Should adventurers rescued by public services be responsible for covering the cost?

When a Canadian man was rescued from a Colorado mountain this week, a familiar question raised its ugly head. Who should pay to save the life of someone who intentionally puts it in danger?

The Canadian Press reports that 19-year-old Samuel Frappier, of Quebec, became stranded in Rocky Mountain National Park on Tuesday while climbing down from the 4,345-metre Longs Peek.

Search and rescue crews were forced to call in a helicopter to recover the Canadian teen, a costly initiative that plays out frequently in hills and wild lands of the United States and Canada.

In Canada, and most parts of the U.S., those who challenge nature and find themselves lost or otherwise in peril are rarely asked to cover the cost. Equipment rental and safety training of thousands of volunteers tends to be covered by donations and government assistance. Yet some suggest the public shouldn't be forced to cover the tab that comes from individual wanderlust. And in some rare cases, they are not.

In 2012, a snowboarder disappeared for two days after crossing a boundary at Cypress Mountain Resort, near Vancouver. He was eventually spotted by a helicopter assisting in the rescue efforts and found by a ground search. The cost of the search was estimated at the time to be in the tens of thousands of dollars, covered by the province. Though CBC News reported that Cyprus Mountain forwarded a $10,000 bill to Boucher for his rescue, with the proceeds to be donated to future search and rescue efforts.

In 2009, nearby Grouse Mountain Resort billed three skiers and a snowboarder (and issued lifetime bans) for purposely jumping into a dangerous out-of-bounds area and evading rescue efforts.

But such incidents are rare and, as in those cases, the bills are leveled by private groups not the province or the search and rescue agencies themselves.

And that seems to be the way Canada likes it.

Search and Rescue operations are not rare, especially in mountainous Western Canada.

According to the B.C. Search and Rescue Association, there were 18 land rescue and three inland water rescue efforts during the week of May 19 and May 25. So far this year, there have been a total of 121 land rescue incidents, 24 water incidents and six air rescue incidents in the province.

The B.C. Search and Rescue Association holds a firm policy against charging for search and rescue efforts. The group says it has a moral obligation to help those in need.

But the cost of those rescue efforts is primarily paid for through various government agencies or grants. The $8.1 million in funding it takes to provide emergency assistance comes mostly from gaming proceeds, and support from Emergency Management British Columbia and the RCMP. And as a 2013 discussion paper noted, the need for search and rescue crews is increasing much faster than the access to funding and availability of volunteers.

That paper discussed the matter of finding a new funding model and, again, dismissed the notion of charging people saved in emergency situations as inappropriate.

In some ways, British Columbia should be considered the leader on this issue. Of the 1,933 rescue searches executed in 2011, 1,304 of them were done in British Columbia.

Its neighbour Alberta is also high on that list. The Alberta Parks search and rescue program has a reported annual cost of $599,000, but a spokesperson told Sun News Network earlier this year they were also opposed to charging people to recover that cost, saying it could result in delayed distress calls.

Yet the idea of charging people for their rescue has been formalized in some regions south of the border.

Oregon and Maine have laws letting agencies bill the targets of rescue efforts in some cases. So too does New Hampshire, which charged a 17-year-old boy scout more than $25,000 for pulling him off Mount Washington in 2009. (The lofty bill was later dismissed amid public outcry.)

Washington state tends to cover the cost of search and rescue efforts, but officials can charge out-of-bounds skiers and snowboarders with fines up to $1,000. But in Colorado, the idea of charging someone for a rescue is a bizarre concept.

The Colorado Search and Rescue Board states that organizations will not charge for search and rescue services, except in the rare case of "extraordinary expenses."

Instead, Colorado established a Search and Rescue Fund to held pay for state rescue efforts, which is financed by small surcharges placed on hunting and fishing licences, boat and snowmobile registrations and through the sale of a Colorado Outdoor Recreation Search and Rescue (CORSCAR) Card.

The CORSCAR Card is a voluntary $3/year purchase, but one recommended to those who frequently visit the Colorado wilderness. In the 2012/2013 fiscal year, CORSCAR Card system generated $68,000 in revenue.

Of note, the British Columbia Search and Rescue Association recommended following Colorado's model to improve its own financial situation.

"The SAR Fund model has the potential to ease demands on Ministry budget lines, as well as reduce the administrative workload on staff and volunteers involved with applications and grants," the proposal suggested.

There seems to be a consensus, in Canada at least, that charging people for search and rescue efforts could be dangerous and fraught with problems, and that's probably for the best. Still, people aren't going to stop getting lost and trapped in the wilderness any time soon. A new plan to pay for their recovery may be necessary. It's comforting to know we're already thinking ahead.

Want to know what news is brewing in Canada?
Follow @MRCoutts on Twitter.