Forum
Buying gear? Please use these links to help 14ers.com:

More info...

Other ways to help...

Don't be a Hero

Have an interesting or epic climbing story? Post it here.
User avatar
Posts: 592
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:14 am
Location: Golden

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby madbuck » Sat Jun 12, 2010 5:13 pm

Anyway, agree with the general posts, and sure would appreciate if someone nearby, with obvious skillz and willingness, were to attempt to rescue me or a loved one.

Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:52 pm
Location: Houston TX

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby hfd73 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:13 am

I've been watching this thread and really didn't want to comment... but here goes. First of all, kudos to the guide for having the courage to swim over to the girl and help her out. The problem is that they had lost contact with her for 30-45 minutes. In that time someone called 911, and once the AHJ(the Authority Having Jurisdiction) is on scene, it is their responsibilty(regardless of their level of rescue expertise) to keep everyone else from becoming a victim and call for the appropriate level of rescue service. I am a Rescue Technician for a very large urban Fire Dept and I know there are differences between what happens in the city and what happens in remote areas, but the responsibilty of that sheriffs deputy to keep everyone safe is the same. In water rescue there are several different ways to attempt to reach a victim; Reach, Throw, Row and lastly Go. We do not jump to the last option, but instead try all the others first. Now if this had been in the first few seconds of her falling in the water, and someone could reach her to keep her from drowning, then by all means DO IT. We risk a lot to save a lot. But if she had been stranded for 30+ minutes, most likely she was in a somewhat stable position, just stranded. So in this situation we do not risk a lot, but instead come up with a safe manner of reaching her. If something had happened to that guide when he jumped in the water, or had been swept downstream, the rescue operation has now doubled in size and has exponentially grown in complexity. He now becomes the priority victim because he is not stable and the little girl has to wait longer to get rescued. All of this is not hypothetical, it happens all the time. Would be rescuers becomes victims themselves and in many cases actually outnumber the number of original victims.
Alright, time for me to get off my soapbox and go to work. Everyone be safe out there
Jarrod

Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 4:44 am
Location: Alice, St. Mary's Glacier CO

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby glacierPaul » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:24 am

This story happend last week, I believe. Here is a scenario, 13 year old was stable, for 30 minutes with hypothermia, and visibly shaking and scared. How long do you think a 13 year old can hang on, or remain stable? I think the guide saw her becoming fatigued and saw that he was the only option for this situation. Friday, we had 3 separate rafts overturn with 15 people in Clear Creek. Wait for that story to hit. There is already talks of not allowing any rafting when the current is at a certain flow. The parents of the 13 year old girl had the longest hour wait in their entire life that day! She is lucky to have survived that, have not heard anything yet about the 15 rafters. With a possible arrest, I wonder how much more dangerous rafting will be now? Especially when you consider Swift Water Rescue has to be called after an event, they are not waiting around like lifeguards, oh wait, that is the guides job!!!
On a side, the same sheriff, is opposing Eclipse Snow Park up here by St. Mary's Glacier, because he feels it will make the road more dangerous?!?!?!?!?, and be a drain on his resources!

User avatar
Posts: 764
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Rio Rancho, NM

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby cftbq » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:34 am

This would be surprising, if it were not becoming so common. Just more law enforcement hubris, as far as I can see. The idea that someone could be arrested and charged with some crime for coming to the aid of someone needing help, regardless of the technical details, is simply too crazy for words. The gov't. simply wants total control of every situation, and every person, and increasingly uses preposterous charges like this to intimidate anyone out of trying to compete with them. Hopefully the guy they victimized in this will have the grit to fight back, and fight back hard, and just maybe get a legal decision in his favor that will put a damper on such arrogant behavior. Unfortunately, it's not likely. For my own part, I will never hesitate one second to "be a hero," if that's what the situation calls for, and damn the consequences.
I have been to the mountaintop, and I have seen the force
and the power that animates the universe. That may not
match up with your anthropomorphic or teleological idea of
what "god" is, but it's good enough for me.

User avatar
Posts: 1534
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:33 pm
Location: Arvada, CO

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby coloradokevin » Sun Jun 13, 2010 10:55 am

It sounds like the time delay in this rescue is the major factor that made this situation different from a normal rafting rescue. As such, I can understand the involvement on the part of the Sheriff's department, along with a swift water rescue team. Because of our indirect point-of-view in evaluating this situation, we are all basing our opinions largely off of conjecture... We weren't there, we don't know all the details, and we don't know how the situation played out between the victim, the guide, the deputy, and their interactions with each other. In fact, we really don't even know the environmental factors, outside of what the news reported. Still, in my experience the news is always unbiased.

In reality, having someone dumped into class IV/V water isn't all that uncommon in whitewater pursuits, though the victim's are usually quickly recovered by their raft, or another raft in the area. Taking a bad swim is simply an inherent risk in whitewater rafting. I hope I never have to swim a Class V rapid, but I understand that the risk exists every time I enter that kind of river, and I've known plenty of people who have taken bad swims!

I can certainly imagine this situation playing out from a couple of angles, but here are the extremes (as I see them):

1) The girl was in trouble, and no one was there to help her, save for a deputy who was helplessly stuck without equipment on the opposite river bank. The guide heroically jumped in the water (partially out of a feeling of responsibility to HIS victim), and then kept the victim safe until additional help could arrive. Incidentally, this is pretty much the angle the news was taking.

2) The girl was dumped in a rapid, and the rafting company failed to rescue her quickly, for one reason or another. By the time the girl was located by the rafting company, she was stable on the far bank, and in communication with a deputy (albeit across the river). She was wearing a wet suit, was not hypothermic, and was going to be just fine after they figured out how to get her across the river. The rafting guide showed up and made a hasty and unilateral decision to swim to the victim, while the deputy recognized the inherent danger in attempting to perform the rescue in this manner, especially since a rescue team was en route to this location, and the victim wasn't in imminent danger. The deputy explains this situation to the guide, and orders him not to swim to the victim (at this point the sheriff's department IS handling this rescue, since the rafting company failed to do so originally). The guide ignores the deputy, and swims across anyway. The swift water team then needs to extricate both the guide and the original victim from this situation.

In any imaginable scenario, I assume that all of the involved parties were well-intentioned. Since I wasn't there, I don't really know what happened, or who's ego was at fault for creating this news piece (could be a mutual ego-battle too, I suppose). Personally, if I were the deputy, and the second scenario had played out, I probably would have limited myself to giving the guide a firm ass-chewing when he got back across the river, knowing that he had good intentions. But, we don't really know what the dynamic was between these two professionals at the time of the rescue, which is why I have trouble jumping on either one of them for their actions!

User avatar
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: Aurora

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby Alby426 » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:03 am

MountainHiker wrote:I thought we had a “Good Samaritan” law.



+1
My duty, as a human, is not to take, but, to give!

User avatar
Posts: 2388
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 3:59 pm
Location: Littleton, CO

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby MountainHiker » Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:26 am

Not being there I don’t know if or how much the cop over reacted. I do know our legal industry has become too large a parasite on our society. A lot of crap that ends up in court is wasting our resources. Reality is most people don’t have the financial resources to fight back. They can only hope to get offered a plea that won’t financially devastate them.

So whenever you are around a cop, tread lightly. Let someone else come to his notice.

Image
Red, Rugged, and Rotten: The Elk Range - Borneman & Lampert

User avatar
Posts: 302
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:10 pm

Re: Don't be a Hero

Postby tenpins » Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:01 pm

Alby426 wrote:
MountainHiker wrote:I thought we had a “Good Samaritan” law.



+1


the good samaritan law will (possibly) protect you, the unlicensed, maybe uncertified person for trying to adminster first aid or more. If you "remember something about keeping the head still" on a rollover car crash victim, and attempt it, but botch it - you are not supposed to have the liability a FR or EMT will have if they would botch C-Spine protection.
If you remember something in the news about how rescue breathes in CPR are not necessary, but didnt catch the part where compressions should be continuous (so maybe you take a short break after 15 compressions - CPR is hard to do), you shouldnt have the same liability a FR or EMT will have if they do the same.

The deputy was on scene, he has a statutory obligation to coordinate the rescue response. Hell maybe he even become the incident commander, cause he sure as hell called into dispatch and reported he was on scene.

The guide is a hairbrained fool. Finally we are all seeing that he simply swam out there.....and then hung out. And he did so against the lawful order of the representative of the authority having jurisdiction with delegated command authority. He definintely expanded the incident, and set it up for cascading events. Just because is too dumb to realize it, doesnt make it right.

I also commented early in thread on something else echoed now - what kind of FOOLS run rafting trips in those water levels? With Minors to boot???? (private boaters, knock yourselves out) If nothing else, the guiding service should be fined for reckless endangerment. This whole thing could have been avoided with better risk management from the beginnning.

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests