on hiking rescues, they want to charge for the service. The state legislature is also seeking reimbursement for ocean rescues. So, please be safe while vacationing in Hawaii. Aloha.
This bears all the telltale signs of false hysteria. No actual study was done to show that cellphones play any significant part in making people less risk averse instead just some 'experienced hikers' are quoted and they don't give any particular reason to believe this is anything but their own pet theory. However, a few emotion provoking ancedotes (someone calling because they are too tired to get back) are played up with no information given on the frequency of such incidence and likely information about the true severity (did the hikers have medical conditions, was it getting dangerous for some reason?).
Laws made in response to this sort of trash are usually poorly thought out. While we might feel outraged that people who are too tired to walk back home don't pay does it really make sense to change a policy based on a few ancedotes? Perhaps this sort of change will discourage many people from calling when they first encounter trouble for fear of financial cost and ultimately cause loss of life.
I think it makes sense to charge people for their own stupidity. What excuse is there when you do not pay attention to warning signs? And if you think you can hike a mountain in sandals then you deserve to be left up there to rot if not pay for your own extraction/rescue.
New Hampshire has been doing something like this for several years:
http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Newsroom/News_2001_and_previous/news_search_and_rescue_99.htm
yeah i'm still pissed anout the blowholes being closed.
Do what I do before I take big risk in Doom3: Save the game, then take the risk.
hey engadget STOP
stuck in ravine STOP
send rescue robot now STOP
It seems to me that hiking, whether it's up Mount Everest or once around the local duck pond, always has a certain amount of risk to it. It's not unreasonable to expect potential hikers to be aware of that risk and to pay for their own rescue, should it be necessary. Nobody's forcing them to hike, after all. Take personal responsibility for yourself and your mistakes, that's all there is to it.