And stories about boats sinking in bad storms help this sport? The new "Soundings" has a story about Sydney-Hobart race. Sounds like they knew the storm was coming but went for it anyway. People who know nothing about sailing see stories about boats sinking and bad storms and get scared shitless about sailing. They think this is just something that happens to normal sailors. (Probably some of the newer sailors on this site think so too) Does this really do the sport any good? NEWS FLASH If you don’t sail in areas that have hurricanes you won’t run into one. What a concept. The same goes for the Bass strait guys. If the place is dangerous during storms than stay the hell out of it in storms. Isn’t it about time for these races to disqualify people who take chances like that from other competitions. Sailing is making judgment calls, if these guys can’t make good ones they shouldn’t be out there. In my judgment if after an inquiry it is found that uncalled for risks were taken ending in people getting hurt or the loss of a boat then these people should not be out there. This should make for an interesting discussion.
Do people taking foolish chances
- Thread starter Rich18890
- Start date
- Status
Maybe not Rich.
Sailing and crewing is all about personal choice. The sea is unequaled in that regard. But, then calling for help after placing boat and crew intentionally in jeopardy,,,, that's, ??? Hmm, can't finish the sentence properly. This is a family board.
Sailing and crewing is all about personal choice. The sea is unequaled in that regard. But, then calling for help after placing boat and crew intentionally in jeopardy,,,, that's, ??? Hmm, can't finish the sentence properly. This is a family board.
Coroner's Report
I have the Coroner's Report on the '98 Sydney Hobart. All boats knew the bad weather was coming. Several of the 'rabbits' ducked out to safety but the remainder pressed on. Of course it was much worse than everyone expected but one needs to go back to the fundamental reasons we we go sailing. I guess we do it for the challenge, particularly the racing boys. Take away the challenge and you take away the raison d'etre. I have a friend who won it in a subsequent year. Likewise the '79 Fastnet. In this race some of the big Aussie boats were on the way home and were reaching under small spinnakers. They loved the ride and said they were only wiping out four times an hour! Here in the UK the CEO of our National Authority has said he will defend to the last ditch a man's right to go out and take on the elements even though he may loose his life in the process. Whilst I agree with this sentiment, I would not go ocean racing whatever the inducements. Guess I'm just chicken - but still alive!
I have the Coroner's Report on the '98 Sydney Hobart. All boats knew the bad weather was coming. Several of the 'rabbits' ducked out to safety but the remainder pressed on. Of course it was much worse than everyone expected but one needs to go back to the fundamental reasons we we go sailing. I guess we do it for the challenge, particularly the racing boys. Take away the challenge and you take away the raison d'etre. I have a friend who won it in a subsequent year. Likewise the '79 Fastnet. In this race some of the big Aussie boats were on the way home and were reaching under small spinnakers. They loved the ride and said they were only wiping out four times an hour! Here in the UK the CEO of our National Authority has said he will defend to the last ditch a man's right to go out and take on the elements even though he may loose his life in the process. Whilst I agree with this sentiment, I would not go ocean racing whatever the inducements. Guess I'm just chicken - but still alive!
It IS a choice
Less new sailors keep the few available anchorages more available. [just kiddin'] If you knew of a great ski hill which was not crowded, would you tell everyone to come there? It is a matter of personal choice, and has nothing whatsoever to do with only sailing. Heard about all the folks killed in Utah avalanches this year? There is no central "sailing" "thing". It's not like Chevy or Ford trying to put people in cars. We sail because we like the experience, nobody forced us into it. Life is full of risks, both in sports and day-to-day. You take your chances because YOU (and you alone) make your own choices. Beats rappin' about the potential of gettin' shot going to a free election. And Soundings isn't the only publication that mentioned that sailing race. Stu
Less new sailors keep the few available anchorages more available. [just kiddin'] If you knew of a great ski hill which was not crowded, would you tell everyone to come there? It is a matter of personal choice, and has nothing whatsoever to do with only sailing. Heard about all the folks killed in Utah avalanches this year? There is no central "sailing" "thing". It's not like Chevy or Ford trying to put people in cars. We sail because we like the experience, nobody forced us into it. Life is full of risks, both in sports and day-to-day. You take your chances because YOU (and you alone) make your own choices. Beats rappin' about the potential of gettin' shot going to a free election. And Soundings isn't the only publication that mentioned that sailing race. Stu
Not sure where Meg n Kate reside or sail
But most of us who live on the Southern edge of Australia know that the Southern ocean can change in a heart beat. And as for the weather that controlls "our" Southern Ocean it can change in half that time. It is incredibly hard to predict. Often yachts can leave Sydney in absolutely perfect sailng weather with a forecast of rugged things to come as they put their nose into Bass Straight yet the reasonable weather continues. Other years the prediction is for kind weather for the trip and yet without any real warning the weather turns terrible. I guess thats why the race, for lots of reasons, is held in the highest regard by all sailors world wide.
But most of us who live on the Southern edge of Australia know that the Southern ocean can change in a heart beat. And as for the weather that controlls "our" Southern Ocean it can change in half that time. It is incredibly hard to predict. Often yachts can leave Sydney in absolutely perfect sailng weather with a forecast of rugged things to come as they put their nose into Bass Straight yet the reasonable weather continues. Other years the prediction is for kind weather for the trip and yet without any real warning the weather turns terrible. I guess thats why the race, for lots of reasons, is held in the highest regard by all sailors world wide.
Putting Things in Perspective!
We tend sensationalize the occurances of acidents at sea and in the air, when the facts are that sailing, for the majority of us is a pretty tame sport. In my younger years, I had a similar passion for flying. In a thousand plus hours of clear weather and instrument flying, I can't recall a really tense momment (other than my first solo flight). But, I was still chided by parents, wives, girlfreinds and chidren for taking such outlandish risk. Truth is it was less risk than the commute home from work on I635 (Dallas). If sailing or flying was such a death defying activity how do you explain the low insurance rates in comparison to the value of boats and planes.
We tend sensationalize the occurances of acidents at sea and in the air, when the facts are that sailing, for the majority of us is a pretty tame sport. In my younger years, I had a similar passion for flying. In a thousand plus hours of clear weather and instrument flying, I can't recall a really tense momment (other than my first solo flight). But, I was still chided by parents, wives, girlfreinds and chidren for taking such outlandish risk. Truth is it was less risk than the commute home from work on I635 (Dallas). If sailing or flying was such a death defying activity how do you explain the low insurance rates in comparison to the value of boats and planes.
poor judgements
Rich brings up a very interesting subject and just as a aside to his remarks something else to think about is the emergency rescue of the people and the large amount of public dollars spent in getting people out of the poor decisions or poor judgement.More and more the rescue services are charging people who make either very poor judgement calls or just do unlawful "stunts".As public funding get tighter and cost get higher all the time how much is the public responsable to "pay" for the very obivious poor judgements of people.This goes to other sport/activites also (think mountain climbing,sking in the extreme such as posted area that forbid it because of conditions/avalanches.There seams to be a backlash against people who push the extremes or just do unreasonable things and then need to be "saved from themselves" by goverment agencies (police,fire,coast guard). As boaters we know that the coast guard will not come out for anything but life threating conditions,where as they used to assist with towing disabled boat etc. but that has all been privatized. Just wondering what other people think about this and if the goverment has the obligation to pick up the cost for these rescues that would not pass the "reasonable man test" ?
Rich brings up a very interesting subject and just as a aside to his remarks something else to think about is the emergency rescue of the people and the large amount of public dollars spent in getting people out of the poor decisions or poor judgement.More and more the rescue services are charging people who make either very poor judgement calls or just do unlawful "stunts".As public funding get tighter and cost get higher all the time how much is the public responsable to "pay" for the very obivious poor judgements of people.This goes to other sport/activites also (think mountain climbing,sking in the extreme such as posted area that forbid it because of conditions/avalanches.There seams to be a backlash against people who push the extremes or just do unreasonable things and then need to be "saved from themselves" by goverment agencies (police,fire,coast guard). As boaters we know that the coast guard will not come out for anything but life threating conditions,where as they used to assist with towing disabled boat etc. but that has all been privatized. Just wondering what other people think about this and if the goverment has the obligation to pick up the cost for these rescues that would not pass the "reasonable man test" ?
Cutting Edge vs Poor Judgement
I avidly read all the storm survival type stories including the various coverages of the Sydney - Hobart and the '79 Fastnet race. I recommend that all who sail or intend to sail where conditions can change into threatening situations, read enough to see what happens when even the professional and others at the top of the sport bite off more than they can chew. Myself; I race a 7,000 # 28.5 and we win far more than we loose, but I will drop out when conditions may go beyond a double reef and a 110 jib. I have only one boat and don't want to break it; one life and and with the responsibility for others, certainly won't ask them to take undue risk. That said, I might crew on a Sydney Hobart race for the challenge and the thrill. I expect it's way beyond a Marion to Bermuda race. At some point, rescue crews should not be asked to put their lives on the line to bail out someone who intentionally disregards an obviously huge risk. Who is to draw that line of acceptable risk vs something beyond that risk, if not the captain and crews themselves?
I avidly read all the storm survival type stories including the various coverages of the Sydney - Hobart and the '79 Fastnet race. I recommend that all who sail or intend to sail where conditions can change into threatening situations, read enough to see what happens when even the professional and others at the top of the sport bite off more than they can chew. Myself; I race a 7,000 # 28.5 and we win far more than we loose, but I will drop out when conditions may go beyond a double reef and a 110 jib. I have only one boat and don't want to break it; one life and and with the responsibility for others, certainly won't ask them to take undue risk. That said, I might crew on a Sydney Hobart race for the challenge and the thrill. I expect it's way beyond a Marion to Bermuda race. At some point, rescue crews should not be asked to put their lives on the line to bail out someone who intentionally disregards an obviously huge risk. Who is to draw that line of acceptable risk vs something beyond that risk, if not the captain and crews themselves?
:To take risks
As long as there are risks to be taken, someone will, whether it be going into space, or sailing around the world, or climbing Mt. Everest, mankind must take the dare, if you will, or we would not be the species we are! I suspect that driving your car is one of the most dangerous things we all do, but how many of us are willing to give up our wheels! Look at the cost of rescue crews on those jobs! Welive in a world of risks, thats life!
As long as there are risks to be taken, someone will, whether it be going into space, or sailing around the world, or climbing Mt. Everest, mankind must take the dare, if you will, or we would not be the species we are! I suspect that driving your car is one of the most dangerous things we all do, but how many of us are willing to give up our wheels! Look at the cost of rescue crews on those jobs! Welive in a world of risks, thats life!
Rich
I think these stories are a good thing and helps the sport. I think many people that own boats are not keen to danger. What I mean is "it is a sailboat, how could you get hurt?". I think that new or less experienced sailor learns that there are dangers in not only a big international race but even a daytrip in open water. The more we are informed,the better prepared we can be for deteriorating conditions. After the Fastnet, as with the Sidney Hobart, much was learned about storm tactics from the actions taken by surviving vessels. Both of these race disasters were cause by conditions that became many times more dangerious than any of the reports had reported. Sailing is one of those sports that can be very pleasant one minute and grow into chaos by not only weather but hardware malfunctions. This chaos can be relatively safe or get extremely dangerous, simply by the knowledge and experience of the captian and crew. thanks for the discussion r.w.landau
I think these stories are a good thing and helps the sport. I think many people that own boats are not keen to danger. What I mean is "it is a sailboat, how could you get hurt?". I think that new or less experienced sailor learns that there are dangers in not only a big international race but even a daytrip in open water. The more we are informed,the better prepared we can be for deteriorating conditions. After the Fastnet, as with the Sidney Hobart, much was learned about storm tactics from the actions taken by surviving vessels. Both of these race disasters were cause by conditions that became many times more dangerious than any of the reports had reported. Sailing is one of those sports that can be very pleasant one minute and grow into chaos by not only weather but hardware malfunctions. This chaos can be relatively safe or get extremely dangerous, simply by the knowledge and experience of the captian and crew. thanks for the discussion r.w.landau
What if
What if, in order to register or document your boat, you had to sign a statement authorizing the appropriate agencies to bill you for rescue costs should your emergency/mishap be determined to be the result of significant skipper error or misjudgement? It might make some of those on the fringes of competence think twice about their choices. Maybe not, though, since they are the ones with poor judgement in the first place.
What if, in order to register or document your boat, you had to sign a statement authorizing the appropriate agencies to bill you for rescue costs should your emergency/mishap be determined to be the result of significant skipper error or misjudgement? It might make some of those on the fringes of competence think twice about their choices. Maybe not, though, since they are the ones with poor judgement in the first place.
Pay for rescue - another perspective
I think the idea of making people pay for their rescue ignores the larger picture. I would venture that the overall economic benefit of boating is much more than the cost of a few rescues. Rescues, like buoys, harbors, weather reports, are just part of the cost of creating the setting for the activity to flourish. You gotta take both the bad with the good.
I think the idea of making people pay for their rescue ignores the larger picture. I would venture that the overall economic benefit of boating is much more than the cost of a few rescues. Rescues, like buoys, harbors, weather reports, are just part of the cost of creating the setting for the activity to flourish. You gotta take both the bad with the good.
SAR costs and liability
The CG can prohibit someone from doing something which is completely unsafe but rarely does that for cases like a sailboat race. I guess they figure a sailor knows what he is in for. Most search and rescue personnel are government employees or volunteers. Others like ambulance drivers are employees of organizations which make a profit from their activities. Most times their motives are pure and their actions are voluntary. Sometimes not. I was once billed $2000 for a ten minute ambulance ride. On the other hand, I have personally flown as a volunteer crewman (at my own risk and expense) over ten days sometimes in extremely dangerous conditions on a state run search for a pilot who was later found to be smuggling drugs. The state paid for much of the fuel and similar costs but we took time from jobs and paid our own food and lodging. Anyone thinking of doing something stupid or illegal should realize that the people who will look for them are usually doing so voluntarily. The rescuers are not required to take the same risks as the people they are looking for even though they might well choose to do so. The fact is that there are always choices to be made in a search and, like it or not, the stupidity or motive of the victim does become a consideration. I heard a Mayday call a few weeks ago. The guy calling was the only passenger on a fishing boat and had no idea where he was. The skipper had gone overboard to dive for his catch and the passenger could not get him back aboard. The CG finally located him, sent a helo and a hovercraft. The helo dropped a pararescue diver and he determined that the skipper was fine. He had caught something big and would not let it go. That was why the passenger could not hoist him back on board. In that instance, I say the skipper should pay the tens of thousands it cost to find him. On the other hand, it was good training for the CG.
The CG can prohibit someone from doing something which is completely unsafe but rarely does that for cases like a sailboat race. I guess they figure a sailor knows what he is in for. Most search and rescue personnel are government employees or volunteers. Others like ambulance drivers are employees of organizations which make a profit from their activities. Most times their motives are pure and their actions are voluntary. Sometimes not. I was once billed $2000 for a ten minute ambulance ride. On the other hand, I have personally flown as a volunteer crewman (at my own risk and expense) over ten days sometimes in extremely dangerous conditions on a state run search for a pilot who was later found to be smuggling drugs. The state paid for much of the fuel and similar costs but we took time from jobs and paid our own food and lodging. Anyone thinking of doing something stupid or illegal should realize that the people who will look for them are usually doing so voluntarily. The rescuers are not required to take the same risks as the people they are looking for even though they might well choose to do so. The fact is that there are always choices to be made in a search and, like it or not, the stupidity or motive of the victim does become a consideration. I heard a Mayday call a few weeks ago. The guy calling was the only passenger on a fishing boat and had no idea where he was. The skipper had gone overboard to dive for his catch and the passenger could not get him back aboard. The CG finally located him, sent a helo and a hovercraft. The helo dropped a pararescue diver and he determined that the skipper was fine. He had caught something big and would not let it go. That was why the passenger could not hoist him back on board. In that instance, I say the skipper should pay the tens of thousands it cost to find him. On the other hand, it was good training for the CG.
Charging for SAR costs...
I've been a mamber of El Dorado County (Ca.) SAR for about 9 years where I serve on the 4 wheel drive team as an EMT and ham radio operator. From what I understand, our county will, on occasion, charge for services if two conditions exist; 1. the person(s) needing rescue came to that circumstance due to breaking laws or rules of conduct ie. skiing out-of-bounds, rafting on a river where boats aren't allowed, etc. and 2. the person is not a resident of the county. From what I understand, our county will bill the county of the person rescued for costs incurred, and then the billed county can go after the rescued person, who can sometimes collect from their homeowners insurance. It doesn't happen very often, but in the case of a lost skier or snowboarder who is lost or injured to the point where a large scale search effort is required, they will likely try to collect. Over the years we have had a number of searches where costs have approached $100k, and a small county like this just doesn't have the money to fund things like this. Fortunately, one of the big-ticket items is chopper time, which we usually get from the Highway Patrol or the military, which we don't have to pay for. It has been noted, however, that there can be a downside to charging for searches. Case history shows that if the person knows they will be charged for a search, they will sometimes wait longer before calling for help. This can make the search even more dangerous and time consuming, as the person tries to 'self-rescue' and makes the situation even worse. As mentioned above, most SAR personel are volunteers (everyone in our team is) who take time off work and provide all of their own equipment (mostly) for the job. (we do get re-imbursed for fuel, food, and supplies used) It's a tough job sometimes (both physically and mentally) but it needs to be done and the rewards are often very satisfying. Re-united a scared little kid (who just spent a night out in the cold forest alone) with their parents will always be a high point. The downside is some mouthy 19 yo who snowboarded 5 miles outside the boundary that gives you attitude because 'I've been waiting hours for you guys, and I'm not leaving until someone finds my goggles.' Wanna bet? Anyhow, just thought I'd chime in. Jeff
I've been a mamber of El Dorado County (Ca.) SAR for about 9 years where I serve on the 4 wheel drive team as an EMT and ham radio operator. From what I understand, our county will, on occasion, charge for services if two conditions exist; 1. the person(s) needing rescue came to that circumstance due to breaking laws or rules of conduct ie. skiing out-of-bounds, rafting on a river where boats aren't allowed, etc. and 2. the person is not a resident of the county. From what I understand, our county will bill the county of the person rescued for costs incurred, and then the billed county can go after the rescued person, who can sometimes collect from their homeowners insurance. It doesn't happen very often, but in the case of a lost skier or snowboarder who is lost or injured to the point where a large scale search effort is required, they will likely try to collect. Over the years we have had a number of searches where costs have approached $100k, and a small county like this just doesn't have the money to fund things like this. Fortunately, one of the big-ticket items is chopper time, which we usually get from the Highway Patrol or the military, which we don't have to pay for. It has been noted, however, that there can be a downside to charging for searches. Case history shows that if the person knows they will be charged for a search, they will sometimes wait longer before calling for help. This can make the search even more dangerous and time consuming, as the person tries to 'self-rescue' and makes the situation even worse. As mentioned above, most SAR personel are volunteers (everyone in our team is) who take time off work and provide all of their own equipment (mostly) for the job. (we do get re-imbursed for fuel, food, and supplies used) It's a tough job sometimes (both physically and mentally) but it needs to be done and the rewards are often very satisfying. Re-united a scared little kid (who just spent a night out in the cold forest alone) with their parents will always be a high point. The downside is some mouthy 19 yo who snowboarded 5 miles outside the boundary that gives you attitude because 'I've been waiting hours for you guys, and I'm not leaving until someone finds my goggles.' Wanna bet? Anyhow, just thought I'd chime in. Jeff
Rescue Charges
The purpose of a pluralistic and socially oriented society is to help others. That's part of the reason why we pay taxes: for "services" that benefit all of us. The fire at your next door neighbor's house could easily spread to yours. It constantly amazes me when the media reports that putting out a fire cost X thousands of dollars. That's the service we ARE paying our taxes for. The dangers that responders endure is priceless, and they earn my respect and gratitude for their efforts and caring. However, the reality is that their salaries are BEING PAID regardless of whether or not they ever, for instance, leave the firehouse. And their expenses (like fuel and maintenance for their boats, planes and automobiles) are, or at least should be, budgeted as well. And, in Jeff's case above, money should and could be made available so that volunteers can be paid for their efforts. It is wonderful that folks like Jeff can provide that kind of assistance on their own. It is only fair to them and our society that they be reimbursed for their time, concern and good deeds, or, at the very least, we recognize WHY they have to volunteer in the first place: the $ isn't there for the trained professionals who used to do that work. The thinking since this country was founded is that we are here to help each other. It is extremely disturbing to me that taxes, for most of us who contribute to these boating threads, remain the same, but are being "supplemented" with "fees," which are nothing more than hidden taxes to make up for the huge tax refunds and giveaways to the 1% of this society who actually are the only ones who could afford to pay for those very services. The pattern that is emerging from the "bait-and-switch," "lie-and-underfund" politicians is truly frightening, for this sport and so many other things in life these days. And 50 years from now, when your kid says: "Dad, social security doesn't work for me because the stock market tumbled again a year before I was going to retire," all you'll be able to do is say "Gee, son, maybe that President was right about it all along (although he's the guy who broke it)." The drastic reduction in federal income and the "misleading" federal budget that doesn't include costs for a major and expensive foreign entanglement (regardless of your personal opinion about that effort), result in funding being directly taken away from distribution to ALL OF OUR states and local communities. First responders are getting shorted so much by this disastrous action that it should be considered criminal, to say nothing about all of our educational systems across the entire country. The issue really has nothing to do with the qualifications of people who get in trouble out there. There have always been and will continue to be the idiots out there. {Try a forum search on that word and you'll be amazed at how much has been written on that topic.
} We all see them every day, on the water, on the road, etc. We each help each other out when we see someone in difficulty on the water. I believe it should be no different in the rest of our daily lives, and that the taxes we continue to pay for those services should, first, be used to increase not decrease those services, and, second, that "fees" to supplement taxes should be eliminated. FYI, the Federal government just made "permanent" the "temporary" fees enacted only a few years ago for using national parks. Just another example of mismanagement. Stu
The purpose of a pluralistic and socially oriented society is to help others. That's part of the reason why we pay taxes: for "services" that benefit all of us. The fire at your next door neighbor's house could easily spread to yours. It constantly amazes me when the media reports that putting out a fire cost X thousands of dollars. That's the service we ARE paying our taxes for. The dangers that responders endure is priceless, and they earn my respect and gratitude for their efforts and caring. However, the reality is that their salaries are BEING PAID regardless of whether or not they ever, for instance, leave the firehouse. And their expenses (like fuel and maintenance for their boats, planes and automobiles) are, or at least should be, budgeted as well. And, in Jeff's case above, money should and could be made available so that volunteers can be paid for their efforts. It is wonderful that folks like Jeff can provide that kind of assistance on their own. It is only fair to them and our society that they be reimbursed for their time, concern and good deeds, or, at the very least, we recognize WHY they have to volunteer in the first place: the $ isn't there for the trained professionals who used to do that work. The thinking since this country was founded is that we are here to help each other. It is extremely disturbing to me that taxes, for most of us who contribute to these boating threads, remain the same, but are being "supplemented" with "fees," which are nothing more than hidden taxes to make up for the huge tax refunds and giveaways to the 1% of this society who actually are the only ones who could afford to pay for those very services. The pattern that is emerging from the "bait-and-switch," "lie-and-underfund" politicians is truly frightening, for this sport and so many other things in life these days. And 50 years from now, when your kid says: "Dad, social security doesn't work for me because the stock market tumbled again a year before I was going to retire," all you'll be able to do is say "Gee, son, maybe that President was right about it all along (although he's the guy who broke it)." The drastic reduction in federal income and the "misleading" federal budget that doesn't include costs for a major and expensive foreign entanglement (regardless of your personal opinion about that effort), result in funding being directly taken away from distribution to ALL OF OUR states and local communities. First responders are getting shorted so much by this disastrous action that it should be considered criminal, to say nothing about all of our educational systems across the entire country. The issue really has nothing to do with the qualifications of people who get in trouble out there. There have always been and will continue to be the idiots out there. {Try a forum search on that word and you'll be amazed at how much has been written on that topic.
} We all see them every day, on the water, on the road, etc. We each help each other out when we see someone in difficulty on the water. I believe it should be no different in the rest of our daily lives, and that the taxes we continue to pay for those services should, first, be used to increase not decrease those services, and, second, that "fees" to supplement taxes should be eliminated. FYI, the Federal government just made "permanent" the "temporary" fees enacted only a few years ago for using national parks. Just another example of mismanagement. Stu
How do you measure productivity for fire
and other rescue type agencies ? It has always been a problem trying to figure out sound budgetary management for organizations with no real objective way to measure results on a cost basis. A common argument is "if it saves 1 life isn't it worth it? " and the answer is no if you could save 2 by using the funds for something else. So in the case of fires we fall back on figuring the cost of efforts to surpress and value of property lost. What you would really like to know is what did you save from loss and what was the value compared to the cost, impossible to guess. In the case of the CG they don't have many options where lives are involved, they are pretty much obligated to search and it's impossible to guess what it will cost or how many they'll do every year. I can forsee a day when "rescue insurance" may be mandated for some activities by government or the sanctioning body (in the case of a race or charter).
and other rescue type agencies ? It has always been a problem trying to figure out sound budgetary management for organizations with no real objective way to measure results on a cost basis. A common argument is "if it saves 1 life isn't it worth it? " and the answer is no if you could save 2 by using the funds for something else. So in the case of fires we fall back on figuring the cost of efforts to surpress and value of property lost. What you would really like to know is what did you save from loss and what was the value compared to the cost, impossible to guess. In the case of the CG they don't have many options where lives are involved, they are pretty much obligated to search and it's impossible to guess what it will cost or how many they'll do every year. I can forsee a day when "rescue insurance" may be mandated for some activities by government or the sanctioning body (in the case of a race or charter).
Stu - something else your kid might say
in 50 years is "Thanks dad for providing me with this huge inheritance. It is your investment in the family and we really appreciate the lifetime of work you did to earn it. It will remind me how much you love us when you are not around any more." Sort of a "future rescue" if you ask me.
in 50 years is "Thanks dad for providing me with this huge inheritance. It is your investment in the family and we really appreciate the lifetime of work you did to earn it. It will remind me how much you love us when you are not around any more." Sort of a "future rescue" if you ask me.
Dedicated to those who dare...
The sea: Endless, ever-changing, eternal. Those who dare to discover their true mettle venture forth in hand-made ships, to challenge Nature unleashed. Many fail the test, and, in time, are forgotten in the hearts of men. They earn little more than an unmarked grave. A few succeed, conquering their fears and realising their dreams, and, in time, come to be held with the highest calibre of adventurers. They earn the right to tell stories. This is the story of a man, a ship, and a dream: East Of The Sun. (Epilogue to forthcoming novel!) ©JC 2 www.jonniecomet.com
The sea: Endless, ever-changing, eternal. Those who dare to discover their true mettle venture forth in hand-made ships, to challenge Nature unleashed. Many fail the test, and, in time, are forgotten in the hearts of men. They earn little more than an unmarked grave. A few succeed, conquering their fears and realising their dreams, and, in time, come to be held with the highest calibre of adventurers. They earn the right to tell stories. This is the story of a man, a ship, and a dream: East Of The Sun. (Epilogue to forthcoming novel!) ©JC 2 www.jonniecomet.com
- Status