Rescue Helicopter "Not a Taxi"

[tasadam]

From the front page of the Advocate newspaper today...
http://www.theadvocate.com.au/news/loca ... 06313.aspx

Shadow police and emergency management minister Rene Hidding said bushwalkers should be better educated about appropriate use of EPIRBs so they were not activated needlessly.

I hereby publicly invite the Shadow police and emergency management minister Rene Hidding to come along to this forum and "better educate" us all on the appropriate use of EPIRB's.

However, I for one would, as a bushwalker (not a boater), be more interested in the appropriate use of a PLB.

Perhaps the Shadow police and emergency management minister Rene Hidding would like to better educate himself on the difference between an EPIRB and a PLB.
Here, Mr Hidding, let me help you.
http://beacons.amsa.gov.au/distress_beacons.asp

What types of distress beacons are there?
There are 3 types:

Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRB) used in ships and boats;
Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELT) used in aircraft; and
Personal Locator Beacons (PLB) for personal use by bushwalkers, four-wheel drivers, other adventurers on land, employees working in remote areas, crew in boats and aircrew.

It seems to me that the whole article is trying to put a negative slant on the use of the rescue helicopter. Like, if I were to be rescued, would people be wondering "did he really need it?" and such.
The artiche headline "it's not a taxi", and quotes such as

Insp Hopkins said both rescues were justified, but some were not.

referring to a couple of justified rescues, but not citing any examples of unjustified rescues. The only example quoted was by Mr Hidding in relation to a Korean tourist with a flat tyre. Hardly just cause for better educating bushwalkers about the better use of EPIRB's. Or PLB's.

I would like to know whether there is any monitoring of the types of problems that people get into that require the use of the helicopter, justified or not, and then to see whether there is any educating done or information supplied to those doing walks such as (primarily) the Overland Track, so that the root cause of the problems can be addressed, rather than the rescue once the damage is done.
Accidents happen, the article or my response is not about that. But I do wonder how many rescues are effected that could have been avoided if the person was better prepared.

So, over to you Mr Hidding and Mr Hopkins, welcome to the forum, and please can you provide us with a response?

[MrCAMEL]

It seems to me that the whole article is trying to put a negative slant on the use of the rescue helicopter. Like, if I were to be rescued, would people be wondering "did he really need it?" and such.

I was reading that in paper at the same instant that you posted this.
Yes, I too thought they were trying to put a negative tone across for the use of the helicopter. Yet, all they could do then was write about how the more recent call outs were justified (apart from the flat tyre tourists).
It was a bit of a nothing article. Nothing against Megan Hogarth, she probably just didn't have much to go on.

[tasadam]

I have invited Inspector Darren Hopkins and Hon. Rene Hidding via email, to join in on this discussion.

[tasadam]

Devils I can handle. But the ants......
OK. I don't know about $5000, but if that's what it costs, well, so be it.
When I first read the headline and a couple of lines, I knew what it was on about, and I thought straight off that if I were to be rescued, I would more than happily pay for such a rescue.
It's not about the money. It's about being alive.
With the new registered PLB system coming into effect at the end of the month, hopefully false alarms can be reduced. And if all units require registering, then the managing body knows who owns them, so assuming they would know who to send info to regarding the correct use of these devices. Things like "when to use it".

Again, though, I think it's more about being better prepared, and only using it in a real emergency. I know that if I were to be setting one off, it would have to be because of something pretty darn serious. Snake bite, broken leg, lost for days and out of food. I know of one person that walked out of the park with a broken arm having slipped off some rocks (don't mention the name). If I were fit enough and were capable, I would extract myself if at all humanly possible.

It's not a taxi. It's life insurance. They do a great job and should be commended for it. As the article alludes to, it's a pity that (so it seems), some abuse it.

[walkinTas]

I'd be very interested to know how many of the recent helicopter rescues in Tasmania were the result of Emergency Signal from a PLB or other beacon. I think you will find most of the recent rescue from the OT were probably just phone calls (could be wrong though).

As for charging, I think the rescue helicopter should have the same status as an emergency Ambulance call-out. Since there is currently no charge for Ambulances in Tasmania then there should be no charge for emergency rescues. If there were a charge then there should be an appropriate insurance option that would allow people to insure themselves against the cost of the ride, as with the Ambulance Services in other states.

[theMISSIONARY]

what would it cost to send a team(walking) in to Mt Ossa(and similar) to carry some one out.....

hmm team of 8 four to start carrying on a stretcher and four more for when they are worn out.....not that i intend on being unable to walk out on my own but i do see it as an essential service

[scockburn]

Hi tend to agree with the thoughts expressed. Each time I go into an isolated area where there is more that the usual risk I have either taken out or seriuosly considered taking out insurance to cover the possibility . Never had to test it out and have wondered if this is a waste of money or even wondered if I have taken out the right poliicy , but thought worth mentioning. Steve c

[walkinTas]

Just for clarification I'm am against charging for emergency rescue. I don't have a PLB (yet), but if I was considering purchase (as I am) and I knew that it would cost me $5000 every time I used it, I doubt I would buy one. In the article, both the Government and the Liberal opposition are against charging for the rescue.

However, should it ever be considered necessary, there are better ways to recover the costs than charging $5000 dollars to the rescued person. Some sort of compulsory insurance scheme is one way. Over 700,000 National Park entries were logged in 8 reference sites here in one year. I don't know how many NP passes this equates to but I bet its over 100,000 annually. So another way would be a levi of $10 to $15 dollars on your NP park pass - $1m to $1.5m pa. If you have a park pass your covered for emergency rescue.

[mattanitah]

Surely I think we pay enough tax and fees to cover a rescue helicopter if needed. before you know it we will have a health system like in America. The Chopper will pull up and make sure you have insurance or cash on you before they take you away.

[corvus]

Simple answer already stated if it is $5000.00 or death NO choice however when we do have a choice ? ? on one occassion I walked out from Pelion with a torn Hammie when I could have hitched a ride in the Chopper which came in to pick up a well known BW writer who took a tumble and broke a wing and ribs.
Other than a very simple day walk with others I have carried a "then called EPIRB" for a few years now and fully intend to replace it soon,I may be wrong but have most of the rescues been of less experienced walkers on or near the OLT ? does anyone know how well equipped they were (as in Boots et all) and if parks hire EPIBS to walkers do they really check out their gear and experience.
c

[Penguin]

Worst I have seen was the Western Arthurs two years ago.

There were bushfires on the plains and Parks wanted to clear the Range. When they came upon a group of South Australians near us, the walkers told parks to come back in tow days as they had travelled all the way form Adelaide and it was too early in the walk to be taken out. Parks came to collect us and we said yes. the Rangers were very happy with us. The rangers told us by law they had to come back for the South Australian and could not force them to get into the helicopter. My feeling was first ride free, need to come back $5K.

There are a number of urban legends about beacons being set off. Th 16 y/o that set one off near the Labyrinth because he was tired. It would be good to see the statistics. And to see how bushwalkers compare the motorbikes, climbers and yachties?

[MrCAMEL]

http://www.examiner.com.au/news/local/n ... torypage=0
Another story about the helicopter from today.

On the Helicopter's webstie, they do not have much written and is not very helpful.
They have a few undetailed numbers at the bottom.
http://www.tasmanianairrescuetrust.org/pages/news.htm

I think they are from 2007.

[walkinTas]

$85,000! I can't believe it. I was sure we must be talking millions.

"Tourism’s direct contribution to Tasmania’s gross state product (GSP) in 2006–07 was $1.024 billion" (reference).
"Tasmanian Visitor Survey statistics for 2000-01 show that 83% of all holiday visitors to Tasmania visit at least one National Park" (reference).
"According to the survey, the most popular natural attractions for holiday visitors in 2000-01 were Cradle Mountain (43%), ..." (reference).
“During the 12 months to March 2008, over 840,000 visitors came to Tasmania and spent more than $1.3 billion here” (reference).
"Net taxes on products arising from tourism consumption in Tasmania raised $188.4 million in federal, state and local government revenues" (reference).
The first ‘booked’ walks on the track began on 1 November 2005 and there were a total of 2,224 bookings during the first full season. Almost half-a-million dollars was raised from the booking fee – revenue... (reference)

...and a puny $85k was spent on search and rescue. Oh my..

[frank_in_oz]

$85,000! I can't believe it. I was sure we must be talking millions.
...and a puny $85k was spent on search and rescue. Oh my..

Agree, When I saw it last night I thought I had misread it.

Excellent stuff on the economic benefit to Tasmania.
We are down in a few weeks and well spread to the tune of $2000 between 4 of us to do the South Coast Track
e.g. food, car hire, accommodation, flights to Melaluka, transfers, meals, BEER, Salamanka market, taxis etc

Great thread

[scockburn]

Seems like a very small price to pay for all the incoming $ that must be flowing in from walkers etc. I know I certainly would have had second thoughts about straying South without the knowledge that I'd be able to access help if I really needed it.I had not closely thought of it but I've spent probably 60%-70% of my travel/holiday budget in Tassie because of the value I place in this place and this is what is promoted by government.I wonder what would happen to the tourism $ if they promoted an anti rescue theme?? What really angers me is that there is no way I'd call in any rescue or external assistance unless I believed my life was at serious risk. Keep up the pressure.

[MrCAMEL]

$85,000! I can't believe it. I was sure we must be talking millions.

...and a puny $85k was spent on search and rescue. Oh my..

This amount was only for missions in the Cradle/Lake St Clair Park.

[frank_in_oz]

I am interested in getting some hard evidence regarding who pays for this service.

When we first started doing some "serious" bushwalking trips I did some investigation regarding being evacuated by chopper etc. It was one factor in getting me to join the Ambulance Service in Victoria.

From their web page:

Members and their dependants are entitled to free ambulance transport, paramedic care and treatment, including air ambulance throughout Victoria and Australia.
For non-members ambulance fees start at more than $825 for emergency treatment and transport by road ambulance in metropolitan areas and more than $2800 for the air ambulance helicopter

My ASSUMPTION was that if I required rescuing, it would be by air ambulance, as I would be injured (not just tired) By having ambulance cover, I have been reassured that all my costs of being "rescued" in Tasmania would be covered by my Ambulance membership.

This begs the question, is the rescue service in Tasmania defined as an Air Ambulance? If so, those people with ambulance cover should be billed so the costs are recouped.

If the rescue service is not defined as an "Air Ambulance" then who is responsible for the costs???

The other factor is in relation to overseas visitors who walk the Overland Track. It is unlikely they are members of an Australian Ambulance service BUT they should / may have travel insurance. This may also be an option to recoup funds.

[MrCAMEL]

I've just picked a few things from the article here, there are plenty more, that are just completely ridiculous. It is good that the Government and Opposition don't agree on charging people for rescue when they do things as listed in the article.
http://www.themercury.com.au/article/20 ... -news.html

Mr Bartlett could have given up his breakfast with Kevin Rudd for the same, average, cost for someone to get rescued from the bush.

$3221 for Mr Bartlett and Ms O'Byrne to attend the AFL grand final luncheon;
$5403 for Mr Bartlett and Ms O'Byrne to present Tasmania's AFL bid in Melbourne;
$8765.15 for Mr Bartlett to attend a breakfast with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd; and
$10,000 for Mr Bartlett, Treasurer Michael Aird, Ms Giddings and Ms O'Byrne to attend a Tasmanian Symphony Orchestra fundraiser at Tetsuya Wakuda's Sydney restaurant.

rene hidding registered on the forums. I wonder if he will type anything?

[johnw]

A lot of good points have been raised in this discussion. I'll comment later, but I found some stats on page 23 of the Tasmania Police and Emergency Management 2007/08 Annual Report that seem to be relevant. They appear to cover all helicopter operations/rescues, but are a bit difficult to interpret in the context of bushwalking-specific incidents:

"In 2007-08 Marine and Rescue Services took part in
142 helicopter rescue and recovery missions, with
25 dive and 32 land-based operations in the same
period. The reduction in land-based operations from
49 in 2006-07 has been due to the reduction in forest
protest activity."

Helicopter operations hours are also quoted across a number of services.

In addition to the link that tasadam posted earlier, the AMSA site has a very good factsheet on Distress Beacons

[tasadam]

rene hidding registered on the forums. I wonder if he will type anything?

I hope so.
I sincerely invited him with a view to hear his input - please play nice everyone...

Hello Rene. Welcome!

[tastrekker]

Good morning folks,

Check out page 3 of The Advocate. We get a mention. No URL though.
They now have the example we were looking for. The headline reads, "Rescue helicopter called out, but not needed"

For those not blessed with delivery of the Cradle Coasts local rag, here's some of the good bits...

"...helicopter was sent to the aid of a lost bushwalker in the Cradle Mountain area yesterday only to arrive and find the woman safe and unhurt.
"The lone American buswalker activated her Nat. Parks hire beacon after becoming lost overnight in the Frenchmans Cap area.
"The ... woman found the track again and turned the beacon off.
"The Advocate's reports sparked heated discussion on the online forum of a Tasmanian bushwalking website..."

TasTrekker

[tastrekker]

...and now I guess I should have an opinion on the subject...

I see these beacons as the same as a call to 000. It should be a life-threatening emergency. In this example, I don't think we don't have enough info to judge.

Was the American visitor walking overnight? If so, she should have been well equipped with overnight gear. In such a case, without any injuries, being lost is not life threatening until your food runs out or your equipment fails in some way.

Was the American a lone day visitor to the area? Perhaps she has walked part way along the track without any gear or warm stuff (stupid I know but it happens a lot)? In this case, being stuck out overnight could well have been life-threatening for all we know.

Education is the key. I have never hired one of these beasties. Do they come with any info about when to use it? Is the info similar to the guidelines for 000?

I am also inclined to go with Rene Hiddings quote in todays paper, "In a humanitarian sense, we should behave like surf lifesavers. Get them out and ask questions later." If nothing else, these incidents are an excellent training exercise for those involved and will help keep their skills sharp for when someone is lying at the bottom of a cliff in a lot of serious trouble.

[walkinTas]

This amount was only for missions in the Cradle/Lake St Clair Park.

Realise that! The points is simple, the newspapers are claiming that unnecessary call-outs to bushwalkers are costing Taxpayers, when in fact, total call-outs to the OLT are a tiny fraction of the revenue generated by the Overland Track, by National Parks and by the broader Tourist Industry. Tassie National Parks are obviously very important to Tourism (83% of all visitors) and Cradle Mountain/Lake St. Clair is the number one National Park attraction (43% CM, 37% LSC). Unnecessary call-outs are very infrequent and a tiny fraction of total call-out costs. The rescue helicopter is a very important part of Government support for recreational bushwalking and Tourism in general.

Education is the key. I have never hired one of these beasties. Do they come with any info about when to use it? Is the info similar to the guidelines for 000?

It would seem to be an obvious and sensible place to start to address any problems.

[tastrekker]

...and I guess I should really point out the lack of geographical knowledge exhibited by our illustrious Advocate. Saying the Frenchmans Cap track is in the Cradle Mountain area is like saying someone lost in Devonport was in the Launceston area!

[Son of a Beach]

...and I guess I should really point out the lack of geographical knowledge exhibited by our illustrious Advocate. Saying the Frenchmans Cap track is in the Cradle Mountain area is like saying someone lost in Devonport was in the Launceston area!

Or like the new trend (even where I work) of calling an area "The Cradle Coast" (presumably meaning that part of the coast that is really close to Cradle Mountain?).

[Son of a Beach]

I've found the second article online at: http://www.theadvocate.com.au/news/loca ... 08513.aspx

for those who don't have the paper version.

[walkinTas]

Here is another report for those interested titled "ESTIMATING THE VALUE OF TASMANIAN NATIONAL PARKS TO PARK VISITORS" (pdf file). In part, it talks about the impact that an increasing in park entry fees would have on tourism.

A couple of quotes:

"Real gross state product was estimated to be around $120 million higher than would be the case if no park users visited Tasmanian PWS sites."
"PWS tourism was estimated to contribute 4,200 full and part-time jobs to the Tasmanian economy."
"Thus according to Table 8, PWS visitor expenditure accounts for about a quarter of all tourism-generated jobs in Tasmania."

So again, the cost of the Search & Rescue service is insignificant in comparison.

And talking about an increase of $1 per person-visit:

"An outside estimate of the negative effects on the Tasmanian economy was computed with the aid of the FEDERAL model as a loss in Tasmanian gross state product of $2.8 million and 89 jobs, a significant proportion of them part-time."

A $1 increase results in a small adverse effect on the Tasmanian economy. However, a large increase of Parks fees with a levy, or an addition insurance, or forcing people to buy/hire a PLB might be a bad idea.

[tastrax]

Just a few more things to add to the mix...

I suspect the state does not pay anything to "find " the PLB that has been set off as I think that is a commonwealth responsibility. Maybe when it is found by the commonwealth contractor (Rotorlift?) then maybe they inform the state authorities and they make a decision about what to do.

I suspect the old EPIRBs were actually paid for primarily by the Police (because they wanted to reduce "search times") not Parks. I suspect Parks would probably have preferred an an education program rather than being involved with hiring EPIRBS...after all they dont hire tents, trangias or parkas thats a private enterprise job (in the main). Parks appears to be the "agent" for Police and use Service Tasmania as a service provider to supply outlets for the public to get the items.

Maybe by setting off an EPIRB rather than starting a "rescue" by phone call then half the cost goes to the commonwealth.

Well, it's easy enough to set a "negligence" standard for call outs- if the call-out is due to the negligence or recklessness of the walker, or is unnecessary, then it should be charged to them. Things like lack of preparation, not having adequate gear or maps, not carrying a GPS, shouldn't be borne by the taxpayer. Acts of God, accidental injuries, etc should be. Courts have to make these decisions everyday- it's not that hard.

[johnw]

Just my 2 cents worth . This issue comes up from time to time all around the country. Unfortunately the press frequently demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issues (including simple geography, as has been shown). A typical reaction is to sensationalise any incident. From what I have read over the years, most of these incidents seem to involve overseas tourists who are ill prepared. The public sentiment that these unfortunate episodes produces is that all bushwalkers are irresponsible. Consequently it always seems to generate a call to place some sort of restriction on all bushwalkers, or demand that they foot the bill for any rescue. Such propositions are borne of ignorance. They are both unfair and unreasonable. Where similar things happen around suburbia or at the beach, and a chopper is called in, they do not seem to evoke the same reaction. Why?

It’s also worth noting that the person who decides to activate a distress beacon, or otherwise summon assistance, may not be the person in trouble. Unless you are walking solo (and able) it may be others in your party who are left with that responsibility.

Regarding medical emergencies, including accidents, as a trained first aider I’d be horrified if the attitude adopted was to charge people for evacuations. In my personal experience about 80% of remote area first aid training is devoted to assessing when to evacuate a casualty. Believe me you don’t wait until the last minute to get them out. If the only practical way of doing that is by chopper, then so be it. It is possible for apparently minor concerns to quickly escalate into a serious situation and the underlying cause not easily identified and treated. Making a decision to evacuate is not a perfect science, and in most cases the person assessing the situation is not likely to be a doctor or paramedic (for example, me). Any additional pressure in making that decision, due to possible financial sanctions on those in distress, carries an enormous risk of placing someone’s life in further danger.

I do think there is a need to provide better education for visiting tourists. Mind you there is already a lot of information available on the Parks website. Of course such information is also available in many other places, including on BWT/BWA, if people take the time to look for it.

From my own experience Parks do not check the gear or experience of fee-paying walkers on the Overland Track. They provide the information about it and expect you to read and understand the requirements, risks etc. That is not unreasonable. However, there will always be people who will underestimate what they are undertaking, due to such issues as lack of experience, or English not being their first language. This, unfortunately, becomes a recipe for disaster. To address the language issue, maybe the information provided to intending walkers needs to be made available in multiple languages?

Tastrekker makes a good point about emergency response teams’ need (and desire) to maintain a degree of preparedness. With a son involved in volunteer emergency services, I’m aware that responding to actual incidents does assist with this, and isn’t easy to simulate in routine training activities. The main issue that needs to be considered, in relation to this, is the risk to the rescuers themselves resulting from responding to callouts that turn out to be non life-threatening.

I think walkinTas’ analysis is spot on. The cost of rescues appears to be a drop in the ocean compared to tourist revenue generated. I haven’t worked out my own economic contribution but I know it’s been fairly substantial over the past 3 years, with two or three of us making 5 trips totalling about 10 weeks in Tasmania. Typically this includes transport, accommodation, meals, entertainment, parks passes, discretionary shopping, and so on. And hopefully I’ll be back again ! Anyway, I wonder what the difference in cost is for a rescue helicopter and crew in operation vs having them sitting on the ground? What do they do when not in action?

Bottom line – I believe that providing emergency rescue services is a fundamental responsibility of any government and needs to remain free of charge.