Do you charge for SAR operations?

[Just Plain Ruff]

Ok, now that we have established a couple of things.

Some say not to charge ever at all.

Some say to charge but only for certain circumstances

The other group says Charge everyone.

Who do we charge? Do we bill the person needing rescuing?

Do we bill the persons insurance company? Just which insurance company do they bill? Health insurance, home ownners or what?

Do we require then someone goes out hiking in a national park that they pay a fee that goes towards the SAR fund?

My thoughts on the fee. If you want to hike in a state or national park, when you enter the park you pay let's say a 2.50 fee or some nominal fee that then is used to pay for a daily insurance policy for rescue operations. If you don't get lost and need rescue then you are out 2.50 but if you do get lost or in need of rescue, then you are covered for the rescue ops. The insurance kicks in and your rescue is in effect free.

Everyone who enters the park pays the fee. It could be on a per car basis or a per RV basis and everyone in that car is covered for the fee of 2.50 per car, 10.00 per RV and so on.

The insurance kicks in to cover the rescue and all is good.

I know that many national parks have usage fees or admission fees so an additional 2.50 or whatever the national park service deems necessary could be done.

Just my thoughts.

[scubanurse]

I like that idea ruff. When I lived in Maryland, I was on the border with DC and the Potomac River and while I wasn't at the station to respond to the river calls, I would hear them go out almost daily in the summer.

When a river rescue call got dispatched, units from Maryland and Virginia (both river banks) and the Park Police helicopter would be dispatched. Often times, these calls were to rescue future Darwin award winners. People who were not qualified or experience white water kayakers/rafters would attempt class 4+ rapids with nasty undertows. Or people would try and free climb near the rapids on slipper rocks. All of which are warned against in numerous signs.

I would have no problem as a citizen paying a nominal fee when entering a park to go towards SAR operations as I know these can be very costly. Just like when I'm planning on traveling out of country, I make sure I have health insurance coverage...preventative and preemptive and hopefully I'll never have to see a SAR team rescuing me

[iMac]

Should the organizers of search and rescue operations charge those rescued?

Should the organizers charge fees from rescued people if those people did not take reasonable precautions to make their rescue easier?

I ask this because I had a great conversation with someone from Montana on a airplane over the billing question.

He adamately said that those rescues should be free

I disagree'd especially if that person did not take reasonable precautions like bring a Cell phone, a signalling device or some other way to be found. There are certain recommendations to all hikers and explorers that are universal and I think if those reasonable precautions were not followed then they should foot at least part of their bill of the rescue.

For those who are separated from their equipment and signalling devices due to a fall or injury then they should not get billed.

I'm sure all the SAR members of this forum will have opinions so chime away.

Listen, we bill for ambulance transport, we bill for extrication and we bill sometimes for even no-servicing patients, why not bill for the rescues of future darwin award recipients?

I hear yea and I agree, but who do you charge when most of the missions are for skeletons or other body searches that turn out blank. Nothing is charged locally, and they run strictly on donations. I'm not sure how you could measure or draw the line of who you would charge and who you wouldn't. My personal view on this, is this is providing a service. Regardless of the fact you called or didn't call for them, they had to come out. You don't provide free pre-hospital care if the patient itself didn't call do you? I call for charging regardless of the situation.

[Eyegor]

As an active SAR member my thought process is the administrative route: In my "perfect world" any person in need of SAR resources would be free to call without fear of being personally billed by SAR. EMS transport, medical bills, etc. etc. are fine. If the person's actions are deemed civilly or criminally negligent then fines or charges will be levied through that process. All other costs of SAR would be paid for through private "rescue insurance" user fees, local, county, state, fed, tribal budgets, etc. Most municipalities of whatever size have a pot "usually small" of SAR money that comes from licensing, park fees, fines, % of land management budget etc. All routes of financial support need to be actively sought in order to keep user fees, fines, and insurance affordable. Please don't try to make any deficit up by billing the person.

[croaker260]

Our agency does charge. 500 dollar base plus OT costs of the mebers.

Typically 25/hour x 6 man SERT = 150.00 / hour. This is in addition to the actual patient care charges if any. We are a paid agency with ALS capability on our team.

This is our out of county rate.

Think of it this way, the typical response can cost many thousands of dollars (I can think of one complicated multi day response costing over 5K in OT costs alone)in terms of equipment, training, etc.

The local taxpayers bear the weight of that cost and supplement it by paying for the training and readiness already. We try to offset that through grants, but you know how it is for a non-fire based agency (we are 3rd service) to get grants.

Anyway... I digress....many of these missions are out of county, so for people and/or areas who are not even part of our tax base to begin with, we are requested. Additionally, my county bears the liability for workmans comp and such. I think its perfectly reasonable for our agency to charge the fees so that the taxpayer who pays for the agency does not have to spend any extra dollars to support another county or non taxpayer in another county. In short, we are making these out of county responses "zero impact" on the in county taxpayers. Afterall they take responders and equipment out of the in county system, often disrupt the in county schedule, so I think the taxpayers are altruistic enough.

Keep in mind we dont do search, only rescue and recovery. Other counties often have SAR teams, We actually trained some of them....and may are volunteers who depend on donations. GOOD FOR THEM! But we are th only ALS resource for rescue if they cant handle it. Most of them are BLS.

I whole heartedly support the concept. But I work for an agency that has a responsibility for prudent use of taxpayer dollars. And since most of these rescues occur "out of county", we have an obligation to minimize the impact on the taxpayer whose dollars keep our operation running.

[rock_shoes]

As an active participant in British Columbia SAR operations this thread brings the following recent incident to mind.

Golden Search and Rescue suspends services among legal liability concerns

To make a long story short the couple in question did something particularly stupid (skiing out of bounds without filing a trip plan with anyone) and the surviving partner decided to sue the very people who saved his life afterwards. This incident sent waves through the SAR community in BC that are still being felt. Many groups (all of which are volunteer non-profits) had to threaten withdrawal of service before the provincial government stepped in and offered some protection for the directors of these non-profit groups. Individual SAR volunteers have always been protected by provincial legislation. The directors of the various non-profits are not so protected and thus require liability coverage that is only now provided by the provincial government.

The level of expectation placed on SAR by the public has grown exhorbitant in some cases. To some degree BC SAR operations have been damned by their own success. Typical services offered include technician level rescue (rope, ice, swiftwater/flood), mountain rescue, and basic ground search and rescue.

No subject is ever charged for any of the operational costs for SAR in BC. As an active participant in SAR I can honestly say this incident made me question whether or not that should continue to be the case. If the public is going to demand professional liability then I should damn well be paid as a professional. I've always been willing to step forward and do my best for people in these situations. Watching a group of similair folks put through hell for doing the same put a sour taste in my mouth. Who should be charged? How much should be charged? I don't know. I would like to be able to go on charging nothing. Recent events have made me question whether or not the free ride can continue.

Citizens of BC are charged a flat fee for ambulance services (not even remotely close to the actual cost at $85 per ride whether that be ground BLS or air critical care transport). Maybe the same fee should be billed to recipients of SAR services?

[tniuqs]

As a past Member of SAR ROCK/SNOW/ICE/ SWIFT H20 (with 2 groups in Alberta)

I have never charged for my time or use of some rather very expensive Kit ... only rock_shoes understands my personally huge investment. I applaud those groups that dedicate time, training, and extensive efforts .. but now to be held personally responsible if they cannot successfully locate a person that has without a shadow of doubt subjected (I am familiar with the Golden OUT OF BOUNDS search in the link) themselves to the wilds and mountain / ocean / back country. I have done many searches for someone who signed OUT .. but failed to sign back IN ! to be located in a PUB ... especially when I have been humping a big pack, in 6 ft of snow, in a storm, at night, following tracks. There HAS to be personal accountability ... that said looking for a 4 y/o kid wandered away from a camp ground a whole different scenario.

So to hell with liability in that case and throw many resources you can to find that Kid as fast as you can but it has to be coordinated by a Search Master and experienced/ trained searchers as not to destroy tracks or scent ... helpers with zero training stay at home ...

http://www.globaltvedmonton.com/Philanthropic+family+asks+help+find+missing/3314925/story.html

Now I did investigate this case (just last PM) and contacted RCMP to find that out that the experts have called off the search as it highly likely the body will NEVER be found ... now here is the hard part to deal with .. the emotion that drives this type of things .. now looking at a scenario of "psuedo SAR" jumping it to "Help Out"Well knowing the area in question I can say that this family is asking to put more people in harms way, (even though they say they are not they just do not understand) This in a dam controlled flood plain, high water with unprecedented high run off, white water, bears, absolutely no roads (just animal paths) very tough ass bush and highly likely the body is already 200 miles downstream, the North Saskatchewan River just doesn't care.

Do I go put myself in harms way (now with a possibility of legal action against me) ... or go as a safety man to watch over the masses of weekend warriors that have a Quad / Canoe in the back of their "pick me up truck".

hmmm after reading this thread I am "thinking again"

cheers

[Richard B the EMT]

Interesting. This seems to be similar to discussions I have heard and read, that the Emergency Services don't have any obligation to try and save anybody.

I am undecided if I support that concept.

[rock_shoes]

Interesting. This seems to be similar to discussions I have heard and read, that the Emergency Services don't have any obligation to try and save anybody.

I am undecided if I support that concept.

If you are being paid as an emergency service provider you have every responsibility to fulfill the role for which you are being paid. If, as is the case for SAR in most of North America, you are providing a service on a volunteer basis you in fact have zero responsibility to provide any service whatsoever. This is exactly why, as much as I don't have a personal problem with individual volunteer EMS providers, I will never be a supporter of volunteer EMS.

[croaker260]

If you are being paid as an emergency service provider you have every responsibility to fulfill the role for which you are being paid. If, as is the case for SAR in most of North America, you are providing a service on a volunteer basis you in fact have zero responsibility to provide any service whatsoever. This is exactly why, as much as I don't have a personal problem with individual volunteer EMS providers, I will never be a supporter of volunteer EMS.

NOT TRUE.

If you are part of an agency , especially one that either recives public funds, or has a public charter/contract...and you are with in your response area (etc etc etc) you have just as compelling and legal "duty to respond/act" as a paid provider. Does not matter if you are not paid. If you are on shift or on call, you are on shift or on call. Period. This is why in many states the bystander good samariton immunity does nto apply when you are working for an agency/company/squad/what have you.

NOTE this is not an obligation to be "unsafe".

Now if your not on duty/call, you do not have to respond. If you are driving by as an offduty person, you are not obligated to respond unless you have some oragnizational specific policies.... The descision is an ethical and moral one at that point.

Edited July 25, 2010 by croaker260