Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Tim Holding missing 2-Sep-2009 At 2:32:30 PM Bob Saki

Message

On 2/09/2009 evanbb wrote:
>On 2/09/2009 Bob Saki wrote:
>>Holding should pay for his rescue though. That's how I roll
>
>Oh, it's a shakey precedent though Bob. Does suggest that poor people
>(eg most climbers) won't be rescued in future because they can't afford
>to pay for it.

On 2/09/2009 nmonteith wrote:
>Getting anyone to pay for their rescue starts a very ugly precedent (covered
>heavily in the the Bluies rescue topic a month or so ago). Why does he
>have to pay for one? Because he is a minister? rich? silly?. You'd need
>to benchmark these traits if you want to introduce a pay per rescue scenario.

Well fellas,

I don't disagree entirely with your view it set a difficult/ugly precendent but life is full of them, Cromwell & Co pushed some through in 1649 for example.

I think a stand needs to be made i.e. post the climb assess as impartially as possible how prepared the adventurere was prior to task and based on sliding scale a % of rescue fee is paid.

If I was in the same situation I would fit the bill myself so regardless of rank/title/wealth this applies.

At the end of the day he was potentially risking the condition of others. I also believe that this could have been prevented.

I recently did a 4 day solo hike in the barry range/howitt area and made sure that the choice I made reduced risk as I was solo. He should have done the same after that first step out on the summit ridge

Mind you as a Tax Payer I'll help spring for a minesterial EPIRB/Beacon ;-)