I see the keyboard mavericks are still going *fart*
No idea what you are asking. I made post #48 because I found the things on Skurka's list interesting. My post #76 referenced the cost of rescues and who should pay....it really has nothing to do with this young woman. I just happen to believe in "the user pays" theory and personal responsibility.Originally Posted by Time Zone
there one in maine last year or the year before very much like that discussed on here. 2 hikers who were held up by an impassable ford but otherwise perfectly fine had someone send a chopper to go find them.
either i'm looking at the wrong photo or there is no obvious IV bag
even if there were, someone complains of feeling sick while out hiking in the heat a bag of fluids is probably SOP.
ive often said half the problem here is there are some number of people working in SAR who just cant wait to rush up the mountain and help someone. sort of like how i've read that newfoundlands will rescue swimmers who arent drowning just cause it's what they do.
Good catch. Long sleeve knit shirt. Sleeves down to her wrists. Hands crossed over her abdomen. No place for a drip in her arms. A blanket covering her from abdomen down.
No IV drip.
Wayne
Good catch. Long sleeve knit shirt. Sleeves down to her wrists. Hands crossed over her abdomen. No place for a drip in her arms. A blanket covering her from abdomen down.
No IV drip. The article says that she walked some under her own power with assistance.
Wayne
There were two photos in the link I posted earlier, including this one:
1B6F79F0-F223-4D1F-B1F3-4DD34113F0B0.jpg
I have no idea what or how serious the woman’s medical condition was, or even who called the authorities.
Not sure if everyone feeling sick on a hot day gets put in a sleeping bag and given an IV by the first responders though.
If I came upon a hiker exhibiting signs of severe dehydration (not saying that is what she had, just as a hypothetical) I would not hesitate to call 911myself for their benefit— whether they wanted me to or not.
Would you?
I am agnostic on this, mainly because these 'news' stories are maddeningly short on details and there is hardly ever follow-up on them. For all we know — and should assume — the woman who was rescued is following this discussion and can provide more details.
But tell me, what would your opinion be if she needs to be rescued again in a few weeks?
I subscribe to the old saying that Once is a fluke, twice is a pattern. Maybe LD hiking simply isn't her 'thing' and she now has two very large clues that suggest she shouldn't try to force the issue.
Last edited by cmoulder; 07-23-2018 at 07:38.
The Five Basic Principles of Going Lighter ~ Cam "Swami" Honan of OZ
precisely. even if 100% legit medical issue you cant keep going out and trying as if having to call for rescue is no biggie and all part of the experience.
there is some slight degree of possibility the 2 calls are coincidences arising from 2 separate and unrelated legit medical issues and its all a massive bout of bad luck, but i doubt it.
Not trying to argue, but definitionally a singular occurrence can not be a "coincidence".
No further commentary offered on the situation at hand, there isn't enough data given to base a judgement upon.
Good point... Ok, let's say fluke.
Last edited by cmoulder; 07-23-2018 at 07:42.
The Five Basic Principles of Going Lighter ~ Cam "Swami" Honan of OZ
I did not see anything in that Pinterest page beyond a common assortment of lists and maps regarding the AT. I've not seen any follow up reports on incident that describes her gear, the woman's condition, and the rescue itself to reach any conclusions outside some photos of the use of an IV which can be due to several different medical issues. Where did you get the information she carried 10-pounds of water? I am not sure anyone can make a judgement regarding the merit of the first or second rescue.
Having been involved in SAR work, I can say in that community it is preferrable to engage in rescue response over recovery. There are few who will not answer the call to help regardless if they are paid or not.
I'm certainly questioning if I want to renew my membership to a site that allows it's members to actively drives hikers away from the community.
Last edited by Farr Away; 07-23-2018 at 09:54. Reason: collateral
Being a donating member is well worth it for the access to the “ignore thread” feature alone. A feature which I’ll likely be using on this steaming excuse for a thread in the near future.
E67EFF98-8EB2-4128-90F8-38C3B454D616.jpeg
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
an honest and legit question- in what ways has this thread done this?
way back at the beginning a post or two used a pejorative to describe the hiker in question. aside from that, i don't see the problem.
its always struck me as odd that people on an internet discussion board will writes posts which, in effect, bemoan the fact that discussion is taking place.
Theres two kinds of people
Those that have their opinions, and respectfully allow others to have theirs too.
And then you have those that cannot stand if someone has a different opinion than they do. They argue, criticize, name-call, label, scream, cry, demonstrate, threaten to leave. In positions of authority, they will ban or remove counter viewpoints.
Good riddance to them.
Opinions are based on past experiences as much as current information, btw.
Last edited by MuddyWaters; 07-23-2018 at 09:35.
Just walk away if it's that bad... no need to give notice. I've done it.
Good tip from Elf on the Ignore option; you can ignore individuals as well as threads!
The Five Basic Principles of Going Lighter ~ Cam "Swami" Honan of OZ
I love discussions, I love debate. Some people in this thread are clear that they're debating general concerns about the relative ease of rescues, apparently longing for the good old days when you flat out died if you made a mistake on a mountain... and that's a perfectly fine discussion to have, even if I disagree with them. Ideally, it should be moved to it's very own thread.
However some of the people in this thread (including yourself,) are just jumping to very specific conclusions about how it's her attitude, how it's her generation, how it's a moral failing to ask for help on the trail. There's way too much political and morality based agenda laden garbage in these posts. It's self congratulatory, virtue signalling because you survived your youthful stupidity, that's just survivorship bias. How she's an idiot because she didn't have the same genes, the same health, the same teaching that you were so fortunate to have.
These rants are evident all through the website, not just this thread. These rants have very little to do with actual hiking, and much more to do with being a vehicle to whine and complain about things you don't like in the world, like hippies, and socialism and adventurous youth. ... and now I'm guilty of the same thing, complaining about intolerance... but at least I'm not dumping on a specific hiker who ran into some difficulty as an excuse to make my point.
again, there were a small quantity of early posts that were pejorative in nature. those are long back up the thread and no one has continued just attacking and name calling the hiker in question, certainly not me.
for my part, i like to discuss hypothetical implications of a situation. some, seemingly like yourself, seem to take this as my stating that i know exactly what happened with the exact situation. i don't and that isnt what i am saying. it really just seems to me like batting around hypotheticals is somehow offensive to you and a group of others. i really don't get why.
is this website really better if there are just half as many threads because we don't bother discussing "what ifs?" any more because we don't know all of the details?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote